Oil War

37
Oil War
State visit of King Fahd of Saudi Arabia. Reception participants: US President Ronald Reagan and future President Donald Trump. 1985.


The crisis of capitalism


At the turn of the 1970s and 1980s, the Western world, the capitalist system and the United States were in crisis. A new Great Depression was approaching, which had previously led to the organization of World War II. Then London, Paris and Washington bet on Italy, Japan and Hitler's Germany to unleash a major war in Europe and Asia.



The World War allowed the United States to get out of a terrible crisis that threatened a new civil war and a sharp deterioration in America's political and economic positions. The United States became a superpower by "cutting up" world markets and destroying competitors. The dollar became the world currency, which allows the United States to maintain its position as a global leader to this day, dumping its debt and inflation on all of humanity (What is US hegemony based on?).

The Soviet Union, against the backdrop of the "decaying West", seemed like a mighty military-economic colossus. The Soviet superpower controlled a significant part of the planet and possessed all modern and advanced technologies. Yes, there were difficulties and problems, but they seemed minor and quite surmountable.

Militarily, the Red Empire was invulnerable. Washington faced a difficult task: how to topple and plunder the USSR without a major war? The Union was incredibly strong, had a national economy with duplicate capacities, the strongest land army in the world. A people ready for mobilization. A powerful engineering, scientific and technical corps.

However, there was no way out. Either the collapse of the USSR, or a severe crisis of the capitalist world led by the USA. Therefore, the team of the American President Ronald Reagan (1981-1989) decided to start an active information and economic war, a "war of indirect actions". The USA managed to draw the USSR into Afghanistan, forcing us to fight not on two fronts (the collective West with Japan and China), but on three - with the Islamic world. The resources of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries were used against us. The world of the past, the archaics - the Vatican, Islamic fundamentalist regimes came out against the USSR.

Striking at the USSR's weak points


The Americans were able to organize and support the anti-communist mass movement in Poland. At the same time, Moscow was forced to save the Polish economy, which Warsaw had driven into crisis. To invest huge amounts of money in Poland.

Washington, together with the Saudis, made sure that oil prices collapsed, leaving Moscow without currency (How the US and Saudi Arabia played against us). They managed to convince the Europeans to "shoot themselves in the foot" - not to trust the USSR. With the help of sanctions and the introduction of export controls in NATO countries, they blocked the flow of advanced technologies to the USSR. First of all, this concerned computer technology, microelectronics, technologies and equipment for hydrocarbon extraction, machines for ultra-precise metal processing, etc.

The US demonstratively unleashed an arms race. They announced a strategic defense initiative – the so-called “Star Wars”, which turned out to be a soap bubble.

Hitler, when he was crushing Poland, France and England, made excellent use of the weak points of his opponents. The Germans studied their opponents well, found their weak points. They relied on novelty, new military technologies. On military psychology.

In essence, the Reaganites did the same thing, only on a new level. On a global level. In just 10 years, from 1981 to 1991, they succeeded. They defeated the Red Empire. More precisely, they psychologically broke the top of the USSR, activated the "fifth column", which simply surrendered the Eurasian empire.

Reagan's team found the USSR's weak points and skillfully influenced them. This was the "anaconda strategy" - informational, ideological, political-diplomatic and economic pressure on the USSR. Plus military conflicts on the periphery of the Red Empire, which ate away at its military-economic resources. Now the US is doing roughly the same thing, consistently and systematically pressuring the Russian Federation, forcing it into a "shameful peace" (Anaconda Strategy: Strangling Russia).

American and Western "think tanks" studied the USSR closely and attentively. The psychology of the upper crust, the economy, development trends. As a result, the US often knew more and better about the USSR and Soviet society than Moscow.

The Westerners found two main weaknesses: the oil “pipeline” and the degeneration and Westernization of the Soviet elite. In fact, nothing has changed in the Russian Federation. It has only gotten worse, given the loss of developed industry and the further degradation of the top, which has begun to turn into a caste of new nobility.

"Oil swamp"


The essence of the oil “pipeline”: we will sell oil and purchase the necessary technology, equipment, machinery and consumer goods from the West.

This was the case in almost all Soviet civilian industries in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Why invent and make something yourself if you can buy it? We will sell oil and gas and buy everything we need. German machines and other equipment, Finnish refrigerators and American pipe layers.

They switched to blind imitation of Western technologies. In particular, they buried the Soviet path of computer development and began to copy American computers. The late USSR began to rely on purchasing and copying Western technologies.

It is worth noting that this was only the beginning of the decomposition of the scientific, technological and industrial potential of the Soviet civilization. In the Russian Federation, this "pipe" was further developed. Modern Russia has almost completely lost the ability to produce its own civilian cars, aircraft, ships (its own hulls, all electronics, engines - foreign), electronics and microelectronics. Thus, instead of hundreds of civilian aircraft of different types, Russia can now produce several units.

At the beginning of the 1980's Reagan's team made a very clear and systematic conclusion: it was necessary to reduce the USSR's foreign exchange earnings from hydrocarbon exports and block the channels for the flow of modern Western technologies. And force the Russians to spend more foreign currency, drawing the Union into local wars, into the arms race. Forcing Moscow to invest even more in allies, in various “friendly” regimes in Africa or Asia.

Method of cultural cooperation


The main role in the defeat of the USSR was played by the information, cultural war. The method of cultural cooperation, when Soviet society, especially the elite and intelligentsia, accepted Western standards and values. They believed in the illusion of freedom.

The party nomenclature and the Soviet elite absorbed Western values. In particular, in the late USSR, closed film screenings were held. They showed Western films that were not shown in regular cinemas.

It is clear that the older generations of Soviet people who saw the horrors of the Civil War, the devastation of the 20s, survived the Great Patriotic War, raised the country from the ruins of the most brutal war, built the Soviet superpower, took this information calmly. It was no longer possible to "reprogram" them. But the younger generations absorbed Western fashion, standards, wanted a "beautiful life", like abroad.

The Komsomol leaders, the future "new Russians", were swooning over images of Western consumption. These images were transmitted to the intelligentsia and the masses. Everyone thought that ordinary Western citizens lived like in the movies: a private apartment, a villa, a yacht, several cars per family, resorts, beautiful and expensive clothes, etc. Although only the rich and the upper middle class lived like that.

At the same time, the late USSR was unable (or rather, the channels were blocked) to provide an alternative future. A wonderful faraway place. The Soviet image of the future was practically lost at this time and replaced by a Western one. A consumer paradise.

As a result, a significant part of the Soviet elite either joined the ranks of the "fifth column", actively destroying Soviet civilization, or withdrew, passively observing the destruction of the USSR. Soviet bosses decided to privatize the Soviet Union in order to gain access to overconsumption, personal planes, yachts, villas, whiskey and beauties under palm trees.

Moreover, the West was able to instill in the Soviet (and later Russian) ruling circles a persistent image that the USSR was hopelessly ill, had fallen behind the “advanced and developed” countries, and that nothing worthwhile could be done here. In general, the USSR “only produces galoshes.” Everything best and good is made only in Western countries and Japan. Only there are advanced technologies created, etc. Everything that came from the West was perceived as the ultimate truth.

Hollywood films, fashion, pop music, pictures of the “beautiful life” – all of this acted as part of the information weapons. The cultural code is being recoded. As a result, already in the 80s, millions of Soviet people were crazy about Western culture, worshiping everything American. Movie and stage stars, cars and cinema, clothes and cola. There appeared masses of people who were ready to become second-rate Americans and Europeans, sending "this country" far away.

A good example is the former Ukrainian SSR. Almost the entire population was "brainwashed" there. Westernization and Ukrainization (radical nationalism). So that Ukrainians were ready to be servants-workers, brothel workers and escorts, just to get out of the country. This dream - to become part of the EU, NATO, the "developed world", led Little Russia to a fratricidal slaughter. Ruin-2, when Southern Rus' became a battlefield, with complete destruction and depopulation of the territory.

The information, psychological and socio-cultural war led to the fact that the Soviet nomenklatura and intelligentsia wanted to become “bourgeois”: "The bourgeoisie was delighted then, they quickly enrolled Bad Boy into their bourgeoisie and gave him a whole barrel of jam and a whole basket of cookies. Bad Boy sits, eats and rejoices."

The new bourgeois surrendered the Soviet civilization for the right to privatize the people's wealth, part of the global elite-mafia. They themselves brought wealth and resources to the feet of the owners of TNK-TNB. For several years, they saved the Western world from a systemic crisis, allowing the socialist world to be plundered.

The new nobility became a comprador, speculative bourgeoisie, thriving due to the sale of the wealth of the Russian world and the degradation of the people. The main part of the people was left with nothing. Russia was again turned into a raw materials appendage, and in the long term — "cannon fodder" in the fight against China.


Mikhail Gorbachev, Ronald Reagan (center) and George W. Bush (left) in the USA, December 1988
37 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    5 February 2025 04: 27
    The information, psychological and socio-cultural war led to the fact that the Soviet nomenklatura and intelligentsia wanted to become “bourgeois”
    That's how, without a single shot, they destroyed a state, for the sake of a barrel of jam and a basket of cookies...
    1. +1
      5 February 2025 07: 49
      Quote from Uncle Lee
      That's how, without a single shot, they destroyed a state, for the sake of a barrel of jam and a basket of cookies...

      There were plenty of shots there too. There are many facts about how promising leaders were eliminated, clearing the way for Gorbachev. How already recruited traitors were put in high positions and promoted. It was a large-scale operation of the West, and there was no place for "white gloves" and chivalrous rules of combat.
      1. +3
        5 February 2025 08: 47
        In essence, the Reaganites did the same thing, only on a new level.

        And yet they were lucky then, the cards fell in their favor. Now the attempt to repeat is following the same scenario, but they are stalling.
        Firstly, globalization and the Internet age have opened up opportunities to see what's going on. The information deficit in the USSR contributed to the fact that disinformation penetrated under the guise of truth. In propaganda, the one who knows how to lie and is pathologically strong in it is strong. At that time, we were less adapted than the West. We were more naive, we looked at the best side of humanity.
        Secondly, given the same lack of full information, when only the colorful side was presented, an illusion arose. This is by analogy, when our wives look at all sorts of Instagrams and every day someone posts how they went somewhere, bought something, gave her something, flowers, etc. And it is not clear that this is all collectively, that everyone also has problems and less colorful moments, it is just that no one posts them. And therefore it seems that in your own, like the parrot Kesha from the cartoon, there is nothing, everything is gray, etc.
        Thirdly, everything is also connected with the previous ones - the forbidden attracts. And until you have had your fill of it all, until you know it yourself, you will continue to envy. But, after the collapse of the USSR, we "ate our fill" of everything and therefore the situation is completely different now.
        Fourth: China and the global south. Their growing consumption and development have greatly shifted the balance of external power and influence.
        Fifthly - traditional values. The US, under the leadership of the Democrats, has seriously missed the mark with gender diversity and all the nonsense associated with it. They wanted to make a weapon of penetration out of it, as with democratic values. But they did not take into account that such "freedom" would completely reject most countries from them, including the Arab countries, which they supported last time.
    2. +3
      5 February 2025 08: 51
      Quote from Uncle Lee
      destroyed the state for the sake of a barrel of jam and a basket of cookies...

      a state without a barrel of jam and a basket of cookies is hardly a state...

      Young generations wanted the "beautiful life."
      It turned out that this is the ordinary life of ordinary people.
      1. +2
        5 February 2025 11: 52
        Quote: Olgovich
        It turned out that this is the ordinary life of ordinary people.

        That's right - the average American could buy Levi's jeans in two days of work, a VCR in a week and a half, while in our country it cost several months' wages of a skilled worker.
        1. +1
          5 February 2025 14: 24
          Quote: Krasnodar
          The average American could buy Levi's jeans in two days of work
          Are you sure you're not getting anything wrong? With a $50 price tag on Levi's jeans, you can buy them for two hours of work by the average American
          1. +1
            5 February 2025 18: 19
            Quote: Dutchman Michel
            They can be bought for about two hours of work of the average American

            No, the average American salary during the years of late stagnation and perestroika was not $25 per hour))
            That's about $4000 a month, numbers closer to the tenth.
            1. +2
              6 February 2025 05: 43
              Quote: Krasnodar
              No, the average American salary during the years of late stagnation and perestroika was not $25 per hour))
              If the average salary was lower, then jeans would cost less, that's understandable. But the parity between the cost of jeans and the average salary was preserved.
              1. +1
                6 February 2025 06: 41
                I think the salary was around 5 bucks an hour, jeans cost 60-70 dollars
        2. -2
          5 February 2025 15: 19
          The average American could buy Levi's jeans in two days of work, a VCR in a week and a half

          It is strange that consumer loans remained the predominant source of funds for purchasing consumer goods in the category "household appliances", and on Mondays American housewives took scissors in hand and began to cut grocery coupons out of newspapers or stood in line to get those from the Department of Agriculture? Here is an example from 1982.
          P.S. If I'm not mistaken, jeans are cotton trousers. You couldn't buy yourself cotton trousers in the USSR for two days of work?
          1. +2
            5 February 2025 18: 33
            Americans bought refrigerators / televisions / washing machines in installments, after they paid off their mortgage or rent, had children + bought cars, etc., that is, the life of an American family in the 1980s resembled the life of a modern Russian family, without the endless standing in line for a car and an apartment.
            Not to mention the quality of the latter.
            Low-income people still receive coupons and other things from them, depending on the state, today these are people with an income of about 200 ₽ per family, which in Russia, according to PPP, is equal to about 000 ₽.
            Jeans - to simplify even more, jeans are trousers. You could buy several of them in the USSR for a day's work. But not Levi's jeans, ;)
            1. -1
              6 February 2025 10: 41
              I think the salary was around 5 bucks an hour, jeans cost 60-70 dollars

              In 1980 the median was 4,05 after taxes. Lewis $20, $28,32, $40, $XNUMX depending on quality.
              Americans bought refrigerators / televisions / washing machines on installments

              So then, instead of comparing how much you have to work to buy jeans, it's wiser to compare how much you have to work to pay off your debts. And here in the USSR in the 1980s - the same two days, and in the USA - 4 months.
              But not Levi's jeans,

              This is the ace of trumps. request
              True, in the US itself, for some reason lol Regular, normal trousers cost more than jeans. The fact that we were willing to pay more for them was just a tax on stupidity.
              Not to mention the quality of the latter.

              Consumer goods are all these Sunbeam, Salton, Hoover, ADL, PIFCO, AJAX, etc. And not Kenwood, Moulinex, Tefal, etc. I would not admire their quality. I once used an ADL iron and a Rowenta vacuum cleaner in England. Mass market products from the 80s. They were no different in quality or (which may seem incredible to many) in design from our irons and vacuum cleaners of the 80s.
              1. 0
                6 February 2025 17: 56
                Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                In 1980 the median was 4,05 after taxes. Lewis $20, $28,32, $40, $XNUMX depending on quality.

                That is, a couple of days of work.
                Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                how much you have to work to pay off your debts. And here in the USSR in the 1980s - the same two days, and in the USA - 4 months.

                The question is, for what?
                A washing machine, a refrigerator and a TV in the USSR were clearly not worth 2 days of work for an average Soviet person

                Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                True, in the US itself, for some reason, regular normal trousers cost more than jeans. The fact that we were ready to pay more for them is just a tax on stupidity.

                If from Dior, then yes, more))
                Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                I wouldn't be thrilled with their quality.

                The Baby Washer and the Average Western Washer of the 1980s
                1. 0
                  7 February 2025 11: 54
                  That is, a couple of days of work.

                  Yes. I don't understand the hype around the fact that you can buy trousers in two days of work.
                  The question is, for what?

                  What is the question here? Everything is written - "how much do you have to work to pay off your debts".
                  If from Dior, then yes, more))

                  No, it's not about Dior.
                  The Baby Washer and the Average Western Washer of the 1980s

                  Average Western Washing Machine from the Late 1980s EARLY 1990s This is what is in the photo.
            2. ANB
              0
              6 February 2025 11: 17
              . But not Levi's jeans,;)

              This is a market :)
              Deficit (no official supplies, high demand) - price rises.
              Jeans annoyed me then and they annoy me now. And I don't buy them for myself and I don't wear them. They're just plain uncomfortable. They're stiff and make your legs look bad, unless they're acid washed.
              1. +1
                6 February 2025 17: 57
                Quote: ANB
                . But not Levi's jeans,;)

                This is a market :)
                Deficit (no official supplies, high demand) - price rises.
                Jeans annoyed me then and they annoy me now. And I don't buy them for myself and I don't wear them. They're just plain uncomfortable. They're stiff and make your legs look bad, unless they're acid washed.

                I'm conditional
                1. ANB
                  0
                  7 February 2025 01: 38
                  . I conditionally

                  And conditionally, it has already been written here. Cotton blue trousers (with permanent paint) of Soviet sewing, even with yellow stitching, cost 6 rubles.
                  1. The comment was deleted.
              2. 0
                7 February 2025 13: 55
                Quote: ANB
                . But not Levi's jeans,;)

                This is a market :)
                Deficit (no official supplies, high demand) - price rises.
                Jeans annoyed me then and they annoy me now. And I don't buy them for myself and I don't wear them. They're just plain uncomfortable. They're stiff and make your legs look bad, unless they're acid washed.

                It's strange, but they don't paint anything for me...
          2. MSN
            0
            5 February 2025 19: 39
            If I'm not mistaken, jeans are cotton trousers. In the USSR, you couldn't buy yourself cotton trousers for two days of work?

            Levi's and the like at the market (there was nowhere else to buy them for the vast majority) cost 250 rubles. Two salaries of a junior engineer.
    3. +4
      5 February 2025 11: 23
      Quote from Uncle Lee
      That's how, without a single shot, they destroyed a state, for the sake of a barrel of jam and a basket of cookies...

      But what to do if the state cannot provide citizens with an equivalent barrels of jam and baskets of cookies - and instead of it, at best "long, green, smells like sausage", and in the worst case - a queue, a queue, a queue?
      And it would be good for everyone... but no - the best representatives of the Soviet people, the loyal sons of the party and their families at the same time enjoy the benefits of special distribution centers, official cars and official housing. And along with them, those who have sucked at the trough of the distribution system of goods, in which goods are more important than money.
      Plus the devaluation of labor, when pay was artificially limited from above - "there is no place for grabbers here." And even if you two plans zaludi, but you can't jump higher than the ceiling. And the best reward for the best workers in production was an increase in production standards. smile
      1. AAK
        +2
        5 February 2025 14: 04
        "What to do if the state cannot provide citizens with the equivalent of a barrel of jam and a basket of cookies...(C)
        It's one thing when the state can't, in our case the "state" rather categorically didn't want to, apparently "universal equality" scared the "heirs of Ilyich" much more...
        1. 0
          7 February 2025 13: 57
          Quote: AAK
          "What to do if the state cannot provide citizens with the equivalent of a barrel of jam and a basket of cookies...(C)
          It's one thing when the state can't, in our case the "state" rather categorically didn't want to, apparently "universal equality" scared the "heirs of Ilyich" much more...

          Private owners would provide everything
      2. 0
        5 February 2025 14: 23
        Quote: Alexey RA
        . And the best reward for the best workers was an increase in production standards.

        They forgot about the certificates... Honorary...
    4. +2
      5 February 2025 14: 03
      Quote: Uncle Lee
      The information, psychological and socio-cultural war led to the fact that the Soviet nomenklatura and intelligentsia wanted to become “bourgeois”
      That's how, without a single shot, they destroyed a state, for the sake of a barrel of jam and a basket of cookies...

      It is impossible to destroy a country that does not have critical problems.
      1. +2
        5 February 2025 14: 32
        Quote from Kartograph
        It is impossible to destroy a country

        Everything can be destroyed by stupidity, or even betrayal. But critical problems are created artificially and there are many examples of this....
        1. 0
          7 February 2025 14: 03
          Quote: Uncle Lee
          Quote from Kartograph
          It is impossible to destroy a country

          Everything can be destroyed by stupidity, or even betrayal.

          So these are critical issues.
          1. 0
            7 February 2025 15: 18
            Quote from Kartograph
            So these are critical issues.

            They were created artificially...
  2. 0
    5 February 2025 07: 13
    I'm wondering if the king wasn't ashamed to greet a talking cow by the hoof))? Or were kings not so compliant with Sharia back then? And the marked one certainly looks like Friday to his white sahibs
  3. +9
    5 February 2025 07: 29
    Very superficial and contradictory article
    had a national economy with duplicate capacities... A powerful engineering, scientific and technical corps

    in almost all Soviet civilian industries in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Why invent and make something ourselves if we can buy it? We'll sell oil and gas and buy everything we need. German machine tools and other equipment, Finnish refrigerators and American pipelayers

    sighs about the past in the spirit of the same Western propaganda... everything was much more complicated...
  4. +4
    5 February 2025 08: 51
    Washington and the Saudis caused oil prices to collapse, leaving Moscow without currency

    You don't need to read the rest after this.
  5. +4
    5 February 2025 10: 17
    It was impossible to destroy such a country except if it itself did not want it. A confluence of many circumstances led to the end of the USSR. Here, not only the "pressure" of the West, but also the degradation of the ruling class, the mood in society, the situation on the markets and much more. The system's update module did not work, and the old men in power thought in completely different categories.
  6. +2
    5 February 2025 10: 23
    [quote]The Soviet Union, against the backdrop of the "decaying West", then seemed like a mighty military-economic colossus.[quote][/quote] Dear thinking audience! It seems to me that this phrase, and especially the word "seemed" contains a big mistake by the apologists of the USSR! I respect the USSR very much, and I still worry about its collapse, but... Objectively, we ourselves believed in our own power, and then forced the West to believe. But, the people there are simple, but distrustful and impudent!!! All the way they tested our Union on "dare", waited until we believed in our power - and then they pushed us. This always happens... I want this to end with work on the mistake on our part... I really want it... IMHO, of course
  7. 0
    5 February 2025 12: 39
    The author may not agree with me, but today's Russia is much stronger on its feet than the USSR was in the 80s. The ephemera of the Western world has dissipated like fog. There is nothing particularly good there. Yes, they robbed for 500 years, created a cooperative of the golden billion, oppress the planet. But the people there are shit. And the value system is miserable. A 100 dollar banknote is more valuable than honor and honesty. At the same time, in our country, over 30 years, the people have rebuilt the economy, preserving 80% of the Soviet legacy (hello dancers!), did not lower human dignity, defended sovereignty, returned part of their historical lands. Never before has any country in the world been under such sanctions as we are, and there is also a war with NATO and the Ukrainian Reich, and in 2 years our GDP has grown by 7,6%. Russia still feeds its neighbors, but not in the ruinous way the USSR did for itself, and the rating of the country's leader is 75%. Europe has knocked out its teeth, shot itself in the knees, poured 100 billion euros into the bottomless abyss of Plyasunov's country in 3 years - and there is no victory. Not even on the horizon. Now the main thing, in the upcoming negotiations with Trump and his barracudas, is to show our strong position. But we need to end the war, it will definitely not be beneficial for very long.
  8. +1
    5 February 2025 14: 03
    Well, that is, ""Boss, everything is lost! The plaster is removed, the client is leaving!"... Does this remind anyone of anything? The article is pure manipulation. Be vigilant.)
  9. +1
    5 February 2025 19: 03
    I recognize Samsonov from the first lines already. You scroll down, oh yes, your instincts are right, Samsonov.
  10. 0
    5 February 2025 19: 19
    Once again about our bright, kind past and aggressive capitalism.

    It turns out that in the 50s and 60s of the 20th century, everything was fine in our country. Including the economy developing, and the army, the Soviet Army, was strong, and we had advanced technologies, and there was readiness for mobilization at the first call of the Party and the Government.
    And the support for this development of our country were our fathers, grandfathers and great-grandfathers, who remembered how bad it was during their childhood and youth.
    Where and how did all this good, bright today and tomorrow begin to disappear in the 70s?
    Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Chernenko, Andropov, Gorbachev... They are also "fathers, grandfathers, great-grandfathers".
    If the Americans were trying to destroy the USSR, then in the USSR, in the Central Committee, in the Politburo, in the Army, the KGB, and the Ministry of Internal Affairs, there were lilies of the valley?
    And what about technologies??? It turns out that as soon as the damned Americans closed our access to dual technologies, we began to lag behind? But we were an advanced country. We had our own development of computers. And then we turned onto the IBM highway?
    And all this is the machinations of the American military, and we sat and watched as everything collapsed?
    Our country turned out to be weaker than the USA because they are the predatory wolves of capitalism, and we are the herbivorous cows of socialism?
    What nonsense! Our country fought. And won. And the first satellite is ours. And Gagarin is ours.
  11. +1
    5 February 2025 21: 58
    The country's leadership, party organs and, first of all, the central apparatus of the party are to blame for the collapse of the country. The people in our country have never really decided anything.