Military Review

Russia is the most important obstacle to Global America

From the date of September 11, the US 2001 has been trying to speed up their project of rebuilding the world in the image and likeness of their “founding fathers”, who dreamed of a democratic and liberal society. However, across this path, the United States are non-Western societies that also demonstrate their will to rule. In particular, Russia, which is one of the most important geopolitical obstacles for Washington. Russia is gradually expanding its sphere of influence and showing the world that, especially in the energy sphere of politics, it has no equal.

One of the classics of geopolitics, Englishman Halford J. Mackinder (1861-1947), who taught geography at Oxford, argued that the entire geopolitical dynamics of the world is built around the mainland of the continent of Eurasia, around the heartland (Heartland - the core of the earth, the main array). The central point of support (Pivot) of this heartland in the very center of Eurasia, which is unattainable for the maritime powers, for world politics is Russia. Russia is an empire, according to Mackinder, “which has the same strategic position as Germany in Europe throughout the world.”

Around this epicenter of global geopolitical "earthquakes", which is protected by a belt of natural obstacles (Siberian expanses, the Himalayas, the Gobi Desert, Tibet), which in turn form the "inner crescent" around the epicenter, the "coasts" of Eurasia - Western Europe, Asia Minor, Middle East, South and East Asia.

Behind these “shores” of Eurasia, separated by sea obstacles, are two island systems that complement the “inner crescent” of Eurasia - Japan and the United Kingdom, which are the bridge to the “outer crescent” around Eurasia, which includes the United States.

Russia is the most important obstacle to Global America
Mackinder Illustration Map

Within the framework of this concept of the geopolitical world, global sea powers, the so-called “thalassocracies” (Greek “talas” - sea, “short stories” - power), whose interests are protected by Mackinder, must constantly strive to prevent the continental unity of Eurasia. Thalassocracies should support conflict along the Eurasian East-West axis between the most important continental powers that could otherwise form an alliance (France / Germany, Germany / Russia, Russia / China), as well as the Thalassocracy within the framework of the Mackinder theory should be controlled and " coast "of continental Eurasia.

This Anglo-Saxon matrix, which is applicable both in the case of the British Empire of the 19 century and in the case of the US thalassocracy of the 20 century, remains to this day an important element for understanding the current geopolitics in the world. Mackinder's theory reminds us of two things that Anglo-Saxon Talas Socracies never forget: the project of Europe as a great power cannot, in principle, take place without a strong and independent Germany (Germany has been largely dependent on the United States since 1945); The second thing is that a global counterweight to US world domination is impossible without a strong Russia.

The United States wants Global America. The goal of American foreign policy, apart from elementary optimization of economic and strategic interests, is the reorganization of the entire world in the image of American society. The United States ascribes to itself the Messianic role, which is the internal engine for the advancement of American power in the world. When Churchill and Roosevelt signed the Atlantic Charter in 1941, they thereby created the long-desired world government, whose task was to organize and promote the liberal and democratic globalization of the world.

Before 1947, the United States sought to draw closer to the USSR in order to establish a world government in partnership with it, although the essences of the American and Soviet efforts to globalize the world were clearly not compatible with each other. Two years after the European collapse of 1945, the Americans realized that they could not integrate the Soviet Union into the liberal world order they had planned and accepted the fact that they would have to geographically narrow their project: atlantism temporarily replaced globalization.

When, in the year 1989, the USSR began to rock, the dream of globalization came to life again and moved the United States to strengthen its presence in the world. On the deathbed of communism, a new global enemy emerged as a pretext for expanding US global influence: Islamic terrorism.

During the Cold War with the USSR, the United States fed on Islamic terrorism in order to prevent socialist revolutions in countries stretching to Soviet Russia. Sunni Islamists were allies of the United States against the USSR in Afghanistan. Then Sunni Islamic militants were born, and in general, the Alkaida and Algerian Islamists matrix.

Then there was the Shiite revolution in Iran 1979 of the year, and the United States turned away from the Shah of Iran. Washington’s calculation was that the Shiite revolution - unlike the Marxist revolution - would not go toward rapprochement with the USSR and at the same time it would counterbalance the Sunni fundamentalists in the region.

In the Arab world, they were the Muslim Brotherhood, from Egypt to Syria sponsored by the United States. Washington provoked Iraq to war with Iran and vice versa, according to the principle of “let them kill themselves” (let them kill each other), which the Americans have already tried in the case of Russia and Germany. The goal of the Iraqi and Iranian wars was that Washington saw the destruction of Arab nationalism, which ran counter to Israeli interests in the region. This US alliance with the fundamentalist Muslim Brothers survived the collapse of the USSR and was involved in the destruction of Yugoslavia and the creation of two Muslim states in Europe: Kosovo and Bosnia-Herzegovina.

Islamic fundamentalism has always been beneficial to the United States, both in the struggle against communism during the Cold War, and in its new role as the official enemy at the end of the bipolar world system. Of course, there are real Islamists in fact, they are not a virtual mirage created by the United States. Islamists can really cause trouble and destabilize. But even if the Islamists kill people, by this they do not change and cannot change in their favor the global balance of power between the world powers.

The war against radical Islamists is only the official cover for a much more real war: the US war against the powers of Eurasia.

After the disappearance of the USSR, it became clear to the Americans that one of the continental powers of Eurasia, in combination of its demographic mass and industrial potential, could impede the implementation of the Global America project, and this power is China. The dizzying industrial and financial upsurge of China in relation to the United States resembles the situation with Germany, which in its development on the threshold of the First World War caught up with the Anglo-Saxon thalassocracy, on the threshold of surpassing them. And this was the most important reason for the first World War.

The logic of American strategists is as follows: if China, with the help of its economic power and geopolitical independence, becomes the most important world power, adhering to its Confucian model, which strongly shields China from Western democracy, this will mean the end of the Global America project. ". In this case, Americans should abandon their famous “fateful predestination” principle (“Manifest Destiny”) of America 1845, and also abandon the ideology of American messianism of the “founding fathers”.

Already at the time of the collapse of the USSR, the Americans were pondering how to prevent the strengthening of China. Probably they then understood how relevant the logic of Mackinder's theory was. The Anglo-Saxons first did away with the Eurasian project of Germany, then finished with the same project of Russia, and now they must put an end to the Eurasian project of China. Again, the sea wanted to curb the land.

The wars against terrorism and for human rights are only occasions that should fog the real goal of the new Eurasian war: China as the goal of this war, and Russia as a condition of victory in this war. China is the goal of this war, because it is the only power in the world that in the coming 20 years will be able to rob the US of global primacy. Russia as a condition for the US victory in this war, because of the strategic deployment of Russia in one direction or the other depends on what configuration the global world of tomorrow will take: unipolar or multipolar. As Russia decides, it will be all over the world.

Against China, the Americans have developed a new global strategy, which consists of several points:

- Expansion of the transatlantic bloc close to the borders of Russia and western China

- Establishment of control over China’s dependence on energy and resources

- The environment and isolation of China through old and new US alliances with traditional historical opponents of China (India, Vietnam, Japan, Korea, Taiwan)

- Elimination of the balance of strategic nuclear weapons between nuclear powers through the development of a global US missile defense system

- Instrumentalization of separatism for political purposes (in Serbia, Russia, China to the very borders of Indonesia) and redrawing of borders (in the Arabic Middle East)

After 1990, Washington hoped to win over Russia to form a large transatlantic bloc from Washington to Moscow, in the middle of which would be the European periphery, which, after 1945, was reoriented to the Atlantic. That hope was expressed by Bush Sr. in 1989 when he called for an alliance "from Vladivostok to Vancouver." This alliance would be a union of white people led by the hegemon of the United States, which, paradoxically, does not sound, with 2050, he himself will comprise less than half of the whites from his population.

The expansion of the trans-Atlantic bloc takes place within the framework of the first level of the great Eurasian game. The Americans not only saved NATO after the disappearance of the Warsaw Pact, but also gave this military bloc a new life: first, NATO turned from a military bloc based on classical international law (military function in case of aggression against one of the NATO members) into a bloc with the right to military intervention. Second, the NATO bloc increased due to the admission of Central and Eastern European countries. The Baltic and Yugoslav space (Kroatsia, Bosnia, Kosovo) was also included in the sphere of influence of NATO. To continue the expansion of NATO for the final encirclement of Russia, the Americans staged the so-called “orange revolutions” (Georgia 2003, Ukraine 2004, Kyrgyzstan 2005) - peaceful regime changes - which were organized and funded by American foundations and NGOs, and were aimed at planting old regimes new - anti-Russian. As soon as the pro-Western president of Ukraine Yushchenko came to power, he immediately demanded that the Russian fleet be withdrawn from the Crimea, at the same time expressing Ukraine’s desire to join NATO. In exactly the same way, the freshly baked President of Georgia in 2003 acted, speaking in favor of Georgia’s membership in NATO and the withdrawal of Russian troops from the territory of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

Until the very day of September 11, the 2001 USA, with the help of NATO, was building up its influence in Europe. They strengthened Albanian and Bosnian Islamism and simultaneously deprived Russia of influence in the post-Yugoslav space. However, in the 2000 year, one important event took place, perhaps the most important event since the end of the Cold War (even more important than the events of 11 on September 2001): the coming to power of Vladimir Putin. This was one of those events that occur from time to time in history, returning to balance the natural influence of geopolitical constants on the historical process after historical outbursts.

Putin had a very clear and clear program: by exporting energy resources, Russia’s power could be restored again. The oligarchs had to be deprived of control over the country's mineral resources, because they practically did not care about Russia's national interests. Putin has built powerful oil (Rosneft) and gas (Gazprom) concerns that serve as instruments of Russia's state and strategic interests. But Putin has still not revealed his cards regarding what position Russia will take in the American-Chinese struggle. This question he left open. Some, including myself, had previously held the opinion that the rapprochement between the US and Russia would be short-lived and purely utilitarian-market-oriented (the official American doctrine of the war against terrorism did not allow the US to put pressure on Russia because of its military operations in Chechnya), but at the same time, I and others from the very beginning understood that Putin would strive to pursue a policy of Russia's independence, although there were others who believed that Putin was a pro-Western politician. Putin had to first resolve the conflict in Chechnya and put energy under the control of the state, and it was a very difficult task. One unambiguous and clear criterion, however, indicated that Putin had returned to the basics of the policy of the Russian great power: a change in policy in favor of Iran and the resumption of arms sales to it, as well as assistance to Iran in conducting a nuclear program for civilian purposes.

Why was the coming to power of Putin so important? Although at first it was not so clear at the time, Putin’s coming to power meant Russia's not joining the transatlantic alliance, which automatically meant the collapse of the US unipolar world, including the collapse of their Grand Strategy towards China, which was supposed to break the back of China and most to prevent the onset of a multipolar world order.

In addition, many Europeans did not immediately realize that Putin personified an effective response to global economic competition, a response that suggested economic competition in the world between countries based on their identity and belonging to certain civilizations. Perhaps the Americans understood this better than the Europeans. Hasn’t Bush Jr confirmed this in his own words about what he saw in Putin a man who devoted his life to Russia's interests without a trace?

11 September 2001 opened up opportunities for Americans to accelerate their program to Americanize the world, i.e. establishing unipolarity. In the name of the war against evil, which they themselves created, the Americans without any delay received: unlimited support from Europeans (that is, they strengthened "atlantism" and at the same time weakened "the great power of Europe"); temporary rapprochement with Russia (Russia agreed to this rapprochement in order to suppress Islamic separatism in Chechnya); squeezing China's influence from the Muslim republics of the former USSR in Central Asia at the expense of this temporary US-Russian alliance; the American presence at the very border of Western China and on the southern borders of Russia in Afghanistan; the return and strengthening of US influence in southeast Asia as a whole.

But the euphoria of Americans in Central Asia lasted the entire 4 year. Fearing for the Orange Revolution, the leadership of Uzbekistan drove the Americans out, moving closer together with Russia, although before that Uzbekistan had dreamed of rising for a split second to the great power of Central Asia as opposed to its older brother Russia. Since 2005, Washington has begun to lose its position in Central Asia, as it is increasingly retreating in Afghanistan, despite the additional military contingent from Europe demanded to help, whose troops are not able to take over the fate of their own civilization in the fight against the Taliban-Pakistani alliance directly supported by China, which the United States, in turn, seeks to oust from Central Asia.

The Chinese can now again dream of access to Kazakh oil and Turkmen gas in exchange for building oil and gas pipelines in their own East Turkestan (Xinqiang province). Beijing also hopes that Russia will in the future balance its energy supplies to Europe with supplies to China (not only to China, but also to India, Japan, South Korea, etc.).

Thus Putin’s political game appears before us in all its clarity. Russia went to rapprochement with the United States for the sake of suppressing Islamist terrorism on its territory, which had so greatly weakened the country. But with this rapprochement, Putin in no way intended to give up Russia's legitimate interests: reunification with Ukraine (Ukrainians and Russians are kindred peoples, and besides, reunification with Ukraine will give Russia access to the Mediterranean through the Black Sea from Sevastopol to the Crimea) and interception Georgia’s accession to NATO. And if the United States and the countries of the European Union supported the independence of Kosovo, why then is Russia denied the right to support the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, whose residents do not want to be part of Georgia?

Mackinder was right. In the big Central Asian game, Russia remains the most important player. Putin’s policy to a greater extent than China’s policy is blocking Washington’s path, although America’s main goal is China, as the only potential contender for world supremacy among the great powers. It was Putin’s policy that created the Moscow-Tehran-Caracas energy axis, which includes a quarter of all the world's proven oil reserves and up to half of the gas (which will soon replace oil). This axis represents a strategic counterweight to US-owned Arabian gas and oil. The United States intended to cut off oxygen to China through energy control. But even if the United States controls the oil and gas of Saudi Arabia and Iraq (1 and 3 are ranked respectively by the world's proven oil reserves), the United States does not control either Russia, or Iran, or Venezuela, or Kazakhstan. On the contrary - these countries are rallying more and more closely. Together, they intend to end the dollar hegemony in the global economy (this dollar hegemony allows the US to force Europeans to pay US debts and help bankrupt American banks).

No one doubts that the United States will try to end this policy of Russia, putting pressure on countries neighboring Russia. The Americans will also try to build alternative Russian oil and gas pipelines, because Russia owns an extensive network of such pipelines, covering the whole of Eurasia and providing energy resources to Europe and Asia. But what can Washington do against the energy and strategic heart of Eurasia? Russia is a nuclear power. Those sensible Europeans who are not blinded by the misinformation of the American media know that they are more dependent on Russia than Russia on them. The whole of Asia, whose economies are now growing by leaps and bounds, craves for Russian and Iranian oil and gas.

In these conditions, and in the process of the emergence of a multipolar world, the Europeans would have brought themselves a lot of benefits if they now began to regain consciousness and wake up. Will the current deep crisis in which they are now in the minds of Europeans? Let us hope that this will be a positive consequence of the difficult situation in which the peoples of Europe will find themselves in the coming decades. ”

About the Author:
The author of the article, a Frenchman, Aymeric Chauprade, studied at universities in Switzerland and Sorbonne in Paris, holds a doctorate in political science, worked as an assistant professor at the Military Academy at the General Staff in Paris during the 1999-2009 period, (according to some information, he was dismissed from due to disagreements with the leadership in the vision of geopolitical reality) is the author of several fundamental works on geopolitics (below), collaborates with many magazines and newspapers as the author of articles (information about him in French wikipedia om:, has its own website "Realpolitika", dedicated to geopolitics ( with a lot of own and foreign materials, including many ( up to half) is devoted to Russia. In addition, the site maintains an additional blog:

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Magadan
    Magadan 1 October 2012 07: 19
    This is all interesting, but at the same time a very complicated theory. Everything is much simpler. According to scientists from the UN, the main resources in the world are arable land (to live and grow food), water and forest (because without oxygen it is somehow impossible to live). Energy resources are a secondary thing, because tomorrow they can invent some kind of crap that oil will replace.
    From these resources, the number of hectares of land that are now used by the average inhabitant of the planet was calculated. Forest and water on these hectares were taken into account, averaging something there too. Then they spread it out by country, got to whom how much hectare is required to ensure the consumption of their average citizen. Less than all, a hectare is required for the inhabitants of Africa - less than 1 ha per person The average Russian needs 2.5 hectares to satisfy his level of consumption. Europe consumes about 4 hectares per person. But the residents of the United States introduced into the stupor these experts from the UN. The average American's lifestyle plus its consumption, requires almost 11 hectares per snout! Scientists immediately calculated how much hectare of land would be required for every inhabitant of the planet if everyone consumed as Americans. It turned out that if everyone now consumed as an average US citizen, then it would take 2 more such planets as Earth.
    And now for the fun part. Russia owns 50% of the arable land of the planet, more than 50% of fresh water, and 90% of the oxygen in general is produced by Siberia and the Amazon. Moreover, the population of Russia is only 2% of the global population.
    About six months after this report, Madeleine Albright stated that it is not fair for a small number of citizens of a large country to own too many resources. According to her, the world community should somehow divide all the world's resources "fairly among all."
    So the whole problem is in our resources, and not in some mysterious "Pivot Wasps"
    1. Sakhalininsk
      Sakhalininsk 1 October 2012 07: 52
      You just noticed the "+", the fat old bitch Madeleine and her followers, led by the owners, are sleeping and tossing and turning from the desire to take away and share among themselves the riches bequeathed to us by our ancestors. So their marsh lures are howling, and how all the shiro we have and how miserable and how it is necessary in the ass to kiss the anointed star-mattress.
      We survived the worst time of the 90s, God willing, we will survive the present time, and not an hour we will see how fascist killers hang on the streets of Fashington.
      1. 755962
        755962 1 October 2012 12: 26
        Madeleine Albright, being the US ambassador to the UN, once declared: it is unfair when only one state has half of all world resources. This phrase, uttered not by chance, encompasses all the problems of today's Russia, although in theory it should be evidence of great happiness for this country.
        1. mark021105
          mark021105 1 October 2012 15: 32
          And these P_I_N_D_OSOV in the last 20 years has already become a tradition to appoint hysterical unsatisfied SU_CH_E_K to the post of Secretary of State.
    2. serjio777
      serjio777 14 October 2012 20: 00
      and 90% of the oxygen in general is produced by Siberia and the Amazon.

      Plus Magadan with one amendment - Amazon does not produce oxygen because the amount of oxygen that it gives out is more than compensated by carbon dioxide from the products of decay in a hot climate. Light forest planets are moderate — we and Canada.
  2. Alexander Romanov
    Alexander Romanov 1 October 2012 07: 20
    I recently read this article on Military Materials, the article is interesting for something., But again, the United States will also try to weaken Russia's policy. belay Yes, it’s too late to try, it had to be done in 90x. Now it’s not possible anymore. The United States is bogged down in the Middle East and all plans, both political and military, are sinking. And the alternative network of non-gas sector pipelines is really a bummer. Nabucco, as was a dream, remained. The only way to curb Russia and cut energy hoses is to wreak havoc in Europe itself, destroying consumers, but not everything is going smoothly. China is also not a bad consumer, what to do in this situation, the United States, well, I would recommend to shoot yourself hi
    1. tronin.maxim
      tronin.maxim 1 October 2012 07: 53
      Quote: Alexander Romanov
      what to do in this situation, the United States, well, I would recommend to shoot

      Imagine this Karina, democracy shot itself! Make a fantastic movie! laughing
      1. Alexander Romanov
        Alexander Romanov 1 October 2012 08: 23
        Quote: tronin.maxim

        Imagine this Karina, democracy shot itself! Make a fantastic movie

        And what to shoot, Clinton takes out a gun and inserts the barrel into his mouth, BACH and all happy endings, the world has become brighter and cleaner hi
        1. alexng
          alexng 1 October 2012 09: 41
          Yes, and shoot late agony is already in full swing. Now for the United States, the worst enemy is its own people. They did not have to start the swamp revolution in Russia. But at every step there was a warning - do not touch Russia in any way. They disobeyed and got the most ... And now, so as not to be taken by the United States, everything will work against themselves.
  3. bask
    bask 1 October 2012 07: 38
    Yes amers ,, sleep ,, and see how we, to tear off, Sibir.kukesh them, and a bolt to the throat, that’s the whole theory.
  4. grizzlir
    grizzlir 1 October 2012 07: 47
    Quote: bask
    Yes amers ,, sleep ,, and see how we, to tear off, Siberia.

    You know, I’m tired of listening to the same thing. If the amers wanted to tear something off from us, they did it calmly in the 90s of the last century. In fact, they also don’t really need chaos in a country with nuclear weapons capable of destroying the planet. Until then, the last stationary ICBM complexes, I’m calm for the power. But what will happen after this is a question. Mobile complexes like Topol, this is not a nuclear sword, but rather a knife.
  5. Apollo
    Apollo 1 October 2012 07: 49
    After reading the article, I came to the conclusion that the theses of my two publications dated August 08 "The world looks with hope at Russia" and from August 10 of this year "Russia + China = Military-political union ?! and the meaning of Emerick Shoprad's article" Russia - The Most Important Obstacle to Global America ". completely coincide !.Article +!
    1. Armata
      Armata 1 October 2012 08: 13
      Greetings to Apollon. As always, Russia is the cornerstone for solving all problems. That is why we should always be responsible for the peace of the world? Us that their problems are few?
      1. Alexander Romanov
        Alexander Romanov 1 October 2012 08: 25
        Quote: Steam Train
        That is why we should always be responsible for the peace of the world? Us that their problems are few?

        Hi Zhenya, yes, there’s enough poble, only the world constantly brings us into some kind of swamp, and again we need to pull it out request
        1. Armata
          Armata 1 October 2012 08: 37
          Quote: Alexander Romanov
          yes there is enough trouble, that's just the world constantly puts into some kind of swamp, and again we pull
          Sanya hi. Most of all annoying me at what cost it always comes to us.
          1. Alexander Romanov
            Alexander Romanov 1 October 2012 09: 00
            Quote: Steam Train
            Most of all annoying me at what cost it always comes to us.

            Well, judging by the fact that you got a minus for this comment, this does not bother everyone. We ourselves are to blame, having won, we allow them to recreate all the institutions of power and others are again engaged in politics, which ultimately leads the world to another battle hi
            1. Armata
              Armata 1 October 2012 09: 11
              Quote: Alexander Romanov
              Well, judging by the fact that you got a minus for this comment, this does not bother everyone
              Well, Sanya is not afraid and does not think only short-sighted people. And mostly in his youth, for whom war and devastation is the romance of computer games in the style of cyber punk, where he is cool and drenches everyone. But if you think about all these games are made in order to operate with fragile minds. And this is also a huge harm.
      2. Apollo
        Apollo 1 October 2012 09: 16
        Quote: Steam Train
        That is why we should always be responsible for the peace of the world? Us that their problems are few?

        Greetings to Eugene and all other forum participants.!
        The fact is that the course of human history predetermined special mission of Russia !!!If not she then who ?! Destiny.
      3. volcano
        volcano 1 October 2012 10: 00
        Quote: Steam Train
        That is why we should always be responsible for the peace of the world? Us that their problems are few?

        This is due to the geopolitical position of Russia ...
        Historically, Russia protects the East from the West, and the West from the East .... And that is why we are the center or axis of the world ..... We are a barrier between civilizations .......
        ... Unfortunately, the burden is heavy ..... and the prevention of global chaos is achieved at the cost of a lot of blood and the lives of our people ....

        In theory, if the West and the East could achieve a positive contact, and a mutually respecting existence, then of course it would become easier for us ....
        Hence the truth and one more peculiarity .... Precisely because we are not the West and not the East, but the CENTER OF THE WORLD, we are not ours for either one or the other ..... and we will never become ours ...... .
        It is entirely possible that this is precisely the exclusiveness of Russia ....... we are not with the world (East or West) we are above it ...
      4. datur
        datur 1 October 2012 13: 10
        LocomotiveAlas, but it has always been like that !!!! RUSSIA = IT IS IMPORTANT !!!!! without us, peace of the khan !!!
    2. zadotov
      zadotov 1 October 2012 08: 28
      The obstacle is not very big. We do not use the respite given to us by the Islamic world. After a small slip, America will again turn its attention to Russia, which is weakening every month, torn by internal contradictions. Namely Russia! Only a short-sighted person thinks that America will butt in the near future. with China-These are economic Siamese twins. The world does not look at Russia with hope, but builds its own little worlds. I’m surprised by the mood on this site-type Russia will put everyone back in place.

      A knight in rusty armor goes smugly forward onto the battlefield — again, I am in the center of events — while the muskets are being charged at his back
      1. vorobey
        vorobey 1 October 2012 09: 36
        All welcome friends. I read and realized that it was deja vu. For some reason, Russia has always become an insurmountable obstacle for various kinds of ambitious figures. remember the best friends of Russia the same Bismarck as he foresaw a clear doctrine on the dismemberment of Russia. but nevertheless he openly said that it’s better not to fight with Russia and that you either need to play with it honestly or not play at all since the Russians always come for their money. And by the way, Europe has already experienced this several times, since Russians usually come for a long time later with dances, bears and other attributes. Even the bhizik has changed his rhetoric somewhat since he realized that America was torn apart by what ardent amerophiles would not say now. Remember the picture of Vasnetsov Vityaz at the crossroads. A somewhat free interpretation for those who want something else to overcome or fuck from their mother. Guys without options.
    3. Che
      Che 1 October 2012 12: 51
      Historically predetermined by Russia to bear this burden. It is a counterbalance to the hegemony of the United States. Throughout its ancient history, what is now called Russia performed this function. Remember Tartaria. There was no Tatar yoke. it’s just that the supreme ruler put things in order in subject areas. Western historians have distorted our history. And they won in the global game for that historical period. It seems the rollback begins.
  6. Gavril
    Gavril 1 October 2012 08: 37
    Because we were born in the best country in the world and all other countries envy us. This we have in stock so many vigorous bombs that would be enough to destroy a dozen planets. This is our largest number of billionaires after the United States, but the horror of salt has risen in price. Only in our country can all the armies of the world put together their caps, but run together from the military commissar)))
  7. Averias
    Averias 1 October 2012 09: 14
    If we imagine this development of events: Russia and Germany have integrated with each other, and have tightly integrated (and this has been talked about for a long time in Germany). What are we going to observe? This is exactly what this article is about. The ephemeral "power" of the United States will burst like a soap bubble. And you will not need to do something for this. They will bend themselves. Europe without hesitation and brainwashing will join us, because Europe without Germany will be tight, oh, how tight. And you don't need to be a great analyst to notice, this is where everything goes. I just described the ideal plan, but something similar is definitely coming. Centralization of Eurasia, with its natural resources (and military combined power) - what can other countries provide against such an argument? Nothing at all.
  8. Hippopotamus
    Hippopotamus 1 October 2012 09: 39
    Everything is correctly said. And it is well shown what the "empire of evil" is today, sowing evil and confusion throughout the world.

    But the Germans need to get closer. Recall Catherine the Great. Moreover, the Germans themselves, not their dissolute government, want it no less. To create an alliance between Russia, Germany and China, and the Anglo-Saxons will choke in their own vomit.
  9. Magadan
    Magadan 1 October 2012 10: 33
    Quote: Hippo
    But the Germans need to get closer. Recall Catherine the Great. Moreover, the Germans themselves, not their dissolute government, want it no less.

    I, too, for close cooperation with the Germans. We complement each other very harmoniously. It is a pity that only forever Germans are set against us, or we take the side of the Anglo-Saxons (as in the 1st World War).
  10. anfreezer
    anfreezer 1 October 2012 10: 49
    "Predictions of Saint Righteous John of Kronstadt about the revival of Russia
    “If we gather everyone's will into one will - we will stand! If we gather everyone's conscience, into one conscience, we will stand! If we collect everyone's love for Russia; in one love - we will stand! " "I foresee the restoration of a powerful Russia, even stronger." Nothing to add ...
  11. Forget
    Forget 1 October 2012 11: 14
    We had a drill

    Russia, my love
    Native poplar birch trees
    How dear are you to the soldier
    Native Russian land.

    A special joke, we had a lot of Uzbeks and they sang with a terrible accent smile
    1. mark021105
      mark021105 1 October 2012 15: 35
      BUT SINGLES !!! wink And God forbid, Uzbeks, Tajiks, and Kyrgyz will also sing !!!
  12. SSR
    SSR 1 October 2012 11: 16
    China as the goal of this war, and Russia as a condition for victory in this war. China is the goal of this war, because it is the only power in the world that in the next 20 years will be able to rob the United States of its global primacy. Russia as a condition for the victory of the United States in this war, because it depends on the strategic deployment of Russia in one direction or another, what configuration the global world of tomorrow will take:

    This fragment can be characterized all under the carpet fuss.
    The question is who will be "friends" with whom against whom.
    God grant us to stay away. (IMHA)
  13. vladimir64ss
    vladimir64ss 1 October 2012 11: 23
    Quote: Hippo
    But the Germans need to get closer.

    Quote: Magadan
    I, too, for close cooperation with the Germans

    If those from under the rubble of the EU have time to jump out. True, then they will be more modest. And now more and more with high glances. In general, a firm French view of the "current" moment gives hope that they too will stop jittery in front of the amers and send them to (on) ....
  14. Sasha 19871987
    Sasha 19871987 1 October 2012 11: 33
    Yeah ... Americans always were afraid of us ..
  15. bask
    bask 1 October 2012 12: 19
    grizzlir read publications ,, Madame ,, Albright under the Clinton administration. Quote ,,,, Siberia is a universal property,. General human-amers. Alas, this is not my fantasy but realities. But these are still the most ,,, soft ,,, sayings. But an alliance is needed not only with China, but also with India, Iran, Syria, Cuba. Deploy in Cuba like that ... Iskanders in response to missile defense in Europe. Conversation with the United States only from a position of diplomatic force. They do not understand otherwise.
    1. grizzlir
      grizzlir 1 October 2012 15: 09
      Answer the simple question, why didn’t the Americans conquer Siberia in the 90s of the last century? Many politicians want to chop off someone’s bold piece, but it won’t go any further. Many of us also spoke in favor of the Crimea joining Russia, the Japanese regularly make claims to the Kuril Islands, China to the part of the Far East and Siberia, the Norwegians to the Russian waters of the northern seas. These statements can not be called more than populist. I repeat, while the remnants of stationary ICBMs are on alert, no one is scrambling. The truth is that one wonderful politician who took the presidency gave the Norwegians some of the land.
      1. wax
        wax 1 October 2012 16: 04
        And another wondrous politician, from whom Georgia will not lose its hair, despite all the seizures of Misha (also native to the Americans), gave the States half of the Bering Strait along with all the fish that gravitate towards the Pacific coast of the United States.
  16. datur
    datur 1 October 2012 13: 15
    The main achievement of the Americans is Coca-Cola !! whether it’s a remedy for diarrhea, felts for constipation !!!!!!! this is their whole strength !!!!!!! yes
  17. bask
    bask 1 October 2012 16: 13
    I completely agree with you. So, in 88, Shevernadze also finished off the amer’s fishing grounds in the Berengovo Strait, not mine. About the remnants of ICBMs also to a point. Therefore, the Iskander in Cuba is the only alternative. And in the 19th century on land, Russia would have torn Amers to shreds. This is my opinion. But without new ICBMs and medium and short-range missiles, we kirdyk, this is real.
    1. grizzlir
      grizzlir 1 October 2012 18: 24
      Quote: bask
      And in the 19th century on land, Russia would tear Amers to shreds.
      Sorry of course, in what century ??? what
  18. Goldmitro
    Goldmitro 1 October 2012 17: 51
    It is clear that the battle for future world leadership has already begun. The United States, with the support of its allies, began to reshape the world according to their plan, and the "out-of-hand" Russia with its modern politics hinders them like a bone in their throat. Having defeated Russia, they will not only remove the most important obstacle to the establishment of their hegemony in the world, but will also gain control over enormous natural resources - the basis for their world domination for centuries, which they have long dreamed of. The war of the West against Russia is already going on not in the old fashioned way, but with the help of modern technologies that make it possible to destroy the state from the inside. With outside support, under the slogans of promoting crap, protecting human rights, etc., tension is created within the country on interethnic, religious or social grounds, which is brought to the level of direct confrontation within society, leading to chaos and the collapse of the country. This technology has already been tested in a number of countries, and now it is Russia’s turn, whose most vulnerable point is an openly weak interethnic and regional policy and here ANY means of nuclear deterrence WILL HELP! Instead of strengthening the role of the Russian ethnos, as a state-forming and the only one capable, which has been tested for centuries, to cement the commonality of the numerous peoples of Russia, this role is belittled to please the ruling clans of national minorities, Russians are being infringed and discriminated against, which naturally leads to an increase in interethnic tension in society , which is fraught with an explosion, which can destroy Russia without nuclear strikes, which, in fact, is what the shit-mongering-well-willed Russia is trying to achieve.
  19. Karabin
    Karabin 1 October 2012 20: 01
    Oh, these theorists with their theories. Magadan is right, everything is much simpler — resources, especially land and water — these are the main reason and prize of the struggle. Thanks to our Great Ancestors, Russia has abundant resources. But how do we handle them? By whom, with what and how are we going to defend them? The fact that we sell an incredible amount of oil, gas and wood is not pride, it is a shame for a once technologically advanced power. The way we manage the proceeds from the sale of resources is even more disgraceful, and often a crime. Instead of developing our own industry, especially mechanical engineering, we are developing a screwdriver surrogate and super-Dzhetovschina, proudly calling it international cooperation and attracting investments. At the same time, a significant part of the funds is stored in the long-term 2% securities of those whose politicians were not shy about voicing the injustice of owning Russia with its own resources. Instead of developing and strengthening our own agriculture, provided with more than land and water resources, we opened the doors for dubious agricultural products from behind the mound. In addition, labor migration to agriculture is gaining weight. land, largely illegal. I will not repeat myself on the national question, I agree with Goldmitro. Russia, having in the present established social and economic system, is extremely vulnerable. Should a catastrophe commensurate with 1941 occur, Russian statehood cannot stand it, there is no inner core, neither in the economic, nor in the political sense, nor at the level of the national idea. The idea of ​​enriching at all costs and consuming to the maximum, namely, only this idea is real, and not just in words, can be offered by the modern elite and power, it is not able to unite the nation. It is urgent to change the socio-economic formation, to switch from the power of lobbyists of big capital to the power of statesmen . It is very difficult and fraught with shocks, but another way is to surrender control of resources, which means the gradual destruction of the country.
  20. Karabin
    Karabin 1 October 2012 20: 30
    [media = http: // http: // v = 2H2PwmrNNm8 & feature = player_embedded
  21. Karabin
    Karabin 1 October 2012 20: 33

    something like this...............