Military Review

England is the fierce enemy of Russia

135
England is the fierce enemy of Russia
British military leader Frederick Poole in Arkhangelsk. 1918


Over the past three centuries, England has been Russia's most formidable enemy. Only since the Second World War has Britain divided this place with the United States. The continuous conflict with England was fueled by the desire of the British to rule the world. Clearing the place of "king of the hill" for themselves, the British skillfully pitted the most powerful powers against each other.

"King of the Hill"


Speaking about France, Poland, Germany, Sweden, Turkey, Japan or China, one can also note the mistakes of Russia in this or that conflict with these countries. There were historical, territorial, economic or dynastic reasons. It was a natural struggle of peoples for a place in the sun. It was different with England.

The British wanted to rule the world. Therefore, century after century, Prussia (then Germany), Poland, Sweden, Turkey, Persia, France and Japan were set against Russia.

Russia and Britain did not have common borders and territorial disputes.

In particular, the idea of ​​going to India in order to provoke an uprising against the British there, arose in St. Petersburg only after another British meanness. When Tsar Paul I realized that he had been deceived and simply forced the Russians to "drag chestnuts out of the fire" for England. Set off Russia and France. The two powers could well have lived, if not in alliance and harmony, then at least while maintaining neutrality.

As, for example, Spain, Portugal and Russia. The Spaniards and the Portuguese also created world colonial empires, but they never meddled in the affairs of Russia, did not try to play us off with our neighbors. Therefore, in all conflicts between Russia and England, without exception, the "Englishwoman" is definitely to blame.

Recalling the main milestones in Russian-British relations, one can mention the attempts of England to make Russia an unequal trading partner - from Ivan the Terrible to the tsars of the Romanov dynasty. It was the intention of Nicholas I to develop Russian industry (the policy of protectionism), which violated the economic interests of the British, that became one of the main reasons for the appearance of European armies in Crimea.

Britain prevented Russia from returning to the Baltic, supporting Sweden in the Northern War and in subsequent wars with the Russians.

The British set Turkey against Russia so that the Russians would not go to the Northern Black Sea region, not break through to the Balkans, the Caucasus, the Mediterranean Sea (Constantinople, the straits) and to the southern seas.

To prevent the Russians from gaining a foothold in the Caucasus, England armed Persia.

In the Seven Years War, Britain supported Prussia.

Then London was able to drag Russia and France into a long and bloody confrontation. A series of heavy Russian-French wars. War with Napoleon.

The Russian Tsar Pavel realized the mistake and tried to get out of the trap, but the British organized a conspiracy of degenerate representatives of the Russian aristocracy. The Russian knight fell on the throne.

Tsar Alexander, apparently psychologically broken by the death of his father, became a figure in the great game of London. The Russians began to fight in the interests of Vienna, Berlin and London against France, although at this time they had no reason at all to fight the French. Russian interests in the south and east, age-old national tasks (for example, the straits and Constantinople) were practically forgotten.

At the same time, Britain does not forget to set Turkey and Iran against us. The British armed and trained the Persian army. British agents in the Caucasus taught the Circassians and mountaineers to fight against Russia. The British dragged out the Caucasian War in every possible way.

The tradition will be preserved much later. In the 1990s, the British parliament will talk about the independence of Chechnya.

Russia dives headlong into European affairs, becoming a "European gendarme". Spends a lot of time, resources and energy to maintain peace and order in Western Europe. All in vain. We are being used. Russians are admired when they save Europe from the "tyranny" of Napoleon or Vienna from the uprising of the Hungarians, but no thanks.

In the Crimean (Eastern) War, the "world community" - England, France, Sardinia and Turkey oppose the Russians. Austria trains the army, fetters our main forces at the Danube theater. The war is miserably lost.

Russians are pitched against the Japanese


Britain prevents Russia from occupying Constantinople in 1878 and takes away the fruits of victory. Tsar Alexander II retreats.

Britain is hindering Russia in Central Asia.

The British are beginning to accept Russian revolutionaries in order to use them against the Russian state if possible. This tradition has survived to this day. As before, various Russian trash, traitors and thieves are hiding in London. No issue from the Thames.

At the beginning of the XNUMXth century, the British lion "befriended" the Japanese dragon in order to incite the Japanese Empire against the Celestial Empire and Russia. The British, together with the Americans, armed the Japanese samurai with modern weaponshelped create a fleet. Financed the war against Russia. Japan became a battering ram directed against Russia (How the Anglo-Saxons played off Russia and Japan). At the same time, the Anglo-Saxons use Japan in the same role up to the present time.

At the same time, Russia began to create a powerful "fifth column", to organize, direct and finance revolutionary and democratic movements. Liberal and socialist (Marxism) ideologies were used to destroy the Russian Empire. England helped organize the First Russian Revolution. It was a rehearsal for the future First World War and the 1917 Revolution. London was preparing Russia for the slaughter of the Romanovs.

Here it is necessary to remember that it was London and Washington that gave birth to "international terrorism". It was created by the Anglo-American alliance of power, intelligence services and capital. Spawned, directed and tested in Russia.

England is the birthplace of international terror. Therefore, when, since 2001, the West, led by the United States, began to hypocritically fight terrorism, including “black” (radical) Islamism, it also gave birth to it. In particular, the Anglo-Saxon special services used jihadists even during the Afghan war against Russia-USSR.

Russia and Germany: play off!


England did everything to destroy a potential alliance between Russia and Germany, which could successfully resist the Anglo-Saxons. Face off the Russians and the Germans, Britain's main competitors in Europe and the world. The operation was a success.

The Germans and Russians were conducted, played off (The main enemies of Russia who robbed her were Britain and the United States.).

At the same time, London from the very beginning of the war was not going to share the fruits of victory with Russia. In particular, give Russia the Bosphorus and Constantinople. London was going to destroy and rob its competitors within the Western world - the German world. Destroy, dismember the Austro-Hungarian and German empires. Rebuild the Muslim World (Ottoman Empire). And the main thing is to solve the "Russian question".

The task was successfully completed. The Russian empire has been destroyed, partially dismembered. England became one of the main organizers of the bloody fratricidal Civil War. She supported the national separatists - from Finland to the Basmachs in Turkestan.

The British occupied and planned to include in their empire the lands of the Russian North, part of the Transcaucasus (oil from Baku) and Turkestan.

The British are responsible for the deaths of millions of Russian people during the Troubles. Only the project of red Russia (Bolshevism) saved the state and the people from complete destruction.

Then the Anglo-Saxons relied on fascism and Nazism in Western Europe. We created the "Hitler" project. They helped the Nazis to seize power, and the demoniac Fuhrer was given almost all of Europe to go to the East (As the masters of the West unleashed World War II; Why England and France acted in the interests of Hitler and the USA).

True, here Britain is gradually giving way to the United States. The Second World War led to the decline of the British Empire, the destruction of its colonial empire. London becomes junior partner in the England - USA link.

Later London became one of the instigators of the Third World War, known as the Cold War.

After that, England almost continuously started "hot" local wars. Vietnam, Burma, Indonesia, Korea, Arabia, Kenya, Oman, Yemen, Egypt, etc.

Until now, Britain, as part of NATO, fought against the peoples of Iraq, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and many other countries.

And the last war in the South Caucasus in Nagorno-Karabakh did not go without the British, who secretly stood behind Turkey.

Thus, although England herself tried not to wage a full-scale war against Russia (except for the Eastern War), the secret war between the two great powers never stopped.

London has always been hostile to Russia - tsarist, Soviet or democratic. The British have always tried to push us against our neighbors.

This struggle continues today.
Author:
Photos used:
https://ru.wikipedia.org/
135 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Pessimist22
    Pessimist22 21 January 2021 05: 36
    +29
    Right now it was immediately clear that Samsonov's article, but I absolutely agree that the Englishwoman crap, crap and will crap.
    1. Olgovich
      Olgovich 21 January 2021 08: 12
      0
      Quote: Pessimist22
      Right now it was immediately clear that Samsonov's article, but I absolutely agree that the Englishwoman crap, crap and will crap.

      Duc, and who ... did not shit? recourse

      To ensure their interests, no one neglected this.

      Amazing article term "play off" in relation to not unreasonable roosters, but huge states.

      Didn't they have of your own vital interests, aspirations, plans, and they ruined hundreds of thousands of their soldiers only at the whispering of the English ambassador to the Kaiser's, Sultan's ear?

      Germany in 1914, for example, was itself a subject of world politics and itself was crushing Europe in the name of its purely interests, which, by the way, did not coincide at all with the British.

      Etc.
    2. Bar1
      Bar1 21 January 2021 09: 35
      -6
      Samsonov, why put the English enemies of Russia together with the Cossacks in the first picture? Cossacks are also enemies of Russia?
      1. andrew42
        andrew42 21 January 2021 15: 20
        +4
        There it looks more like the Wild Division than the Cossacks. We leave :)
      2. Cowbra
        Cowbra 21 January 2021 17: 18
        +8
        Krasnov, Shkuro ... Continue? Cossack is an ambiguous thing, by the way the word Cossack is initially abusive.
        1. Bar1
          Bar1 21 January 2021 17: 22
          -21%
          Quote: Cowbra
          Krasnov, Shkuro ... Continue? Cossack is an ambiguous thing, by the way the word Cossack is initially abusive.

          Krasnov and Shkuro were enemies of Russia? What nonsense, why on earth?
          about the Cossack, you don't know anything.
          -cossack -from the word scythe, with a scythe, so it was an oseledets / about a middle one, by a heart.
          -Kazan-Cossack town
          -Caspian Sea -Caucasian Sea.
          1. andrew42
            andrew42 21 January 2021 17: 51
            -3
            There are many options for "Cossack" / "Cossack". The essence is the same. And it certainly was never abusive, except until the whips of 1905, and even then as a result of the closeness of those. who got whips.
            1. Cowbra
              Cowbra 21 January 2021 18: 52
              +12
              That was the name of the robbers. Polovtsev, for example, was also called that. Then they began to call those who fled from justice in Russia. Also, obviously. not honorable rattle
              And Krasnov and Shkuro, who serve Hitler, are clearly not friends of Russia. They may be enemies of the communists, but also of Russia - they are the same friends as the Cossacks of the times of the False Dmitrys, together with the Polish gentlemen, who ruined Russia.
              And about the "scythe" - tell the Don and Yaitsky, aidar. he is a sedentary - Tatar fashion, along with a drooping mustache, they are droopy because Asians grow shitty mustaches - you have to grow long hairs so that at least it can be seen that this is a mustache, and not from a skullcap the thread stuck
              1. Bar1
                Bar1 21 January 2021 20: 28
                -14%
                Arctic fox and these people still hang out on historical forums. You don't know anything.
                Read at least how Bohdan Khmelnitsky and his Cossacks smashed the strongest state in Europe at that time, Poland / RP. Then Khmelnytsky defeated the Poles in several battles and took by assault 20 Polish cities, including fortresses, and covered himself with unfading glory. were the "runaway peasants"? You and people like you OI are absolutely screwed up.
                For such a war, any army must have its own base i.e. production of weapons, ammunition and, most importantly, there should be many years of military TRADITION, only then the army will win.
                -From the famous battles of the Cossacks, these are: Victories of the Cossack squad of Ermak over the army of Khan Kuchum, the times of Ivan 4, when ALL Siberia was conquered.
                -Azov sitting of the Cossacks, when the city of Azov was taken and all the attacks of the Ruretsk troops were repulsed - the middle of the 17th century.
                - "Give me some Cossacks and I will go through the whole of Europe," Napoleon said. And he knew exactly who was worth what.

                Quote: Cowbra
                And Krasnov and Shkuro, who serve Hitler, are clearly not friends of Russia. ABOUT


                Krasnov did not serve Hitler, but wanted to drive the Jews and other neruss out of Russia.

                Quote: Cowbra
                And about the "scythe" - tell the Don and Yaitsky, aidar. he is a sedentary - Tatar fashion, along with a droopy mustache, they are droopy because Asians grow shitty mustaches


                what would you understand in the Cossack military tradition.
                1. Cowbra
                  Cowbra 21 January 2021 20: 39
                  +12
                  Quote: Bar1
                  what would you understand in the Cossack military tradition.

                  And I'm from a Cossack family. and you. unicellular. don't poke me. Go teach how the last Zaporizhzhya Sich went under the arm of the Basurman, under the Turks, then you will tell me about the inviolable slogan. as they in this case were for Faith, and for the Tsar and for the Fatherland. I picked up on the Internet delirium - still climbs to teach
                  1. Bar1
                    Bar1 21 January 2021 20: 41
                    -12%
                    Quote: Cowbra
                    Quote: Bar1
                    what would you understand in the Cossack military tradition.

                    And I'm from a Cossack family. and you. unicellular. don't poke me. Go teach how the last Zaporizhzhya Sich went under the arm of the Basurman, under the Turks, then you will tell me about the inviolable slogan. as they in this case were for Faith, and for the Tsar and for the Fatherland. I picked up on the Internet delirium - still climbs to teach


                    insignificance.
                    Well, two of the Cossacks and the Cossacks are already vilifying it.
                    1. Cowbra
                      Cowbra 21 January 2021 22: 59
                      +12
                      Quote: Bar1
                      Werewolves.

                      Skygazer. So you know, the Ural embassy in the 16th century to the tsar was equipped in this way - every Cossack carried an ax and a chopping block with him. Guess why.
                      Everyone, don't write to me. Annoying people like you, mummers
                      1. Bar1
                        Bar1 21 January 2021 23: 50
                        -7
                        Quote: Cowbra
                        Skygazer. So you know, the Ural embassy in the 16th century to the tsar was equipped in this way - every Cossack carried an ax and a chopping block with him. Guess why.
                        Everyone, don't write to me. Annoying people like you, mummers


                        you don't even know that.
                        The fact that the Cossacks went to the Tsar with a chopping block and an ax is not the 16th century, but the 17th century, but Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov, and this story is from the Pugachev rebellion of Pushkin.
                        And you still say that you know about history?
                        By the way, this story from Pushkin is most likely a fiction.
                    2. Alexander Suvorov
                      Alexander Suvorov 21 January 2021 23: 59
                      +24
                      Bar1 (Timur)
                      insignificance.
                      That you yourself correctly noticed!
                      Well, two of the Cossacks and the Cossacks are already vilifying it.
                      Or maybe we are just aware of WHO such Cossacks really are? I know the history of the Cossacks better than you, not an educated mediocrity who considers himself an expert on everything and everyone. I live here on the Don and all my ancestors were Cossacks.
                      I can say for sure that SOME residents of the Don still consider you inferior to themselves and call you contemptuously "ka-tsa-pami", and the Ukrainians as "khokh-la-mi", and the Moldovans as "gu-tsulami". Didn't know about this, "defender" of the Cossacks? For the Cossacks, all non-Cossacks have always been something second-rate, do not believe me, read Sholokhov, he certainly knew his fellow countrymen up and down. Read in Quiet Don about the pogroms of "hokh-fishing" in the market, maybe something in your fool confused and will appear ... Although it is unlikely ...!

                      P.S. Yes, there are many glorious and valiant pages in the history of the Cossacks, and this is the true TRUTH, BUT in our history there were such scum as red, skin and others, whom you deify, although their name is always anathema.
                      By the way, do you want to go under the article "rehabilitation of fascism"? Otherwise you can arrange ...
                      1. Bar1
                        Bar1 22 January 2021 00: 20
                        -11%
                        Quote: Alexander Suvorov
                        Or maybe we are just aware of WHO such Cossacks really are? I know the history of the Cossacks better than you, not an educated mediocrity who considers himself an expert on everything and everyone. I live here on the Don and all my ancestors were Cossacks.


                        I feel sorry for you. Your horizons are like a keyhole or like a crack in a fence.
                        My ancestors are Cossacks, Horde people from Lake Borovoe, the village of Koturkul, yellow stripes, so I also know a lot of things. Now this homeland is lost.
                        Do you want to flaunt your knowledge of "khokh_lov, hutsuls, kats_apov", but it cannot occur to you that this is information from the Internet? What are you bragging about?
                      2. Alexander Suvorov
                        Alexander Suvorov 22 January 2021 00: 28
                        +17
                        Bar1 (Timur)
                        I feel sorry for you
                        I feel even more sorry for you ...
                        Your horizons are like a keyhole or a crack in a fence.
                        But yours is striking in its diversity ... laughing What do you use? Cannabis? It is unlikely, judging by the fierce delirium that you are carrying, more likely LSD or something even heavier.
                        My ancestors are Cossacks-Horde from Borovoe lake
                        I sympathize, but anything can happen.
                        village Koturkul
                        There is no such settlement there is the village of Koturkulskaya of the Kokchetav district, you cannot even name the place correctly.
                        so I know a lot too.
                        In the psychiatric hospital, everyone knows a lot, which is not known to others ... laughing
                        Do you want to flaunt your knowledge of "khokh_lov, hutsuls, kats_apov", but it never occurs to you that this is information from the Internet?
                        What from the Internet, my grandmother?
                        What are you bragging about?
                        Me, nothing, and you? With your deep ignorance?
                      3. Bar1
                        Bar1 22 January 2021 00: 32
                        -8
                        Quote: Alexander Suvorov
                        There is no such settlement, there is the village of Koturkulskaya of the Kokchetav district, you are not even able to name the place correctly.


                        that's what my grandmother called the village, and not an article from the Internet.
                        Did you regret the kats_apov? If you are a Cossack, then from your hatred for the Cossacks you must first of all bite yourself.
                      4. Alexander Suvorov
                        Alexander Suvorov 22 January 2021 00: 34
                        +20
                        Idiocy is apparently not treated judging by you. Goodbye, I'm tired of throwing beads in front of you.
                2. Bar1
                  Bar1 22 January 2021 00: 21
                  -4
                  Quote: Alexander Suvorov
                  By the way, do you want to go under the article "rehabilitation of fascism"? Otherwise you can arrange ...


                  Well, yes, what is there that I don't know?
          2. place
            place 25 February 2021 19: 33
            0
            Quote: Bar1
            Krasnov did not serve Hitler, but wanted to drive the Jews and other neruss out of Russia.


            To know who "wanted" what is a class! Any event in the History of mankind can be explained in any way that "these wanted this, and they wanted that." Or maybe any criminal "wanted" something high and disinterested? Yes ... we wanted the best, but it turned out as always ........
            But the Supreme Court of the USSR did not know what Krasnov and Vlasov wanted, and out of their naivety they took, and even hanged "Russian patriots" for treason. Personally, I would just hang them by the balls.
        2. andrew42
          andrew42 22 January 2021 13: 31
          +1
          For the boyar master, any fugitive is a thief and a robber, indiscriminately. The essence of the Cossacks is free life, will. I don’t know how the Oseleeder annoyed you in principle - what kind of phantom pains? - Call Svetoslav, Rurik's grandson, and ask what kind of devil he was dragging the steppe donkey. For example, I don’t know. But I think there were reasons. I am also sure that the presence of a settler is not a sign of a robber. Compared to the civilized Polish gentlemen who roasted children and women alive, the Cossack robbery was not near.
          1. Cowbra
            Cowbra 22 January 2021 13: 33
            0
            Have you even read what I wrote? Where did you see there
            Quote: andrew42
            the presence of a settler is not a sign of a robber

            Read one more time
    3. Alexander Suvorov
      Alexander Suvorov 21 January 2021 18: 09
      +31
      Bar1 (Timur)
      Krasnov and Shkuro were enemies of Russia?
      No damn, they were true "patriots", so genuine that together with Hitler they came to kill and plunder their own people. However, they did not consider the Russians their own and, on occasion, robbed them without a twinge of conscience. The raid of Mamontov and Shkuro began as a brilliant military operation and eventually slipped into a banal robbery. Learn history as it was, and not as you see it from a psychiatric hospital.
      Before you write nonsense, you would ask a question. The Cossacks have always been independent, the same Krasnov first wanted to sell himself to the Kaiser, along with the entire Great Don Host.
      To judge who the Cossacks are, one must be them, I tell you as a hereditary Don Cossack!
      1. Bar1
        Bar1 21 January 2021 18: 18
        -20%
        Quote: Alexander Suvorov
        No damn, they were true "patriots", so true that together with Hitler they came to kill and rob their own people


        nk dude, do not confuse "your people" and not your people, who then led the USSR, it was them that the Cossacks came to kill.

        Quote: Alexander Suvorov
        The raid of Mamontov and Shkuro began as a brilliant military operation and eventually slipped into a banal robbery.


        seriously, but what is it called the suppression of the peasant uprising by the Bolsheviks Tukhachesk with gases? Isn't it genocide? And the suppression (thousands of executed) of the Bolsheviks in Siberia by the Bolsheviks on Lenin's orders, what is it called?
        Are you talking about a Cossack? Bullet you are from shit, not a Cossack.
        1. Esoteric
          Esoteric 21 January 2021 21: 56
          -9
          and the suppression of the peasant uprising by the Bolsheviks Tukhachesk with gases, what is it called?

          He's a Bolshevik, you can't prove anything to him. They are Bolsheviks, after all, "white and fluffy", and even if they tortured, hounded someone, then all this does not count, because in the name of the "great" idea.
        2. Alexander Suvorov
          Alexander Suvorov 22 January 2021 00: 10
          +18
          Bar1 (Timur)
          nk dude
          "Dude you see in the mirror every day!
          you
          You will "poke" your mom ...
          Do not confuse "your people" and not your own people, who then ruled the USSR, it was them that the Cossacks came to kill.
          They are different Cossacks, there were Krivoshlykov and Podtyolkov, but they were also red with a skin, so do not carry nonsense.
          seriously, but what is it called the suppression of the peasant uprising by the Bolsheviks Tukhachesk with gases?
          This fake has already set my teeth on edge. Have you poisoned a lot? Several horses?
          And the suppression (of thousands of those executed) by the Bolsheviks in Siberia on the orders of Lenin is what is called?
          Any power must defend itself, otherwise it is not power, but a waste of life, like the power of a bloody nikolashka or a tagged bear.
          Cossack talking?
          The Cossacks are gone for a long time, there are clowns dressed up. Personally, I am a descendant of the Don Cossacks on both my paternal and maternal lines, but above all I am RUSSIAN !!!
          By the way, the Cossacks, as I wrote above, did not identify themselves with the Russians!
          Bullet you are from shit, not a Cossack.
          Well, you are about the same Russian and the same type of "historian"!
          1. Bar1
            Bar1 22 January 2021 00: 38
            -6
            Quote: Alexander Suvorov
            This fake has already set my teeth on edge. Have you poisoned a lot? Several horses?


            with whom to come to speak, only ignorant.


            The next day, June 12, 1921, Tukhachevsky signed order No. 0116 on the use of chemical weapons against the rebels [34] [35]:
            ORDER of the Commander of the troops of the Tambov province No. 0116 / operational-secret

            Tambov

            12th of June 1921

            The remnants of the defeated gangs and individual bandits who fled from the villages where Soviet power was restored, gather in the forests and from there raid civilians. For immediate cleaning of forests I ORDER:

            1. The forests where the bandits are hiding, clean it with poisonous gases, precisely count on the cloud of suffocating gases to spread completely throughout the forest, destroying everything that was hiding in it.

            2. The artillery inspector should immediately bring in the required number of toxic gas cylinders and the right specialists.

            3. The commanders of the battle areas persistently and vigorously carry out this order.

            4. Report on measures taken.

            Commander of the Troops Tukhachevsky Chief of Staff of the General Staff Kakurin

            Russian State Military Archive F.34228. Op. 1. D.292. L.5


            https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Тамбовское_восстание_(1920—1921)
          2. Bar1
            Bar1 22 January 2021 00: 49
            -6
            Quote: Alexander Suvorov
            Any power must defend itself, otherwise it is not power, but a waste of life, like the power of a bloody nikolashka or a tagged bear.


            protect from his people? They defended themselves against the Russian people.
          3. Bar1
            Bar1 22 January 2021 00: 58
            -7
            Quote: Alexander Suvorov
            The Cossacks are gone for a long time, there are clowns dressed up.


            Even that you don't know. In 2014, the troops of Ataman Kozitsin were the first to enter Debaltseve, clearing him of ukrov.
            1. Cowbra
              Cowbra 22 January 2021 21: 09
              +3
              Do you know who the rear Cossacks are?
              1. Bar1
                Bar1 22 January 2021 21: 29
                -4
                do not talk like that, here is a forum, if you have something to say, talk.
                1. Cowbra
                  Cowbra 23 January 2021 01: 43
                  +1

                  Like this
              2. The comment was deleted.
              3. The comment was deleted.
        3. d1975
          d1975 22 January 2021 23: 32
          0
          That's all I understand, I am a descendant of the Kuban people too, so what? Doesn't give you the right to descend, too, but I don't understand which tribe, it's so disrespectful to conduct a dialogue. I read and am amazed! One of my relatives was in prison for 58 st. in the 40s. But he did not fight against his people, he dug the Belomor Canal, survived and ended up at the front near Stalingrad! From the age of 14 he fought at the ataman Shkuro and did not hide it, and the Second World War beat the Nazis, lived for 93 years. After the arrest, the family bought out their own house. But he did not betray his homeland. He swore and said: "What is gurtove, then chirtove!", Waiting for the collapse of the USSR. I scolded that there is no master in the country, I will quote his words: "Unnatural Soviet system!" And his relative handed him over, after the next feast. And what do you think, the man is broken, no! Here is the true Cossack spirit. Grandmother raised 5 children. One died in the floodplains in the Kuban. Eh you, but also called a Cossack. I haven't heard so much muck about us here for a long time. Disrespect for you, contempt and shame. Personally from me. am
          1. Bar1
            Bar1 23 January 2021 22: 30
            -2
            Quote: d1975
            I haven't heard so much muck about us here for a long time. Disrespect for you, contempt and shame. Personally from me.


            but you can just poke your finger, who is it? Otherwise it is undefined.
            1. d1975
              d1975 24 January 2021 15: 43
              +1
              The answer was to you personally, read on your nonsense!
              1. Bar1
                Bar1 24 January 2021 16: 37
                -1
                Quote: d1975
                The answer was to you personally, read on your nonsense!


                but I thought not to me, write specifically.
                Quote: d1975
                But he did not fight against his people,


                and that Krasnov or Shkuro fought against their people?
                Recently I watched the 2007 movie "Nine Lives of Nestor Makhno", it shows all the intrigues of Lenin, Sverdlov and Trotsky, Frunze against the anarchists Makhno. But Makhno was an ally of the Bolsheviks, it was his army that defeated Denikin. He was the FIRST who gave land to the villagers and supported the starving workers of St. Petersburg , and the Bolsheviks cut them all out.
                And what about the suppression of the uprising in the Tambov province, and the suppression of the uprising of Chembarnikov?
                Krasnov and Shkuro fought primarily against the Bolshevik Zh_ids.
                So close your mouth.
                1. d1975
                  d1975 24 January 2021 19: 40
                  +1
                  Judging by your comets, you do not live so far from me, your culture is 0. But you are very rude. Your tongue would clean the shabo, but you are wasting energy in the wrong direction. I wrote about the events after the civil war, why Denikin refused to fight against the USSR. This is an act! And you are not a Cossack, but a Cossack asshole .... th! Seems not mistaken about you! Shameful!
                2. Bar1
                  Bar1 24 January 2021 19: 45
                  -2
                  Let's just say, you are a mindless freak, what was required is what you got.
                3. d1975
                  d1975 24 January 2021 19: 49
                  +3
                  Write in Russian ! Krasnov has become a traitor! You know how you can't be slightly pregnant! He betrayed his homeland! He fought against the Red Army (Soviet Army), well, well! What else do you need. I have one of their grandfathers buried in Treptow Park. Died 30.04.45/9/15. at XNUMX XNUMX am. Sniper shot, regimental reconnaissance, Kuban Cossack. The second grandfather fought with Bandera, and you decided to change my worldview! will not work . They are traitors to me.
                4. Bar1
                  Bar1 24 January 2021 21: 15
                  -3
                  Quote: d1975
                  Write in Russian ! Krasnov has become a traitor! You know how you can't be slightly pregnant


                  damn you. You do not know the history and you take to judge from your mound. When the troops of Frunze entered the Crimea, they first of all dealt with their allies - the army of Makhno, then all the former troops of Wrangel were destroyed and the numbers of people killed are huge.
                  And do you want Krasnov or Shkuro to simply substitute themselves for destruction?
                  About Shkuro they write that he did not fight against the Red Army in WW2, but collaborated and was engaged in the preparation of the Cossack reserve.
                  After the war, THOUSANDS of Bandera troops and all kinds of "forest brothers" were captured, but they were not shot, like the Cossacks, but exiled, and when Khrushchev came, he freed all this bastard from prisons.
                  Only the noblemen and Cossacks were practically completely destroyed by the Soviet power. There was not a SINGLE Cossack army left in Ingushetia.

                  This article is about the Crimean Red Terror in 1920-1921. For the events in Crimea in 1917-1918, see the article Mass Terror in Crimea (1917-1918).

                  The Red Terror in Crimea is the Red Terror that was carried out on the territory of the Crimean Peninsula in 1920-1921 after the establishment of Soviet power in the specified region. From November 1920 to the end of 1921, all the "class enemies" of the Soviet state that remained on the peninsula after the evacuation of Wrangel's army were physically destroyed in the Crimea. The punitive measures were sanctioned by the central Bolshevik leadership and organized by the local authorities.

                  In the collective work of French historians "The Black Book of Communism", these events are called "the most massive killings during the entire civil war." Go to the section "# General estimates" According to official Soviet data, more than 56 people were shot in the largest cities of the peninsula alone [000 ]. The well-known writer, participant of these events I. Shmelev, referring to the materials of the Crimean doctors' unions, estimates the number of victims of terror at 1 people [120]. The editor of "Novy Zhurnal" Roman Gul in one of the chapters of his book "I took Russia ..." (Sept. 000) gives approximately the same figures [2]. The historian S. Melgunov also names the number of 1978 victims [3]. Other contemporaries of the events named the number of up to 120 thousand victims. Go to the section "# Estimates of the total number of victims" Historian I. Ratkovsky in his study cites the figure of 000 people [4].


                  https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Красный_террор_в_Крыму
  • The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. The comment was deleted.
            3. The comment was deleted.
            4. The comment was deleted.
            5. The comment was deleted.
            6. The comment was deleted.
  • Cowbra
    Cowbra 22 January 2021 21: 09
    0
    Exactly. That a Cossack is a "robber soul" is not even an insult. but to explain to this mummer why it is easier to shoot himself.
  • Living7111972
    Living7111972 22 January 2021 05: 32
    0
    What will you leave me?
  • Akuzenka
    Akuzenka 22 January 2021 09: 40
    +2
    Krasnov and Shkuro were enemies of Russia? What nonsense, why on earth?
    about the Cossack, you don't know anything.
    Timur, good afternoon. You are promoting an alternative here too. And who defeated Nazism in World War II?
  • Sergey Sfiedu
    Sergey Sfiedu 3 February 2021 19: 12
    0
    "The empire has no permanent allies, the empire has permanent interests." Well, the British really have more or less constant interests (and then we must understand that the Conservatives and Labor had and have completely different foreign policies), but our empire has to figure it out. Everything suggests that the myth of the eternal enmity with England was invented for jingoistic patriots, no matter what unnecessary questions are asked to the authorities, and the authorities themselves, both tsarist, Soviet, and the current "elite" have always found common ground with the English elite.
  • apro
    apro 21 January 2021 05: 38
    -17%
    That's in vain so about the Britons. How much they helped the Russians. The Bablo paid. It was all honorable. And they allied against Napoleon, and against the Kaiser and against the sworn Bolsheviks ... and relatives of the Russian tsars. And today great friends of the new Russians. Allowed to settle in London. and business to do.
    1. antivirus
      antivirus 21 January 2021 06: 35
      +12
      even allowed their sewers to be used by "our Londoners" ......................................... .................................................. ......................
    2. Crowe
      Crowe 21 January 2021 07: 33
      +22
      Well, they did not save the tsar, although they could, but they were not allowed to settle for the new Russians (half a percent of them were Russians), but they were allowed to steal their money in Russia.
      1. apro
        apro 21 January 2021 09: 18
        +8
        Quote: Crowe
        Well they didn't save the king

        What kind of a king ??? a de-crowned character .. not a king ... but a citizen. Ordinary.
      2. andrew42
        andrew42 21 January 2021 15: 22
        +6
        Hmm uzhzh ... The story of citizen Romanov is a true mug of the British "ruling" house. Symbionts of usurers. Nothing personal, just business.
      3. Obliterator
        Obliterator 21 January 2021 15: 56
        -7
        Quote: Crowe
        Well, they did not save the king, although they could

        Could not. His salvation did not depend on them.
    3. mr.ZinGer
      mr.ZinGer 21 January 2021 07: 40
      +10
      And Herzen and Marx gave shelter ...
    4. Bar1
      Bar1 21 January 2021 18: 00
      -5
      Quote: apro
      That's in vain so about the Britons. How much they helped the Russians. The Bablo paid. It was all honorable. And they allied against Napoleon, and against the Kaiser and against the sworn Bolsheviks ... and relatives of the Russian tsars. And today great friends of the new Russians. Allowed to settle in London. and business to do.


      uh, that's what you mean. For britof.
      Maybe you heard out of your ears that the Angles created a concentration camp for the Russians in Arkhangelsk. They persecuted people, shot them, and that means you like them? Everything is clear with you.
      1. apro
        apro 21 January 2021 18: 09
        -11%
        Quote: Bar1
        Arkhangelsk concentration camp for Russians.

        for the communists, they created ... with the Russians they have friendship .. allies after all.
        1. Bar1
          Bar1 21 January 2021 18: 22
          -3
          Quote: apro
          Quote: Bar1
          Arkhangelsk concentration camp for Russians.

          for the communists, they created ... with the Russians they have friendship .. allies after all.

          thousands of communists were in the camp and all communists? Do not lie.
          1. apro
            apro 21 January 2021 18: 28
            -7
            Quote: Bar1
            thousands of communists were in the camp and all communists? Do not lie.

            and who else. the real Russian patriots. in the Anlitz jacket. on the English tank fought with the red.
            1. Bar1
              Bar1 21 January 2021 18: 49
              -3
              Quote: apro
              Quote: Bar1
              thousands of communists were in the camp and all communists? Do not lie.

              and who else. the real Russian patriots. in the Anlitz jacket. on the English tank fought with the red.

              thrown into the camp for any suspicion of involvement with the Bolsheviks.
        2. andrew42
          andrew42 22 January 2021 14: 11
          0
          You are talking nonsense. Anyone was thrown into the Mudyug concentration camp for resisting the occupation authorities, and simply for being unreliable. In the North, resistance to the invaders was more Russian than communist.
          1. apro
            apro 22 January 2021 15: 06
            -1
            Quote: andrew42
            In the North, the resistance to the invaders was rather Russian,

            Ie, as I understand it, the Russians fought with the British allies. Who came to fight the Bolsheviks ???
            1. andrew42
              andrew42 4 February 2021 12: 26
              +1
              Look a little wider. In the North, the Reds were the only alternative to foreign invaders. In fact, there were no “whites” as such. So, a couple of hundreds of restless souls, ready to lie under the "civilized" Entente and burn Russia.
      2. stariy
        stariy 21 January 2021 18: 18
        -1
        Quote: Bar1
        and relatives of the Russian tsars. and today great friends of the new Russians. allowed to settle in London. and do business.

        It was ironic.
  • Mykhalych
    Mykhalych 21 January 2021 05: 48
    +18
    The former "mistress of the seas", having lost her former greatness, sank to frankly insane accusations against Russia either about the Skripals, or about the underwater invasion. And speech the English message that the United States and Great Britain will do everything to prevent Russia from fighting the challenges of the pandemic- this is the height of the madness of the arrogant Englishmen. Rudeness and lies are distinctive features of the Anglo-Saxons.
    As Vysotsky's grilling: "They scare them with plates, they say, mean ones fly, Now your dogs bark, then the ruins say" ...
    1. 2 Level Advisor
      2 Level Advisor 21 January 2021 06: 30
      +11
      The mistress of the seas, now the mistress of financial flows, I think it will be cooler .. but for the seas they have minke whales, if someone needs to be called to order .. no need to write off the shaves, oh no need .. and the British Commonwealth continues to exist -the queen has never been refused, for example, to enter the war .. so they have a lot of influence ..
  • tatra
    tatra 21 January 2021 05: 52
    +8
    Enemies of the Bolshevik communists on the territory of the USSR are always the same, including the fact that some of them were accomplices of the Anglo-Saxon occupiers of their homeland in Grazhdanskaya, while others, after their seizure of Russia, made the Anglo-Saxon Whites' lackeys, starting with Kolchak, their "heroes" and brought them to England huge money from Russia.
    1. d1975
      d1975 22 January 2021 23: 37
      0
      I will tell you that there are no winners in the civil war! As if who is here and what did not think. We were simply removed from the chessboard of the world. And they did it by someone else's hands and will do it! And we, as they say, will attend to Lavrov.
  • Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 21 January 2021 06: 00
    -1
    Interestingly, when meeting with Soviet troops, the Angles also held their sticks?
  • Cartalon
    Cartalon 21 January 2021 06: 16
    -5
    Fierce Delirium however
    1. Doctor
      Doctor 21 January 2021 06: 29
      -5
      Fierce Delirium however

      No, just Vlasovism.

      London has always been hostile to Russia - tsarist, Soviet or democratic.


      Bolshevism dragged the Russian people into a war for the interests of the Anglo-American capitalists alien to them.
      England has always been the enemy of the Russian people. She always tried to weaken our Motherland, to harm it.
      But Stalin, in serving Anglo-American interests, saw an opportunity to realize his plans for world domination, and for the sake of implementing these plans he linked the fate of the Russian people with the fate of England, he plunged the Russian people into war, brought on his head innumerable calamities, and these scourges of war are the crown all the misfortunes that the peoples of our country endured under the rule of the Bolsheviks for 25 years.


      England did everything to destroy a potential alliance between Russia and Germany, which could successfully resist the Anglo-Saxons. Face off the Russians and the Germans, Britain's main competitors in Europe and the world. The operation was a success.

      The Germans and Russians were carried out, played off (England and the USA were the main enemies of Russia who robbed it).

      .
      I came to the firm conviction that the tasks facing the Russian people,
      Can be resolved in alliance and cooperation with the German people. The interests of the Russian people have always been combined with the interests of the German people, with the interests of all the peoples of Europe.


      Why I took the path of fighting Bolshevism
      (Open letter from Lieutenant General A.A. Vlasov)
      1. Alt 22
        Alt 22 21 January 2021 06: 43
        +19
        Vlasovism is not attacks on the enemies of Russia, to which the communists do not belong, Vlasovism is when, hiding behind stories about the interests of the Russian people, to act on the side of the enemies of Russia and the Russian people - the Nazis, or the British, the Americans ...
        1. Doctor
          Doctor 21 January 2021 07: 11
          -3
          Vlasovism is not attacks on the enemies of Russia, to which the communists do not belong, Vlasovism is when, hiding behind stories about the interests of the Russian people, to act on the side of the enemies of Russia and the Russian people - the Nazis, or the British, the Americans ...

          Everything is correct. A plus. This is written to show what propaganda is.

          In fact, not only England has no permanent allies, but only interests.
          Everyone has it.
          Any society is heterogeneous, under Trump there was one foreign policy, under Biden there will be another.

          In the West, there are 2 main centers of Power - the Anglo-Saxons and the Germans. Russia has always hesitated between them. Stalin - so several times in his life.

          It so happened that the economic interests of Russia now lie in Germany. Plus Germany is closer mentally to our current president.
          Therefore, the articles are like that. wink
      2. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
        Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 21 January 2021 10: 36
        -2
        Quote: Arzt
        No, just Vlasovism.

        Bravo! A very pertinent quote!
        With some cuts "Samsonov" will sign under each word of Vlasov.
  • antivirus
    antivirus 21 January 2021 06: 33
    0
    it is necessary to pour holy water (secretly brought to London) the walls of parliament and the Trafalgar pillar.
    can "let go"?
    there is a joy to live life this way ---- I'm happy for the English "Serov". Russia also changed the borders of its neighbors and influenced distant "friends".
    "And from our window the Red Square is visible .." It is better to see the whole world from the Kremlin window than one courtyard.

    I know who is stopping me from pumping my abs and biceps .... but England is to blame.
  • Filxnumx
    Filxnumx 21 January 2021 07: 01
    -5
    The continuous conflict with England was fueled by the desire of the British to rule the world.
    So Fomenko and Nosovsky are right: before the Romanovs, Russia-Tartary ruled the world?
    1. Deniska999
      Deniska999 21 January 2021 07: 08
      0
      One does not follow from the other.
  • Stirbjorn
    Stirbjorn 21 January 2021 08: 11
    +11
    Liberal and socialist (Marxism) ideologies were used to destroy the Russian Empire. England helped organize the First Russian Revolution. It was a rehearsal for the future First World War and the 1917 Revolution. London was preparing Russia for the Romanovs' slaughter.
    Well, the author showed his true face - otherwise he pretended to be a socialist before. It turns out that the revolution of 1905 was organized by the British - and on Bloody Sunday, disguised Englishmen fired at the Russian workers ?! Or did Russian soldiers shoot at the British disguised as Russian workers ?! wassat It is already getting to the point that the national heroes Stepan Razin and Emelyan Pugachev are British agents, such guardians are announcing. Ugh three times.
    By the way, you can write the same article about France - the French, the Poles and the Turks, got into trouble during the time of Catherine. Napoleon's invasion again, the Crimean War. The revolution, which the Old Believer merchants financed, because the French capital strangled them, the Wallonia and Charlemagne divisions, and Macron and Navalny fellow
    And you can also concoct about the Germans - from the Livonian Order to Frau Merkel
  • smaug78
    smaug78 21 January 2021 08: 27
    +2
    England is the fierce enemy of Russia
    the author of the title is clear. The article itself is a portion of half-truths, lies and the Masters of the West. laughing
  • Trapperxnumx
    Trapperxnumx 21 January 2021 08: 37
    +3
    That is, the periods of alliances with England, as well as the fact that for a couple of centuries she was our main trading partner - we are throwing nafik out of our history.
    And why, in fact, remember the "unnecessary"?
    It is necessary to study history, and not to live with manuals.
    1. andrew42
      andrew42 21 January 2021 15: 26
      +1
      Trade what has to do with it? - And they trade with the natives. And if at gunpoint native bows, then generally respectfully trade. English culture is one thing, but the base of the World Moneylender is another.
    2. Petro_tut
      Petro_tut 21 January 2021 22: 49
      +1
      One question - what kind of help did the shaved ones render to Peter 1 in building the fleet and boosting industry?
      1. Trapperxnumx
        Trapperxnumx 25 January 2021 08: 43
        0
        The sale of hemp, timber and iron is both money for the treasury and the development of industry.
        https://warspot.ru/14577-penkovye-intrigi - очень хорошая статья про "то славное время")
    3. d1975
      d1975 22 January 2021 23: 42
      0
      And what does trade have to do with it? What unions are you talking about? This has never happened. What do you think is the union?
      1. Trapperxnumx
        Trapperxnumx 25 January 2021 09: 02
        0
        Quote: d1975
        And what does trade have to do with it? What unions are you talking about? This has never happened. What do you think is the union?

        Trading is always good. Britain was the main foreign trade partner of Russia throughout the 18th century. Russia sold wood, hemp, iron, etc. to England, thus developing its metallurgical production and filling the budget. Almost the entire 18th century, the balance of trade was in favor of Russia (they sold more than they bought).
        What unions were not there? The Entente was not there? Or was there no Anti-Hitler coalition? I am not going into the distant 18-19 centuries yet. The last two, I hope, are enough.
  • Astra wild2
    Astra wild2 21 January 2021 09: 16
    +1
    "Tsar Alexander, apparently, psychologically broken by the death of his father," and Artemenko yesterday argued that Alexander just did not digest Napoleon maniacally.
    1. apro
      apro 21 January 2021 09: 42
      +1
      Quote: Astra wild2
      Alexander did not digest Napoleon downright maniacally.

      When he received Anlick subsidies for anti-French coalitions.
  • Astra wild2
    Astra wild2 21 January 2021 09: 36
    +4
    "Liberal and socialist (Marxism) ideology was used to destroy the Russian Empire" about the liberal I agree. And I will not give up Marxism-Lenenism to the British. Samsonov, do not hope
  • Maks1995
    Maks1995 21 January 2021 09: 56
    +2
    The proverb about a tiger, a dragon and a wise monkey, in its version, is attributed to absolutely everyone.
    There are no fools among the ruling parties. World powers are always fighting among themselves, uniting only against someone else.

    If you don't know what to write about, write everything to the Saxons.
  • Kot_Kuzya
    Kot_Kuzya 21 January 2021 10: 04
    +2
    England is a fierce enemy not only of Russia, but of the whole world. England has destroyed all the empires of the world since the 18th century. Its first victim was the Spanish Empire, which England destroyed with the help of pirates who robbed Spanish merchant ships and undermined the Spanish economy. Then England destroyed the French Empire in 1815 by the hands of the Russians, Prussians and Austrians, and became the world hegemon, finally expelled the French from India and completely subjugated India. Then, in the course of two Opium Wars, England destroyed the Chinese Empire, completely robbed it. Then, during the First World War unleashed by England, she destroyed Austria-Hungary, the German Empire, the Ottoman Empire and the Russian Empire. It is a miracle that the Bolsheviks came to power in Russia, who restored Russia under the guise of the USSR in almost the same borders as the Republic of Ingushetia, otherwise Russia would have disintegrated forever into small pieces, as the multinational Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman empires collapsed. Now England, in alliance with the United States, is milking and robbing the whole world, unleashing wars and coups around the world. Indeed, there is no one worse and more insidious than the Anglo-Saxon.
    1. andrew42
      andrew42 21 January 2021 15: 54
      0
      Britain destroyed all of these listed empires for one simple reason: they were ruled by NATIONAL elites. This is the answer to all the riddles. And the Anglo-Saxons (as the ruling elite) in Britain "ended" in 1066. It is a sin to wave the bones of the dead, but many people like this cliché.
  • vladcub
    vladcub 21 January 2021 10: 16
    +3
    "Spain and Portugal also created world colonial empires, but never got involved in the affairs of Russia," but is it okay that Spain and Portugal at 18 have already yielded the "palm" to England? From the middle of the 18th the Britons began to be "interested" in Russia, and before that they had enough things to do.
  • Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
    Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 21 January 2021 10: 20
    +5
    The team of authors with the nickname "Samsonov" has a pronounced syndrome of a cook who talks about history and politics - no matter what she writes, a primitive recipe for scrambled eggs comes out. This, my judgment, is not history. This is run-of-the-mill propaganda. It's time for VO to create a corresponding heading. There would be Samsonovs, haraluzhnye and "retired colonel Malyutin" with his roads to the temples. Sometimes one gets the impression that "Samsonov" stupidly rips out pages from the history textbook for a hygienic procedure after sending out a great propaganda need.
    1. mr.ZinGer
      mr.ZinGer 21 January 2021 16: 32
      +1
      [/ i] "Sometimes it seems that Samsonov is stupidly tearing pages out of the history textbook ..." [i]
      And he tries to retell it in his own words.
  • Kushka
    Kushka 21 January 2021 14: 04
    0
    "I am tormented by vague doubts" (C)
    There is no house on the territory of the USSR that does not have
    those killed in the Second World War, who passed it before the Victory. Many have
    photographs of these relatives, pre-war, front-line.
    They carefully keep their personal belongings, awards, awards
    weapon
    Imagine, you find out that in the city of Khust, there is a house in
    which keeps personal belongings, photographs of a relative who is active
    fighter of the OUN or UPA, de even in Hitler's uniform.
    Fascist brat, you say (although this Vuiko lived in Czechoslovak
    city, was a Czech citizen and did as he wanted).
    So, in EVERY German house, both in the East and in the West, then
    the same - personal belongings, "souvenirs" sent
    them from the front (we know they loved it and wrote about it in their
    letters - "I sent") photographs from the front of relatives - Hitler's
    soldier. And I don't give a damn who they were - Goebbels fanatics killing
    "subhuman" or intimidated privates who fired at all living things,
    to survive.
    But we now have peace, work, friendship with Germany. We give them gas, they give us turbines
    Siemens. The first person chirps almost every day on the phone with the chancellor
    And on VO Samsonovs and K, as on schedule, they drive publications about "the entire European Union,
    attacked the USSR ", separately about each - starting from the Finns, and sequentially
    about Poland, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Croatia, Italy, all this is in great detail.
    Along the way, all the publications are poking through about "saved Europe from the brown plague",
    as if she was "sexless" somehow, "we made a decisive contribution to the victory over
    fascism ", again" asexual "somehow.
    And somehow it moves aside that the same Monty smashed the Nazis from Libya, through
    all of southern, western, northern Europe, right up to the Baltic. What the losses of the Nazis
    in Egypt were equal to or exceeded their losses at Stalingrad. Took
    surrender of Germany on behalf of England and the United States (I will not say anything about Lend-lease, this is
    became a common place).
    So is the world changing or not changing? Or everything is like a hundred years ago - said the leader
    "bourgeois enemy" and went to kill the bourgeois on 1/6 of the land (although in no code
    no civilized country has such a crime "bourgeois")
    And then - "kulaks", "spies", "pests", "Finnish flea" - we have a lot
    for hatred it is not necessary - the leader will tell whom to love and whom to hate.
    We already had "peace, work, friendship" with Germany, and the kissing of top officials
    for birthdays. How it ended is known.
    1. andrew42
      andrew42 21 January 2021 15: 51
      +1
      Shadow on the fence.
      1. Kushka
        Kushka 21 January 2021 17: 42
        +1
        Why is it so faded? So write - a blatant lie,
        sophisticated slander of the insurrectionary
        "cookies" and lace panties .... ugh, jelly, la-la-la
        1. andrew42
          andrew42 21 January 2021 18: 05
          +1
          I wanted to be brief, but it’s hardly possible. I also don't see anything disgusting that someone is holding a photo of their ancestors in military uniform. Even if they fought to the death with my ancestors. This is THEIR history and THEIR memory. At least until they began to publicly admire the deeds of their ancestors, if such were criminal and inhuman. The bad news is that you tighten the motive of respect for ancestors to the current situation, and even attach it to several levels higher, in particular, to modern cooperation between states, or to the official diplomatic game of the past. Pulling by the ears, trying to impose your assessment on the relationship of formations and states for a decent period of time, while appealing to the stories of individuals with their photographs. It's not gonna go.
          1. Kushka
            Kushka 21 January 2021 19: 41
            0
            I must agree with you in many ways, but I want to draw
            Your attention, to my "doubts".
            That is, I do not presume to assert something, much less insist
            on something. I honestly write - I doubt - biased all this
            somehow yes and sewn by Samsonov and K with white thread.
            How I doubt another hackneyed mantra - like seasoned ones,
            evil and cunning guys from across the ocean, vile played off two boobies
            with each other, while incredibly rich and rich.
            There is one of two things - either Stalin and Hitler really were
            stupid, like the cubs from the famous fairy tale, which the fox
            ate the whole circle of cheese, and they got only a small piece
            Poland .... oh cheese. And would be smarter, honestly talk - you
            Uncle Sem instigated me? And you Churchill? - Oh, they are bastards! Well
            hold on !. Yes, together as we would have swum across the Channel, and how we weighed
            to London, but how they would show up to this Sem, and how they piled on him
            and burn Washington to hell. Then they would have divided among themselves
            the whole shari .... oh circle of cheese - in half.
            Or, nevertheless, neither Stalin nor Hitler were stupid and the head
            and they both cooked no worse than the bigwigs in London or Washington.
            It's just that WWII had other reasons, not far-fetched.
            And this mantra is as harmful as about the eternal enemy
            England. Both are openly shameless attempts
            to instill false attitudes into the minds of contemporaries (I will not give in).
            1. andrew42
              andrew42 22 January 2021 13: 40
              0
              There were no "cubs". If one of the parties is furiously eager to fight, then there will be a fight. It doesn't matter if Stalin could dodge or not, Hitler would have gone to the Osten Drang anyway. Firstly, for him it was a "natural" fixed idea, and he considered it his own principle to the depths of his soul. Secondly, such a person was equipped and guided / supported so that he would not "change his mind, that he was confused." Here even the political system in Russia did not play any role (as it is today, for example), especially the personality of the leader. And as for Stalin, if I were in his place, I would have kissed Hitlerysha in the ass if I could win for 6 months. If ... But in real life it was not, Hitler's European Union flooded immediately. as soon as more or less organized.
              1. Kushka
                Kushka 22 January 2021 13: 56
                +1
                I agree with you. The demoniac could not be stopped -
                one of his ideas about the conquest of "living space"
                for the German people with countless riches
                both on the ground and underground. Apparently I picked it up
                an "alternative history" virus.
                By the way, I read somewhere that some American boss,
                after a standard "production" meeting,
                demanded from subordinates to continue in the "delirium" mode.
                This was allegedly the reason for the great success.
  • CastroRuiz
    CastroRuiz 21 January 2021 14: 47
    -2
    Statie i avtoru plus.
  • andrew42
    andrew42 21 January 2021 15: 48
    +1
    After the Khazar Kaganate, Britain is the first formation where the national elite was replaced by the financial "international" with a cherry on the cake in the form of the head of Karl Stewart. Earlier, Holland could have become such a base, but something did not grow together, and the place for a "base" is not more successful than a separate island territory - the cost of physical protection is much less.
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 21 January 2021 16: 01
    +2
    "Over the past three centuries, England has been the most terrible enemy of Russia.
    Only since the Second World War did Britain share this place with the USA "///
    ----
    Two World Wars Russia-USSR fought with Germany, having England as allies. smile
    But the terrible enemy is England. belay
    The Frenchman Napoleon attacked Russia and captured Moscow. But the terrible enemy is England. belay
    And the people successfully hawala this nonsense, do not even frown. laughing
    1. Kushka
      Kushka 21 January 2021 17: 37
      0
      Add, England smashing Napoleon, freeing up resources
      and attacked the USA in 1812 and took Washington in 1814
      and burned down the White House and the same Capitol.
      But now - "since World War II, Britain has shared this place with the United States."
      So all the same - "since ..." or after WWII? From what moment, more precisely, is it possible?
    2. Petro_tut
      Petro_tut 21 January 2021 22: 56
      0
      Have you forgotten the reason why RI became an ally of France and Britain in WWI
    3. andrew42
      andrew42 22 January 2021 13: 47
      0
      In WWI, England was not an ally of Russia. You twist. The military-political alliance was formalized only with France. The Petersburg agreement with Britain was solely on the delimitation of spheres of influence, in light of the fact that anti-Russian fuss was postponed for a while against the background of Germany's claims to leadership in Europe, and to a colonial redistribution. Thus, throughout WWII Britain was an indirect ally for Russia, a conditional one, through the "French bridge" whether it was three times wrong. Russia was to Britain no more than a "direct enemy" yesterday and an "enemy of the enemy" today.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 22 January 2021 14: 12
        +4
        Antanta (fr. Entente agreement, consent) is a military-political bloc of Russia, Great Britain and France. Abroad in the official and academic literature adopted the extended name of the Triple Entente, Eng. Triple Entente [1] [2].
        1. andrew42
          andrew42 3 February 2021 16: 11
          +1
          These are common words. "Entente" is a purely conceptual thing. Legally void. Read international treaties and agreements. There is no military-political union between Britain and Russia.
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 3 February 2021 16: 19
            +2
            The Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907 or Convention between the United Kingdom and Russia relating to Persia, Afghanistan, and Tibet.

            "Fierce enemy" laughing England gave loans to Russia. The convention lasted well until 1918.

            King George V looked like his relative Nicholas II,
            like a twin brother. In the same uniforms they would not be distinguished. wink
            1. andrew42
              andrew42 3 February 2021 16: 29
              +1
              "relating to Persia, Afghanistan, and Tibet." - That's it. I already wrote about this in 2 posts above. Where is the military assistance here-? This is a purely "water truce" from Mowgli, nothing more. This is the essence of the Petersburg Convention of 1907. Loans are a military alliance ??? - I repeat once again, Russia and Britain did not have any mutual obligations to enter the war when attacked by a third party.
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 3 February 2021 16: 39
                +2
                England cannot be called a friend of Russia. But also on the "fierce enemy"
                she does not pull in any way. smile
                I have been to England many times. Both countries, Russia and England, are very similar.
                And there, and there they like to fight with their fists, they like to get drunk in a bar.
                Both those and others are Spartans in relation to cold, rain, weather and everyday life,
                can eat anything and not notice it.
                Make friends! drinks
                1. andrew42
                  andrew42 4 February 2021 12: 18
                  +1
                  And I personally do not at all burst into hatred of English culture. Quite the opposite. For me, the culture and history of Britain is like my "second home", and I studied at an English school as a child. Only I clearly distinguish where there are the English people (descendants of the Celts / Saxons / Utes), and where the greedy, treacherous, unprincipled British "Elite", which on the way to world domination for centuries used this people as an expendable material in a state of being brought to complete bestiality. And there can be no peace here. I haven't avenged them yet for Godwin :)) The debt has been hanging for a thousand years.
                  1. voyaka uh
                    voyaka uh 4 February 2021 12: 29
                    +1
                    "where is the greedy, treacherous, unprincipled British" elita ", which on the way to world domination for centuries used this people as a consumable in a state of being driven to complete bestiality" ///
                    ---
                    If you replace the word "British" with the word "Russian" in your proposal,
                    then you will also get a very truthful statement. yes
                    Indeed, in England there is still a hierarchical division into
                    elite and people. I had interesting discussions in London on this issue.
                    I lived in a wealthy house in a wealthy neighborhood, but with a bottom-up family.
                    And they complained about the elite barrier.
                    Nevertheless, their people respect the elite. Because those are traditional
                    send their children to special forces in hot spots.
                    Churchill served as a cavalryman in four wars.
                    Prince Harry flew the Apache and ran through the villages
                    in Afghanistan with a gun.
                    1. andrew42
                      andrew42 4 February 2021 12: 48
                      +1
                      I will answer with the words of Bumbarash, I hope the Soviet film is known? - "You have Gavrila yours, and I have mine." Nehay the people of England with their elite toil themselves. The main thing is that these "elitaries" of a usurious nature should not go under our arm. This is no longer the War of the Scarlet / White Roses. You can pose as many descendants of knights as you like, "go" to war and so on, but the essence of servicing the World Usurer will not go anywhere. And Harry really "fell out of the nest", let's see when he gets enough of the game "independence", maybe he will become a Man.
                    2. andrew42
                      andrew42 4 February 2021 13: 01
                      +1
                      And as for the comparison of the elites, I don’t drown either for the old, degraded "Russian pre-revolutionary" or for the current "Russian" one. The first had merits, but played out to the uttermost "Cherry Orchard" and died during the final transition to bourgeois relations. The latter are not much better than their British "colleagues" - in relation to the governed people, and sooner or later they will also receive a neck from Mother History for "new fiscal serfdom". However, Russia has been distinguished for centuries by the fact that its own elite, when separated, is swept away and renewed from its own (!) Bowels, and in Britain it has been an eternal parasite since 1066 A.D. The venality of the elites to the detriment of the fate of the governed people is an eternal scourge with two ends.
                      1. voyaka uh
                        voyaka uh 4 February 2021 13: 46
                        0
                        "However, Russia has been different for centuries in that its own elite, when separated, is swept away and renewed from its own (!) Bowels" ///
                        ----
                        It is difficult to agree in your statement that the constant change of elites -
                        in fact, revolutions and system changes are good.
                        Usually, it is considered the other way around - if there are no revolutions in the country for long periods
                        and civil wars (with a smooth change in the economic structure), this is a positive trend.
                        The last revolution in England was in the 17th century - then, only continuous
                        economic and social reforms.
                        This means that the elites in England are quite smart and prudent.
                        Despite the transition from the status of an empire to the status of an ordinary European
                        countries and impoverishment because of this, in England there were no social explosions.
                        The monarchy is still popular.
                      2. andrew42
                        andrew42 4 February 2021 14: 12
                        +1
                        I also find it difficult to agree with the "cleverness and foresight" of the island elite. Between "fencing" and "serfdom", I personally would choose serfdom - I would not want to hang out in a loop on the side of the road among hundreds of other gallows. "Cleverness and foresight" is in the mercenary elite interests - well, today in Russia this is at the forefront. And as for an "ordinary European country" without "social explosions" - so you can sympathize with the British in human terms - they have lost "The Empire over which the sun does not set." And why, but because the function of the world financial metropolis has been transferred to the United States, and two Scrooges have no place in one repository. And Britain is a waste material, but the "old garage" is always needed, and even for "European democracies" a watchman is needed. We'll live a little longer - we'll see more - how ordinary Britons will live well. So far, the trend is negative. However, the tendency in modern Russia is "twice a minus", so you should not try to teach the Britons how to live, - for now, the refuge is in "Londongrad" and not "City of Moscow". I can agree with this.
                      3. voyaka uh
                        voyaka uh 4 February 2021 14: 19
                        0
                        "You can humanly sympathize with the British, - lost" The Empire, over which the sun does not set "///
                        ---
                        Why sympathize? All empires collapsed.
                        None survived.
                        And the British are not worried about this, and I am not.
                        The future belongs to ordinary countries.
                    3. andrew42
                      andrew42 4 February 2021 14: 18
                      +1
                      "The monarchy is still popular." - Props and a toy to amuse the plebs' pride with nostalgia for the former greatness of the Lady of the Seas. This monarchy, - for a long time, simply "privileged shareholders" of the Rothschild Empire.
                    4. voyaka uh
                      voyaka uh 4 February 2021 14: 30
                      0
                      If you seriously take an interest (outside the Internet conspiracy smile )
                      - The Rothschilds are (relatively) not very rich.
                      Compared to today's rich in Silicon Valley
                      barons are boring poor people from the century before last.
                      (If they have already started to sue the Vienna City Hall over the building
                      the Rothschilds by the Nazis, and then nationalized by Austria,
                      then their financial affairs are frankly bad).
                      And in England the Rothschilds were pretty much dispossessed by the Laborites in the 50s.
                      In London, Qatar foundations and Indian oligarchs own property
                      ten times larger than the Rothschilds.
                    5. andrew42
                      andrew42 4 February 2021 15: 00
                      +1
                      about the Rothschilds - this is the past path of the British monarchy. Nevertheless, this path cannot be removed from the song. Of course, in the 20th and 21st centuries, there are already different layouts, different players and figurants.
  • cheap trick
    cheap trick 21 January 2021 16: 27
    0
    Well, since those times, nothing has changed, as they were meat and remained.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Timofey Charuta
    Timofey Charuta 22 January 2021 01: 28
    +3
    A simplified view of history through the prism of the current geopolitical situation.

    1. If all the meanness and dirty tricks of the British were of benefit only to them - why Russia and its great-wise kings, subsequent leaders with such enthusiasm climbed into all the "traps" set by the Britons - they did not miss a single one!

    2. As the author of the article, he thinks of a hypothetical peaceful coexistence, for example, of the USSR and Nazi Germany - if we assume that 1941 is another setup by the British.
    The same with regard to Napoleon - to seize half of Europe and in awe to stop at the borders of Russia (then the tricks of the vile English begin) ...

    3. Germany, England, Russia, France - all wanted to dominate in Europe, so they regularly fought with each other.

    4. By the way, did Peter attack Sweden (Great Northern War), just because the British needed it?

    Samsonov has good articles, many of his ideas are close to me, but, probably, the author's desire to always be in trend often fails ...

    P, S.
    American girls with my lords annoy me more and more, but the truth is dearer ...

  • zenion
    zenion 22 January 2021 15: 12
    +1
    The author forgot Central Asia and the creation of the Basmachi. The Bolsheviks everywhere managed to upset the plans of the Naglo-Saxons. So they found such muzzles, exactly the same ones that were near the tsar and the USSR was destroyed by Marked, whom the naglich praised. And the idiots destroyed Russia. Straight, like in a song - you don't need a knife for a fool, you lie in three boxes and do with him what you want!
  • dgonni
    dgonni 22 January 2021 22: 22
    +2
    If we evaluate Samsonov's article from the standpoint of logic. Then there is a wild pity for the rulers of Russia! It turns out that the Angles used them as they wanted in their interests for centuries!
    Now a question! Or are these Angles so clever or our rulers in all ages were not far off!
  • Zementbomber
    Zementbomber 23 January 2021 03: 40
    -1
    Skimmed through.
    Why the British Empire not was supposed to be a "fierce enemy of Russia" - and so did nIPONEL ...
  • Andron59
    Andron59 23 January 2021 13: 25
    +3
    And Russia constantly succumbs and fawns on foreign countries, wants to look good, correct, but it is high time to understand that Russia will NEVER be a good friend for the West, the West does not need Russia, the West needs Russian lands. It would be time to live by our own concepts, having spit on the west. Russia has never lived well under good (for the West) rulers, Russia has always lived well under bad (for the West) rulers. They were bad at the suggestion of the West. Ivan the Terrible, Stalin, because at the suggestion of the West and their Russian mongrels within Russia, these rulers are considered tyrants and executioners.
  • nnz226
    nnz226 23 January 2021 14: 28
    +1
    To paraphrase Senator Cato the Elder: "London must be destroyed!"
  • Orrin
    Orrin 23 January 2021 23: 15
    +7
    England is the fierce enemy of Russia

    Was an enemy, an enemy and will always be for us.
  • Sergey Novitsky
    Sergey Novitsky 24 January 2021 08: 56
    -1
    The Anglo-Saxons are the offspring of the devil, one of their many crimes against humanity is to destroy the people of an entire continent, and from another continent to bring slaves for themselves, what other nation on the planet is capable of such long-term fanaticism?
  • ratcatcher
    ratcatcher 25 January 2021 19: 14
    0
    "Liberal and socialist (Marxism) ideology was used to destroy the Russian Empire." - it would be better to start with this immediately. Wouldn't waste time reading ...
  • Seal
    Seal 26 January 2021 14: 18
    0
    The Englishwoman, of course, shits. But it is stupid to hang absolutely all dogs on it.
    Until 1610, the main activity of British merchants in the Volga region was not interrupted - they regularly exported through Arkhangelsk to England strategic raw materials that Britain desperately needed: saltpeter and sulfur from the Lower Volga for the manufacture of gunpowder, flax for the manufacture of ropes, necessary as the rigging of the fleet under construction, which they bought for root, rawhide for horse harness, etc.
    When the change of power in Moscow began to seriously threaten the British monopoly on the Volga, it was the British “Moscow Company” that provided money for the arming of the mercenary army, which was later called the “national militia”.
    Here is a typical testimony about Nizhny Novgorod: “Foreigners appointed to officer positions received a land salary in the Nizhny Novgorod district (below are examples of estates allocated to foreigners). In 1614, the Nizhny Novgorod garrison included 500 Russian archers and 200 foreigners. In 1620, their number did not decrease, although in 1619, 500 Nizhny Novgorod archers were transferred to Kaluga "(Nizhny Novgorod. Architecture of the XIV - early XX centuries., N. Novgorod: Nizhegorodskie Novosti, 1994, p. 12).
    It is characteristic that for the first patriotic appeal of Kozma Minin in Nizhny Novgorod, there was no money to arm the new militia in September 1611. But when, in the second appeal, Minin offered to sell the yards, to pledge wives and children, the merchants gave money - English merchants, and under this very draconian pledge.
    With this money, "Western European Cossacks" flocked to the Volga region: mercenaries like Jacob Delagardie, J. Margeret and others. Dmitry Pozharsky negotiated for help even with the Austrian Emperor Matthew Habsburg (who was finally recognized by the Ottoman Sultan in 1606!).
    This militia, for the most part consisted of mercenaries, being equipped, went to restore order not to Moscow, but to Kazan, where the voivode Velsky was killed, and then up the Oka to Ryazan, and up the Volga to Yaroslavl. According to N.I. Ulyanov (Historical experience of Russia. Essay on the collection "Scripts". Ann - Arbor, 1981), the Royal Council in London decided that the lands along the Northern Dvina and the Volga lower reaches with the cities of Arkhangelsk, Kholmogory, Ustyug, Totma, Vologda, Yaroslavl, Nizhny Novgorod , Kazan and Astrakhan were to go under the protectorate of King James I. An armed expedition was sent to Arkhangelsk, under the guise of trade, led by John Merrick (head of the Moscow office of the English "Moscow Company") and General for Special Assignments William Russell (the same Russell who at the end of the XNUMXth century annexed Ireland to England with fire and sword).
    In the spring of 1612, the British set up their headquarters in Yaroslavl, where a whole team arrived from the British Isles (MPI. Pp. 447 - 448). This team brought English ship cannons, which can still be seen in the museum of the city of Pereslavl - Zalessky - there they are listed as taken from the Poles, but what Poles near Pereslavl, if, according to traditional historiography, they were heroically stopped by the defenders of the Trinity Lavra 70 km away from Moscow to Pereslavl? No, this Anglo-armed militia occupied a strategically important intersection of roads from Yaroslavl to Moscow and from Vladimir to Tver, on which Pereslavl-Zalessky stands.
    In Kostroma, the British found Misha Romanov with his mother, after which the Anglo - Romanov deal took place. The funny thing is that Mikhail Romanov in 1613 was not only elected at the Council in absentia, but almost a month later they could not be found at all until he was brought under guard from Kostroma!
    1. Seal
      Seal 26 January 2021 14: 32
      0
      By the way, the only one, besides the Stroganovs, who gave a loan to Mikhail Fedorovich so that he would pay off the mercenaries for his coming to power, was the English king James I Stuart, who allocated a large sum for this purpose - 20 thousand rubles, moreover, from personal funds (i.e. it was not a state, but a private loan!).
      Under Mikhail Fedorovich, who became tsar, there was an active diplomatic correspondence with the English court, on average, the parties sent each other two letters per year. Moreover, the English kings wrote not only to the Russian sovereign, but also to his father, Patriarch Filaret. And in 1621 alone, Mikhail sent 8 letters to his overseas colleague Yakov. The rulers even agreed on a kind of "league" - a trade and political alliance, which, perhaps, could have taken place if not for the death of the English monarch in 1625.
      The British played a special role in ridding our north of the Swedish expansion. In 1617, in the village of Stolbovo near Tikhvin, it is unlikely that peace between the two powers would have been concluded, if not for the mediation of the English envoy. He tried several times to persuade the Swedes to stay when the negotiations reached an impasse and they were about to leave. The Swedes wanted to get all the lands captured in the Troubles - together with Novgorod. The Russians demanded that everything be returned. As a result, a compromise was reached, which at that time was acceptable to both sides: Sweden received the Baltic cities, cutting off Moscow from the outlet to the sea, and, in addition, almost a ton of silver; Russia returned Novgorod and focused on the war with Poland. The representative of England was generously rewarded by the tsar: among other things, he was granted a fur coat from the tsar's shoulder: a rare, exclusive honor for a foreigner. The diplomat's name was John Merrick.
      Taking the Turkish fortress of Azov in 1696 and gaining access to the sea, Tsar Peter began building a large fleet there and went to Europe to improve his qualifications. In Holland, however, having mastered the practice of shipbuilding, he was dissatisfied. The ships were not built according to science. I had to sail to England, fortunately, both the ruler of Holland and the English king was William III, who was sympathetic to the young king. There Peter found what he was looking for, uttered the famous phrase that if he were not a Russian Tsar, he would like to become a British admiral and hired shipbuilders.
      The first to come to Russia were Osip Nye and John Den, then Richard Cosenz, Richard Brown and Richard Rams. Den died soon after, and Nye built eleven battleships for the Azov fleet in ten years. Then at the Izhora shipyard there were 20 brigantines, six ships and six frigates in the St. Petersburg Admiralty. After the death of the tsar, he finished building the first Russian 100-gun battleship "Peter I and II", and among his many students were such masters as Fedosey Sklyaev and Lukyan Vereshchagin. After working in Russia for forty years, Nye built more than forty ships, of which half were ships and frigates!
      And Cosenz first worked in the south, but his main achievements were in the St. Petersburg Admiralty. There, in cooperation with the king himself, he created the famous 64-gun battleship "Ingermanland", and in total, having worked for more than twenty years, he built six ships, many frigates and other ships. When Anna Ioannovna decided to revive the ship structure in Solombala, in 1733 he erected an admiralty there, which would then build half of the Russian sailing ships of the line! He will die in 1736 and will be buried in the local cemetery. The tombstone of the great master will survive to this day.
      Richard Brown also started in the south. A talented and well-trained shipbuilder, he devoted 35 years of his life to the Russian fleet. Despite his difficult character, vanity, arrogance and quarrelsomeness, Peter I appreciated him, because he was an excellent specialist. After the Olonets shipyard and Novaya Ladoga, where he had two ships on his account, Brown worked in the capital's Admiralty and created ten ships and two frigates. In 1732 he launched the groundbreaking 110-gun Princess Anne! He died in 1740 and was buried in the Alexander Nevsky Lavra.
      Richard Rams worked in Russia for twenty-five years. Under Peter, he built three battleships. It turns out that as a result, out of thirty-odd ships built in Russia at that time, twenty-two were created by the hands of English craftsmen! In addition, of the 18 purchased abroad, 11 were also of English origin (bought in England), and they cost half the price of the Russians and served longer.
  • Dmitry Kapustin
    Dmitry Kapustin 26 January 2021 20: 59
    0
    There is no need to cringe and ask someone else's opinion, but think and act without looking back at neighbors
    and everything will quickly fall into place. And for this you don't have to settle down and learn from your neighbors. Moreover,
    from them one can only learn to hate the Motherland.
  • Oleg T
    Oleg T 27 January 2021 03: 50
    0
    Where is the mess around Russia, Britain is right there. Sport is national for them. The points they are gaining or the points are not known, but on distillation. As such - 1/6 of the earth's sushi ball at point blank range ignores the English language. Is this order?
  • Nick rex
    Nick rex 27 January 2021 15: 05
    0
    ".. while the Anglo-Saxons use Japan until now ..", gyyyy
    That is, not the islands are the reason, but their mother horse is the Anglo-Saxons. Not the stupidity of the command and the lack of normal logistics is the reason for the defeat in the Crimean war, but ... what? Who? And the Austrians, who fettered the main forces. Is generally a pearl that cannot be or an explanation. write escho, author, I adore the efforts of our Russian partners to whiten the black and say that we were there but were not there, and then again there was ethanyms in general, and the Anglo-Saxons are to blame, hehe
  • Maxim Aranson
    Maxim Aranson 27 January 2021 19: 58
    +1
    Yes, that's right. Once upon a time Great Britain was enemy number 1 for Russia. Now the USA has taken this place in terms of the aggregate of the dirty tricks perpetrated against us. But it is unlikely that we will ever make peace with the former "mistress of the seas", so all discussions about peaceful coexistence are a deliberate lie.
  • echo
    echo April 10 2021 06: 02
    0
    you forgot to mention the backward Zionist and Ashkenazi Jews who were involved in the destruction of Russia.