The Coming European War

45 215 229
The Coming European War


It's hard to shake the feeling that the Ukrainian War is preparation for some larger war. Something like the Spanish Civil War or the Winter War with Finland.

This is evidenced by both the growing militarization of Europe and the persistent attempts to exclude Russia from international organizations. Lest we seem to be retelling "Kremlin propaganda," let's focus on the indisputable facts.

NATO's military bloc has been strengthened in the northern direction by the inclusion of Sweden and Finland, and Russia cannot compete under its own flag at key international sporting events.

Rumors of a major impending war beyond the Ukrainian front are circulating not only in the Russian but also in the Western press. Various dates around 2030 are being mentioned.

Let's not dismiss the warning signs and try to imagine what this coming war will be like.

Wars fought close together inevitably end up being linked, because often the same people take part in them.

Let's take the Patriotic War of 1812. The Finnish and Caucasian campaigns were adjacent wars. Just as Napoleon's troops, led by Barclay and Kutuzov, attempted to wear them down with a combination of retreat and partisan attacks, so too did the Swedes in Finland and Shamil's murids in the mountains of the North Caucasus attempt to resist the advancing Russian army in the 19th century.

Beyond the similarities between wars fought in the same era, the warring armies have their own traditions. The Russian army fights in a Russian way, and the German army in a German way. However, "Kremlin propaganda" sees the main rival not in Germany, but in the Anglo-Saxons, that is, the British-American alliance.

There's a Russian view that the Ukrainian war effectively ended in April 2022 with the Istanbul Accords. However, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson arrived in Kyiv, and Ukraine seemed to receive a colossal boost to continue the war. Essentially, a new war has begun, no longer with Ukraine, but within Ukraine. However, given the constitutional annexation of new regions to Russia, the war has also been waged on Russian territory.
It's clear that Russia's adversary in the coming war will be the British-American alliance and its mobilized allies. The accession of Sweden and Finland to NATO clearly suggests that the Baltic Sea region will be the arena of hostilities.

Provocations by the Baltic states, through which Ukrainian aircraft flew to Russia (the Leningrad region ports of Ust-Luga and Primorsk) drones only strengthens this assumption. Poland is located in the southern Baltics, through which war-torn Ukraine receives weapon NATO countries.

The British style of warfare is quite clear: massive bombing raids and amphibious operations. Russia fought Britain only once, and unfortunately, it was unsuccessful. This was the Crimean War of 1853–1855. A motley international coalition was assembled, including the French and Turks, coastal fortresses were bombed remotely, and two amphibious landings were undertaken: in Kamchatka and Crimea.

The Allied actions on the Western Front against Germany in World War II followed the same pattern. There is no reason to believe that the British-American alliance will change its traditions in the 21st century. The presence of strong Russian allies in the Far East makes that region relatively safe, so it is clear that the main blow will fall on Russia's northwest.


The Kaliningrad region could become the Crimea of ​​the 21st century. It's relatively easy to isolate, and its loss could significantly demoralize Russian society. Clearly, in addition to the main blow, there will be distracting ones. Attempts to occupy the coastal areas of the Barents Sea and establish puppet governments cannot be ruled out. Such attempts were made during the Russian Civil War. Similarly, during the Time of Troubles, Russia was cut off from the coastal areas of the Gulf of Finland where St. Petersburg now stands.

In this situation, Russia's attempts to break the blockade of Kaliningrad through the Suwalki Gap on the Lithuanian-Polish border would be entirely logical. Western analysts consider military action in this region highly probable. Hence Germany's militarization, which is intended to mitigate this threat.

Russia's active defense will not be limited to the Polish-Lithuanian borderland. It's possible that the Russian General Staff will draw on Ukraine's experience of launching diversionary attacks deep into enemy territory. During the last Russo-Swedish War, Russian troops captured Gotland Island, which allowed them to control the southern Baltic Sea. Western media are reporting on a possible Russian attack on Spitsbergen, whose capture would lift the potential blockade of Murmansk and Severodvinsk. The Baltic region, where the German garrison in Courland surrendered only after the end of the Great Patriotic War, appears quite attractive from a geopolitical perspective. During the Patriotic War of 1812, it was Riga that enabled the defense against MacDonald's French corps on the distant approaches to St. Petersburg.

It's difficult to say how much robotic systems will change the course of military operations. However, on the Russian side in the Baltic Sea, unmanned boats are more promising than large ones. missile Cruisers. Regarding UAVs, it's clear that all military science efforts will be focused on overcoming this threat.

The psychology of using nuclear weapons has changed. The euphoria of apocalypse seems to be a thing of the past; nuclear weapons are perceived as a technical means with a specific range of applications. The meaning of guaranteed destruction of the enemy is lost, as the goal of war is not suicide, but victory over the enemy. Therefore, the limited use of nuclear weapons against military targets—headquarters, bases, and enemy troop concentrations—cannot be ruled out. Modern information technology makes it possible to cast a "fog of war" over such ambiguous actions. For example, there is still no consensus in the media regarding who blew up the Kakhovka Reservoir dam.

However, it's not a given that the coming European war will be a global one. The Middle East and North Africa have their own internal conflicts. Latin America is demonstrating relative stability. Escalation in the Pacific region is difficult to predict.

It's unlikely the British-American alliance will decide to fight on two fronts. It's unlikely that cautious China will dare to open a second front in the East, and China's appetites don't extend beyond Taiwan.

The outcome of the coming European war is unclear. Clearly, just as NATO is currently helping Ukraine, China will also be helping Russia, since if Russia is defeated, China will be next. A Russian victory would allow for a clearer delineation of the Baltic Sea border, cool anti-Russian hysteria in the West, and allow the Russian flag to be displayed again at the Olympic Games.

229 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. + 44
    12 May 2026 04: 46
    will cool anti-Russian hysteria in the West and allow the Russian flag to be displayed again at the Olympic Games.
    Is it worth starting a global massacre for this? what
    1. -5
      12 May 2026 06: 20
      Quote from Uncle Lee
      Is it worth starting a global massacre for this?

      We don’t control Europe... Will there be a global massacre?
      Trump abruptly broke with Europe, in part to avoid being drawn into it. And he's slowly withdrawing his troops...
      So they might start a little get-together. After restructuring the economy. And confident that we won't use nuclear weapons.
      And to fight with drones and missiles... We don't have that much of that. And even the water cooling system isn't powerful enough.
      Do they have a bad army? There's a frantic recruitment drive in Holland. They're signing up themselves. And they're letting the fruit ripen—if the people there don't overthrow the Euroglobalists, they could easily overwhelm them with their numbers and production—our mobilization reserves are also seriously battered, both human and industrial. And the Ukrainians haven't gone anywhere.

      I don't think it will come to that - after all, families, accounts, and real estate abroad will force the government to seek compromises.
      1. + 13
        12 May 2026 07: 16
        "...Trump abruptly broke with Europe—in part to avoid being drawn into it. And he's slowly withdrawing his troops..." (c)

        Rather, it is a "distracting object of false attention."
        1. +8
          12 May 2026 08: 53
          Quote: Rusfaner
          "...Trump has abruptly broken with Europe—in part to avoid being drawn into it. And he's slowly withdrawing his troops..."

          Considering that Trump is a businessman, he won't be sawing off the branch. The United States and the European Union are the world's largest trading partners. In 2025, the combined trade turnover between them exceeded $1 trillion. According to Chinese customs data, total trade with the United States decreased by 18,7% to $559,74 billion.
      2. + 12
        12 May 2026 07: 45
        I don't think it will come to that - after all, families, accounts, and real estate abroad will force the government to seek compromises.

        They would rather push the government to sign a new "Brest Peace".
        1. +3
          12 May 2026 10: 10
          Quote: Rostislav
          They would rather push the government to sign a new "Brest Peace".

          For its time, the Brest Peace was a blessing; what might happen now is hardly comparable.
          I will repeat what was said in another publication, this one is even closer to the topic.
          The EU and Ukraine are US stooges; perhaps the US should be monitoring the "process" here. Ukraine, as an anti-Russia, is supposed to empty our warehouses and arsenals with EU support, cripple our industry with drone strikes, which will only intensify, and, overall, ruin our economy. The second act, now the EU (NATO) in alliance with the Ukrainian Armed Forces, attacks an exhausted Russia with "conventional weapons." The US sits back overseas, making money from the war. The final, "second front," will be if Europe fails. There's no need to imagine an apocalypse, with our profiteers dreaming of returning everything to "the way it was"; the main thing is to push things through to the point of imposing an ultimatum. The main threat to the US isn't the oligarchs and renegades who have co-opted capitalism, but the remaining Soviet nuclear missile potential. So, he needs to be dealt with under the auspices of the SVO, so that the bad guys, having brought things to a head, in the name of peace and humanism, hand him over to their dear "partners" for international control. Is that an option?

          In this scenario, the optimization of our industry, education, healthcare, science—everything inherited from the superpower—is understandable. They developed only what the West needed from a colony (the West doesn't need any other Russia): raw materials, semi-finished products, and the transfer of assets to foreign banks. But, unfortunately, the "colony" possessed a powerful nuclear potential, the only one in the world capable of destroying the United States. With the recognition of the coup in Kyiv and the integrity of Ukraine, it turned out interesting, like the blame shifted from a sick head to a healthy one. Criminals became victims of Russian "aggression," yet now the Druzhba oil pipeline has been launched, with all the ensuing consequences, suggesting they'd sell their own mothers for a golden piggy bank. An episode that aptly characterizes the essence of tweaked capitalism and its henpecked fat cats. So, too, can the strategic nuclear forces be surrendered without fear of bayonets and pitchforks (they did what they could, they wanted what was best).
          1. + 16
            12 May 2026 10: 19
            I. Strelkov, also without optimism, speaks about the prospects:

            "An option would be something like this: 'peace without annexations and contributions along the line of combat contact.' However, the problem is that there will be no peace or truce under such conditions at this time, not even a single word.

            The enemy is on the rise. They have completed preparations for their strategic program to marginalize our economy through massive drone and missile strikes. They currently have the upper hand in the air and are putting up vigorous resistance on the ground. According to the information I'm receiving, we are advancing in some areas, and they are advancing in others.

            The latest strikes on Crimea, which continue every day, show that the enemy is destroying our air defenses, destroying our military installations, and we, despite everything, cannot prevent this flow of drones and unmanned aerial vehicles, boats, and everything else.

            In other words, we were unprepared for the current situation. In such a situation, the enemy will not reconcile with us at all, even through the OSCE, even without annexation and indemnities. Their demands will escalate, their negotiating positions will harden, so there's no doubt that even if our forces make such a concession as leaving the remaining part of Donbas in enemy hands, it will be met with contemptuous sneers from Kyiv's former "esteemed partners" (I emphasize, not mine).

            So don't even hope. There will be only one winner in this war. And there will be no compromises whatsoever."
            1. +6
              12 May 2026 14: 46
              Quote: Boris Sergeev
              That is, we were not prepared for the current situation.
              The current situation was created by voluntary restrictions imposed by the "operation," under the influence of the interests of big capital—for whom war is a mortal enemy. Sanctions, restrictions, and yet the number of billionaires in Russia has only grown during this very strange military operation.
              Firing expensive anti-aircraft missiles at significantly cheaper and less labor-intensive drones. The positional stalemate is essentially artificially created, a consequence of an "operation" in which war and trade with enemies go hand in hand. And there's no need to mention "others." The Chinese can trade for both ours and yours, and they aren't bombed by drones like Russia. The main thing is to clear out the reserves, carry out a belated mobilization; there's no guarantee there'll be enough to equip the new divisions. The story with the SVO equipment kits, just to refresh your memory. Who needs that kind of "hockey?"
            2. 0
              12 May 2026 22: 09
              Quote: Boris Sergeev
              I. Strelkov, also without optimism, speaks about the prospects:
              "An option would be something like this: 'peace without annexations and contributions along the line of combat contact.'"

              Wow, even Strelkov would have been satisfied with a peace agreement with the LBS. I wonder why the Uryakly-Dolva people downvoted me here a day ago, when I suggested limiting ourselves to Donbas and leaving Kherson and Zaporizhzhia for later, as the good spirit of Anchorage advises us?
              "So don't even hope. There will be only one winner in this war. And there will be no compromises whatsoever."
              Judging by the pace of the North-West War, the collective West is seriously vying for the laurels of victory.
              I disagree with Igor Ivanovich about the impossibility of compromise. Compromise is possible and will be, the only question is when.
              To speed up the compromise, we need to double the attacks on Kyiv. I see no other option.
              1. 0
                13 May 2026 08: 24
                A blatant exaggeration: Strelkov only mentions "peace under the LGBTQ+" as an unrealistic scenario. The West's offensive continues, and it seems our leader in Anchorage was "simply blatantly deceived" regarding Donbas.

                Reporter: Is there any understanding between you and Putin that Russia should get all of Donbass?

                Trump: No.


                So while you're campaigning for "political compromises," things will get to Crimea.
              2. SAG
                0
                13 May 2026 15: 50
                To speed up the compromise, we need to double the attacks on Kyiv. I see no other option.

                I'm not asking how this will lead to a peace agreement. I'm curious what kind of compromise could be agreed upon, as long as we don't bother Kyiv anymore. Can you elaborate?
                1. 0
                  13 May 2026 15: 53
                  Quote: SAG
                  how this will lead to the signing of a peace agreement.

                  Why do we need this agreement? We need their capitulation; everything else will only be a temporary freeze on the conflict.
                  1. SAG
                    0
                    13 May 2026 16: 44
                    I don't know why, I read it in your comment 😅
                    1. -1
                      13 May 2026 18: 10
                      Quote: SAG
                      I read it in your comment

                      In which?
                      1. SAG
                        0
                        13 May 2026 18: 28
                        To speed up the compromise, we need to double the attacks on Kyiv. I see no other option.

                        In this regard. If this isn't your comment, then asking me why we need to compromise is pointless. That question should be directed to the author of the original comment.
                      2. +1
                        13 May 2026 21: 17
                        Quote: SAG
                        In this. If this is not your comment

                        You've confused me with the MBRShB.
            3. +1
              14 May 2026 06: 08
              There will be no winners in this war. This has long been obvious.
          2. +3
            12 May 2026 21: 49
            Quote: Per se.
            Ukraine, as an anti-Russia, is supposed to empty our warehouses and arsenals with the support of the EU, damage our industry with drone strikes, which will only intensify, and, in general, ruin our economy.

            That's right. Therefore, completing the SVO, even under Anchorage's herbivorous terms for Ukraine, will be a difficult task for Putin – neither Zelensky nor the West wants that. The West wants us to fight until we're exhausted, losing as many people as possible and depleting the economy as much as possible. And then, depending on the situation, they'll figure out what to do with us. Either they'll force us into unfavorable contracts for the "joint development" of our natural resources, threatening SVO V2, this time in the Baltics, or, in the event of resistance, they'll provoke a conflict, and a non-nuclear one at that.
            Quote: Author
            the goal of war is not suicide, but victory over the enemy. Therefore, one cannot rule out limited use of nuclear weapons against military targets: headquarters, bases and concentrations of enemy troops.

            This nonsense again. There will be no use of tactical nuclear weapons. The West won't strike first, and the Kremlin will give the order when warheads rain down on our leadership (if they have time). Because using nuclear weapons against NATO isn't just suicide, it's the murder of everyone close to us, and half of humanity to boot. The process will likely snowball. Counting on the cowardice of Europeans and Americans is foolish and criminal.

            And what to do, how to prevent a negative scenario?
            In my opinion, we need to escalate the strategic military operations, moving towards truly devastating strikes, especially against Kyiv. No, I'm not hoping for their capitulation, but it will strengthen our negotiating position. And we need to conclude the strategic military operations as quickly as possible, so that the resources it allocates can be used to build up our conventional missile and drone capabilities, as well as air defense systems. This is a chance to avoid a new war.
            Once again - do not try to fight "until complete victory" in Ukraine (greetings to the Uryakly-Dolvovites!), but, having concluded peace on ACCEPTABLE terms, build up the non-nuclear potential of air attack and defense weapons.
            In the meantime, ramp up the power of massive strikes against the WRG's rear. Not 500 drones and 20 missiles, but 1000 drones and 50 missiles in a salvo!
            1. +2
              12 May 2026 22: 37
              I agree that it would be good to increase strikes, but why? We make 25 Kalibrs a month and can't ramp up production. Our economy can't keep up with European and American ones, and Putin is afraid to convert our economy to military needs, as the people would be very upset by it, as it would require declaring martial law, which would impose horrific restrictions on the population. So Putin is dragging his feet, hoping it will resolve itself.
            2. +1
              13 May 2026 06: 42
              Quote: MBRBS
              Therefore, completing the SVO, even under the Anchorage conditions that are favorable for Ukraine, will be a difficult task for Putin.
              Why did the Guarantor start all this in 2022, having recognized Ukraine's integrity in 2014 and failed to take advantage of all the real opportunities of that time? It seems the Yeltsin case is alive and well—"God bless America," and the junk of our fat cats is in other people's banks. For them, Russia is just a cash cow and a lemon to squeeze, with dual and triple citizenship.
              What you're saying about escalating the attack... It's not about these Democrat guys; they're doing what they're doing, and it seems like it was planned that way. However, the "greed ruined the sucker" thing seems to be about them. Victory requires a renewed socialism and people's power.
          3. +6
            12 May 2026 22: 51
            For its time, the Brest Peace was a blessing

            To think that Russia's greatest defeat is a blessing is stupidity.
            1. -1
              13 May 2026 06: 32
              Quote: a.shlidt
              To think that Russia's greatest defeat is a blessing is stupidity.

              Why? It was the lesser of two evils. Now, if the Bolsheviks had screwed up Russia after this, instead of ultimately creating a superpower, then yes, they would have shown weakness and made a mistake.
              A war to the bitter end—that was a utopia. No one would have surrendered Constantinople to Russia, nor indeed anything else. The entire struggle for the global throne of capitalism wasn't intended to keep Russia great. That's why the German, Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman, and Russian empires vanished into oblivion. Only the British Empire remained in Europe. Moreover, everything was done to ensure that the worthless Nicholas II abdicated, and Russia would have secured the pro-Western February Revolution. Furthermore, the Tsarist debts on loans, which with that government promised enslavement and the collapse of the country, would have seen Yeltsins, Gaidars, and Chubais emerge as early as 1917, in a semi-literate, dependent country. The Bolsheviks saved Russia.
          4. -1
            13 May 2026 07: 15
            Was the Brest-Litovsk Peace a blessing? Half a country with industrial potential was given over to the Nazis. This started a civil war. For almost a year after the Bolsheviks came to power, Russia lived peacefully, resigned to their rule. Only after the humiliation of Brest-Litovsk did normal people realize that such leaders needed to be kicked out.
            1. +1
              13 May 2026 09: 43
              Quote: Fakapych
              Was the Brest-Litovsk peace a good thing?
              First, the lesser evil. No one would have left Russia alone, enough of these fairy tales. The West doesn't need a strong Russia, not with the Tsar, nor with the Communists, nor with the Democrats. There would have been a civil war anyway, even without the Bolsheviks; General Kornilov's rebellion is proof of that, but no one would have built a superpower.
            2. 0
              13 May 2026 13: 50
              Half the country with industrial potential was given to the Fritzes.


              By that time, the Fritzes had already taken Poland and half of Ukraine. The Russian Tsarist army was effectively destroyed and incapable of anything. So was the Tsarist industry.

              Only after the Brest humiliation did normal people understand that such leaders had to be kicked out with piss rags.


              A fan of the White Guard and the lackeys of the West?
        2. +3
          12 May 2026 14: 09
          The compromise for the other side would be our capitulation. We've already tried to win on points.
      3. +7
        12 May 2026 08: 58
        Quote from tsvetahaki
        Trump abruptly broke with Europe, in part to avoid being drawn into it. And he's slowly withdrawing his troops...

        He didn't tear anything apart and all the troops are in place, but they withdrew the 5000 that were brought in in 2022.
        Quote from tsvetahaki
        And being confident that we will not use nuclear weapons.

        And why are you so sure? Surety should be 110% in such a matter.
        Quote from tsvetahaki
        Is their army bad? There's a frantic recruitment drive in Holland, for example. People are signing up themselves.

        Is it so crazy that conscription has to be introduced because no one wants to join the army?
        Like many others, your position is based on a certain hysteria fed by the media. This isn't very good; you need to try to think for yourself. Someone shapes the media agenda, and for some reason, that someone needs thoughts like yours in their heads. Perhaps to shape society's demand for peace at any cost.
        1. +2
          12 May 2026 17: 07
          Quote: Level 2 Advisor
          Is it so crazy that conscription has to be introduced because no one wants to join the army?

          Before you say anything, at least check. Volunteers actually signed up in Holland. And in Germany, too—I wish it were worse.
          And who forms the media agenda?

          I wonder where you get your data? Following your point of view, you should believe what you like, because everyone lies.
          Which is almost correct - but there are also primary sources - such as documents on government websites.
          1. +3
            12 May 2026 18: 08
            Quote from tsvetahaki
            And in Germany too, I would like it to be worse.

            I only found news about 4000 people signing up in Germany... Do you have any other data?
            Quote from tsvetahaki
            I wonder where you get your data? Following your point of view, you should believe what you like, because everyone lies.

            Think and analyze for yourself, and don't use the opinions voiced in the media instead of your own, and perceive them critically, since they are, first and foremost, just someone's opinion, and if we're talking about our media, they're mostly peer-reviewed... Think in general, in short, first and foremost for yourself... and having thought about it, I personally don't see the need, desire, or objective reasons for the EU to start a war with us... and that's not even mentioning nuclear weapons, which alone is enough to understand that it won't happen... hi
            1. 0
              13 May 2026 06: 48
              Quote: Level 2 Advisor
              But when I think about it, I personally don't see any need, desire, or objective reasons for the EU to start a war with us.

              I completely agree with this. But there are subjective reasons. They talk a lot about 1914—when no one wanted war and it was inevitable.
              Trump's political pressure and internal turn to the right threaten the loss of power - and the logical solution for the Euroglobalists to unite and maintain power is a small victorious war.
              Why small? Because they firmly believe in the possibility of slowly boiling the frog—a measured, gradual increase in the temperature of the confrontation, even to the point of a "gentlemanly" exchange of isolated blows. Like what happened with Ukraine for three years.

              In March 2026, the Ministry of Defense Germany reported a sharp jump in applications—20% more than the 2025 target. "Defense Minister Boris Pistorius has officially stated that the government is deliberately allowing 'overbooking': the number of approved candidates may exceed the number of available vacancies in order to create a reliable reserve and compensate for possible attrition." You can check it out. https://militarnyi.com/en/news/conscientious-objection-germany-recruitment/
              В Holland https://www.hollandtimes.nl/2026-edition-2-march/increase-in-army-vacancies-mainly-for-supporting-roles/
              Denmark - a little easier to read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_in_Denmark
              1. +2
                13 May 2026 14: 58
                Quote from tsvetahaki
                Trump's political pressure and internal turn to the right threaten the loss of power - and the logical solution for the Euroglobalists to unite and maintain power is a small victorious war.
                Why small?

                It’s easier for this purpose to find someone weaker than the Russian Federation with nuclear weapons, rather than the strongest country in the vicinity, right?

                Quote from tsvetahaki
                Because they firmly believe in the possibility of slowly boiling the frog—a measured, gradual increase in the temperature of the confrontation, right up to a "gentlemanly" exchange of isolated blows. Just like what happened with Ukraine for three years.

                What's the basis for such a conclusion? I've only heard this kind of thing from "experts" on TV talk shows...
                Quote from tsvetahaki
                In March 2026, the German Ministry of Defense reported a sharp jump in applications—20% more than in 2025. Defense Minister Boris Pistorius officially stated that the government deliberately allows for "overbooking": the number of approved candidates may exceed the number of available vacancies in order to create a reliable reserve and compensate for possible attrition. You can check it out. https://militarnyi.com/en/news/conscientious-objection-germany-recruitment/

                Are you kidding? I take it English isn't your thing? "Conscientious-objection-germany-recruitment" translates into Russian as "conscientious objection," but I couldn't find any confirmation that there are more applicants than slots... It seems a bit fake...
                Quote from tsvetahaki
                https://www.hollandtimes.nl/2026-edition-2-march/increase-in-army-vacancies-mainly-for-supporting-roles/

                News about an increase in "auxiliary" vacancies in the army—civilian rear service personnel...
                Quote from tsvetahaki
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_in_Denmark

                about the fact that only being discussed Possibility of increasing from 10000 to 15000 people - Danish Armed Forces...
                I honestly couldn't find anything that suggested any aggression against the Russian Federation was being prepared... and all of this was mostly happening back in 2022, after the start of the Russian Central Military District, like, "We're afraid now." hi
                1. +1
                  13 May 2026 18: 16
                  It’s easier for this purpose to find someone weaker than the Russian Federation with nuclear weapons, rather than the strongest country in the vicinity, right?

                  Found it.
                  Finland, Sweden. Reduced to a common denominator.
                  What is the basis for such a conclusion?

                  Well, if only all our red lines reached the "experts", but not you, then oops!
                  You are joking?

                  If you don't understand the article, here's the ministry's summary: https://www.grosswald.org/bundeswehr-personnel-2025-breakdown/
                  As of 31 December 2025, the Bundeswehr comprises 184,194 military and 81,958 civilian personnel - totaling 266,152.
                  This represents a net increase of approximately 3,000 soldiers over the year, the highest year-end military personnel count in over a decade. Recruitment hit 25,000 new enlistments in 2025 — the best result since the suspension of subscription.
                  And about those who are interested - https://militarnyi.com/en/news/conscientious-objection-germany-recruitment/
                  I haven't found anything that suggests any aggression against the Russian Federation is being prepared, frankly speaking... and all of this is mainly happening in 2022, after the start of the Russian Central Military District, like - we're fighting

                  Well, you really want to be like Lieutenant Rzhevsky - straight out "We are looking for volunteers to attack Russia."
                  If it does happen (an attack), for Europeans it will be a "reflection of unmotivated aggression by a country that is seizing Ukraine."
                  1. +1
                    13 May 2026 18: 42
                    Quote from tsvetahaki
                    Found it.
                    Finland, Sweden. Reduced to a common denominator.

                    Yes, even the same Turkey, Algeria, Egypt, etc., you can pick on a pole.. And without nuclear weapons.. somehow it’s safer.. Yes, they didn’t even participate in the attack on Iran.. And you’re talking about the Russian Federation..
                    Quote from tsvetahaki
                    Well, if only all our red lines reached the "experts", but not you, then oops!

                    To start a war with the Russian Federation, you need to be absolutely sure that nuclear weapons will not be used... absolutely... An attack by the Russian Federation would be an attack on the country... Even the Kursk region was a small incursion in relation to the country's total territory... And for example, I, like many others, do not consider this a reason to use nuclear weapons... But if the EU attacks... I already think it is worth it, as do many citizens like me... These are somewhat different, don't you think?
                    Quote from tsvetahaki
                    This represents a net increase of approximately 3,000 soldiers over the year, the highest year-end military personnel count in over a decade. Recruitment hit 25,000 new enlistments in 2025 — the best result since the suspension of subscription.

                    The number has increased by 3000 people in a year - does this sound like preparation for war? I don't think so. For example, since the start of the Second World War, our numbers have grown by how much more.
                    Quote from tsvetahaki
                    And about those who are interested - https://militarnyi.com/en/news/conscientious-objection-germany-recruitment/

                    I repeat, here about unwilling Serve, why are you citing a link that contradicts your own position? Put it in the translator or something...
                    Quote from tsvetahaki
                    If it does happen (an attack), for Europeans it will be a "reflection of unmotivated aggression by a country that is seizing Ukraine."

                    This is such a complete gamble that they'll suddenly sign up to fight for the Ukrainians in a hot war that I don't even want to discuss such nonsense, frankly speaking... They don't really care about the Ukrainians. Russia isn't planning on taking over the entire outskirts, and it's highly likely that it will stay roughly where the border is now... well, up to the border with the DPR, I think. So why the hell would they even fight? Every war should bring something... What would a war with Russia bring them, with the considerable risk of getting nuclear weapons, especially when the population itself has absolutely no desire to fight? Some kind of artificial hysteria is being created in society - why? I already wrote about it above (in my opinion).
                    1. +1
                      14 May 2026 06: 43
                      "According to official data, in 2026 the number of people wishing to enlist increased by approximately 20% compared to the same period last year."
                      If this is about unwillingness to serve, we have different English.
                      And you didn't understand the main thing.
                      It's not about quantity, but about the trend. A shift in consciousness is slowly taking place. I won't search for the analysis I read – I don't remember where... But what I've given is sufficient.
                      From personal experience, while the Germans and Dutch used to hide their ancestors, now pride is emerging. So far, it's in the form of "they fought honorably, they were heroes." But sometimes, with a shift to "...they fought against the eastern barbarians."
                      Russian Ukraine was reformatted in 6 years - I think if they push harder, they can handle Europe in 4 years.

                      As for the nuclear weapons... Raise the temperature gradually, and nothing will happen. For example, seizing a tanker and engaging in combat with our fighter. No matter how powerful our weapon is, they have significant quantitative, and perhaps even qualitative, superiority.
                      So what - should we launch a nuclear strike on the tanker and the plane?
                      And the next tanker is the same... Local battles.
                      And why would the government use nuclear weapons? To sit in a luxurious nuclear shelter instead of a palace? To never visit Europe again???
                      Even I don't believe this answer - which will NOT allow you to return from "partnership" to your old ways...

                      And why fight – except for skirmishes? Fifty years behind the Iron Curtain won't seem like a short time.
                      1. +1
                        14 May 2026 09: 02
                        For the West, our elite is on the level of Serbian General Radko Mladic. If any of them go to Europe, it will only be to The Hague for trial. So, "circling back" is an illusion. The point of no return has been passed.
      4. +4
        12 May 2026 11: 05
        Trump has abruptly broken with Europe.

        Trump will be replaced in 2029
        1. -2
          12 May 2026 11: 11
          He's established his totalitarianism and autocracy in just a few months, and he refuses to acknowledge poll results that show his approval rating at 36-39%. So, it's entirely possible he'll do everything he can to remain President for another term.
        2. -1
          12 May 2026 16: 56
          Trump will change, but the US and EU will not.
          Europe in the form of the EU will categorically not suit the United States, regardless of which party rules there.
          This is already irreversible, so the US will make every effort to break up this new empire.
        3. 0
          13 May 2026 00: 16
          I hope he doesn't change before 29 thanks to his "young" age, or maybe they won't help him change. Besides, a fair number of overseas audiences are bored with him; they're tired of him, you know. tongue
      5. +2
        12 May 2026 13: 29
        Quote from tsvetahaki
        Quote from Uncle Lee
        Is it worth starting a global massacre for this?

        We don’t control Europe... Will there be a global massacre?
        Trump abruptly broke with Europe, in part to avoid being drawn into it. And he's slowly withdrawing his troops...
        So they might start a little get-together. After restructuring the economy. And confident that we won't use nuclear weapons.
        And to fight with drones and missiles... We don't have that much of that. And even the water cooling system isn't powerful enough.
        Do they have a bad army? There's a frantic recruitment drive in Holland. They're signing up themselves. And they're letting the fruit ripen—if the people there don't overthrow the Euroglobalists, they could easily overwhelm them with their numbers and production—our mobilization reserves are also seriously battered, both human and industrial. And the Ukrainians haven't gone anywhere.

        I don't think it will come to that - after all, families, accounts, and real estate abroad will force the government to seek compromises.

        Trump withdrew his soldiers from one place in Europe and transferred them to another place in Europe closer to us.
    2. +6
      12 May 2026 06: 51
      Remember, as long as capitalism exists, there is the inevitability of wars; somehow you are to blame for the fact that I want to eat.
      The flirtations of the red-haired Satan from Washington, amid the supposed discord in relations with NATO, should in no way dilute our attention to the possible theaters of war in the northwest of the Arctic region, the Atlantic and the Baltic Sea, where a northern expeditionary alliance is being formed with dates, norgs, logs, and a number of countries under the command of the little Brits, and a southern one with gypsies, macaroni-eaters, and their neighbors, brothers, the Magyars, meaning frogs with nuclear weapons.
      One should always remember: Nobody wanted war, war was inevitable.
      1. bar
        +8
        12 May 2026 08: 16
        Quote: ZovSailor
        Remember, as long as capitalism exists, wars are inevitable.

        The inevitability of war has always been present in human history, both under capitalism and long before it. And after it, nothing will change.
        1. -4
          12 May 2026 09: 14
          bar
          Today, 08: 16
          The inevitability of war has always been present in human history, both under capitalism and long before it. And after it, nothing will change.

          hi Without a doubt, one of the catalysts for military action is the development of nationalist movements in countries, leading to changes in governments and fundamentally transforming the policies of states.
        2. 0
          12 May 2026 22: 54
          bar Okay, then let's formulate the idea like this:
          Until communism triumphs in the world, wars are inevitable.
          I don't really believe in the reality of "pure" communism, but we must strive for it. Russia, I hope, will continue to be a leader in this field. Not now, but later.
          1. 0
            13 May 2026 01: 21
            Russia, I hope, will continue to be a leader in this. Not now, but later.

            Actually, China declared it was building communism. It's picked up a breakneck pace, and I'm afraid we won't be able to keep up.
          2. SAG
            +2
            13 May 2026 16: 10
            Until communism triumphs in the world, wars are inevitable.

            Yes Yes Yes fellow Islamists will tell you the same thing about the World Caliphate, nationalists about the domination of the white race led by the Fuhrer, imperialists about an all-powerful empire, and so on...
            Do you really not understand? This is not God's intention. It is impossible to build a Tower of Babel on Earth. Peace is only possible within a system of checks and balances, with respect for other ideologies and religions. In such a system, in a thousand years, war will become anathema.
    3. +5
      12 May 2026 10: 47
      Quote from Uncle Lee
      Is it worth starting a global massacre for this?

      Many people view the militarization of Europe in very fragmented terms. Try looking at the process as a whole.
      1. Europe has no self-control. Most politicians are outright clowns, supported not by voters but by money, and their behavior is completely controlled by their puppeteers. They can arrange anything they want; they have no principles or will of their own.
      2. Europe faces enormous challenges due to competition from China and growing protectionism in the US. Manufacturing is seriously declining in both GDP and quality. This means they risk being cut off from profitable trade and short of money, while their own resources are too limited and there are no visible ways to reverse the situation. This means Europe will be ready for adventures.
      3. Due to its bizarre policies, the Russian Federation has seriously weakened its control over its external perimeter, is experiencing colossal problems with demographics and internal effectiveness, relying solely on nuclear weapons and literally provoking short-lived, victorious border redistributions, and is also drawn into a protracted conflict in Ukraine. Meanwhile, a very threatening situation is already developing in the Baltic and the Gulf of Finland, not only with Kaliningrad.
      4. The notorious number of troops and military expenditures are several times greater than those of European countries than our forces.
      5. The level of internal tension in Russian society is extremely high – economic, social, and political – plus the instability of power is obvious to everyone, meaning the country has very little potential for mobilization, and this is obvious.
      All this creates a huge imbalance of power, which politicians could try to realize at any moment through pressure, some real aggression against us, and attempts to temporarily solve their problems at our expense. War is a last resort; it could be limited to pressure and concessions in negotiations, but it could also escalate to war. The government's negligence and criminal unwillingness to recognize the obvious threat, attempts to squeeze everything out of people and not share the profits—all this could lead our country to new terrible events.
      1. osp
        +3
        13 May 2026 04: 37
        None of the problems that have plagued the country for the past 30-35 years or more have been resolved. They haven't been resolved even in relatively prosperous times.
        Neither the problem of theft and corruption in power, nor the problem of catastrophic population decline, nor the problem of the collapse of science and production in the country, nor the mass impoverishment of people in the regions.
        There was some talk about it, even a sea of ​​money was allocated.
        But all this went down the drain.
        It is naive to think that Western intelligence agencies do not know this.
        They know and provide their superiors with comprehensive conclusions about the state of affairs in Russia.
        And they even suggest how, when and where you can use it.
    4. 0
      12 May 2026 10: 57
      There will be war, and what are we doing? Building up our army, creating a threat to the enemy in Europe? So far, nothing. Is our complacency simply astounding, or is it weakness and an inability to pursue our own policy? We are planning to sign Minsk-3, and, oddly enough, precisely so they can prepare for this war. And the Ukrainian Armed Forces will play a crucial role in this war!
      1. +1
        12 May 2026 14: 23
        Quote: Alexander Odintsov
        Is our complacency simply astonishing or is it weakness and the inability to pursue our own policies?

        And weakness, and short-sightedness... And some kind of vileness and obscenity hangs in the air.
      2. +3
        12 May 2026 23: 06
        Quote: Alexander Odintsov
        We are going to conclude Minsk-3 and, oddly enough, precisely so that they can prepare for this war.

        And now, in your opinion, they're not preparing for it? But as soon as we conclude Minsk, they'll rush to get ready? Why would that be?
      3. osp
        +5
        13 May 2026 04: 49
        For example, just look at the population of the Arkhangelsk and Vologda regions.
        These regions are each the size of a European country.
        And less than 2 million people live there! That's less than in one Moscow district!
        And they are losing their population, turning into a deserted territory while Moscow grows with skyscrapers.
        For information: the population of Finland alone is almost 6 million people, the population of Sweden is more than 10 million people (twice the population of St. Petersburg), the population of Norway is almost 6 million people.
        In aviation and ships, communications and reconnaissance systems, and even in ground forces, we have overwhelming superiority over Russia in that direction - we have almost no large military formations there, and never have had any.
        We cannot defeat them with conventional weapons.
        There should be no illusions here.
    5. -2
      12 May 2026 17: 07
      and will allow the Russian flag to be displayed again at the Olympic Games.

      I'm a Putin supporter. But what I don't like about him is his excessive love of sports, which has led to hundreds of billions of rubles in excess spending. It would be better if he favored the manufacturing industry.
      1. +2
        13 May 2026 01: 29
        Quote: Alexey Lantukh
        and will allow the Russian flag to be displayed again at the Olympic Games.

        I'm a Putin supporter. But what I don't like about him is his excessive love of sports, which has led to hundreds of billions of rubles in excess spending. It would be better if he favored the manufacturing industry.

        I didn't notice any love for sports or industry, sorry. But I did see a love for all kinds of shows.
        1. SAG
          0
          13 May 2026 16: 18
          After all, bees are created to seek nectar, and flies – a different substance. Everyone sees what they want to see!
    6. +1
      12 May 2026 18: 01
      Quote from Uncle Lee
      Is it worth starting a global massacre for this?

      And who is going to start it?
      1. +2
        12 May 2026 23: 10
        Carmela The author of the article writes about the use of tactical nuclear weapons. This will almost certainly lead to global carnage.
        1. osp
          +1
          13 May 2026 04: 55
          Europe is full of American-made B61 tactical nuclear bombs.
          NATO countries' aircraft can use them if the Pentagon and the US President give the go-ahead.
          Even the F-16s supplied to Ukraine can use them - this has been the main carrier in Europe for 40 years.
          Britain and France have hundreds of strategic warheads on submarines, and the French also have their own tactical ones.
          So there are enough nuclear charges in the Old World.
          But they have no need to be the first to use them against Russia—they have plenty of other weapons. There's plenty of air power alone.
        2. 0
          13 May 2026 16: 41
          Quote: MBRBS
          This will lead to a global massacre.

          Do you think that such a massacre is worse than Russia’s capitulation?
    7. -1
      13 May 2026 12: 03
      The global trend of an imminent war with Russia was set by the globalists who control the Anglo-Saxons and Gayropa.
      The period 2029-2030, which the Europeans themselves call the beginning of the war, is subject to adjustment, which could well shift to 2027-2028, because all wars and conflicts began with surprise attacks and a coincidence of many accidents.
      Russia has been assigned the sacred mission of preventing all vile intentions of its enemies with preemptive disarming strikes.
  2. + 18
    12 May 2026 04: 48
    Hooray... We can do it again... Thanks to grandpa for the victory... But the reality is different.
    1. +4
      12 May 2026 07: 26
      "If reality does not correspond to my theory, so much the worse for reality" (c) either Hegel or Einstein, either jokingly or seriously, either said it or not
      1. +3
        12 May 2026 07: 39
        Either one of two: Gogol, Hegel, Babel or Bebel, or not! lol
        1. +1
          12 May 2026 12: 33
          Gogol? Hegel? Google! :)
    2. + 16
      12 May 2026 09: 00
      Quote: Themistocles_
      Hooray... We can do it again... Thanks to grandpa for the victory... But the reality is different.
      Yes. The reality is different. Our main grandfather is a bit off.
    3. -1
      12 May 2026 23: 11
      Themistocles At best: "Thanks to Grandpa for the match fix." laughing
  3. +9
    12 May 2026 05: 03
    Maybe it's time to stop inciting tensions? It's enough to remember that NATO was just a name until 2014. Experienced officers were either dismissed or transferred from the EU to Afghanistan.
    1. man
      + 14
      12 May 2026 07: 17
      Quote from invisible_man
      Maybe it's time to stop inciting tensions? It's enough to remember that NATO was just a name until 2014. Experienced officers were either dismissed or transferred from the EU to Afghanistan.

      My wife recently celebrated her anniversary. She used to work for a travel agency, primarily focused on European tours, and she worked through Russian Germans. From their congratulations, we realized she was in Germany. they are really very afraidthat Russia is really going to attack Europe... It was a revelation to me... request For what I bought, for that I sell ...
      1. +9
        12 May 2026 11: 37
        And they watched enough of Solovyov's evenings, where the host had already fired a nuclear weapon at them once.
        There is something to be afraid of
        1. SAG
          +1
          13 May 2026 16: 22
          How accurately did you identify yourself in one phrase? good
          In Germany, people only watch Russian channels 24/7! What parallel universe have you fallen out of?
    2. + 17
      12 May 2026 07: 23
      Even after 2014, the same thing happened... We so zealously denied and denied any involvement in the events in Donbas that almost everyone in NATO thought we would act "like gentlemen," with low intensity and through proxy forces, just like the "civilized people" in that very NATO are accustomed to...
      P.S.: I liked the author's analogy, but I'm afraid it wasn't what he meant... I simply never knew that the Winter/Finnish War was part of Hitler and the Axis powers' preparations for the invasion of the USSR... I naively always thought that our leadership overestimated its strength and got a bit caught up in the redistribution of spheres of influence, inadvertently demonstrating to others that piling up tens of thousands of tanks isn't enough; you have to know how to use them, which isn't happening. So it's us who need to be divided, not divided...
      1. +8
        12 May 2026 07: 32
        Quote: parma
        ...I just never knew that the Winter/Finnish War was part of Hitler and the Axis countries' preparation for the invasion of the USSR...

        According to the latter joint resolution of the All-Union Central Council of Trade Unions and the Central Committee of the All-Union Leninist Young Communist League In the textbook edited by V. Medinsky "World History" (10th grade) everything was exactly like this
        1. +9
          12 May 2026 08: 04
          Um... I don't even know now whether it's a good thing that I graduated from school almost 20 years ago or not...
          Sorry for the off-topic post, but colleague, could you tell me what's going on there now: did the damned traitors persuade the Supreme Command to invade Finland, or did Finland stage a false start and attack the city named after Lenin?... And how are they commenting on the three-and-a-half-month existence of the Finnish Democratic Republic?... Anyway, I'll have to find that textbook online.
          1. +2
            12 May 2026 13: 52
            Is it good that I graduated from school almost 20 years ago or not?

            Even in Soviet times (my school years were from 1983 to 1993), they didn’t think of this.
        2. bar
          +1
          12 May 2026 08: 19
          But whether this was actually the case is a big question.
          1. bar
            -2
            12 May 2026 08: 26
            Although, if you dig deeper, the Finnish war was started with the goal of pushing the border away from St. Petersburg to secure it (previously, the Finns had been offered a fair exchange of territory, but the proud Finns hadn't condescended). But what they were trying to secure it from is perfectly clear: a Hitler invasion. So Medinsky is quite right.
            1. +6
              12 May 2026 09: 01
              There's a pretext, and then there's a reason. The pretext was indeed to "move" the border, but the reason... the creation of the FDR on our territory with its 20-strong army. This guy hints at slightly different desires than simply "moving" the border. Moreover, by a "completely strange" coincidence, the "people's government" itself was created before the start of the war and just as self-dissolved before the signing of the peace agreements!
            2. +4
              12 May 2026 11: 11
              Before this, the Finns were offered a fair exchange of territories

              It's not very fair, to be honest. The Finns were offered to give us the first-class fortifications they had built, and in exchange they were offered land in the swamps.
              1. +1
                13 May 2026 01: 04
                To be absolutely precise, Stalin, with his war, was, at a minimum, correcting the mistakes of Alexander I, who had annexed lands on the Karelian Isthmus to the former Swedish Finland, conquered in 1809, which had been returned to Russia in 1721, and which had long before been part of Novgorod's domain until they were captured by the Swedes.
                Of course, everything pointed to a desire to reclaim Finland entirely, but the new 1940 border didn't emerge out of nowhere, and the Red Army settled on it in March 1940 not only out of fear of Britain and France entering the war. I'm certain that during the behind-the-scenes negotiations with key global players in the late winter of 1940, Soviet representatives defended the 1940 borders precisely on these grounds. Similarly, the western borders of the future GDR reproduced the borders of the Baltic Slavs before the first German Drang nacht Osten. Indeed, it was not without this that the Anglo-Saxons were ultimately forced to accept these arguments.
                1. +1
                  13 May 2026 07: 40
                  In fact, we officially recognized Finland's existing borders at that time. Over the course of history, one can find different justifications for borders, and each one has its own version. But this doesn't necessarily mean we should immediately fight over them, otherwise the planet would be mired in endless wars. Especially since the USSR didn't recognize itself as the legal successor to the Russian Empire.
                  1. -2
                    13 May 2026 22: 48
                    The German agent Ulyanov-Blank recognized them, after which German troops landed in Finke at the very end of 1917 and drove the "Red Finns" out of there.
            3. -2
              12 May 2026 13: 35
              Quote: bar
              Themistocles

              Quote: bar
              Although, if you dig deeper, the Finnish war was started with the goal of pushing the border away from St. Petersburg to secure it (previously, the Finns had been offered a fair exchange of territory, but the proud Finns hadn't condescended). But what they were trying to secure it from is perfectly clear: a Hitler invasion. So Medinsky is quite right.

              Medinsky is a smart, intelligent person
    3. -1
      12 May 2026 23: 27
      invisible_man War has changed. No one will attack; they'll destroy with missiles and, according to satellite reconnaissance, mainly drones. What's needed here are the appropriate officers, a new generation. It's not hard to produce them. They won't study the experience of previous world wars.
  4. +8
    12 May 2026 05: 30
    Quote from invisible_man
    Maybe it's time to stop stirring things up.

    Hmm...Trump is raging in the world... Israel is trampling the Arabs into asphalt, and soon Cuba will be torn apart.
    In Russia, UAVs produced in Europe and the US, launched in Ukraine, are raiding our oil refineries and Russian residential high-rises. request
    Who is your appeal to regarding incitement?
    Our country is being shelled...all sorts of sanctions are being imposed...and you are talking about some kind of incitement...original. what
    1. + 11
      12 May 2026 05: 38
      Our country is being shelled...all sorts of sanctions are being imposed.

      So how did it all start? Whose idea was it to stage a small, victorious war? And without a tsar, no less...
      1. + 10
        12 May 2026 05: 53
        Quote from invisible_man
        Where did it all start?

        smile And it all started with NATO's advance to the east.
        Remember Yugoslavia? Or have you already forgotten?
        Do you really think that the king is the main reason here?
        Look deeper...remember the Maidan, remember the overthrow of Yanukovych, remember the massacres in Donbas and Odessa. There are more than enough reasons for the SVO...the Tsar is already a secondary part of the overall picture.
        It is bad that the implementation of the SVO was unprepared and entrusted to poorly qualified people. hi
        We've been marking time for five years now, so to speak.
        1. + 25
          12 May 2026 06: 06
          No one denies the overthrow of Yanukovych, the massacre of people in Donbass and Odessa...
          But someone recognized Poroshenko. For eight years, someone didn't care about the massacre in Donbas and Odesa... and then, bam, they "cared." And now, no one at the government level has even mentioned the tragedy in Odesa. Less than a month after the SVO began, someone started begging for a deal, and they're still begging for it.
        2. -1
          12 May 2026 09: 06
          Quote: The same LYOKHA
          Look deeper... remember the Maidan, remember the overthrow of Yanukovych, remember the massacre of people in Donbass

          From here in more detail.
          1. -1
            12 May 2026 09: 31
            The main thing is to mix up cause and effect, add your own version, and no one will figure out why it all started.
            Rewatch the latest direct line. For example, it stated that February 22 happened because of a coup in Ukraine.
            1. 0
              12 May 2026 09: 42
              The enemies of the USSR have proven they don't care about all the coups in the former USSR except one. Their new "friends" are those who came to power through coups. But the fact that they did all this in one case after a coup isn't about the coup itself, but about who they overthrew.
              1. -2
                12 May 2026 10: 54
                Quote: tatra
                But the fact that they did all this in one case after the coup - the point is not in the coup itself, but in who they overthrew.

                Who declared there was a coup? If you're referring to Yanukovych, no one "overthrew" him, as he himself claimed. He remained president until Poroshenko's election.
                1. +2
                  12 May 2026 11: 08
                  What nonsense. How can you be the President of your own country while living in a foreign country? And that doesn't change the fact that all of this happened not because of a coup, but because of a specific person who was overthrown, or whether he fled—it doesn't matter.
                  1. -1
                    12 May 2026 13: 09
                    Your answer leaves me stunned.
                2. +2
                  12 May 2026 14: 17
                  Quote: WIKI
                  Yanukovych, then his no one "overthrows"l "

                  Maybe there was no Maidan?
                  1. +1
                    12 May 2026 14: 54
                    There were two Maidans, and Yanukovych was offended on both. The first Maidan was in 2004.
                  2. -1
                    12 May 2026 16: 15
                    Tell me, who overthrew Yanukovych?
                    1. +4
                      12 May 2026 16: 56
                      Victoria Nuland. She orchestrated a coup and overthrew Yanukovych for cookies.
                      1. 0
                        12 May 2026 19: 19
                        Quote: Rosemary
                        organized a coup

                        Who and by what document established that there was a coup?
                    2. +1
                      12 May 2026 18: 14
                      Quote: WIKI
                      Tell me, who overthrew Yanukovych?

                      Those who organized the Maidan. Why do you keep asking me stupid questions?
                      1. -4
                        12 May 2026 19: 16
                        Then tell me, with what document was he overthrown? The Maidan didn't overthrow him. It arose because Yanukovych refused to sign the association agreement between Ukraine and the European Union. That's what sparked all the fuss.
                      2. +1
                        12 May 2026 21: 33
                        Quote: WIKI
                        With what document was he overthrown?

                        On February 22, 2014, the Verkhovna Rada, through a bill, prematurely terminated the powers of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych. According to the Ukrainian Constitution, the early termination of a president's powers is only possible in the event of his or her resignation, incapacitation due to health reasons, removal from office through impeachment, or death. None of these conditions were met on February 22, 2014. However, this did not prevent the Ukrainian parliament from setting a new date for the presidential elections that same day: May 25, 2014.
                      3. -1
                        13 May 2026 07: 52
                        Quote: Boton
                        terminated the powers of the President of Ukraine early

                        Where in the document does it specifically state the termination of his powers? What it actually says: "Resolution No. 757-VII of February 22, 2014, established that Viktor Yanukovych, in the opinion of the Verkhovna Rada, unconstitutionally removed himself from the performance of his duties." ALL.
            2. -4
              12 May 2026 13: 43
              Quote: Gardamir
              The main thing is to mix up cause and effect, add your own version, and no one will figure out why it all started.
              Rewatch the latest direct line. For example, it stated that February 22 happened because of a coup in Ukraine.

              Okay, there was a coup, but 8 years have passed since the coup and it didn't bother anyone at all. He only wanted to return Donetsk and Luhansk under a yellow, black rag.
              The NWO started because Kyiv was preparing for a blitzkrieg and had to declare a NWO.
              If the SVO hadn't declared Donetsk and Lugansk razed by Bandera's forces, a massive uproar would have erupted within Russia, and the possibility of losing power arose. The SVO's initial goals were not very ambitious: liberating the Donetsk People's Republic, recognizing Crimea, allowing unimpeded land access to Crimea, and lifting sanctions. All the stated goals were a beautiful smokescreen, like disarming and denazifying the fascists.
              1. -2
                12 May 2026 14: 29
                Some enemies of the USSR conduct their propaganda against other enemies of the USSR - according to the template of their general anti-Sovietism, including the fact that in your country the USSR wanted to attack Germany, but it got ahead of it
              2. +5
                12 May 2026 14: 57
                You have too high an opinion of the Kremlin guys. They follow the rule of taking as much as possible and then haggling. They took the price in February, and by March they were already haggling.
              3. +3
                13 May 2026 00: 17
                Quote: Ivan Kuzmich
                and the SVO began because Kyiv prepared for the blitzkrieg and had to declare a state of emergency

                That's right. It had to be. The interests of our business were also beginning to be infringed upon by the VNA. Our leadership had quite mercantile motives. Yes, they wanted to help the people of Donbas, of course, too. They hoped to push back the front line. They hoped that Zelensky would flee, losing his slippers, and all the Nazis after him. They thought everyone would be afraid of the dreaded Putin and would throw up their hands. And Putin would become the savior of the Russian world. Such were the dreams of the Kremlin dreamers.
                And here many Urya-patriots are still in the clouds, wanting to reach Lviv.
          2. +1
            12 May 2026 14: 18
            Quote: WIKI
            From here in more detail.

            Why are you pretending? Who are you trying to portray? Don't you remember those events in Donbas? Haven't you heard about exploding air conditioners either?
            1. -1
              12 May 2026 16: 31
              Quote: Stas157
              Don't you remember those events in Donbass?

              I remember. What caused the events in Donbas?
              1. +2
                12 May 2026 18: 12
                As a result of the armed coup d'état on the Maidan.
        3. +8
          12 May 2026 10: 15
          ...Do you really think that the Tsar is the main reason here?
          Look deeper... remember the Maidan, remember the overthrow of Yanukovych, ..


          Well then. Let's talk about the Tsar.

          "-- Why did Russia recognize the unconstitutional third round of the presidential elections in Ukraine in 2004?
          -- Why did Russia allow the overthrow of the Ukrainian president by the second Maidan, his abandonment of the 404 territory, and recognize the fascist coup?
          -- Why didn't Russia take advantage of the weakness of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and, at Yunukovych's request, restore constitutional order to 404?
          -- Why did Ukraine prepare for the "SVO", but Russia did not?

          And for dessert.
          In the links below you will find the answer to your phrase: "It is bad that the implementation of the SVO was unprepared and was entrusted to poorly qualified people."

          Are they destroying the GRU?! https://topwar.ru/3448-gru-unichtozhayut.html

          HOW THE GRU SPETSNAZ WAS DESTROYED. https://vk.com/wall-48144384_267862

          Who is to blame for the destruction of the GRU system – the second most important intelligence agency in modern Russia? https://dzen.ru/a/XL2OmTRWrACzk_8v
        4. +1
          13 May 2026 00: 04
          Quote: The same Lech
          There are more than enough reasons for the SVO...

          I agree. But that doesn't mean it should be launched without proper preparation, using dubious intelligence. Even I, without any intelligence, knew we definitely wouldn't be greeted with flowers—all I had to do was browse Ukrainian internet resources. It's likely that not only the president, but even our intelligence services don't use the internet.
          They underestimated the enemy, greatly underestimated it. Intelligence failed. Who's to blame? Maidan? NATO?
          Right now, we're stuck in the same place. Okay, so drones are hindering the offensive. But what's stopping us from increasing the scale of drone and missile strikes against the enemy's rear? Just two years ago, we had about 300 Geraniums and 20-30 missiles in a single salvo. It's the same now. What prevented us from increasing the numbers to 1000 Geraniums and 100 missiles? We're not producing enough—build a couple more factories. We could have built that in two years. The enemy moves faster than our leadership.
          If they weren't ready to fight with all their might, they shouldn't have started. They could have recognized the independence of the LPR and DPR, sent troops there, and remained on the defensive.
          And now there's a problem even reaching a deal – Kyiv doesn't want it. Europe doesn't want it.
  5. -13
    12 May 2026 05: 33
    Western fascists will never abandon their plans to destroy Russia and my personal opinion is that they don’t need to be reminded of the victory over Hitler, for them it’s an unnecessary provocation, for themselves, yes, it’s a great holiday, we are not slaves, but in reality we lost the Cold War, the fascists are not sleeping, they are preparing, but for them the main problem is the new generation of consumers, which does not matter According to the ideas of the fascists, we would hold out for another 25 years, until the last generation of the fascists' grandchildren dies, and the world settles down, but these are my thoughts...
  6. + 19
    12 May 2026 05: 36
    You know, lately many people have been in a kind of military euphoria, when they can cheerfully say: "...Nothing in the world smells like this. I love the smell of napalm in the morning! Once we bombed a certain hill, for twelve hours straight. And when it was all over, I climbed it. There was no one there anymore, not even a single stinking corpse. But the smell! The whole hill was saturated with it. It was the smell... of victory." (c) Apocalypse Now.
    It's clear these hotheads aren't planning on fighting, not even a little. What war? They'd rather roll under their bed and leave it alone for a couple of hundred years, lick their wounds, so to speak. The other side, for whom aggressive policies were the catalyst for Scandinavia joining NATO, has begun churning out weapons because they're uneasy, and now their neighbor has a ton of weaknesses. But you'd have to be a moron not to understand that their strength will be undermined in a conflict. A strong economy is often the best shield, that's what we need. Nuclear missiles are great, but they won't fly anywhere, while money and economic ties always hit the mark, and they hurt. There are plenty of rich countries that everyone wants to conquer, but no one can. You can't shoot missiles at them, because that defeats the point of capturing them. You can't strangle them economically, because they'll retaliate more powerfully. A cleverly thrown wad of cash can blow up far more than an enemy's entire fleet. It's like Prostokvashino here: we have the money, but no brains. So, apparently, this isn't our path. As for everything else, you know, when neighbors at the dacha start fighting over an old wooden toilet, it causes confusion, and the urge to buy a gun from such inadequate neighbors...
    1. -1
      13 May 2026 10: 06
      A strong economy is often the best shield, that's what we need. Nuclear missiles are good, but they won't fly anywhere, but money and economic ties always hit the target and hit hard.
      Could you tell me whether the economic ties between the USSR, where all the republics were connected, helped to prevent its collapse? Perhaps they held together post-Maidan Ukraine? Kazakhstan, Georgia, and Armenia? Or forced Germany, for example, to abandon its anti-Russian policies?
      1. +3
        13 May 2026 12: 01
        There were no connections, just the usual buy-and-sell. There are no powerful holdings or technological industries that could somehow influence policy. We don't produce anything that can only be bought from us, with no alternatives. Well, with the possible exception of nuclear energy technology.
  7. ayk
    -10
    12 May 2026 05: 38
    Unfortunately, most people don't understand that a major war lies ahead. The government isn't rushing things, conserving its energy. Imagine you have to run a marathon, but you're running it like a 100-meter dash. What will the result be? On the other hand, the opportunity to stall is running out. The key issue is the ability of a single operator, or even an AI, to control a swarm of drones, as well as Europe's readiness for war in 2029-2030. A swarm of drones controlled by a single operator would negate Russia's superior mobilization potential. Europe's readiness for war, if they so decide, could provoke them to intervene in the conflict in Ukraine. A window of opportunity has now opened. The US has withdrawn from Ukraine and is bogged down in Iran. Then they'll have a confrontation with China, and they won't have time for Europe. This means we have three years to resolve the issue with Ukraine. We need to mobilize 1-1,5 million people. Open a front in northern Ukraine. Attacks on Kharkiv, Kyiv, and Lviv. Then Ukraine can be finished off in a few months.
    1. man
      + 10
      12 May 2026 06: 20
      Quote: Ayk
      We need to mobilize 1-1,5 million people. Open a front in northern Ukraine. Attack Kharkiv, Kyiv, and Lviv. Then Ukraine can be finished off in a few months.

      Why did you remain silent for so many years with this? strategic talentWhy didn't they remind Putin and Gerasimov of this in time? request Come on, get dressed quickly and run to the Kremlin!
      1. +2
        12 May 2026 13: 49
        Quote: mann
        Quote: Ayk
        We need to mobilize 1-1,5 million people. Open a front in northern Ukraine. Attack Kharkiv, Kyiv, and Lviv. Then Ukraine can be finished off in a few months.

        Why did you remain silent for so many years with this? strategic talentWhy didn't they remind Putin and Gerasimov of this in time? request Come on, get dressed quickly and run to the Kremlin!

        they are not teachable
    2. +4
      12 May 2026 07: 01
      Quote: Ayk
      You need to run a marathon, but you're running it like you're running a 100-meter dash. What will the result be?

      The outcome is already clear, because the enemy has a relay race on the same distance, our floor runners are chanting as if they were in the 100-meter dash, and we need to move it into the all-around: overtake one at 100 meters, roll another in the mud and shoot the third, after which we calmly finish the distance in full view of the remaining crouched enemy stage runners.
      1. ayk
        -12
        12 May 2026 08: 01
        We're running with one opponent for now. The others are watching. As soon as they start running, we'll draw our machine gun.
    3. +1
      13 May 2026 00: 28
      The mobilization of 1-1,5 million people is needed.

      We'll fight for another couple of years and then we'll have to mobilize. The people won't be thrilled, to put it mildly. That's why the Kremlin is looking for a deal.
      As far as I understand, the most important thing is providing water to Crimea and Donbas. Also, lifting sanctions. Denazification can be forgotten.
      1. ayk
        -2
        13 May 2026 04: 03
        The most important thing is the security of our western borders. This goal has not gone away. We will fight until we achieve our goals. It will be a long and difficult road, but do we have any other choice? There are no other options. The United States is leaving Europe, and we will somehow deal with the European countries. We will completely liberate Ukraine sooner or later; there can be no compromise on this.
  8. +3
    12 May 2026 05: 43
    The psychology of nuclear weapons use has changed. The euphoria of apocalypse seems to be a thing of the past....


    What is the point of nuclear arsenals in nuclear countries today?! ...
    Yes, nuclear weapons are still a deterrent... but they no longer guarantee that nuclear countries can safely afford to do what they want....
    The world in the 21st century has become much smaller.....
    But neither Trump nor Putin noticed this... they didn't notice that the world had become very small...
    Such interdependence of countries on each other, such global dependence on world trade, simply did not exist before....
    Any interruption of this interdependence leads to unpredictable results.....
    Against the backdrop of the "special operation," ordinary people in Russia have already felt it...
    1. KCA
      -22
      12 May 2026 06: 25
      Well, personally, I didn't feel anything, I assembled a computer in the fall, not the very best i5-9400, 32Mb DDR3, two SSDs of 450MB, hard 1.9Tb, GTX 1650, I replaced the hard drive in the laptop with an SSD, I understand, not a TOP config, but it will last me for a few more years, I haven't noticed a crazy increase in prices for food, beer either, the Internet, despite the efforts of Roskomnadzor, works, I open any sites I want, in general, the horror-horror, personally, I don't notice, yes, I understand that drones fly somewhere, for me, none have flown yet, but they were within 25 km, it's annoying, of course, but in the holy 90s, when terrorists blew up whatever they wanted, took hostages, gang showdowns with explosions and constant gunfire, everything was normal, peace and serenity?
      1. + 15
        12 May 2026 07: 06
        Residents of Kursk, Belgorod, and other border regions, as well as Donbass, give you a standing ovation... I think so...
        1. KCA
          -15
          12 May 2026 08: 23
          And do the residents of Moscow, Beslan, Kizlyar, Buynaksk, Budyonnovsk, Vladikavkaz, Kislovodsk, Volgograd, and many other, smaller cities applaud you? Have you forgotten the terrorist attacks there? And how many were there? Oh, I get it, but that's different...
          1. 0
            12 May 2026 09: 37
            About the Nord-Ost terrorist attacks of 2002, Beslan in 2004, the Moscow metro bombings of 2004 and 2010, the Domodedovo bombings of 2011, and Crocus City Hall in 2024
            I'm not even talking about the blown up generals
      2. + 10
        12 May 2026 09: 00
        I don't know about you, but for the last couple of years I've had the feeling that I've been working, figuratively speaking, for the refrigerator... Yes, it's not a disaster, but my salary goes on food and rent, so it's problematic to put anything aside, to save up...
        1. +2
          12 May 2026 13: 51
          Quote: Jackson
          I don't know about you, but for the last couple of years I've had the feeling that I've been working, figuratively speaking, for the refrigerator... Yes, it's not a disaster, but my salary goes on food and rent, so it's problematic to put anything aside, to save up...

          We're working on the toilet, to be more precise.
      3. +7
        12 May 2026 14: 37
        Quote: KCA
        I built a computer in the fall, not the best i5-9400, 32MB DDR3... GTX 1650

        I understand you're bragging about building an archaic computer from old, used components (which are no longer manufactured)? Well, you should be sorry about that, not having enough money for a basic, new, inexpensive PC. But you certainly did well to get out of your predicament.

        Quote: KCA
        I haven't noticed any crazy rise in food prices, or beer prices either.

        Do you even go to the store? If so, that's a very strange statement. I, for example, have started drinking beer less often. Because the prices have become so high.
        1. KCA
          0
          12 May 2026 15: 45
          I have a K&B under one window, a 5-ka under the other, just 15 steps away, I go there, of course, and at the moment I’m sitting with a beer
        2. KCA
          0
          12 May 2026 15: 57
          I have a K&B under one window, a 5-ka under the other, just 15 steps away. I walk around, of course, and right now I'm sitting with a beer. Do you want checkers or should I go? I built my first computer in 1989, and I always know what I need, not what I need, not what I need for a system unit that consumes more power than a welding machine or a 100-unit mining rig. And you can buy an i9 for ~50,000 if you like it. And yes, it's not all about the computer's power. If you ignore all the options offered, I've cut out about 50 extensions from Fox on one computer, like mail.ru and the like. It's rubbish, basically.
          1. +1
            12 May 2026 18: 22
            Quote: KCA
            and you buy the i9 stone for

            I also built a new computer in the summer of 2022. It's a simple setup, but with completely new components: i5-12400, 16 GB DDR4, 500 GB SSD M2. It cost me about 25 rubles. That's all. I don't see any economic sense in building something from old components.
            1. KCA
              0
              12 May 2026 20: 14
              It suits me, I found my body on Ozon just for fun:
              Zalman
              ZALMAN Z3 Plus (Z3 Plus-bl) black computer case - 91,634 rubles, old crap?
          2. 0
            13 May 2026 00: 39
            I always know what I need, and not have to bend my fingers over a system unit that eats up more electricity than a welding machine.

            Right!
      4. +2
        13 May 2026 14: 37
        I built a computer in the fall, not the very best i5-9400, 32Mb DDR3, two 450Mb SSDs, a 1.9Tb hard drive, a GTX 1650, I replaced the hard drive in my laptop with an SSD.


        You've apparently been in a coma for the last six years. Generations of graphics cards and processors have already come and gone. You assembled old hardware on the cheap. Yes, it works. But back in 2005-2015, I could build a computer with modern, up-to-date components for my salary. And I had enough money, even though I worked low-paying jobs.

        I haven't noticed any crazy rise in food prices, or beer prices either.


        Well, apparently you didn't go grocery shopping. Mom and Dad did. That's why you didn't notice.

        I open any websites I want, it's just horror,


        Well, you use KVN. So you open it. And you try not to notice it. laughing
        1. KCA
          0
          13 May 2026 14: 51
          Naturally, I use a workaround. Dad's gone, and I take Mom to the grocery store. I don't give a damn about the processor and graphics card generation. You're the one boasting about a supercomputer, apparently, despite being so small. I wrote that I'm perfectly happy with what I have, four windows in a row, I don't need more. Or am I just terrified for internet browsing, torrents, and other crap without an i9? I've been using a PC since 1989 and I base my thinking on sufficiency, not on showing off my coolness. I played that game enough back in 1995. For example, I bought a two-room apartment in 2000, without debt, loans, or mortgages, and what have you achieved? Did your parents buy you a fancy computer?
          1. 0
            13 May 2026 17: 30
            I go grocery shopping for my mom.


            Then why are you lying about not noticing the price increase? I've really noticed it over the last four years. Even though my salary is growing.

            For example, I bought a two-room apartment in 2000, without debt, loans or mortgages, and what have you achieved?


            Where did you work in 89, that you had access to a PC? And what kind of job did you have that in 2000 you used your savings to buy an apartment for tens of thousands of dollars? Not everyone is so fortunate to work where you did. And you boast about buying an apartment? Well, I built a house. It took 10 years. So what?
            1. KCA
              0
              13 May 2026 17: 42
              In 1989, I was still in school, interning as a computer operator, as they called it. I did my internship at the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research (JINR), where even at that time IBM PC-compatible computers were as plentiful as shoe polish in a shoe polish factory. The apartment didn't cost tons, but 14,000, or more accurately, 13,000, but it was very conveniently located. The owner was moving in with her son, a one-room apartment in a Khrushchev-era building cost exactly 7000, which was absolutely impossible, no one would have moved in. I worked there, surprisingly, right? As a computer salesman, not entirely on my own, I chipped in for a percentage for the space, accounting, and other small things.
              1. 0
                14 May 2026 08: 34
                So, basically, you were practically a businessman. In the 90s, those who weren't involved in business mostly vegetated paycheck to paycheck. I vividly remember my parents working two jobs just to put food on the table. No one even dreamed of owning a computer back then, much less buying an apartment. In the Moscow region, a one-room apartment in the 2-kilometer district cost a whopping 30 rubles. An impossible sum for 90% of the country's population at the time.
            2. KCA
              0
              13 May 2026 17: 47
              In 1989, I was still in school, doing my internship as a computer operator, that's what they called it, I did my internship at the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, where even at that time IBM PC compatible computers were as plentiful as shoe polish in a shoe polish factory. I even have an official certificate stating that I am a "Computer Operator, 3rd category." The apartment didn't cost a ton, but 14,000, or more accurately, 13,000, but it was very conveniently located, and the owner was moving in with her son, a one-room apartment in a Khrushchev-era building cost exactly 7000, with this, it was ironclad, no one would have moved in. I worked, amazing, right? As a computer salesman, not entirely on my own, I paid a percentage for the premises, accounting, and other small things. At that time, many were interested, but the sales companies weren't very interested.
  9. +2
    12 May 2026 05: 45
    However, "Kremlin propaganda" sees...
    Do you want to distance yourself from her or are you being disingenuous? laughing

    From the Anglo-Saxon perspective, their malice and intentions are understandable. I've already written that Russia has encroached on their dominance. And it's clear as daylight that the gamble on high oil prices makes them furious. But if justice is at stake—and I'd like to believe it is, otherwise Russia is no better than its opponents—then the globalists can be resisted by uniting and strengthening the Middle Eastern and Asian states, as well as Russia, India, and China.
    To prevent a third world war, balance is needed. The solution lies in a fair dialogue between the blocs. But this may not be achieved quickly.
    1. +9
      12 May 2026 06: 04
      Quote from cytadell
      The solution lies in a fair dialogue between the blocs. But this may not be achieved quickly.

      The weak are beaten...
      1. +1
        12 May 2026 06: 16
        The weak are beaten...
        A cornered mouse can also show its teeth...
        1. +7
          12 May 2026 06: 48
          What good are the teeth shown if you can't use them?
        2. +8
          12 May 2026 06: 54
          Quote from cytadell
          The weak are beaten...
          A cornered mouse can also show its teeth...

          My cat Styopka loves these types...I saw them myself...how he drove them into a corner and strangled them...a bandit and a scoundrel.
          1. +9
            12 May 2026 11: 20
            He's not a scoundrel, it's just how nature intended him to be.
            He would be a scoundrel if he made a deal with mice - he doesn't touch them, they don't rustle in the territory under his control.
        3. +2
          12 May 2026 13: 53
          [quote=cytadell][quote]They beat the weak...[/quote] A cornered mouse can also show its teeth...[/quote. ]Yes, a mouse can bite unpleasantly, but not fatally.
          mice bit me in my happy childhood )))))))
    2. +1
      13 May 2026 00: 44
      Quote from cytadell
      From the Anglo-Saxon perspective, their malice and intentions are understandable.
      I have already written that Russia has encroached on their dominance.

      I wonder how? By offering them cheap oil and gas, and they, ungrateful as they are, refuse? laughing
      1. +1
        14 May 2026 18: 11
        By offering them inexpensive oil and gas, and they, ungrateful, refuse?

        Well, my dear, let's be honest. What do you mean inexpensive? And who imposed the oil price ceiling on Russia? So, I suppose they gave Russia an ultimatum first? And only then did it start inexpensiveThis is an objective and unfavorable observation. Although I don't presume to judge pricing policy, don't get me wrong. Secondly, who tried to pump Iraqi, Syrian, and Iranian oil for next to nothing, creating and fueling the Islamic State, supporting gangs and non-governmental forces in these countries? Or have they already forgotten? Europe was doing this, trying to get resources for pennies. Russia then sounded the alarm—although essentially, it was already a hint, like, "Guys, we'll get cheap oil at a price we're happy with."
        But the truth is somewhere in between ;)

        So let's be objective.
  10. +6
    12 May 2026 05: 59
    Before Borodino, officers proposed actions to Kutuzov that, in their opinion, would bring victory to the Russian army. Kutuzov replied, "You need victories, but I need the meaning of victories." There is no nationalistic way of waging war. Zhukov wrote in his memoirs that "the Germans taught us how to fight." Every war is fought according to its own rules. But there is an unshakable rule: advancement in rank. The war of 1941-1945 gave us young marshals and generals. If you look at their age, it rarely exceeds 50.
    1. -1
      12 May 2026 06: 06
      When the Germans approached Moscow to within 30 km, Stalin asked whether we should surrender the capital.
      Zhukov answered no and he had good reasons for this.
      1. 0
        12 May 2026 13: 26
        In my entire life, this is the first time I've heard about this.
  11. +6
    12 May 2026 06: 12
    First write:
    "However, Kremlin propaganda sees the main rival not in Germany, but in the Anglo-Saxons, that is, the British-American alliance."
    And then continue immediately:
    "Obviouslythat Russia's rival in the coming war will be the British-American alliance with allies mobilized around them."
    Author confused - if it is obvious, then it is not propaganda, but a statement of fact, and if it is propaganda, then it is not obvious at all.
    It feels like the article is translated from who knows where.
  12. +4
    12 May 2026 06: 15
    Quote: Vladimir M
    But someone recognized Poroshenko, for 8 years someone didn't care about the massacre of people in Donbass and Odessa... and then bam, they "started caring"

    Surkov, Kozak, Shoigu and his deputies... just remember the president's entourage and advisors... request
    Of course, the Commander-in-Chief is responsible for everything... but someone is putting their thoughts into the Commander-in-Chief's head that everything is fine, that the problem can be solved according to their concepts... alas, alas... until we go through a streak of defeats and humiliations, we will not see victories.
    1. + 10
      12 May 2026 06: 27
      All these Surkovs, Cossacks, and Shoigis are feeling pretty good right now.
      ...alas...until we go through a streak of defeats and humiliations, we will not see victories.

      I think we'll only be able to move toward Victory once we hit rock bottom. It won't be possible any sooner; things are too far gone... hi
      1. +1
        13 May 2026 00: 49
        Quote: Vladimir M
        I think that we will be able to move towards Victory only after we “reach the bottom.”

        When the country's leadership changes radically, and EVERYTHING. I hope I live to see that bright day.
        1. -1
          14 May 2026 05: 02
          It won't be possible, however, to live to see that time. These are clones of the privatizers, and their clones will follow them, and again.
          And then, maybe
          one day
          out of nowhere
    2. +6
      12 May 2026 08: 11
      Quote: The same LYOKHA
      Surkov, Kozak, Shoigu and his deputies... just remember the president's entourage and advisors...
      Gerasimov is still the Chief of the General Staff.
      1. +1
        14 May 2026 05: 03
        And what about Gerasimov? He faces a most difficult task: how to fight without touching what shouldn't be touched.
  13. + 10
    12 May 2026 06: 52
    It is obvious that just as NATO is now helping Ukraine, China will also help Russia.
    Well, that's not at all obvious! Many believe that a weakened Russia benefits not only Europe, but also "our Eastern brothers." Moreover, it would "elevate" the yuan above the ruble... what
    1. + 18
      12 May 2026 07: 14
      Five years ago, much was also obvious:
      - it is obvious that a significant superiority in the number of troops, military equipment, aviation and missiles will allow the Russian army to quickly suppress the resistance of the Ukrainian army;
      - it is obvious that a significant part of the population and political elite of Ukraine will not resist or will even support Russia’s actions;
      - it is obvious that there will be a rapid capture of Kyiv and other key cities;
      - it is obvious that the political leadership of Ukraine will quickly leave Kyiv or capitulate, which will allow a loyal government to be established in Kyiv;
      - it is obvious that Western countries will limit themselves to formal condemnation of Russia and weak sanctions, without providing large-scale military assistance to Ukraine.
      And a lot of things were obvious five years ago, but the reality turned out to be completely different.
      1. + 17
        12 May 2026 07: 22
        Yes, there were many "obvious" assumptions that weren't borne out in reality. One of them was that "Europe won't go against Russia because it's afraid of losing cheap energy resources." request Alas...
    2. + 11
      12 May 2026 09: 48
      By the way, as Victoria Anatolyevna said, the Chinese are simply mowing down the forests in Siberia. I wonder who gave them permission? There aren't many options. Either Zelensky or the English are doing the dirty work...
      1. +1
        13 May 2026 01: 06
        Incidentally, if the SVO drags on for a long time, it will lead to forests and crops being set on fire. Using satellite navigation, this is easily accomplished: a drone flies to its distant target, dropping thermite bombs along the way. Even if the "Lyuty" is shot down at the end of its journey, it will still cause quite a mess.
  14. + 14
    12 May 2026 07: 07
    It is unlikely that cautious China will decide to open a second front in the East, and China's appetites do not extend beyond Taiwan.

    It is highly unreasonable to think this way about a country that has appetites for the entire Far East and supplies both sides.
    The priority given to us is merely a consequence of pressure and an understanding of “who’s next,” but as soon as Russia “gives in”…
    China is solely for itself. Its support for Russia is very limited and only as long as it can restrain its enemies.
    1. +8
      12 May 2026 07: 33
      This is a mantra))) China is my brother laughing So where is the good, barely populated land around China? In India? No, the Japanese have always ripped off China. They have a complex, but the Far East is a good chunk, so China might be a good bet if the patient is really stupid.
      1. +3
        12 May 2026 23: 17
        I agree, the author of the article went completely overboard when he claimed that China would defend us in a war with Europe. In other words, the author completely misunderstands the international situation. If China sees our weakness, it will, on the contrary, seize our territory from Lake Baikal to the Pacific Ocean.
        1. 0
          13 May 2026 10: 38
          If China sees our weakness, it will, on the contrary, grab our territory from Lake Baikal to the Pacific Ocean.

          Okay. Let's say this happened.
          1. What will this give China? A hostile population, in a sparsely populated area, with minimal infrastructure? That would be a logistical nightmare.
          2. What resources will it receive? Gas? Oil? Perhaps arable land. If anyone bothers to open a map and look at where most of the above is extracted, it's almost entirely in the western part of the country. The Yamal Peninsula is much closer to Moscow than to Blagoveshchensk.
          So, in the end, China gets a hated enemy, just like we now have in the West, only it also has nuclear weapons. In return, it gains cold, sparsely populated lands.
          And finally, my last question. Why does such an expansionist China always choose a more difficult target, rather than something easier like Kazakhstan, for example?
  15. +3
    12 May 2026 07: 23
    Over the whole of Spain, a cloudless sky ...
    This is how the Francoist rebellion began, and then the Spanish Civil War, which served as the spark for the great European war. It was in Spain, as on a vast proving ground, that the weapons of the future war were tested, and it was there that the future commanders of the Red Army and the Wehrmacht gained combat experience.
    It is unknown whether there will be "cloudless skies" over Kaliningrad or some other phrase will be invented to spark a new major war.
    Who knows what's going on in the heads of the crazy Euro-bureaucrats who are being pushed by the globalists to create a big mess, just to throw everything under the rug - the war will write it all off.
    One thing is clear: Kaliningrad is now the most likely region that the enemy could strike, both in order to divert our forces from Ukraine and in an attempt to start a war on two fronts.
    The truth will be revealed later anyway, as long as it is not too late...
    1. +2
      12 May 2026 09: 51
      I don't know. What about the European bureaucrats? But maybe some kind of exchange will happen over time? Crimea is ours. But Kaliningrad is gone. The chess player clearly can't see even one move ahead.
  16. +6
    12 May 2026 07: 30
    Kaliningrad should be broken through not through Suwalki, but through Samogitia, preferably all of it, and Klaipeda will be needed, and anyway, it's our land and we don't need a corridor, but a Lithuanian region within the Russian Federation. Naturally, the local population doesn't even need to be taught, they speak Russian if necessary))) and the most ardent ones should be drowned in the local swamps
    1. 0
      12 May 2026 07: 44
      Quote from Mazunga
      The population doesn't even need to be taught; they speak Russian.
      and regularly wanders to Russia, sometimes for gas, sometimes for groceries... bully
    2. 0
      12 May 2026 15: 01
      Quote from Mazunga
      Kaliningrad should be penetrated not through Suwalki but through Samogitia.

      I also think that we need to break through Latvia-Lithuania.
    3. +1
      13 May 2026 01: 11
      Mazunga Kramatorsk hasn't been taken yet, and you're already setting your sights on the Baltics. Those patriots are incorrigible :)
  17. The comment was deleted.
  18. 0
    12 May 2026 07: 52
    [quote=Roman Bubnov]The sky is cloudless over all of Spain...
    This is how the Francoist rebellion began, and then the Spanish Civil War, which served as the spark for the great European war. It was in Spain, as on a vast proving ground, that the weapons of the future war were tested, and it was there that the future commanders of the Red Army and the Wehrmacht gained combat experience.
    It is unknown whether there will be "cloudless skies" over Kaliningrad or some other phrase will be invented to spark a new major war.
    Who knows what's going on in the heads of the crazy Euro-bureaucrats who are being pushed by the globalists to create a big mess, just to throw everything under the rug - the war will write it all off.
    One thing is clear: Kaliningrad is now the most likely region that the enemy could strike, both in order to divert our forces from Ukraine and in an attempt to start a war on two fronts.
    The truth will be revealed later anyway, as long as it is not too late.
    And by the way, we shouldn't count on China's help either. The Chinese will be watching and waiting for the right moment to grab a sizable chunk of our Far East territory if things get really bad for us in the West...
  19. -3
    12 May 2026 08: 01
    Europe's plan is to attack Russian territory with impunity until 2028-2030, thereby crippling the economy and stirring up popular discontent. Then, at the right moment, provoke upheavals (see 2927) and introduce occupation forces. Fighting the Russians is terrifying, but occupying them is a pleasant and familiar business.

    World War III is already underway. It just didn't start with a ground invasion, but with an air attack, which is still ongoing. No one can rule out the possibility that among the hundreds of drones flying our way, a few might not be armed with nuclear warheads. And at best, we'll be presented with an ultimatum. At worst, we'll be attacked.
    1. +1
      12 May 2026 09: 53
      Why stir up the population? Aren't you already aroused by the burning of cows? By trading with the supposed enemy?
      1. +1
        13 May 2026 07: 57
        Just because someone denies reality, it doesn't stop being reality, no matter how much the denier might want it to be. Unfortunately.
  20. +4
    12 May 2026 08: 15
    After five years of the Air Defense Forces with unclear results, it's unclear why they publish such articles? They can't figure out the Ukrainian Armed Forces, and now the author is threatening to destroy all of Europe. The only thing left to do is immediately launch nuclear attacks and destroy the entire world. Ground operations are out of the question—there's not enough population for everything.
    1. +1
      12 May 2026 13: 45
      Wipe your glasses, maybe you'll see something. The collapse of NATO—what do you think of that result? And Kyiv, Odesa, and the other Kharkivs… What do we need them for? And why do we need Ukrainians anyway?
      What's wrong with Europe threatening us with war? Europe actually declared war on us back in 2014, and what happened? And nothing!
      1. -1
        12 May 2026 19: 38
        Eighty-five years ago, all of Europe was working for Nazi Germany, which was seeking to destroy the USSR. Now, that same Europe is working for Bandera's Ukraine. In Berlin, London, and Paris, they no longer hide the fact that the time has come to take revenge for May 1945. They're even naming the start date of a new "march to the East"—2030. They need four years to gather their strength.
        This is the fifth time Victory Day in the Great Patriotic War has been celebrated in the context of the Central Military District, yet we still expect the government to take decisive action to mobilize Russia economically. And we began preparing for that war back in the late 1920s.
        1. -2
          12 May 2026 21: 49
          So what? They're far less prepared for war with us now than they were in 2022! In three years, they'll lose their last allies outside Northern Europe, and go bankrupt to boot.
        2. +1
          13 May 2026 01: 24
          Quote: Boton
          We are still waiting for the authorities to take decisive action to economically mobilize Russia.

          I haven't been waiting for a long time.
          "There is no need to transfer the country to a war footing" (c) Mishustin, 2024
          1. -2
            13 May 2026 10: 22
            Why not be in the trenches? No need to wait, just get involved!
      2. 0
        13 May 2026 01: 21
        Vatnik_I don't need Kyiv, let it drown in shit every year. But I wouldn't mind Kharkiv. Just as a whole, not a ruin.
        1. +1
          13 May 2026 10: 24
          Wouldn't you also consider the million Ukrainians living in Kharkiv? Or do you have a suggestion for getting rid of them?
    2. +2
      13 May 2026 01: 18
      It is not clear why such articles are published?

      The article is empty, it is written for a small fee.
      There is no point in talking about ground operations - there is not enough population for everything

      It's not even enough for half of Ukraine.
  21. -15
    12 May 2026 08: 46
    Russia is ruled by an intelligence officer who professes the philosophy of judo, the main principle of which is to use the enemy's strength against himself, and a strategy of deploying the force financed and nurtured by the Europeans against themselves suggests itself.
    Do you think it's impossible? Absolutely not! Anything is possible in this life, but sending Ukrainians westward, first the Ukrainian Armed Forces, and then the majority of Ukrainian city residents, simply by depriving them of the opportunity to live in cities, will solve these problems easily if the task is set.
    And millions of Ukrainians will move to Europe, after all, they were promised a European life in a "Garden of Eden"! There's no need to fear a world war. Russia is reliably protected, with 6,5 nuclear warheads, the Perimeter (Dead Hand) system, and the Krug (Dead Water) system, deployed in 2022. Want to learn more? Read the story on Prose.ru: "Status-6 Krug System. Dead Water."
    1. +5
      12 May 2026 09: 21
      Quote: Vyacheslav Boldyrev
      A story in Prose ru, "Status-6 Circle System. Dead Water"

      This is simply the opinion of a "military expert" who is an aircraft technician who was dismissed from the Russian Armed Forces for "bad reasons" back in 1994 and who has never had anything to do with nuclear forces. His speculations should not be taken seriously.
    2. -1
      12 May 2026 22: 24
      Quote: Vyacheslav Boldyrev
      Russia is ruled by an intelligence officer

      sad More precisely, Stirlitz. From 17 moments. Incidentally, he rose to a high rank in Germany. And everyone believed that Stirlitz worked for the good of the Reich and the Führer.
      But the movie Stirlitz never wore his Budyonovka hat in public. But the Kremlin Stirlitz... hm... hm... did wear it in public. sad .
    3. +3
      13 May 2026 01: 30
      Russia is ruled by an intelligence officer

      What kind of intelligence officer would he be if he thought Ukraine would welcome us with bread and salt? His philosophy is "buy and sell," no wonder he always talks about trade turnover.
  22. +4
    12 May 2026 08: 57
    So what did the USSR's enemies lack? They created a parasitic state perfect for themselves—exporting high-priced products from the Soviet raw materials and industrial sectors, importing large quantities of food and high-quality manufactured goods, and the whole world was on their side.
    But no, because of their, to put it mildly, negative mentality, they destroyed all of this.
    And it’s the same in their anti-Sovietism, as in their propaganda against the same enemies of the USSR as they are - first they do something themselves, and then they pretend to be “innocent victims.”
  23. 0
    12 May 2026 09: 20
    The enemies of the USSR and the Soviet people on the territory of the USSR are incapable of living peacefully and calmly, or of benefiting their country and people. First, they, along with the occupiers of Russia and the USSR, unleashed two wars against the Soviet people. After capturing and dismembering the USSR into their own vicious, anti-Soviet, Russophobic states, they began waging wars against each other. And, while blaming the crimes of those from whom they took the USSR for the crimes they killed and executed, they themselves selflessly kill each other.
  24. -4
    12 May 2026 10: 15
    There are doubts that we are confronted by an Anglo-American alliance. The more time passes, the more clearly the contradictions between the Americans and the British become apparent, and these contradictions are fundamental. We have no such contradictions with the Americans.
  25. +5
    12 May 2026 10: 49
    What beautiful arrows on the map. History teaches nothing. They kept drawing victory marches until February 24, 2022.
    All that's left is to insert the song into the article:
    A plane will fly, a machine gun will be sharpened,
    Mighty tanks rumble
    And the battleships will go, and the infantry will go,
    And dashing tachanka rush.
    In short, the author of the article is overwhelmed with optimism.
  26. -7
    12 May 2026 12: 13
    The NWO is more like a "Finnish" war, while the "Spanish" war is like Syria. Unlike the USSR, Russia didn't lose its "Spanish" war, which allowed it to break Turkey away from the "Northern Europe" bloc that opposes us. The prolongation of the "Finnish" war allowed NATO to collapse. There's a chance that by the time we reach WWII, "Northern Europe" will not only be left without allies, but also bankrupt.
    Actually, that's all you need to know about SVO.
    1. +6
      12 May 2026 14: 32
      Oh, these eternal show-offs of the USSR's enemies. They've been showing off for 35 years, but no matter what they do, they always end up ruining everything, doing everything poorly, even when they got more freebies from the USSR than other enemies of the USSR.
      1. 0
        12 May 2026 16: 52
        They're doing everything right. They were unlucky that they didn't get amateurs on our side this time.
    2. +1
      13 May 2026 01: 40
      Vatnik_ When will we get to Kherson? Will we make it to Kyiv in time for the 100th anniversary of Victory Day? It has been repeatedly calculated that, at the current rate, it will take more than 50 years of fighting to destroy all of Ukraine. That was a year ago. Now the pace has slowed.
      1. +1
        13 May 2026 10: 26
        What are we missing there? We'd be perfectly happy with the wild countryside from Kharkiv to the Polish border.
  27. +3
    12 May 2026 13: 49
    A massacre is quite possible. The local kings, who control billions, have long since become accustomed to being untouchable and getting away with everything.
    They believe, and not without reason, that the slaughter will not affect them, only the common people.
    300 people with one bomb, 2 million killed in the Ukrainian Armed Forces (according to the latest "expert").
    And?
    The entire elite is alive and well. Rogozin even got shot in the butt while drinking. Some lost money. But others gained. It's just the way things are...
    Iran had a misfire, they died. But there's always something wrong there, among the Muslims.
    But Assad, unanimously elected and promising not to run away... Well, you see... he's not in poverty. Just like the Rostov prisoner. Just like Poroshenko. Just like Yukos-man. And so on and so forth.

    Kings are used to - with a snap of a finger, Strelkov here, Prigozhin there, N. there, straighten the borders, give away an island, lay pipes... and suddenly it doesn't work for the neighbors.

    Nothing can be changed.
    All VIPs probably already have a luxury bunker and a lot of bungalows on the islands....
  28. +2
    12 May 2026 13: 57
    It's obvious to Koza that no matter what the deal on dividing Ukraine is, there will be a continuation
  29. -1
    12 May 2026 14: 52
    In a certain case, victory will be the destruction of the enemy, and one’s own safety is taken out of the equation and is not taken into account in the formula.
  30. The comment was deleted.
  31. 0
    12 May 2026 16: 42
    Quote: Uncle Sam_2
    Gogol, Hegel, Babel or Bebel, or not!

    Don't confuse Gogol with Hegel, Hegel with Bebel, Bebel with Babel, Babel with a cable, a cable with a dog, a dog with a bitch...
  32. +7
    12 May 2026 17: 48
    I think direct parallels with the past are simply inappropriate. People have changed, life has changed, everything has changed, and there will be no repeats.
    But what's happening now is a completely different process. All over the white world, including Russia, people's sentiments are roughly the same: they're fed up with migrants, fed up with governments always prioritizing foreign policy at the expense of domestic policy. Nobody really wants to vovevat, a Frenchman, a German, or a Spaniard doesn't even want to pick up a gun when they hear the word "Russian"—they're generally positive about it, and they don't trust their governments' Russophobia at all. The same thing applies here: the word "French" or "German" hasn't triggered the "bastards, enemies" reflex. So the problem is both more subtle and more global—it's that the leadership and elites of almost every country have lost their legitimacy. They're simply no longer supported, no one really believes in the fig leaf of democracy, and it's unclear why, time after time, people come to power in countries with policies that are completely opposed to the will of the people. Yes, then propaganda kicks in at full speed, and it seems like some things are hushed up, but overall, people have become too smart and educated to be controlled like a herd of sheep. That's the essence of today's situation, and it's not at all about us going to Berlin and them going to Moscow.
  33. 0
    12 May 2026 18: 15
    The author is an uneducated alarmist! If anything starts, it will happen immediately and everywhere. It will be a fight of everyone against everyone.
  34. +1
    12 May 2026 21: 25
    Quote: KCA
    I have a K&B under one window, a 5-ka under the other, just 15 steps away. I walk around, of course, and right now I'm sitting with a beer. Do you want checkers or should I go? I built my first computer in 1989, and I always know what I need, not what I need, not what I need for a system unit that consumes more power than a welding machine or a 100-unit mining rig. And you can buy an i9 for ~50,000 if you like it. And yes, it's not all about the computer's power. If you ignore all the options offered, I've cut out about 50 extensions from Fox on one computer, like mail.ru and the like. It's rubbish, basically.


    You should probably describe this on Habr...
    They'll give you upvotes and improve your karma faster there. So what's there to brag about?
    I don’t even know some of your words.
  35. +2
    12 May 2026 21: 30
    Quote: tatra
    The enemies of the USSR and the Soviet people on the territory of the USSR are incapable of living peacefully and calmly, or of benefiting their country and people. First, they, along with the occupiers of Russia and the USSR, unleashed two wars against the Soviet people. After capturing and dismembering the USSR into their own vicious, anti-Soviet, Russophobic states, they began waging wars against each other. And, while blaming the crimes of those from whom they took the USSR for the crimes they killed and executed, they themselves selflessly kill each other.


    And which two wars against the Soviet people? The Great Patriotic War. And what was the second?
  36. +2
    12 May 2026 21: 33
    Quote: Boton
    Eighty-five years ago, all of Europe was working for Nazi Germany, which was seeking to destroy the USSR. Now, that same Europe is working for Bandera's Ukraine. In Berlin, London, and Paris, they no longer hide the fact that the time has come to take revenge for May 1945. They're even naming the start date of a new "march to the East"—2030. They need four years to gather their strength.
    This is the fifth time Victory Day in the Great Patriotic War has been celebrated in the context of the Central Military District, yet we still expect the government to take decisive action to mobilize Russia economically. And we began preparing for that war back in the late 1920s.


    Exclude England from the rest of Europe, which worked for Nazi Germany. And probably Ireland, too.
    1. -1
      12 May 2026 23: 57
      Quote from Fangaro
      Then exclude England from the whole of Europe.

      And they already excluded themselves, they had Brexit. laughing
  37. +3
    12 May 2026 21: 59
    What, the Kremlin didn't know anything? Didn't understand? A huge number of wonderful opportunities to end this scumbag with victory were missed, but they kept dragging their feet... This VVP has dragged his feet so much, giving the West so many gifts, it's amazing where they even come from. Oh, it's terrifying what the current Kremlin has brought the situation to with its indecisiveness, something the current Kremlin denizens never had and never have. Oh, I can't stand it, it's such a disgrace... What will the great chess player do and not do now, having lost every game? Continue trying to win the war by sheer force of will? The enemy is fighting more technologically and modernly. The enemy is rapidly destroying the economy, threatening everything... They are doing everything we failed to do. I don't know what VVP will do?
  38. +2
    12 May 2026 23: 37
    Let's not dismiss the warning signs and try to imagine what this coming war will be like.
    / / / /
    War with Europe is most likely coming. It's highly likely that our current leadership, given the choice between war and disgrace, will choose the latter and end up with both.
    The helpless drawing of some "red lines" is an absolute confirmation of this.
  39. 0
    12 May 2026 23: 58
    In this situation, Russia's attempts to break the blockade of Kaliningrad through the Suwalki Gap on the border between Lithuania and Poland would be quite logical.
    Absolutely illogical! Why trudge through forests and swamps under attack from the Poles and Germans when you can rush along good roads through the Baltics, solving other problems along the way.
    The point of guaranteed destruction of the enemy is lost, because the goal of war is not suicide, but victory over the enemy.
    The guaranteed destruction of the enemy is the true and complete victory.
  40. -1
    13 May 2026 00: 21
    It is unlikely that the British-American alliance will decide to fight on two fronts.

    The author makes good points about the historical parallels currently being observed in Russia's war in Ukraine with the 404 state and the West, but does not take into account certain historical features that should be taken into account.
    So, a little history:
    1. In the late 1940s, in 1941, the USSR also believed that Hitler wouldn't attack the USSR, that he would start a war with the USSR until he had dealt with England, and that Germany wouldn't fight a war on two fronts. But look how it turned out...
    2. After the end of the civil war in Central Asia, a war with the Basmachi continued until the early 1940s, supported and constantly fanned by England. This war only ended in 1940 with the outbreak of World War II.
    Therefore, the author's assertion that a war on two fronts is "unlikely"—that "unlikely, unlikely, and unlikely"—is not at all unlikely. The Anglo-Saxons, with the support of Gayrope, could start a war not only on two, but also on three or four fronts. And who knows where else they could possibly wreak havoc on Russia and China.
  41. -1
    13 May 2026 01: 23
    One can speculate as much as one wants, but it will be as the "world government" deems fit, effectively (though unofficially) ruling both politics and economics. Behind the mystical aura of this "department" lie the well-known names of the world's leading business leaders, who, of course, pursue their own primary financial and economic interests, giving them power over the world—a world that is forced, often unconsciously, to dance to their tune. It's sad, but such is the reality of life. request
  42. -1
    13 May 2026 10: 08
    There's no need to fear a world war! Only a coward dies many times, and no one on earth is immortal! Russia has 6,5 nuclear warheads, the Perimeter (Dead Hand) system, and the Krug (Dead Water) system, which will be deployed in 2022, which reliably protect our country. But if enemies decide to attack us, they will only need to deploy all of these systems simultaneously, rather than gradually escalate hostilities.
    But still, as we see from their behavior, that’s why they’re furious and afraid, and they’re doing the right thing!
  43. 0
    13 May 2026 11: 55
    At the end of the 40s, in 1941, the USSR also believed that Hitler would not attack the USSR, would start a war with the USSR until he dealt with England, that Germany would not wage a war on two fronts.

    By the end of 1940, the USSR had already fully realized that Hitler would inevitably attack the USSR. After France's defeat and capitulation, there was no Second Front against Germany. It was the USSR's turn, and Moscow understood this perfectly well and did everything necessary to repel the coming aggression.
    I'm not sure that Moscow is doing everything necessary for the coming war with Europe.
  44. 0
    13 May 2026 12: 58
    It's hard to shake the feeling that the Ukrainian war is preparation for some larger war....
    and this will be the last war, not a war with drones, but with an A-bomb what
    1. -1
      13 May 2026 16: 18
      Right. Right!!!
      Napisałem mnóstwo słów przed chwilą tutaj, w wystarczyła Pani krótka wypowiedz.
      Cieszę się, że nie jestem sam.
      Pozdrawiam
      1. -1
        14 May 2026 14: 27
        Nix verstehn po polski laughing
        Maybe you could answer in a language everyone understands, because Polish isn't a global language like Russian and English. winked
  45. -3
    13 May 2026 15: 40
    The communists have been talking about the coming world war for ten years now. But ten years later, Eagle Eye, an Indian, noticed that one wall of the barn was missing.
  46. -1
    13 May 2026 16: 14
    Mam inny pogląd na tę wojnę.
    Po pierwsze, czy będzie?
    Po drugie, czy z USA wśród uczestników?
    Po trzecie, czy z bronią jądrowa?
    Jeśli będzie, to Europa zostanie w niej zniszczona. Rosja też ucierpi, ale Europa zniknie. Możliwe zatem, że obecne europejskie działania to raczej wewnętrzna sprawa, służąca tylko do zdyscyplinowania społeczeństw i ich integracji wokół władzy. Za cenę biedy, ograniczeń i cenzury oraz ujednolicenia politycznego.
    W innym przypadku to samobójstwo.
    USA wcale nie muszą uczestniczyć, im wystarczy zarobić i uzależnić pozostałość Europy tak, aby już nigdy nie musiały USA z tą Europa mieć problemów. Wojnę mogą poprzeć, skłaniać do niej. Ale nie walczyć. Walki drapieżników rzadko się zdarzają, gdyż zagrożony jest także zwycięzca. Co z tego, że wygra, skoro będzie słaby?
    Broń atomową będzie przez Rosję zastosowana koniecznie i to jest nie tylko jasne ale i uzasadnione. Dysproporcja sił jest zbyt duża. A zagrożenie ostateczne. To właśnie spowoduje spustoszenia w Europie nie do opisania.
    I to właśnie wstrzyma też USA.
    MAD nie zniknęło. Ono istnieje. USA mimo bunkrów dla elity rozumieją, że one po takiej wojnie, totalnej, też właściwie znikną. Rosja zaś nie. Bo jest tak duża, tak ma dużo możliwości ukrycia i rozproszenia, że ​​USA ryzykują odwrócenie sytuacji dzisiejszej.
    Konkretne poczynania konwencjonalne są nieistotne. Broń atomową Rosja zastosuje od razu i od razu maksymalnie, choć krótko licząc na efekt destrukcji psychologicznej. Oraz paraliż Europy. To wynika choćby ze słów p. Putina: jeśli walka jest nieunikniona, trzeba bić jako pierwszy.
    Żądni tu oligarchowie nic nie znaczą. Tu będą znaczyć twardzi generałowie, którzy zabezpiecza swoje rodziny w Rosji. I będą walczyć naprawdę. Nawet p. Putin, jeśli będzie go to jeszcze dotyczyć, nic nie poradzi.
    Opowieści o Bałtyku, Kaliningradzie itd, to inna wojna. Ona mogłaby taka być może za czasów ZSRR, gdy liczył on 220 mln ludzi. I byli satelici.
    Ale nie teraz, gdy Europa sama się obnażyła i pokazała, czego chce.
    Teraz nie będzie już kunktatorstwa.
    Będzie uderzenie.
    A flaga olimpijska raczej długo po tym będzie zwisać potargana i brudną, z wyjątkiem igrzysk azjatyckich.
    Lepiej nie mieć złudzeń. Obecna akcja na Ukrainie pokazuje, iż znów mamy sytuację z 1.wojny światowej, czyli całkowity brak rozsądnych srodkow przełamania na froncie. I nawet masa ludzi tu nie ma znaczenia. Znów Somma, Paschendael, Verdun, tylko słowiańskie.
    Rozwiązanie leży w pozbawieniu przeciwnika zaplecza. Zniszczeniu jego ośrodków produkcji i dystrybucji oraz dróg zaopatrzenia na świecie. I nie uczynią tego kindzaly czy cyrkony, bo to za małe i zbyt punktowe środki. Nowadays nie oresznik.
    Ukraine Rosja dziś nie pokona, o ile nie zniszczy jej pomocników. I lepiej, żeby było to już jasne. Wojna europejską przynajmniej ten problem by rozwiązała. Choć to nieprzyjemne.
    Jeśli nie stworzy Rosja czegoś na podobieństwo czołgów w 2.wojnie światowej, to konflikt na Ukrainie albo musi zakończyć jakimś wstrętnym kompromisem, albo liczyć się z poważnymi kłopotami. One już pukają.
    I nie liczyć na Chiny.
    Te bowiem mają ogromne pole manewru i całkiem inna skalę możliwości. Mogą Rosję zostawić samą, gdyż mogą inaczej dogadać się z USA.
    A przede wszystkim, jak to w Chinach, przeczekać.
    Stwierdzenie, że Chiny będą po stronie Rosji to bardzo, bardzo uogólnione zaklęcie magiczne. Bo co to znaczy konkretnie?
    W czym objawia?
    I przede wszystkim na ile jest trwałe?
    Zatem wojna w Europie to klęska. Lub poniekąd sukces. Klęska, gdyż pociągnie za sobą eliminacje Europy, ale i słabość Rosji. Sukces, gdyż...pociągnie za sobą eliminacje Europy.
    Tak czy inaczej będzie to w Europie wojna ostatnia...toczona za pomocą broni.
    Potem będzie już tylko zgodnie z powiedzeniem Einsteina...
    1. 0
      13 May 2026 19: 28
      Nie chodzi o nasze życzenia, ale o trendy. Rosja nie chce wojny, ale są sytuacje, w których jest ona nieunikniona. A Chiny, jeśli nie wesprą Rosji, staną się kolejnym celem dla krajów zachodnich. Rozumieją to. Dlatego Putin rozpoczął wojnę po swojej wizycie w Chinach.
    2. 0
      20 May 2026 16: 49
      jaki jest pożytek z dużego terytorium Rosji, jeśli 90% jej populacji mieszka w jej europejskiej części? Rosji do Uralu wystarczy zniszczyć, a zamiast wielkiej Rosji będzie wielki Chanat syberyjski!
  47. 0
    13 May 2026 20: 09
    This is some kind of madness, citizen-writers, we lost 27 million people 81 years ago. We barely recovered from that. And now, as I understand it, everything is overgrown with the weeds of oblivion and grief-stricken journalists are already painting new pictures of a dark global apocalypse... Yes, it's sad, it's a shame that only 80 years had enough sense not to fight together as a world.
  48. +1
    16 May 2026 09: 44
    The best victory in war is a war that is prevented. The question is, what can prevent aggression by European NATO countries against Russia? Only the threat of their immediate destruction in the event of aggression! This is precisely the kind of military strategy Russia should pursue, backed by both military technology and political support. And the tearful lamentations about the "inadmissibility" of using nuclear weapons, even in the event of an attack on Russia, contribute to this in every way.
  49. 0
    20 May 2026 16: 41
    So, we'll fight to have the opportunity to display our flag at the Olympic Games?
  50. 0
    22 May 2026 11: 35
    As a teacher at the Ecole Militaire, I'd like to know who will FIGHT on behalf of Europe? Not just flail their tongues, but actually FIGHT? The Poles? Or who? Or will they round up some blacks and send them off to war?