World War as a way out of the global crisis

The result of solving the accumulated problems in modern society can be the construction of a qualitatively new world order


According to a number of experts, the global economic crisis, the end of which no one dares to designate, is one of the consequences of geopolitical changes at the turn of the XX – XXI centuries. The subsequent destruction of the bipolar model of the world and the change in the status of many states led to an increase in the number of contradictions between countries and coalitions, which cannot be resolved based on the principles of world order adopted in the middle of the last century and not taking into account the current realities. On the agenda, the creation of new rules that can satisfy different civilizations. Time will tell which way this process will go - peaceful or military.

Today, many experts and analysts talk about the possibility of a world war, which is considered by them as a tool for solving the accumulated problems in modern society.

This is not surprising. The last three decades have been accompanied by global upheavals — the Warsaw Pact and the entire world socialist system collapsed, the Soviet Union collapsed, and China broke out into second place in the world economy. Nanotechnologies, genetic engineering, and other qualitatively new methods and methods of production, marking the transition of the most developed countries of the world to the sixth technological order, are being introduced more and more extensively.

Meanwhile, the principles of the international community in the second half of the twentieth century, largely following the Second World War and the subsequent Cold War, are still at the heart of the modern world order.


That is, we can say that the existing world order does not fully correspond to the new realities. It is this contradiction that underlies the growing crisis phenomena in the world, which are most clearly manifested in the economic sphere.

Therefore, there is a perception that there is a global economic crisis. At present, this is the main factor determining both global and regional political processes and the direction of development of the internal political situation in almost all countries of the world. Despite the emergency measures taken by the leaders of the majority of states to resolve it, success so far has not been achieved.

The reason for the failure of anti-crisis actions is that the global economic crisis is only a manifestation of a deeper and larger-scale civilizational crisis that covers almost all aspects of the life of modern humanity.

This drastic change in modern civilization is generated by a whole system of fundamentally fundamental contradictions of a global nature.

Imbalances and contradictions

The most important factors that gave rise to the global crisis (essentially civilizational) are the following contradictions:

1. Between the growth of production and consumption and the available resources necessary for development, as well as the capabilities of the Earth’s ecosystem to neutralize the negative consequences of human activity. The resolution of this contradiction is possible only by reducing consumption.

2. Between "poor" developing countries (mainly owners of most of the world's raw materials) and "rich" industrialized countries. Its resolution is possible either by introducing fairer global commodity-money relations, or by actually destroying the sovereignty of developing countries, by establishing military-political control over them in one form or another by the states of the industrialized West.

3. Between national and transnational elites. The resolution of the contradiction is possible in one of two ways.

The first of them involves the construction of a unified world state where supranational authorities and various other transnational subjects will dominate with a radical weakening or complete elimination of state sovereignties.

The second is the creation of a world order as a community of sovereign states, reflecting the interests of their peoples, where supranational bodies play only a coordinating role.

4. Between the volume of the global "financial bubble" and the scale of the real sector of the global economy. Its resolution is possible either by eliminating (in any form) this speculative bubble, which is fraught with the loss of power by the transnational financial elite, or by its “conversion” into the real economy, which will mean the establishment of undivided domination of the transnational financial elite over the world.

5. Between the lack of spirituality of the “free market”, implanting the power of money, and the spiritual foundations of the existence of civilizations that form intercivilizational differences, giving rise to the struggle for the domination of ideas. Resolution of this is possible through the establishment of a single spiritual foundation of the world order.

World War as a way out of the global crisis

Disproportions and contradictions that served as the basis for the current civilizational crisis, cover all spheres of human activity and, accordingly, changes in society aimed at eliminating it, should apply to all components of the world order. That is, we are talking about building a qualitatively new world order, which differs from the existing one in all major aspects.

For this reason, measures aimed at overcoming the economic (in particular financial) crisis do not allow and will not allow to resolve this civilizational turn.

Assessing the possibility of a new world

An analysis of possible options for eliminating today's imbalances and contradictions shows that they are antagonistic in nature and without significant prejudice to the interests of certain major geopolitical entities, the crisis will not be overcome. And this means the inevitability of the use of force to get out of this situation. Given the global nature of this process, it can be assumed that the scale of these hostilities can become global.

The experience of resolving two such fractures of civilization in the early and mid-twentieth century shows that overcoming them occurred through world wars — the First and the Second.

Thus, it can be assumed that the developing crisis can generate a new global war and can only be resolved by its outcome. The probability of a large-scale armed conflict, based on objective assumptions, can be assessed as average.

What could be the likely nature of this war?

The main components that determine the nature of any armed confrontation are the participants, their objectives, the use of weapon, the main stages, the factors determining the course and possible outcomes of the conflict.

Likely warring parties and their goals

World War will, of course, coalition. The composition of the parties will determine the commitment of specific countries (more precisely, their elites) to one or another model of the new world order, which they are ready to defend.

An analysis of possible options for resolving imbalances and contradictions shows that a future world order can be built only on one of two models.

The first, which, according to its essence, can be called “the world of civilization hierarchy”, when few “chosen ones”, defining themselves as “the intellectual core of humanity”, preserve and increase the achieved level of consumption due to the cruel exploitation of the rest of humanity with artificial reduction of its number, bringing to critically minimal level of its material consumption and spiritual degradation.

The implementation of this model implies the disappearance of intercivilizational differences - the unification of peoples, and in fact the destruction of different civilizations with the division of all mankind into two “supercivilizations” - the “golden billion” and all the other “exploited subhumans”.

Today, this is manifested in the division of countries into industrialized ones, which have the prospect of further development and the global periphery, which is doomed to degradation in the spiritual, economic, and demographic terms.

The second model could be called “civilization mutual support” or “civilization harmony”. In this embodiment, the goal of globalization is not to unify, but to move upwards all existing civilizations, while preserving and expanding the “field of development” for each nation, which forms the basis for the evolution of each and all of them. This is the path to the future.

That is, in essence, a new global war will be fought for the spiritual foundations of building a new world order: the foundation of the future world order will be either individualism, egoism, suppression of one subject by another, survival at the expense of others, or community, the domination of common interests over private ones, the principle of coexistence over mutual support account.

This is its qualitative difference from the two previous world wars, which were conducted mainly for the economic division of the world.

This allows conceptually determining the composition of possible coalitions in a future world war. They will be two:

1. The so-called industrialized countries of Western civilization, the spiritual foundations of which are based on individualism and the material principle, generating the power of money. This emerging community of states claims to be the world hegemon that controls all the resources of the earth, and is aimed at destroying all other geopolitical entities.

2. The countries of the Orthodox, Islamic and other civilizations in which the spiritual principle dominates over the material, the general over the particular, individual, which objectively orient themselves towards a multi-polar world order.

Currently, the core of the first coalition has already been formed not only politically, but also military-political in the form of a NATO bloc. His global goal in the new full-scale war is clearly understood: the establishment of world domination is a unipolar world.

The elites of the countries of this coalition clearly, first of all at the spiritual level, imagine the main adversary, which at this stage primarily identifies Islamic and Orthodox civilizations.

The community of states oriented towards a multipolar world order capable of forming a second coalition has not yet realized the commonness of its geopolitical interests, not to mention any political or military-political arrangement of a single union. Some of his prototype could serve as the SCO or CSTO.

Today there is no clearly developed, universally recognized model of a new world order in the variant of a multipolar world.

Under these conditions, it is natural that the objectively existing global goal of the countries of the second community - the establishment of a fair multipolar world - is not fully realized by them.

Therefore, there is no understanding of the main task of the states of this coalition in a global conflict - the failure of attempts to establish world domination of Western civilization in the form of a unipolar world order.

This gives the West an opportunity to push them in a brutal internecine struggle. We see Muslims being pitted against Orthodox and Hindus, splitting Islam itself, pushing Sunnis and Shiites together.

Based on the essence of the goals of the first community, it can be called the neo-imperialist coalition, while the second is the anti-imperialist coalition.

Assessing the likely goals of the neo-imperialist coalition, its main global task in world war will be to defeat the unification of countries seeking a multipolar world, with political or even military-political control over them and the elimination or radical weakening of their state sovereignty.

Possible targets for the actions of the anti-imperialist coalition, its main global task should be to repel aggression and disrupt the building of a monopolar world while preserving its state sovereignty and the subsequent building of a multipolar world pattern.

Used weapons

Given the decisiveness of the objectives of the parties in the upcoming world war, one should expect that in its course all the most advanced types of weapons and military equipment, including weapons of mass destruction, will be used:

1. Information weapons will be used at all stages of the preparation and development of a global armed conflict in peacetime and wartime, which is determined by the high secrecy of its impact on the enemy and the lack of an international legal framework that effectively regulates its use. These weapons will become the main means of struggle in the peace period, and with the onset of hostilities will be used in the interests of providing armed forces.

2. Conventional weapons will be used by the parties in full with the outbreak of hostilities. The rationale for this will be to create at least the minimum appropriate moral, psychological and regulatory framework. Before the outbreak of war, one should expect its limited use by special operations forces in the interests of ensuring the effectiveness of information weapons. Conventional types of weapons will be used by the parties to solve almost all tasks.

3. The main types of non-nuclear weapons of mass destruction (WMD) that can be used are chemical and biological. The possibility of covert use of biological weapons will allow it to be activated not only during hostilities, but also during the peace period. Undoubtedly, the ease of production and use will have a significant impact on the scale and methods of its use, allowing this type of weapons of mass destruction to be activated even by non-state and relatively limited organizations. An important factor reducing the likely scale of the use of biological weapons will be the threat of major epidemics or even a pandemic.

4. Nuclear weapons are currently the most powerful weapons of mass destruction possessed by a limited number of countries of the “nuclear club” and some others that are not formally part of it (in particular, Israel, possibly Iran in the future). The use of these weapons of mass destruction is likely to be extremely limited in scope and mainly to intimidate the enemy in order to force him to abandon the escalation of the war or further struggle. Large-scale use of nuclear weapons is unlikely due to the fact that this would mean a national catastrophe for countries that exchanged massive blows, with their likely disappearance from the face of the earth as state entities.

Other components of the analysis of the possible nature of the global confrontation - the state of the proposed coalitions, the main stages of the war, the factors that determine the course and possible outcomes of its outcome, will be presented in one of the nearest issues of the weekly "VPK".
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

54 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. sv-sakh
    sv-sakh 13 December 2012 06: 48 New
    • 20
    • 0
    +20
    there are only three letters: WMD and nobody else will care about anything in this world ...
    What kind of world war? This war is on today! Now!
    Two worlds “West” are at war with “East”.
    The ideologies of the United States and Russia are at war using lysoblyudov and traitors from the former CIS (let's call our former brothers who they are, and they are Judas, traitors and fratricides).
    Fight the media.
    Fighting the economy.
    They fight for the bowels, for water, for land and air.
    Fighting for space.
    Corporations and parties are fighting between countries and within all states.
    The world has been in the fire of war for a long time and the offensives have been waged with varying success .. But the battle for Moscow and all of Russia, our new "Battle of Stalingrad," we lost to Yeltsin and others ...
    World wars in their usual sense will be gone ..
    There will be either general destruction with the use of WMD or what is happening now.
    1. Pit
      Pit 13 December 2012 06: 58 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      While this is not even much concealed, but judging by the calls from NATO, they are attuning to a completely normal war. And they don’t hide it already.
      http://3mv.ru/publ/nato_prizyvaet_evropu_gotovitsja_k_bolshoj_vojne/1-1-0-13363
      1. sv-sakh
        sv-sakh 13 December 2012 06: 59 New
        • 6
        • 0
        +6
        The author of the article fell for a decade ...
        (Not the one on your link, but the one on this site)

        According to your link, NATO’s call for war with Russia and Ktiay is nothing more than an attempt to milk the budgets of countries for the purchase of US military equipment ..
        Well, you need to provide something with the public debt of the mattress toppers, and their F-35, etc. does not go at non-kosher prices :)
        1. sv-sakh
          sv-sakh 13 December 2012 07: 17 New
          • 6
          • 0
          +6
          If you look at the globe from the top, then the contour map of states is the cells of a chessboard.
          Each new fall of the regime is a felling of a pawn.
          Every new promotion or alliance is a move.

          Previously, in wars they beat on the flanks, to the center and rear.
          Later on the fronts, and now on the regions.

          War has not changed (War, war never changes) - the scale of the battles has changed.
        2. Pit
          Pit 13 December 2012 07: 32 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: sv-sakh
          Well, you need to provide something with the public debt of the mattress toppers


          War with small states will not provide him. We need a more global adversary. Syria and Iran are not suitable; in essence, they can be fought with the available weapons. But in order to fight with us or China, then here we need something more perfect and powerful.
          The calculation is to repay debts and not to lose leadership. Yes, and with a similar collision, the geyropa is not sickly so hurt, again, her extra. loans.
          1. sv-sakh
            sv-sakh 13 December 2012 07: 52 New
            • 9
            • 0
            +9
            This is the main task of the State Department - to make sure that Europeans do not realize this. Otherwise, no one will need their equipment at all.
            Large countries can impose economically “friends” who will strangle like a noose.
            Collide with each other (China - Russia - India). But there is no way to attack conventional weapons .. This is not reasonable and not effective.
            In short, you need big ones, first crush them into smaller ones or weaken them by pulling in conflicts (08.08.08 did not work), create a revolutionary movement among the elites of society (marsh rebellion did not work), etc. etc.
            By the way, the United States is trying to destabilize the world;) they do not need neither Europeans nor Russians - they need anarchy in Eurasia to continue to stretch the soap bubble of the world gendarme and the world banker against this anarchy.
            1. dirty trick 13 December 2012 18: 26 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Quote: sv-sakh
              By the way, the United States is trying to destabilize the world;) they do not need neither Europeans nor Russians - they need anarchy in Eurasia to continue to stretch the soap bubble of the world gendarme and the world banker against this anarchy.


              + dear!

              By the way, I will answer your opponent in your support

              Quote: Pit
              War with small states will not provide him.

              they are trying to provide him with a large number of wars with small states. since jumping to the big one - the gut is thin.
      2. Bykov. 13 December 2012 07: 49 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Quote: Pit
        only three letters: WMD and no one else will care about anything in this world ..

        Probably for this reason, in such a hurry, defensive echelons of missile defense are being created.
    2. alexng 13 December 2012 08: 29 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      Quote: sv-sakh
      our new "Battle of Stalingrad" we lost


      No, they didn’t lose, but just retreated to convenient positions and now they began to counterattack and the West immediately froze like a bastard in a pan. Now, oddly enough, but the West has lately been getting a red head insolently on all fronts and only in the media hysterically snarls from its hopelessness.
    3. Blackscorp 13 December 2012 08: 33 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: sv-sakh

      sv-sakh


      I agree with you completely .. I would like to note only this: in today's world, war, in its classical sense, is possible only with respect to the least developed countries, or rather countries that do not have a modern, powerful WMD, to give an adequate answer ... relations between Russia and China, while only ideological, economic, etc. are possible. war (as it was against the USSR) ... and as a result, the coming to power of people who "fall" under the West completely ..... The same series includes actions to internationally isolate global opponents (Russia, China) i.e. deprivation of their potential allies, the creation of conflicts, destabilization strips on their borders, etc. ..... In the future (I think after building a missile defense) direct preventive strikes against Russia and China are also possible with the aim of destroying the economic and military potential, the subsequent interception of retaliatory nuclear missile strikes ..... It seems to me one of the reasons why the “swamp performances” died out and did not develop into the “Russian spring” was precisely the presence of nuclear weapons in our country ... Now, if my vision is brief ... ..
    4. Dinver 13 December 2012 08: 49 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      There are a lot of myths about nuclear weapons that are not strange:

      Radioactive contamination from modern nuclear charges comes to naught after 20 years, and after 40 years it will already be at the background level. The biological weapons that infect the earth for tens of thousands of years are much worse. It is not necessary to console oneself with hopes that they will not be used so that the territory is not polluted.

      Long-term nuclear winter has already been scientifically refuted, climate change during a large number of single-blast explosions will be, but not for the long-term period as previously assumed, but for the 1-6 period there are not so many months, and you can wait in bunkers (the stock of provisions at maximum load as not strange calculated for those very 6 months).

      Mass destruction of the population can only be achieved with a surprise attack, so in cases of a full-scale war, the population will be dispersed throughout the country and the purpose of nuclear weapons will only be to destroy infrastructure and destroy large concentrations of troops. If the population is already scattered across the territory, there is the option of causing a tsunami using a nuclear explosion (Sakharov's theory), a very difficult project to implement, you need either a very large power of tens of thousands of megatons or a directed explosion in order to provoke the movement of the lithosphere plate, with nuclear weapons in service , this theory cannot be realized, that is, for the development of a project, calculations and implementation will take a lot of time.

      So the use of nuclear weapons is quite justified in a large-scale conflict.

      With regard to promising types of weapons, it may be possible to use the so-called racial biological weapons about which articles appeared both in our country and in the west.
      1. taseka 13 December 2012 11: 17 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: Dinver
        So the use of nuclear weapons is quite justified in a large-scale conflict.

        Why, having weapons of mass destruction as an OM, from 41 to 45 did neither Germany nor the Soviet Union use them at the fronts, although they ran through the entire war with gas masks? So today, having nuclear weapons, neither the Russian Federation nor the United States will use it - it's just scarecrows and reassurance of naive people here and there !!! Again a soldier, a tank, a plane and a ship.
        1. Dinver 13 December 2012 11: 40 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          You don’t know the story, even when the 1942 Crimea was used, in Adzhimushka, as well as in the siege of Sevastopol, grenades and checkers with phosgene and mustard gas were used to smoke from mines, in quarries and catacombs. After these events, Hitler received an ultimatum from Churchill.
          1. taseka 15 December 2012 08: 41 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            You are inattentive I said at the fronts, yes, OM was used to destroy people in the catacombs (in the rear) in the death camps (cyclone) - but not at the fronts !!!
      2. bart74
        bart74 13 December 2012 22: 59 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Yes, I agree.
        Nobody mentioned something about GMOs.
      3. Ratibor12
        Ratibor12 14 December 2012 03: 36 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        At least tactical nuclear weapons could well be used.
    5. Kaa
      Kaa 13 December 2012 09: 39 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: sv-sakh
      The "Battle of Stalingrad" we lost to Yeltsin and others ..

      We have not lost the Battle of Stalingrad. This was to happen after the victory of the Chechens in Dagestan, the creation of the "Caucasus Emirate" with its separation from Russia, the war in the Volga region and the further formation of the Siberian, Ural and other quasi-republics. Speaking figuratively, until now - summer-autumn 1941. Therefore, we need a win in time, the mobilization of industry and the transition to a counterattack, without the fanaticism of the Barvenkovo ​​operation. In ideological terms - we need a signal that
      "finally we were given a signal to advance
      return our crumbs and spans ... "
      And there ... we will see ... "Shoot, shoot until the last shot, perhaps he will be victorious" - the words attributed to Admiral Nelson.
    6. baltika-18 13 December 2012 10: 50 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: sv-sakh
      The ideologies of the USA and Russia are at war

      Honestly, I have not heard about the ideology of Russia that we have an ideology that is different from the ideology of money. Maybe I don’t know something, I missed it, correct it. Well, as for the rest +.
      1. 755962
        755962 13 December 2012 12: 38 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3


        Well-known screenwriters ...
    7. OSTAP BENDER
      OSTAP BENDER 13 December 2012 15: 09 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      Quote: sv-sakh
      The ideologies of the United States and Russia are at war using lysoblyudov and traitors from the former CIS (let's call our former brothers who they are, and they are Judas, traitors and fratricides).

      Respected! I do not agree with you! How can you call 80% of the Ukrainian people traitors? The remaining 20% ​​are those in power, nationalists and oligarchs! Here you are and apply your statements to them! Look how many members of the forum with the Ukrainian flag are rooting for Russia, Syria, Belarus! And you spit in their faces! With the rest of the paragraphs of your post I agree to all 100% !!!!
      1. Dimka off 13 December 2012 16: 22 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Quote: OSTAP BENDER
        Respected! I do not agree with you! How can you call 80% of the Ukrainian people traitors? The remaining 20% ​​are those in power, nationalists and oligarchs! Here you are and apply your statements to them! Look how many members of the forum with the Ukrainian flag are rooting for Russia, Belarus! And you spit in their faces!

        this is well noticed. I agree.
      2. taseka 15 December 2012 08: 45 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: OSTAP BENDER
        Look how many members of the forum with the Ukrainian flag are rooting for Russia, Syria, Belarus! And you spit in their face

        Although I am on vacation, in the homeland, I agree with you !!!
  2. Alexander Romanov 13 December 2012 06: 56 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Too much speculation and imagination, if the conflict begins with the use of conventional weapons, then where are the guarantees that cruise missiles are not equipped with a nuclear warhead. The conflict will quickly turn into a nuclear one. Yes, and coalitions, as such, will not be. NATO, China, Islamists, Russia, India and groups sympathizing and supporting. Everyone will defend their interests.
    1. Bykov. 13 December 2012 07: 46 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Alexander Romanov
      NATO, China, the Islamists, Russia, India, and groups sympathizing and supporting. All will defend their interests.

      To pit all against all, and then again to get, in the hands of, the whole world weakened by the war, and all its economic opportunities and direct them to serve you.
      Victory, in this war, the one who remains from it, aside. Further, from not stability, beyond two oceans, tranquility, left and right.
      1. Alexander Romanov 13 December 2012 07: 54 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Quote: Bulls.
        To pit all against all, and then again to get, in the hands of, the whole world weakened by the war, and all its economic opportunities and direct them to serve you.

        Today, such an option will not work, the world is global and the US ocean will not protect.
        1. Bykov. 13 December 2012 08: 02 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Alexander Romanov
          Today, such an option will not work, the world is global and the US ocean will not protect.

          And who (in the technological sense) of the alleged opponents is able to break this peace for them?
          They will not go to a direct conflict with us and China, they will act with the wrong hands. The distance from the theater, they are given the opportunity and they will (as history shows.) Take advantage of it.
          1. Alexander Romanov 13 December 2012 08: 39 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Quote: Bulls.
            And who (in the technological sense) of the alleged opponents is able to break this peace for them?

            If there is no conflict with the use of nuclear weapons, then for the United States the main enemy will be its own people, so it will disturb peace. hi
            1. Bykov. 13 December 2012 08: 52 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: Alexander Romanov
              If there is no conflict with the use of nuclear weapons, then for the United States the main enemy will be its own people, so it will disturb peace.

              Yes, in the social, American sphere, a clear and well-defined "seething", the lid can and, in fact, will tear. And it seems that they are going to extinguish the internal fire at the expense of the external. hi
              1. antiaircrafter 13 December 2012 16: 01 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Quote: Bulls.
                And it seems that they are going to extinguish the internal fire at the expense of the external.

                is it by transferring coals?
          2. Cavas
            Cavas 13 December 2012 08: 49 New
            • 7
            • 0
            +7
            Quote: Bulls.
            And who (in the technological sense) of the alleged opponents is able to break this peace for them?

            If in Russia there were always two roads, then in the USA THREE; they steal, steal and steal!

            It is sad for the United States and its allies - but this is a bunch of hairdressers, and nothing more. The fighting spirit as such is completely absent, each soldier is mainly engaged in making money and swinging rights. That is, of course, we all watch Hollywood films and we know that America is full of heroes and supermen, although most of them do not serve in the army, but in real life they never showed us one. Rumor has it that they have some special special forces, like our Alpha, but those three captured in the Yugoslav war, they say, they were from such special forces. The boys cried sobbing right in front of the enemy’s camcorders. There were other similar episodes involving American superheroes, but for some reason they didn’t show this on TV.
            1. Bykov. 13 December 2012 08: 56 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Quote: Cavas
              but for some reason they didn’t show it on TV.

              It's a pity. The rating would probably be to heaven, well, laughter for sure.
              1. Cavas
                Cavas 13 December 2012 09: 03 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Quote: Bulls.
                It's a pity. The rating would probably be to heaven, well, laughter for sure.

                100% - we don’t know how to PR the enemy! hi
                1. Bykov. 13 December 2012 09: 16 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: Cavas
                  100% - we don’t know how to PR the enemy!

                  hi So you need to study, study and study again, smart people bequeathed.
            2. Alexander Romanov 13 December 2012 09: 59 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Quote: Cavas
              The boys cried sobbing right in front of the enemy’s camcorders.

              Hi Sergey, there is a link to a video with American superkrmmandos, throw off neighing laughing
              1. Cavas
                Cavas 13 December 2012 11: 41 New
                • 4
                • 0
                +4
                Quote: Alexander Romanov
                Hi Sergey, there is a link to a video with American superkrmmandos, throw off neighing

                Hi Sasha! hi



    2. Dimka off 14 December 2012 16: 20 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      but I think that there will be no nuclear conflict. Unless they use nuclear weapons - not more. No one wants to destroy all life on earth.
  3. Garrin 13 December 2012 06: 58 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    1. Information weapons will be used at all stages of the preparation and development of a global armed conflict in peacetime and wartime, which is determined by the high secrecy of its impact on the enemy and the lack of an international legal framework that effectively regulates its use. These weapons will become the main means of struggle in the peace period, and with the onset of hostilities will be used in the interests of providing armed forces.

    Well, on the first point, the war is already being waged in all the blades. Some vysyra Klitorichi, what are they.
  4. Vanek
    Vanek 13 December 2012 07: 05 New
    • 11
    • 0
    +11
    World War as a way out of the global crisis

    War is no way out. War is the road to nowhere.

    Not when the European homosexual nor rule the world !!!!!

    Hello to everyone. hi
    1. Alexander Romanov 13 December 2012 07: 07 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Quote: Vanek
      Not when the European homosexual nor rule the world !!!!

      Hi Ivan, but they really want to rule and are ready for this to turn half of the earth into dust.
      1. Vanek
        Vanek 13 December 2012 07: 23 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        they really want to edit


        They really wanted to rule 200 years ago. The result is not remembered.

        70 years ago, they also really wanted to. The result is also not imprinted on the remains of the brain which is not.

        And let them not say that they say that memory is selective. For in steel armor on ice - does not mean the presence of reason.

        Greetings to Alexander.
        1. Alexander Romanov 13 December 2012 07: 33 New
          • 9
          • 0
          +9
          Quote: Vanek
          For in steel armor on ice - does not mean the presence of reason.

          The history of fools does not teach, after that, in the winter, they rushed to Moscow in thin little little boots.
          But now they have thermal underwear and they are again thinking about another revenge. And you’ll explain to them that it’s not a matter of underwear.
          1. Vanek
            Vanek 13 December 2012 07: 37 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            And you’ll explain to them that it’s not a matter of underwear.


            Alexander, with one shot and all on the spot. laughing laughing laughing
  5. cgk
    cgk 13 December 2012 07: 13 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    let the politicians fight, cut, shoot at each other, but I don’t want my child to suffer then all his life because of these freaks who can’t stupidly agree. infuriates - how so, why is it easier to start a war? on a fig brow in general BRAIN and LANGUAGE?
    1. sv-sakh
      sv-sakh 13 December 2012 07: 24 New
      • 10
      • 0
      +10
      Because your child in the eyes of strangers is a slave, all that you have is theirs.
      If you have a different look at this, then go ahead to protect the family and home - Understanding this and forces people to breastfeed embrasures of bunkers.
      Man to man is a wolf and our species is insane in nature.
      Wars will never end.
      1. Vanek
        Vanek 13 December 2012 07: 27 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Sergey, this one -

        Quote: sv-sakh
        your child in the eyes of strangers is a slave


        As in the rest and the rest of the comment ............... nuuuu, only +

        good
    2. Alexander Romanov 13 December 2012 07: 35 New
      • 7
      • 0
      +7
      Quote: cgk
      infuriates - how so, why is it easier to start a war?

      A warrior is the simplest solution to existing problems, at least in understanding the Western way of thinking.
      1. WW3
        WW3 13 December 2012 14: 22 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        Warrior is the easiest solution to existing problems

        One cannot disagree with this - the fastest way to change the mode, change the boundaries, etc.
        There are prerequisites for wars - lack of resources ... food - drinking water, and the population is growing especially in Asia and Africa, the planet will not be able to feed everyone, and wars that periodically arise in the history of mankind were precisely the balance regulator, along with epidemics ... I apologize for cynicism ...
        Battles go for oil, gas, territories, influence, etc.
        Perhaps, of course, other solutions will be found in the future, such as the colonization of other planets, but we will not live to see it, and it looks somewhat more fantastic than the outbreak of war ...

    3. donchepano
      donchepano 13 December 2012 09: 16 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: cgk
      why is it easier to start a war?


      1. "Golden billion" and there are already 7 billion of us on earth
      2. The US national debt is approximately 16 trillion dollars. and if you start a war, then you don’t have to repay debts
      3. World resources are coming to an end, and Russia has huge raw materials and low human potential.
      1. GELEZNII_KAPUT 13 December 2012 11: 28 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: donchepano
        2. The US national debt is approximately 16 trillion dollars. and if you start a war, then you don’t have to repay debts

        This is if you win, but you can lose ... belay
  6. predator.3
    predator.3 13 December 2012 07: 20 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    This war began in 1991, the collapse of the USSR, then there were Iraq, Yugoslavia, then the "Arab spring" and Libya, now Syria then "bears its cross" then Iran, that is, the potential allies of Russia are knocked out of the game, then the hour “x” will strike for Russia, perhaps the amers will try to push us with China, as they say, “divide and conquer!”
    1. djon3volta
      djon3volta 13 December 2012 08: 23 New
      • -1
      • 0
      -1
      and Russia and China are so stupid that when they start pushing them together, they won’t guess that they are pushing them together and destroy each other, right? like Russia and China are the 5-year-old children whom the 14-year-old teenager made fight ? Like all the fools and America are smart, right?
      you write garbage, if they start to push us together, believe Russia and China will understand this right away, and will not lead to provocation.
    2. WW3
      WW3 13 December 2012 14: 33 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: predator.3
      then the "Arab spring" and Libya, now Syria "carries its cross"

      In this chain, Tunisia and Egypt ... In these cases, almost one scenario is observed ... mercenaries are sent, they are pumped up with weapons at the expense of Western democracies and they undermine the ruling regime from the inside, and for the outside world there is a picture of a supposedly civil war and the dictator’s removal from the throne .. ..this is already a worked out scenario ... the Syrian army was considered quite strong in its region, but it also bears losses ... and you correctly indicated that Iran will be next, there is oil and a lot of it .... and here that can begin a conflict where more serious players can get involved ... China, Russia and the United States and NATO sixes ...
  7. VadimSt 13 December 2012 08: 00 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The world is not one to be drawn into a global conflict. Everyone understands and realizes this, especially in Europe, and therefore adventurers (the USA and their “jackal scales”) will “bite”, but they will not get involved in a full-scale fight - this is troublesome, and it is unpromising for victory.
  8. anfreezer 13 December 2012 08: 32 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    sv-sakh "There will be either total destruction using WMDs or what is happening now." I completely agree. Any global conflict will sooner or later lead to the use of this very WMD ... And what a dubious pleasure and XP .... I’m a prospect for “transnational elites” to rule in the post-nuclear world ... Unleashing one local conflict after another, along the chain, they they think that everything is under their control. But somewhere and someday there will be an uncontrolled chain reaction .... but to have unlimited power in an almost lifeless world ... well, I don’t know no But throughout, something apocalyptic is inevitable ..All our European culture has long been moving in some kind of
    tortured tension growing from century to century, and as it were
    heading for disaster: restless, violent, impetuous;
    like a stream tending to its end, without hesitation, afraid
    to think about.
    (F. Nietzsche) Only now can we talk about human culture as a whole, about the existence of mankind. as a civilization ..
  9. Gavril 13 December 2012 08: 34 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    What is the world war in the usual sense of the word? This war will last a maximum of a day, after which the few survivors will not care what happens to the neighbor, he himself would have to live a little more. Therefore, to date, the most acceptable is the economic war, which has long been waged.
  10. Was mammoth 13 December 2012 08: 53 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    I hope that there will be no global war in the military sense. Retribution restrains them. And for this, Russia needs a strong modern army whose spirit is based on the traditions of their ancestors.
  11. Apollo 13 December 2012 09: 03 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    citation-Today, many experts and analysts talk about the possibility of a world war, which is considered by them as a tool for solving accumulated problems in modern society.

    regarding the content of the article
    1. Who are these homegrown experts and analysts? You can speak and write as much and as you like.
    2. If there is a third world war this will be the end of the history of mankind ..
    3. Local wars yes, they will happen but global no.
    4. Preference is given and will be given precisely to the overthrow of certain governments in various states.
    1. Alexander Romanov 13 December 2012 10: 02 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Quote: Apollon
      3. Local wars yes, they will happen but global no.

      Apollo, in fact, a local warrior, can very quickly transform into a world warrior, there are enough conflicts of interests of the main world players and we ourselves will not notice how the warrior’s funnel sucks the country.
  12. Stiletto 13 December 2012 09: 41 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Friends, do you have children? No need to theorize what God forbid to ever experience in practice. Any full-scale war involving at least one of such countries as Russia, China or the United States will be the last for many.
  13. Kosmodrom 13 December 2012 10: 13 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    I agree with the authors, who believe that the warrior has long been coming. And the mechanism of this war was tested in Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, Egypt, Yemen. Now Syria, etc.
    But one cannot exclude the classic scenario of war, as such, including with the large-scale use of nuclear weapons. It’s just that at this stage there are no corresponding conditions and therefore the outbreak of a large-scale war is adequate to suicide.
    However, the United States plans to further conclude a treaty with Russia on the SALT to a level that would ensure the existence of civilization, after applying the remaining nuclear weapons, although one of the parties. The goal is obvious - the destruction of the bulk of our nuclear potential in the first strike by nuclear and conventional means, and the rest, by missile defense. The scenario is very real and will be implemented along with others.
  14. columbus2
    columbus2 13 December 2012 10: 21 New
    • -4
    • 0
    -4
    The first picture is just encouraging :)
  15. Thunderbolt 13 December 2012 11: 22 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    We have tight allies with the Allies. If NATO steps on the land of Syria, the latter will turn their backs. And as with informational defense7 The clitoris is bowing at us, and at least the midpoint of protest will come. Go ahead!
    1. engineer74 13 December 2012 17: 28 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      There will be no NATO boot in Syria, more than sure. Now they are working out another scenario - relying on "local personnel", with "high-tech" military and global information support. Therefore, Iran will soon lose interest, too stable state. After Syria, if they manage to redraw the country, some opposition will again intensify. And it doesn’t matter which, from radical Islamists to emo. If we don’t transfer in time, then at the end there will be no-fly zones, tomahawks and other crap. Therefore, even the salvation of Syria will only be a reprieve, they will find another training ground, Cuba, for example, there is already our 1989 year and we will not reach it. So our country will retain a tough, sane domestic policy and advanced strategic nuclear forces, for starters. At this stage, the outgrowth of our "internal" squabbles into a nuclear Armageddian will not please anyone, but we’ll manage to arm ourselves there and defeat corruption. smile Something like this...
  16. Normal 13 December 2012 12: 21 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    But I did not like the article. It seems to me that the author analyzes the situation in the world from the perspective of the last century. Yes, there are contradictions. The economic system of the whole world is striving for a dead end. But global war is not a way out of this impasse. In any case, such a war as we are used to imagining.
    A war on a global scale, even without the use of nuclear weapons, will not lead to the redistribution of natural resources in favor of the golden billion, and not to the victory of the forces of the anti-imperialist coalition (the very creation of such a coalition is very problematic). Such a war will develop into many civil wars of all against all. And this is at best. There can be no talk of victory in such a situation.
    The world elite, represented by members of the Bilderberg Club, understands this well.
    In my opinion, we should expect a further Western offensive on individual countries without the development of these local wars into global ones. The technological gap between the West and the rest of the world is such that there is no point in a general war when problems can be solved locally.
    The Islamic world, in the person of its radicals, might have unleashed a global armed conflict and does not have a sufficient scientific, technical and industrial base for this.
    Without the support of the USSR or China, Islam is not wealthy as a military force.
    Russia will not fight, because we do not need it. And the West will not fight with us because our elite is pro-Western and controlled through and through.
    China will not fight because this is not his method. Creeping demographic and economic expansion is China's path.
    1. Begemot 13 December 2012 12: 54 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      As for China, I do not agree. Now there is a tremendous excess of the male population over the female in China. More than 140 million people. This is more than the population of Russia. These people have no one to create families with; they are socially disadvantaged and pose a serious problem within the country. The loss of 000-000 hundred million young men for China will not be a tragedy.
      Constrains China from expanding to the north 2 factors. 1. Russia can cause serious damage in case of conflict and, even if China wins, it will be weakened and completely defenseless against the United States. 2. The territories north of the border of China are uninhabited, few passable places without developed infrastructure and industry, with a harsh climate and not very suitable for a comfortable life. Therefore, most likely, China will head south, and Primorye and the Amur Territory will be torn away from Russia, possibly just as a result of the Chinese settling these territories and conducting electoral procedures to separate from one country and join another.
  17. WW3
    WW3 13 December 2012 13: 23 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    If a world war begins, then it will not necessarily be immediately from the global launch of nuclear missiles ... it could be a local conflict into which other players will gradually get drawn ....
    The controversial assertion of WMD and nothing else <> .. there are other types of weapons and they also develop and will start with them ....

  18. Normal 13 December 2012 13: 47 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Begemot
    maybe just as a result of the Chinese settling these territories and conducting electoral procedures to separate from one country and join another.


    That's what I wrote about it. There is no need to fight for this.
    Quote: Begemot
    most likely China will head south

    It is possible, but it is not a global war.
  19. WW3
    WW3 13 December 2012 15: 15 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    The first of them involves the construction of a unified world state where supranational authorities and various other transnational subjects will dominate with a radical weakening or complete elimination of state sovereignties.

    This option is fantastic, people will unite in one state except under the influence of an external threat ... an attack by aggressive aliens will reformat the world order (just kidding) ... lol
    The second is the creation of a world order as a community of sovereign states, reflecting the interests of their peoples, where supranational bodies play only a coordinating role.

    Well, here is a more real development scenario - the foundation was laid by the creation of a supranational UN body ... right after the end of World War II ...
  20. engineer74 13 December 2012 17: 43 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Currently, the very first “fantastic” option is being implemented, but not explicitly.
    Steps:
    1. Infomation attack destabilize the state.
    2. We provide some kind of, no matter what (military, financial, humanitarian, etc.) help to the "rebels". (by resolution of the UN, NATO, US Senate, pirates of the Caribbean or Donald Duck, it doesn’t matter).
    3. We buy those who have come upstairs, if they are not for sale (fanatics or idealists) - we give COUNTRY unbearable loans.
    4. "We invest in the mining industry" (Derbanim resources).
    5. The population is either quietly dying from the “liberal” social system and public debt percentages, or cannon fodder at another facility.

    "Contactless" war, "humane" XXI century, however ....
    1. Selevc 13 December 2012 22: 47 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Back in the early 90s, one American high-ranking politician (in my opinion, the same Brzezinski) said that in the 21st century there will be information, economic and psychological wars ...

      What are we now witnessing with our own eyes ...

      The information war is the promotion of the principles of the same democracy around the world by any means + corrupt media that pour mud rivers on millions of people + evil standards of Western culture and the destruction of all national cultures ...

      Economic wars are organized by bribing the elite and seizing the enemy country on a credit needle ... The IMF is an excellent tool for waging such wars ...
      1. Selevc 14 December 2012 00: 32 New
        • -1
        • 0
        -1
        Psychological warfare is undermining the moral principles of society - imposing pseudo-standards on it (a vivid example of new fashionable religious sects, propaganda of sexual licentiousness, homosexuality and drug addiction) ...

        In Western countries, all these policies are actively used - because your plans for the neo-colonization of the "barbarian countries" can be realized without using tanks, planes and aircraft carriers !!!
  21. Andof odessa
    Andof odessa 13 December 2012 18: 23 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The author was a little mistaken; there are now not 2 opposing forces fighting for leadership (national states and financial corporations), but 3 are industrialists, financiers, and information agents. Each of them in his own way sees the development prospects. and everyone has their own means. industrialists need war to clear the field of activity for their enterprises and the resources for them. financiers are interested in economic instability, the eternal hovering over the abyss that allows you to engage in financial speculation and make money from scratch. media information workers are interested in permanent fear for managing people. and until the full financial crisis and the fall of financiers, there will be no war. but after it will be, but by traditional methods, otherwise they will not be able to rule
  22. Vasilenko Vladimir 13 December 2012 22: 52 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    21 December!!!!!!
    damn pickles I won’t have time to finish eating request
    1. engineer74 13 December 2012 23: 44 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
      21 December!!!!!!
      damn pickles I won’t have time to finish eating

      Try it with milk, maybe the process will go faster ... good
  23. Magadan 14 December 2012 05: 07 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    All this is chatter and philosophy. The whole crisis is due to the Western banking system, which imposed its rest in the world on its work and life style.
    And in the western system money runs out. And they end for a completely understandable reason - they slowly ate that loot that they had raised on the robbery of their colonies.
    They told us that money is earned solely on a democracy with a market economy. But for some reason, everyone had a market economy, and only the colonial robbers (England, France, the USA, the Netherlands, etc.) and their closest allies / neighbors got the money.
    Honestly, only Germans earned money.
    So pipets to the golden billion if someone is not robbed again.
    1. engineer74 14 December 2012 07: 24 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      So the suspicion creeps in that they refer to Russia among the countries that can be robbed. what