Military Review

Russia as the savior of Europe

50
Russia as the savior of Europe 200 years ago, 26 September 1815, Austria, Prussia and Russia entered into a Holy Alliance. The ideological inspirer of the Union was the Russian emperor Alexander I, who, through such an agreement, planned to eliminate the possibility of military clashes between monarchist Christian states. The sacred alliance, which was concluded after the collapse of Napoleon’s empire, was to prevent the emergence of a new big war in Europe, preserve the established order and suppress the revolutionary movements in Europe that could destroy the old world.


Alexander I, inspired by the victory over the French in 1812, formed a new coalition and defeated Napoleon. 31 March 1814, the Russian army entered Paris. Alexander I was experiencing that day his finest hour, the apogee of greatness, glory and happiness. He avenged the shame of Austerlitz, the terrible lesson of Friedland, the humiliation of Tilsit and the fire of Moscow. Contemporaries called Alexander I the "King of Kings", the winner of the antichrist, the liberator of Europe. European capitals enthusiastically welcomed the Russian Cossacks and the Tsar Liberator. Even the people of Paris greeted him with flowers. The main square of Berlin is named after him - Alexander Platz.

Not surprising. Russia still remembers the victories of the Great Patriotic War. But victories are almost forgotten, and the defeats of the times of the Russian Empire, except for the loudest ones. But the confrontation of France with all of Europe was actually a world war in which the future of the whole world was decided. Then on the battlefields of Europe, Asia and America, millions of armies clashed and the question of the future world order was decided.

In September 1814, the victorious monarchs gathered at a congress in Vienna to redistribute Europe liberated from Napoleon. The Congress of Vienna was the most representative stories diplomacy: Europe sent there heads of 216 states, namely two emperors, five kings and 209 sovereigns of princely dignity. True, two hundred dwarf principalities, dukedoms, and electors were extras. All affairs at the congress were solved by the quintet of the great powers - Russia, England, Austria, Prussia and the royal France adopted on their Wednesday. Inside the quintet, the main role was played by Emperor Alexander I.

As always happens when sharing production, the winners of Napoleon began to quarrel: Austria with Prussia - because of the leadership in Germany and the redistribution of local territories; Prussia with England - because of Saxony, and all of them with Russia - because of Poland. Petersburg wanted to add the Duchy of Warsaw entirely to itself. “I conquered the duchy,” said Alexander I, “and I have 480 thousand soldiers to defend him.” But England, Prussia and Austria did not want to strengthen Russia. Things reached the point that 3 January 1815 England, Austria and France concluded a secret treaty and prepared a plan for a military campaign against Russia and Prussia. A new big war was planned to begin by the end of March. The commander-in-chief of the troops of the three powers was also appointed — the same prince K. F. Schwarzenberg, who fought Napoleon. Only "100 days of Napoleon", when the French emperor with a handful of soldiers landed in Europe and without a single shot took Paris, under the enthusiastic greetings of almost all segments of the population, stopped the new global confrontation.

The news of the return of Napoleon frightened and rallied former allies. In fact, Napoleon stopped the great war of the European powers against Russia with his action. The enemies of Russia got scared, Napoleon terrified them. They were afraid of his fame, as the masses followed him. All of them immediately forgot about the strife (or rather, put it aside for later) and remembered the Russian bayonets. The great powers declared Napoleon "the enemy of humanity" and created the 7-th anti-Napoleonic coalition. At this time, Napoleon managed to defeat without the participation of Russian troops.

The Congress of Vienna finished work shortly before Waterloo. His final act was signed on 9 on June 1815. Russia received the bulk of the Duchy of Warsaw under the name "Kingdom of Poland". In the same 1815, the city of Alexander I granted the Kingdom to the Polish Constitution and autonomy within the Russian Empire, although Russia itself did not have such rights and freedoms. Later, the Polish elite would “thank” Russia for a number of uprisings. Austria and Prussia divided between themselves the rest of the Duchy of Warsaw and acquired rich lands: Austria in Italy, Prussia in Saxony. England secured Malta, the Ionian Islands and a number of French colonies. France returned to the borders of 1792. But they didn’t take reparations from it. Alexander refuses to reparation from the bloodless and humiliated country. The allies were forced to submit to the will of the Russian tsar, and in turn refused to reparations. The monarchs, overthrown by the French Revolution and Napoleon, returned to the throne of France, as well as to other European thrones (in Spain, Piedmont, Roman region, Naples, German principalities).

Thus, the Congress of Vienna summed up the great war that lasted for almost two decades, restored the feudal absolutist order in Europe. And in order for Europe to have “order”, create a Holy Alliance.

This is now mainly remembered by history buffs, but in revolutionary France, an experiment was made to create a center of total ideology — anti-Christian, God-given, in essence. That ideology, which currently dominates in Europe, and led her to a complete degradation and to the brink of the death of European civilization and the white race in general.

The Freemasons and the Illuminati (“world backstage”, supranational structures of that time) had already prepared the draft of the New World Order. For the first time the war was preceded by propaganda of secret sects and mass psychological treatment of the population. The Illuminati Enlightenmentists worked tirelessly, creating controlled chaos that would lead to a new world order in Europe and then around the world. The Enlightenment Age ended with a revolution, a guillotine, bloody terror, and a world war. A part of the European intelligentsia welcomed Napoleon as a new Messiah, who would make the world revolution and unite all nations under his power.

The revolution was supposed to destroy the old world, to destroy the monarchy and religion. No wonder in the 1806, the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church betrayed Napoleon's anathema for his persecutions of the church. In all the churches of the Russian empire (Orthodox and Catholic), Napoleon was declared the antichrist and the "enemy of the human race."

However, the architects of the new global order were clearly rushed (or was it a trial balloon). First, the monarchical-aristocratic system has not yet outlived itself, especially in Austria, Prussia and Russia. He still had the potential for development. Secondly, Napoleon was not a limp puppet. In fact, in France there was a restoration of the monarchy. Napoleon entered the taste of the monarchy, created a new dynasty, turned the most dangerous revolutionary reforms. Napoleon refused the world revolution, so he was "written off". Third, Russia has stood in the way of the architects of the new world order. F. Engels later noted quite rightly: “The world revolution will be impossible as long as Russia exists”.

There was one more dangerous scenario for supranational structures. Union of Russia and France. This opportunity was marked by the emperor Paul and Napoleon was striving for this. Russia and France together could press England, establish their order in Europe and the world. However, this possibility was destroyed by the murder of Paul.

Alexander went the other way. He defended legitimacy, the traditional monarchy. Russia liberated Europe, the Russian Cossacks entered Paris. Alexander acted as an idealist. He spoke at the Congress of Vienna with an amazing proposal to build a new Europe based on evangelical principles. In Vienna, Tsar Alexander gives a definition of the rights of nations: they must rest on the covenants of the Holy Scriptures. The Russian tsar proposes in Austria to all monarchs and governments of Europe to abandon national egoism and Machiavellianism in foreign policy and sign the Charter of the Holy Alliance.

It is clear that it was idealism. But no one dared to go against him, as well as against Napoleon's winner. The Charter of the Holy Alliance will be signed by members of the 26 Congress on September 1815. The text was compiled personally by the emperor Alexander, and only slightly corrected by the Austrian emperor and the king of Prussia. The three monarchs, representing the three Christian branches: Orthodoxy (Russia), Catholicism (Austria) and Protestantism (Prussia), address the world in the preamble: “We solemnly declare that this act has no other purpose than to wish the whole world to show its unshakable the intention to choose as a rule, both in the internal management of their states and in relations with other governments, the commandments of the Holy religion, the commandments of justice, love, peacefulness, which are observed not only in private life, but must be led by a politician oh sovereigns, being the only means of strengthening human institutions and correcting their imperfections. ”

From 1815 to 1818, the Charter of the Holy Alliance was signed by fifty states. Up to the death of Alexander I in 1825, the heads of European governments met at congresses to coordinate their policies. England external supported the Union, but remained on the sidelines. This Union violated the plans of the Anglo-Saxons.

Thus, the victims of Russia in the war with Napoleon and the revolution allowed Europe to live in relative peace for several decades. For forty years, from 1815 to 1855 a year, Europe did not know serious wars. Metropolitan Filaret of Moscow spoke about the role of Russia in the world: "Russia's historical mission is the establishment of a moral order in Europe based on the evangelical precepts." In fact, he is right. The historical mission of the Russian civilization on the planet is to preserve the ethics of conscience, belonging to the Highest (Divine) principle and building a society of service and creation, where man is the vicar of God on Earth, and not a two-legged animal that satisfies his lusts.
Author:
50 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. venaya
    venaya 26 September 2015 06: 26 New
    +2
    The historical mission of Russian civilization on the planet is to preserve the ethics of conscience

    Alexander came to power by the method of "patricide", fulfilling an order from a foreign power, it is not known how he died, apparently his whole life was tormented by his sins. Naturally, he became very God-fearing, apparently conscience tormented significantly. He didn’t finish something in his life, he was looking for a way to God. Anyway, he is very similar to a psychopath. What conscience could he keep in the west? She’s never been there.
    1. Ruslan
      Ruslan 26 September 2015 07: 47 New
      +10
      namely, at that moment Napoleon did not threaten Russia at all. moreover, he wanted a union, but Alexander cowardly wandered after the will of traitors and foreigners, so as not to end like a dad. instead of executing all the perpetrators, he dragged the country into a difficult unnecessary war. and the most disgusting and disgusting, these are attempts to give this all some kind of appearance of beauty and importance in all this - we save Europe, ml.ya. yes burn it with a blue flame. forever because of these Eurodowns Russia is pouring its blood.
      although the guilt of our rulers is considerable in this, they look into their mouths, then they are kept on promises, then they are stuffed as friends, and the people pay.
      1. venaya
        venaya 26 September 2015 07: 58 New
        +6
        Quote: ruslan
        ... forever because of these Eurodowns, Russia is pouring its blood. ...

        The attitude of Europeans to conscience was perfectly demonstrated by their most famous leader A. Hitler, in his speech: "Germans, I am freeing you from the chimera of conscience!".
        Comments are redundant.
        With the introduction of “freedom of conscience” in our country, the brains of people who are not accustomed to such “cultural traditions” went completely crazy. People completely lost all orientation: true heroes are called "executioners." What have we come to!
        1. gladcu2
          gladcu2 26 September 2015 14: 21 New
          +1
          venaya

          Thank you for the comment. You can’t say better. It’s just that many liberal trolls appeared on this resource. Which consciously downplay the significance of Russian history.

          On the other hand, in disputes with these individuals there is always room for an extra argument for the glory of truth.
      2. sherp2015
        sherp2015 26 September 2015 10: 54 New
        +2
        Quote: ruslan
        burn it with a blue flame. forever because of these Eurodowns Russia is pouring its blood.
        although the guilt of our rulers is considerable in this, they look into their mouths, then they are kept on promises, then they are stuffed as friends, and the people pay.


        Definitely! Russia is fighting for someone, winning, and then the "saved" pour mud on it from head to toe
        1. gladcu2
          gladcu2 26 September 2015 14: 25 New
          +2
          sherp2015

          Fighting for someone, fighting for yourself. It is obvious.

          You can’t wait when your ally is beaten, otherwise you will be next and alone. Elementary logic.
    2. Azitral
      Azitral 26 September 2015 09: 09 New
      +6
      Contradictory personality. It seems to be, on the one hand, smart and cunning, like a demon, in fact, outplayed Napoleon himself, so he made mistakes. On the other ... Nothing but anger causes his behavior after the capture of Paris. Trying to behave like a European, he showed “chivalry” and “nobility” up to the expense of spending his troops from his own pocket.
      He couldn’t come up with anything stupider and worse. Quotation marks - for the fact that he showed both at the expense of his own people. He had every right to demand full compensation, at least for the destruction of Moscow, and to strip France to a black hair, so that she would not rise anymore. But he didn’t, and for what? Only in order to seem to the West - good, its own, European. And he achieved, of course, the exact opposite, since true Europeans would have been torn off. And, by the way, they would have acted correctly and fairly. He did not do this, so Metternich, Talleyrand and others realized that this was, firstly, a stranger, and that, secondly, Russia and him could be ignored. Out of the blue, he lost the victory. Just as the current one belonged to the "Europeans" with reverence, - and he failed. For the next half century, Russia has secured a historic loss. The same Nikolashka a century earlier, a little more successful, but no better.
      1. Ruslan
        Ruslan 26 September 2015 13: 55 New
        +1
        and France then avenged Crimean revenge. if all France had been taken out, she could not participate in this war. French shipyards and their workers would build a Russian fleet :)
        1. gladcu2
          gladcu2 26 September 2015 14: 42 New
          +2
          Ruslan

          And what did you want from liberal Catholics. After all, you can’t deal with them until you hold your throat.
      2. gladcu2
        gladcu2 26 September 2015 14: 39 New
        -1
        Azitral

        You have now expressed the most liberal logic. The disgusting part that Russia has turned into a weakened state at present, with the collapse of the USSR.

        In all wars, Russia received its contribution, to a greater or lesser extent. But in all wars, Russia retained its Orthodox culture and conducted affairs of honor and conscience.

        And pay its own peculiarity of national and Orthodox culture is that huge empire.
        Russia has long been abandoning the growth of other lands. Since it became difficult to maintain control, or rather to maintain and uphold one's cultural principles.

        You are a simple example. Bulgaria was freed from the Turks. As a result, the Second World Bulgarian Government categorically refused to fight against the Soviet Union.

        So that good deeds remain in the memory of generations.
        1. Azitral
          Azitral 28 September 2015 11: 50 New
          +1
          What is the "liberal logic"? That I believe that the ruler should take care of his people and not a good impression before strangers? And this means - that the damage should be compensated by the one who caused it, and not by their own ruined people. He had no right to “nobly” forgive France, but had to get rid of a competitor and recover costs as much as he could. And: in the memory of WHOSE generations? And how exactly? Poles - are very grateful to us not even for liberation, but - for salvation from genocide? So ... a good Christian should do good deeds without retribution, but the ruler, at the expense of his people - no! Busy Do and Daimio Do are too different things.
      3. Turkir
        Turkir 27 September 2015 09: 46 New
        +2
        Kutuzov was against continuing the war with Napoleon. He believed that Napoleon is a good "counterweight" to Britain. Kutuzov was a high-level politician and diplomat.
        And Alexander I, a lot of posturing, vanity, narcissism. His policies expressed the interests of London, not Russia.
        You still can’t say better than Pushkin:

        The sovereign is weak and crafty,
        A bald dandy, the enemy of labor,
        Unintentionally warmed by glory,
        Reigned over us then.

        We knew him very meek,
        When not our cooks
        Double-headed eagle pinched
        Bonapart's tent.
        .....
  2. tommy717
    tommy717 26 September 2015 06: 58 New
    +4
    And who in the world without sin? Maybe this stone was on his conscience and allowed him to reconsider his attitude to universal values. And Russia has always been the conscience of civilization.
  3. vovanpain
    vovanpain 26 September 2015 07: 09 New
    +15
    Russia saved Europe from Hitler for the second time. Only the Anglo-Saxons, then the British. After 2 world mattresses, they only crap and poisoned their lackeys. This is the Anglo-Saxon “thank you” to the Russian soldier.
    1. Sirocco
      Sirocco 26 September 2015 08: 50 New
      +5
      Quote: vovanpain
      Russia and the second time saved Europe from Hitler.

      Maybe it wasn’t worth it, Russia is well-intentioned and wants to reach out to get Europe out of the cesspool, and that old woman jumps into it again, at the same time insulting Russia in every possible way.
      Maybe in vain we do it? Maybe this is their habitat? Flies then flock to this environment to breed, and we save them, without suspecting that we are depriving them of an increase in population in this case.
    2. sherp2015
      sherp2015 26 September 2015 11: 26 New
      +8
      Quote: vovanpain
      Russia saved Europe from Hitler for the second time. Only the Anglo-Saxons, then the British. After 2 world mattresses, they only crap and poisoned their lackeys.


      Hence the conclusion:
      Never help the Anglo-Saxons, this meanest tribe, under any circumstances!
    3. gladcu2
      gladcu2 26 September 2015 14: 50 New
      +1
      vovanpain

      The fact that England is flawed, you said it right.

      And you know, for example, that the United States planned to create a pro-socialist country on its territory. Roosevelt has already launched a Hollywood propaganda machine advertising Soviet social protection. Only his death and the presidency of Truman stopped the situation.

      There is a book, "History of the United States," by Oliver Stone and Peter Kuzmuk, if I am not mistaken.

      But actually, look at the goblin for an interview with a historian on YouTube.
  4. Rezident007
    Rezident007 26 September 2015 07: 09 New
    0
    Europe will never be a faithful ally and desire a rapprochement with RUSSIA. My opinion is one of the reasons - it could be possible if Russia adopted Catholicism at the time ... Although, again I repeat - Europe is not looking for enemies there ... I’m sure that Russia, the Russian state, the Russian Empire, in general any Russian state formation would be a faithful ally and assistant to Europe (naturally on mutually beneficial principles, mutual respect: We are For You, YOU are For Us).
    1. sherp2015
      sherp2015 26 September 2015 11: 29 New
      +3
      Quote: Resident007
      Russia, the Russian state, the Russian Empire, in general, any state formation of Russians would be a faithful ally and assistant to Europe (naturally on mutually beneficial principles, mutual respect: We are For You, YOU are For Us).


      Enough is enough! Be an assistant to Europe? To hell with their faces ...
  5. s.melioxin
    s.melioxin 26 September 2015 07: 11 New
    +2
    The historical mission of the Russian civilization on the planet is to preserve the ethics of conscience, belonging to the Highest (Divine) principle and building a society of service and creation, where man is the vicar of God on Earth, and not a two-legged animal that satisfies his lusts.
    The cross is heavy, but carry it to Us. DESTINY. Is it heavy? YES. But each nation has its own. We have this.
  6. The comment was deleted.
  7. ImPerts
    ImPerts 26 September 2015 07: 26 New
    -1
    How famously wrapped. It remains to add Nibiru, reptilians and Hitler in the ice of Antarctica. Get a good detective in the style of Dan Brown))).
  8. parusnik
    parusnik 26 September 2015 07: 33 New
    +4
    But victories, and defeats of times of the Russian Empire, except for the most high-profile ones, are almost forgotten.... Yes, enough to rebuke .. That's just the Holy Union and its politics, and the role of Russia, attention was paid in history textbooks, grade 8 .. in the "totalitarian" school ..
  9. Reptiloid
    Reptiloid 26 September 2015 07: 36 New
    +2
    !! RESIDENT OO7 !! - “Europe will never be a FAITHFUL ally” .... Only for a brief moment for its own benefit. Europe, however, never really wanted to be a faithful ally. Only dominance.
    Thanks so much for the article. Just in time.
  10. DMB3000
    DMB3000 26 September 2015 08: 00 New
    +4
    Quote: venaya
    The historical mission of Russian civilization on the planet is to preserve the ethics of conscience

    Alexander came to power by the method of "patricide", fulfilling an order from a foreign power, it is not known how he died, apparently his whole life was tormented by his sins. Naturally, he became very God-fearing, apparently conscience tormented significantly. He didn’t finish something in his life, he was looking for a way to God. Anyway, he is very similar to a psychopath. What conscience could he keep in the west? She’s never been there.

    we save them all the time. and they poured slops on us. got it already. in short. will have to take power into their own hands.
    1. gladcu2
      gladcu2 26 September 2015 14: 59 New
      +3
      DMB3000

      Dmb Have you served in the army?

      How do you think it is to be a sergeant.

      To suppress another's will, what is called power is a heavy burden that sucks out all the energy. Only special degradants can enjoy it.

      Russia built and preserved as an empire on its special cultural and Christian principles, as the only way to reunite different cultures and religions.

      It is difficult and expensive to hold power by force.
  11. Tatarname
    Tatarname 26 September 2015 08: 15 New
    +1
    Quote: vovanpain
    Russia saved Europe from Hitler for the second time. Only the Anglo-Saxons, then the British. After 2 world mattresses, they only crap and poisoned their lackeys. This is the Anglo-Saxon “thank you” to the Russian soldier.

    Europe will collapse in the current situation. Russia has a destiny to conduct another purification campaign and save the world from "shit-racers", "sodomy" and return the world to real human values.
  12. Siberian
    Siberian 26 September 2015 08: 57 New
    +2
    .... Parallels ... parallels, but now = courtyard = 21st century .... and a global player like the USA has appeared in the world ... and Europe, as a faithful satellite of the States, will do only what is prescribed her US and = the historical mission of Russia = has already entered into a direct clash with US politics. And this is how it will end and what historical trials await us, perhaps it will be clear from the speeches of Obama and Putin at the UN session in the near future. All world players will gather there .............
  13. Denis DV
    Denis DV 26 September 2015 09: 12 New
    +6
    Europe is a farmyard, cunning goats, not grateful creatures. We must work with them without any sentiment, without regard to their invented values, this is all lies. Europe needs to be appropriately perceived as people perceive fraudsters, thieves, murderers, speculators, rapists, liars - this is Europe.
  14. 56_br
    56_br 26 September 2015 09: 23 New
    +8
    Dealing with Europe is like throwing beads in front of a pig.
    1. Gorjelin
      Gorjelin 26 September 2015 11: 19 New
      +3
      Russia as the savior of Europe


      Enough to creep before this evil spirits, too much honor for them. Russia in general should stop noticing Europe.

      And then the pro-Western elite in Russia for centuries has the greatest fear of what Europeans think ...

      Dealing with Europe is like throwing beads in front of a pig.


      +1
  15. Tungus
    Tungus 26 September 2015 11: 32 New
    +2
    Quote: Azitral
    It seems to be, on the one hand, smart and cunning, like a demon, in fact, outplayed Napoleon himself, so he made mistakes.

    Nowhere did he replay. At Austerlitz? No, I almost did not get captured. And Napoleon’s response to Alexander’s refusal to give his sister away for him: "... but I didn’t kill my father ...". And the victory over Bonaparte in Russia was won by the army and people, and even the honor and courage of officers. Well, a victory, as a result of the confrontation, Shurik, sorry, profuc. If he didn’t follow Palen’s cause, then maybe Russia (Emperor Paul) with Napoleon and Britain would be erased and India would be divided.
  16. dimosh
    dimosh 26 September 2015 11: 38 New
    +5
    Here it is, the essence of the monarchist system. Sanya had a bite with Napoleon, who, by and large, didn’t give up on him. For some reason, the first decade of the 19th century sent the best Russian armies to some incomprehensible Europe. What for? for what? Sana so wanted. In the 13th year, trapped in a foreign trip. Why the hell ?! Napoleon laid down his best soldiers in Russia, after which the Angles would have raised the Austers and Prussians against him anyway. And let them butt in their Europe for the next 10-20 years. No, Sanya wanted to become a savior. Well, it has become. Cho from this raped Russia? Long-playing smut in the form of zheks. And a short respect for the Europeans (without the English).
    Sanya really, really wanted to be a European. Well, it has become. And what? But he could, having led Napoleon, turn to the south. There the interests of the Empire lay. In Turetchin, in Persia. 480 thousand bayonets of selected veterans! Yes, the straits by 1814 would lie at his feet, and the Russian soldier, whistling, erased footcloths in the Indian Ocean. And no one in Europe would have farted about this - they would have butted Napoleon, butted, butted ...
    In short, Sasha tarnished his megalomania (and did not become a great commander there, although he also became a great politician), taking advantage of the fact that he is an absolute monarch. At the expense of the Russian soldier, whose kurobok Jurassic fields were abundantly irrigated. And that's all. And - zilch.
    But, as it were, a lesson to those who shout - Putin at the kingdom.
    1. gladcu2
      gladcu2 26 September 2015 15: 16 New
      +3
      Dimosha

      And why the hell do you have so much land?

      The Russian Empire didn’t really want to grow land. It’s hard to keep them.

      All these assistance to Europe is, first and foremost, the protection of their territorial interests. That case when timely help and their land is protected. A contribution was taken exactly as needed.

      Remember when the Anglo-Saxons from super-greed demanded from Germany after the First World Impossible, which can not be comprehended.

      There are two things that have a huge gap between European civilization and Russian culture.

      Catholicism and Orthodoxy.
      1. dimosh
        dimosh 26 September 2015 15: 57 New
        +4
        Personally, I land two square meters - enough to kill)
        Or are you talking about Russia? So the Straits still lured Sankin's grandmother, Katerina. Well, and Constantinople, again. Sashkin’s brother, Kostyantin, was precisely hiding under this business (or is this news for someone?). And all this assistance to Europe is never a defense of its territorial interests, especially after 1812 (see my previous comment). Russia did not border France. From the word in general. Europe was seething in itself - and to hell with it, let it seething. Russia is there from what side, besides the sovereign's desire to show off on a white horse? Sasha just overwhelmed Napoleonic fame. Well, I wanted to be a big European than the Europeans themselves.
        And how is it known that the Empire didn’t really want to grow lands? The empire itself whispered? And why did she grab Central Asia after that? And because the race to the Indian Ocean with the British passed. So, in the 13th year, Sashka had an ideal chance: Napoleon is weak, but with the Austrian Prussians, who are supported by the Englishwoman, she still has the strength to butt (without the support of the latter, this butt would stretch for many, many years). And Sashko at that time was smashing Porto, embodying his grandmother's dream of reviving Byzantium; and inserts the wick to the Englishwoman, breaking through Persia to the Indian Ocean and getting access to the warm seas (why did Russia need Port Arthur - in the know?).
        Yes, even to hell with him, with a southern, Turkish-Persian direction. Well, you couldn’t go there. One could simply not get involved in a war absolutely unnecessary for Russia. Once again - France does not border Russia. Absolutely, that is.
  17. Obolensky
    Obolensky 26 September 2015 12: 10 New
    +3
    If you take wars of 300 years or more, where Russia participated, English ears stick out almost everywhere.
    Holy Union - after all, England did not enter there. Nearby stood.

    I don’t understand why the hell did this Europe surrender to us in that war? We save them, but how to save them - a knife in the back. Here is such a European gratitude.

    It’s just that Europe always believed that Russia was obliged to clean up after them and protect them, and only as they would throw off a terrible enemy, then we ourselves, without Russia. Moreover, the people do not need it at all. He threw the enemy from the Russian land and all. But the rulers need to get to the end. How else? Europe is in danger! Ugh. I always said: here they make porridge, let them eat it themselves - without us. I'll see how they do it.
    1. gladcu2
      gladcu2 26 September 2015 15: 22 New
      0
      Obolensky

      Break off.

      You turn on the logic or work with your head in which not only is.

      When you save another, you save yourself.
  18. Koliamba_TV
    Koliamba_TV 26 September 2015 14: 17 New
    +1
    Thus, the victims of Russia in the war with Napoleon and the revolution allowed Europe to live in relative peace for several decades.

    It is a pity that for this world it is Russia that gives a great price, and gratitude, like a fleeting vision, blew and is no longer there.
  19. Rastas
    Rastas 26 September 2015 15: 04 New
    +3
    I don’t understand how one can even be proud of this Vienna Congress, which, in essence, revived feudalism in Europe. I read what was happening at this congress. It was a disgrace. And what kind of world does the author say from 1820 to 1855 ??? I do not understand. But what about the "spring of peoples" 1848-1849, but what about the national liberation revolutions in Spain (1821-1823) Greece (1821-1829), the German principalities, Italy and Hungary (1848-1849), which were alternately crushed by bayonets of interventionists England, France, Austria and Russia. Does the author really like to stifle Freedom?
    1. victor
      victor 26 September 2015 17: 34 New
      +2
      And what is freedom ??? Just not from Wikidia, pazhalsta.Svoboda - THIS MAIDAN !!!!!!!!!!!!! YES ???????? And the murder of my parents, my classmates, my neighbors - in the name of freedom from mos .... is also normal ??? Of course, I don’t ... fatalist - his wife is disabled, walks poorly, didn’t run to cellars during shelling, but his parents, almost 70, spent a year in cellars .. .Come, protect freedom - because ki from Ukraine strangle the freedom of the inhabitants of Donbass. Yap, you, sir, forgive me for the tautology ... By the way, I have many friends in Russia, and not everyone is happy with the GDP ... But, at the invitation to come to THE MOST FREE COUNTRY OF HUGE ... EUROPS - horseradish (plant), no one responded ... But he offered places in battalions - Lugansk, Aydar, APU ...
      1. ALEA IACTA EST
        ALEA IACTA EST 26 September 2015 17: 44 New
        -1
        Quote: victor
        Freedom is the Maidan !!!!!!!!!!!!

        Do not confuse barbarism with freedom. hi
      2. Rastas
        Rastas 26 September 2015 17: 58 New
        0
        There is democracy - the power of the people, and there is ochlocracy - the power of the crowd. And where does your Maidan? You are your stupid Maidan ready to drag anything. And do not call the usual banal revolution a revolution. Let's call the uprising of Spartak Maidan. Here, in general, the conversation is about the events of 1815-1855, but talk about Ukraine on another branch.
    2. Azitral
      Azitral 28 September 2015 12: 05 New
      0
      "But what about the" spring of peoples "1848-1849, but what about the national liberation revolutions in Spain (1821-1823) Greece (1821-1829), the German principalities, Italy and Hungary (1848-1849), which were alternately crushed by bayonets the invaders of England, France, Austria and Russia? "
      Have not seen enough of the Maidan? It’s a pity that they didn’t suppress it in 1917.
      "For honor and justice
      For unrequited demand
      A lot of blood was pouring
      There were a lot of tears. "
  20. gladcu2
    gladcu2 26 September 2015 15: 56 New
    +1
    A very good lecture on the current topic of the information war. Read this author’s article after a lecture by Tim Kerby, American about America.

    Very interesting and instructive. There the American says commonplace things in Russian but in the American style of speech construction. Unmatched in its simplicity, examples and arguments.

    Thanks to the author for the work. Article plus.
  21. ALEA IACTA EST
    ALEA IACTA EST 26 September 2015 17: 10 New
    +1
    And the old order was revived in vain. After 35 years, they received a “return” ...
  22. victor
    victor 26 September 2015 17: 12 New
    +1
    Do not do good to temporary allies, use their resources (material and human), and ..... you will get a weakened enemy. By the way, Alexander I was impudently Saxons pushed to confrontation with Buonoparty ... And Austerlitz was one of the trump cards .. . I do not like arrogance, but to their backroom operations -RESPEKT !!!!!! They know how, psaki take ... Russia to study and learn ...
    1. Rastas
      Rastas 26 September 2015 17: 26 New
      0
      Well, what to do? This behavior of England was dictated solely by the economic interests of the English bourgeoisie, which at that time was the strongest in the world and was afraid of any competition. Still, the economic school of England was the strongest in the world, which is worth only the names of Smith, Ricardo, Malthus, Mill and others.
      1. victor
        victor 26 September 2015 17: 41 New
        0
        Put these names to the image makers ... And by the way, you, such an economist, remember Waterloo, and the joke that resulted in someone .... SOMEONE! Rothschild, became the richest BRITTEN !, no, SAX, or NEGLO (really coming from Egyptian slavery) and fuck him what your idols wrote ...
        1. Rastas
          Rastas 26 September 2015 17: 59 New
          +2
          You too read Starikov. Better read Marx, Engels and Lenin, they have everything on the shelves laid out. There were smart people.
  23. moskowit
    moskowit 26 September 2015 17: 16 New
    +1
    Lived lived, did not grieve. Everything was fine. Slowly developed, raised turnips with cabbage, from Europe tried to take all the best. But gradually, commensurate with the national Russian life and the life of the peoples inhabiting the Moscow, Russian kingdom.
    But then the “Min Herz” appeared and everything that was happening in Europe, whether it concerned us or not, became a mandatory problem for the Russian Empire, the USSR and the Russian Federation. We would have thought better of our own peoples in our multinational country. Her God, because there is something ...
  24. Reptiloid
    Reptiloid 26 September 2015 18: 34 New
    +4
    I think that if Peter “didn’t open the window”, then completely unexpectedly it would open from that direction and all sorts of muck would suddenly climb into calm Russia.
  25. borys
    borys 26 September 2015 19: 55 New
    +2
    But reasonable things are said by dimosh. It’s rude in form, but in fact it’s absolutely true. The same thing is happening today - almost all Russian
    TV channels are discussing the influx of refugees into the geyropu. That's just not-
    understand why the Russians worry about this? Geyropa to a large extent
    she herself is to blame for this, so let her dissipate. And the more geyrops
    If there are problems, the less forces and opportunities will remain to crap Russia.
  26. IAlex
    IAlex 26 September 2015 20: 36 New
    +3
    "Russia as the savior of Europe" - I would rephrase, Russia as the main fool of Europe, for 1000 years there were so many opportunities to end it completely and forever, but everyone loved to creep before this wretched Europe, that it always came round sooner or later with attempts to exterminate ...
    1. Ruslan
      Ruslan 28 September 2015 03: 17 New
      0
      that's for sure you noticed. France, Germany, Poland, Sweden, Norway, Finland, the balkans could be part of Russia, after each war with them. if the kings did not suffer from an inferiority complex in front of Europe. That is why it was to create a Finnish principality ??? even here is a recent example, they won the WWII, did they create the GDR? it was possible to release all interested Germans from the Soviet zone of occupation and create another region of Russia.
      if there was such a policy, in 300 years all of Europe would be part of Russia and would be integrated in one way or another. but alas, one can only regret.
  27. KRIG55
    KRIG55 26 September 2015 21: 35 New
    +5
    Enough to save Europe, let it die in peace.
  28. DMB3000
    DMB3000 27 September 2015 21: 02 New
    0
    Quote: gladcu2
    DMB3000

    Dmb Have you served in the army?

    How do you think it is to be a sergeant.

    To suppress another's will, what is called power is a heavy burden that sucks out all the energy. Only special degradants can enjoy it.

    Russia built and preserved as an empire on its special cultural and Christian principles, as the only way to reunite different cultures and religions.

    It is difficult and expensive to hold power by force.

    I served. and not only just served ...
  29. The comment was deleted.