Military Review

Will the US lose in the second cold war?

95
What does the USA shine in Second Cold War? Losing or winning? The answer consists of many terms, which together do not necessarily give Washington a “winning” point. Some western analysts are inclined to assert that, despite the defeat in the “first cold war” of the USSR, Russia will win the second such war.


On this subject argues analyst Steffen Woll, whose interests extend including to the foreign policy of the States of the West and the Middle East. He believes that the Americans will lose this time. His new article recently appeared on a popular Canadian portal. Global Research.

The United States may emerge defeated from the “Second Cold War”, the author is sure.

Why so?

From 1990 to the present day, American politicians have waged an obvious hidden war, the aim of which is to “curb” the political, economic and military influence of the “former adversary”, the analyst notes. Chechnya, Ukraine and Syria - these are today's “key points”, where the logic of the “second cold war” develops.

The "unipolar" American domination, which arose after the collapse of the Soviet Union, provoked an increase in tensions in the world politically and militarily. The world has developed a trend of deepening inequality and injustice. The situation on the planet has become much more complicated and alarming.

Russia in the 1990's I had enough of the happiness of democracy: economic turmoil, the growth of organized crime, corruption, oligarchy and its control over the major media. According to the author, the real situation on the territory of the former Soviet Union in 1990's was fundamentally different from the picture that the American elites gave out to the public. There was no “golden age” in market Russia, there was no “new-found democracy” and “the rise of the private sector”. It was different: the plundering of the country by oligarchs, ruthless criminal groups, kleptocratic politicians, corrupt military and so on. The country was destabilized and reached the state of "mortally wounded enemy."

According to Woll, Russia still didn’t completely collapse: Yeltsin’s successor, Vladimir Putin, ended up putting an end to the activities of “businessmen” like Roman Abramovich and Berezovsky.

Putin's predecessor, the author of the material directly calls the "the alcoholic Yeltsin". He describes his rule as “chaotic and purposeless.” Nevertheless, in the USA these years were considered as “mostly positive time”: after all, “East and West united their ranks”. In fact, it was a lie: in those years, neoconservatives with the help of brain trusts were disorganizing and selling Russia right and left — both politically and economically. Vladimir Putin, Woll said, “still managed to stop the downward spiral” in many areas. However, Western elites paint Putin as a dubious authoritarian leader, at best, a “semi-democrat.”

Today, Russia has become, in the full sense of the word, a capitalist country, moreover integrated into the global economy. There is a mutual dependence of Russia and the European Union. The military influence and budget of the Russian Federation (52 billion dollars) are insignificant in comparison with similar expenses of the USA (598 billion dollars in the 2015 year). In addition, since 1991, Russia has had to close or leave many of the important military bases and ports due to the expansion of NATO to the east.

However, the size of the territory and the presence of an arsenal of nuclear weapons makes Russia one of the "main threats" to American national interests. So say in Washington. This is confirmed by the fact that for three and a half decades, the US has secretly supported radical Islamist movements with the aim of permanently destabilizing the Russian state, forcing it to get involved in "dirty" and protracted conflicts. The 1980 Soviet-Afghan war scheme is still topical; it was used in both Chechen wars. The US media is dancing to the tune of the White House: from the first Chechen war (1994 year), Russia's long struggle against Islamic terrorism was largely ignored by Western publications, even after 9 / 11 in the United States.

After 9 / 11, there are three key elements of the strategy to slander Russia, Woll writes.

First, specific leaders or members of the government are labeled as “authoritarian” or “undemocratic” types (first of all, Vladimir Putin).

Secondly, Chechen terrorists with ties to Al-Qaeda, and not only them, are designated as representatives of "oppressed peoples" seeking "freedom and democracy."

Third, “human rights violations” that emphasize Western intervention or the imposition of economic sanctions are emphasized.

If all three points are present, the West can go on “justified” violation of the borders of a sovereign state. And in this case, the United States does not even need a UN mandate. The United States is posing as a "knight in shining armor," a "fighter for human rights." In reality, a secret goal is achieved that fits into the logic of the “second cold war”: the weakening of Russia at the expense of reducing its influence, for example, in the “near abroad”, at the expense of infringement of economic and strategic interests.

The same “trilateral” strategy is used by the United States and the West in general to justify NATO interventions. So it was in Iraq (2003), Libya (2011) and Syria (since 2011). Interventions were “legitimized” by the banners of humanitarian aid and speeches about the removal of “authoritarian” rulers and “tyrants” from power. This kind of intervention led to the death of approximately 500.000 people in only one Iraq.

The same was done with Yanukovych in Ukraine. President Viktor Yanukovych was accused by the West of suppressing the democratic “euromaidan”. The media in the US and the EU attacked him with propaganda charges of “abuse of power” and “violation of human rights” and at the same time began to deceive Ukrainians with promises to accept the state into NATO and the EU, which would make Ukrainians gain a lot of benefits. Yanukovych fled, and as a result, the government was replaced by an ultranationalist, anti-Russian and pro-Western: three in one.

Again, this campaign, the author believes, had nothing to do with real humanitarian assistance or concern for democracy and the integrity of the country. American politicians simply hoped to suppress Russia's geostrategic influence by removing the Black Sea naval bases fleet from the Crimea. Meanwhile, these bases, mainly located in Sevastopol, are "the home of the Russian fleet for over 230 years." Any expansion of NATO towards these bases, Russia should consider as a direct threat. Nonetheless, "история”, Drawn in the Western media, depicted defending these bases as“ the occupation of the sovereign territory of Ukraine, ”which, in turn, was used as evidence of Russia's“ aggressive ”and even“ imperial ”aspirations. In fact, Ukraine and Russia signed a corresponding treaty regarding the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Federation as far back as 1997, and its operation would end in 2017.

Now about Syria. According to the analyst, American politicians and the media accountable to them expect that, participating in the Syrian war, Russia, trying to help the Syrian government in resisting the West, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, will be on the verge of a military and economic catastrophe "comparable to" the consequences Soviet-Afghan war. And not without reason, Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain protested not so long ago about the infliction of airstrikes by Russia on the positions of "moderate rebels". But McCain and Obama, apparently, have no idea that the one who looks like a terrorist, speaks like a terrorist and behaves like a terrorist, he is a real terrorist. And not at all "opposition activist."

The geopolitical confrontation of recent years heralds the beginning of a new period of the Cold War in political history, Woll said. US foreign policy is currently built on the “rebirth” of offensive strategies. This can be seen in the invasion of the Eastern European states into the NATO bloc, the imposition of an agreement on the Trans-Pacific partnership in the economic sphere and the “aggressive patrolling” of the waters of the South China Sea.

Recently, the influential journal Foreign Affairs wrote about the rules of the Cold War based on the thesis: who will turn away the first. This rather accurate thesis, which described the former cold war (between the USSR and the USA), may be one of the reasons why the USA may lose in the new conflict.

The fact is that Washington has not yet understood that a new war is not at all built on the principle of "who will turn away the first." This is not at all the same thing as the manipulation of Russia, which led to the success of the United States in the 1990s.

The development of the Russian Air Force in Syria was to show the American establishment that Russia in 2015 did not stand by the sidelines and did not look with envy at the "disastrous policy of the United States and its allies in the Middle East."

Mr Obama, who said that “we don’t have any chess tournament of superpowers,” either lied or “demonstrated complete ignorance” of his government, not realizing what American actions in Ukraine, Syria, and the South China Sea would lead to and other hot spots of the “second cold war”. Both options do not promise the United States "nothing good in the future," Woll said.

An increasing number of Western analysts, we add, criticize the international policy of the White House, which still sees itself as the hegemon of the entire planet. An increasing number of experts ridicule B.H. Obama, whose "peacekeeping" actions and support with the money and weapons of the "Arab Spring" led to the disintegration of the Libyan state, the destruction of Syria, the formation of the IG terrorist group and the new "cold war" with Russia. At the same time, Obama succeeded in Afghanistan: he will go down in history as the president of the United States, in which the ISAF troops suffered a complete collapse, in which part of the territory was regained by the Taliban, and in the end, Afghanistan turned into an advanced opium state.

Of course, in American history textbooks, the Obama era will be presented as a triumph of democracy on the globe - from Ukraine to the Middle East and Africa. As for the problems that authors of textbooks cannot get around, they will be assigned to Russians. Or Putin personally.

Observed and commented on Oleg Chuvakin
- especially for topwar.ru
95 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Dezinto
    Dezinto 18 January 2016 06: 40 New
    39
    300 years of the country ..... and makes problems for millennial countries. It infuriates and surprises me. Maybe the most talented bandits left England.
    1. ava09
      ava09 18 January 2016 08: 57 New
      +2
      Problems are not created by countries, but by individual representatives of not the best part of humanity. It's time to stop freaking out and wondering, you are an adult and far from a moronic citizen.
    2. Mig-31
      Mig-31 18 January 2016 11: 59 New
      +3
      There, all the jackals in their time moved from Europe, but there the main jackals from the country of Judah if the whole world would have lived very well in the Eureka world.
    3. iouris
      iouris 18 January 2016 18: 45 New
      0
      How to count. (
      Quote: DEZINTO
      300 years to the country
      )
      We can say that America was "discovered" in 1495.
      But according to Wikipedia:
      "The United States of America was formed in 1776 with the union of thirteen British colonies, declaring their independence."
    4. gergi
      gergi 19 January 2016 06: 26 New
      0
      The kagtawy rule America. These are not primitive bandits, these ghouls will be worse.
  2. Putinets
    Putinets 18 January 2016 06: 41 New
    0
    Dogs bark, the caravan goes on.
    1. igordok
      igordok 18 January 2016 08: 24 New
      +2
      What is for me: the cold war after WWII never ended. The cold war ends with a hot war. Cold battles are taking place with varying success.
      1. Nyrobsky
        Nyrobsky 18 January 2016 11: 22 New
        +9
        Quote: igordok
        The cold war ends with a hot war. Cold battles are taking place with varying success.

        Not a fact.
        As one of the eastern sages said, "There is no such fortress whose gate could not be opened by a donkey laden with gold."
        The United States, having bought with giblets Gorbachev and Yeltsin, destroyed the USSR without war. In the same way, having bought the European elite, they made Europe controlled by geographical territory, depriving it of the political will to protect its interests, preparing it for economic absorption.
        The US trick is that they "grow" 1-2 corrupt leaders, and they already clone the entire corrupt political elite from them. Where they fail or the "dictator" stubbornly bargains, not wanting to sell for cheap - they simply destroy him and put a puppet in his place (Saddam, Gaddafi).
        They did not have to conduct military operations in order to enter the countries of the former Warsaw Pact, they resolved the issue with the elite with money and dirt. Ukraine was bought for 5 billion greenery (as recognized by Nuland).
        So the hot phase of the war, with an equal opportunity to lose everything "earned and earned", is now not in the trend because of nuclear weapons. But the attempt to exhaust the enemy economically, can bring the desired result, keeping the "assets" intact. It all depends on stamina and willingness to take risks.
        1. igordok
          igordok 18 January 2016 11: 42 New
          +1
          Quote: Nyrobsky
          The United States, having bought with giblets Gorbachev and Yeltsin, destroyed the USSR without war. In the same way, having bought the European elite, they made Europe controlled by geographical territory, depriving it of the political will to protect its interests, preparing it for economic absorption.

          Well, this is the Cold War. And she never stopped. The USA won a temporary victory, but the struggle is on. The Americans are trying to defeat everyone with the help of a golden donkey. But they do not always succeed. And I hope NEVER succeed. A hot war, EVERYTHING is afraid, and so the cold war will be eternal. And the Cold War began not in 1945, but also under Ivan the Terrible, if not earlier. It was interrupted by real wars.
          1. Garris199
            Garris199 18 January 2016 21: 57 New
            0
            Quote: igordok
            A hot war, EVERYTHING is afraid

            She is being led, only by someone else's hands, and where the danger of being shot down is minimal, they themselves fight. Therefore, we ourselves should not shy away from such methods and actively use them, otherwise we will not have many chances to win. Declare Saudi aiding terrorists and the same day to smash the oil rigs with calibers. You can still shake something at the UN in the style of Colin Powell. Will the economic situation improve? Undoubtedly. Will war from oil depot come upon us? Not to life.
  3. Yak28
    Yak28 18 January 2016 06: 41 New
    13
    The dollar that the United States prints goes around the world, the richest and most powerful states are allies of the United States and are afraid of Americans like fire, the NATO military bloc is controlled by the United States and controlled by the United States. The lies that the Western media carry are easily absorbed by their population. So what a fright the United States should lose in second cold war.
    1. Erg
      Erg 18 January 2016 11: 11 New
      +4
      The only way to slam this striped serpentarium is the dollar. As long as we depend on this “dirty green piece of paper,” we have no chance.
      1. 34 region
        34 region 18 January 2016 16: 10 New
        +3
        Erg! 11.11. The whole world depends on the buck for the reason that before they impose it on you, they burned your house. As a result, you were left with nothing. But he had everything (his house wasn’t hurt). He offered you his bucks on a loan to buy products from his yard. Than you enslaved. And the poorer the yards in our village, the more valuable the dollar will be (because no one has anything). And to get away from the dollar, you need to create your own powerful economy. And sell their goods for rubles. And then the untie from the dollar will begin. China may sell for RMB because of its industry. We can’t sell anything for rubles (well, maybe only oil and gas). We do not have our own powerful industry. And all the successes of the rubric are made by us, this is the level of the Soviet workshop, and not of solid production. hi
    2. Azitral
      Azitral 18 January 2016 13: 36 New
      +2
      The power of the Roman Empire relative to that world was much higher than the power of the United States relative to the world today. So what? The resource on which it increased has run out - the Empire has ended. The level of organization is the relative ability to absorb resources, the new level of organization is the ability to make a resource what it did not exist before. Like arable land or pastures were not the main resource for hunters. So far, no one is demonstrating a new level. Neither the notorious China, nor, especially, the USA. None. The resource of the system, the main representative of which is the United States, is coming to an end. These are the masses of people who are ready to work very hard for a penny.
    3. _my opinion
      _my opinion 18 January 2016 16: 00 New
      +1
      Quote: Yak28
      The dollar that the United States prints goes around the world, the richest and most powerful states are allies of the United States and are afraid of Americans like fire, the NATO military bloc is controlled by the United States and controlled by the United States. The lies that the Western media carry are easily absorbed by their population. So what a fright the United States should lose in second cold war.

      several corrections:
      - The dollar prints on the United States (state), and the Fed (a system created and controlled by private banks).
      - if an ally is afraid, then this is no longer an ally ... but rather a vassal .... and one who is afraid will look for ways to get rid of the source of fear.
      - a lie ultimately leads to opposite results than those that are set when it was created ...

      these are my considerations ...
      I did not put minuses ... however pluses too ...
  4. Megatron
    Megatron 18 January 2016 06: 45 New
    +4
    Well, the "advanced opium state" is just as profitable as the United States.
    All drugs from there go to us and to the geyropu.
  5. c3r
    c3r 18 January 2016 06: 54 New
    +2
    The US urgently needs its Khrushchev to expose Obama’s "peacekeeping policy", and then his Gorbachev with "perestroika, pluralism and openness." It is possible and vice versa, but it is better not to deviate from already tested algorithms. And then the "victory" in the second cold war of the USA is guaranteed.
    1. Boos
      Boos 18 January 2016 10: 14 New
      +1
      It is interesting about the successors, Boris, Vladimir and Dmitry. If America is ruled by such "types", it will definitely lose.
  6. Приговор
    Приговор 18 January 2016 06: 56 New
    +4
    As soon as we kill their petrodollar, we will stop them. Not earlier. Alas.
    1. Mera joota
      Mera joota 18 January 2016 07: 16 New
      +4
      Quote: Sentence
      As soon as we kill their petrodollar, we will stop them.

      "Who are "we? On whose behalf are you making such a loud statement?
      Well and most importantly, instead of the dictatorship of the dollar, there will come a dictatorship, let’s say the renminbi (or some other currency, but not the ruble), what will this change for us?
      1. Lk17619
        Lk17619 18 January 2016 07: 58 New
        +1
        Quote: Mera Joota
        What will it change for us?

        It will change, while another currency will strengthen, and the dollar will fall, we have the opportunity to strengthen in the economy. plan and raise a little ruble.
        1. Mera joota
          Mera joota 18 January 2016 08: 51 New
          16
          Quote: Lk17619
          It will change, while another currency will strengthen, and the dollar will fall, we have the opportunity to strengthen in the economy. plan and raise a little ruble.

          What did you close on the ruble? Not the ruble needs to be strengthened, but the economy developed. If the dollar collapses tomorrow, then suddenly for no reason everything will suddenly work for you, and will thousands of lawyers and financiers turn into engineers? Will officials stop stealing? Will roads turn into roads?
          1. heal
            heal 18 January 2016 09: 19 New
            +3
            Quote: Mera Joota
            What did you close on the ruble? Not the ruble needs to be strengthened, but the economy developed. If the dollar collapses tomorrow, then suddenly for no reason everything will suddenly work for you, and will thousands of lawyers and financiers turn into engineers? Will officials stop stealing? Will roads turn into roads?

            Quite right, and the ruble in this situation will strengthen itself.
          2. Corsair
            Corsair 18 January 2016 10: 07 New
            +4
            Quote: Mera Joota
            What did you close on the ruble? Not the ruble needs to be strengthened, but the economy developed. If the dollar collapses tomorrow, then suddenly for no reason everything will suddenly work for you, and will thousands of lawyers and financiers turn into engineers? Will officials stop stealing? Will roads turn into roads?

            what In my opinion, it is necessary to develop more industry and agriculture, along with other industries that actually produce high-quality products, even if they are still below the level of foreignism.
            95 percent banks should be closed (a small number of banks controlled by the Central Bank with a large number of branches in the regions), and on exchanges, introduce limited periods for the resale of resources (not shares), say for 4 months or six months. I bought the resource at the same price and you can’t resell it during this period - it seems that it will cool the speculators hard, because it will be difficult to predict for such a period and it is impossible to instantly play on the fall or growth.
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. Erg
              Erg 18 January 2016 11: 17 New
              +1
              Corsair, you don’t understand something. It takes money to boost the economy. And we cannot print them more than gold reserves. Interest-free loans are needed ... In general, if it’s not clear to anyone, contact the Fed wassat
              1. 34 region
                34 region 18 January 2016 16: 17 New
                0
                Erg! 11.17. If you shake our officials and oligarchs, then there will be enough money in abundance. If they buy various trinkets at ultra-high prices and there is still money left for storage in foreign banks, it means that we simply got lost this money. It is unclear of course why there is not enough money in the budget.
              2. Corsair
                Corsair 19 January 2016 14: 45 New
                0
                Quote: Erg
                Corsair, you don’t understand something. It takes money to boost the economy. And we cannot print them more than gold reserves. Interest-free loans are needed ... In general, if it’s not clear to anyone, contact the Fed

                request Xs ... I wonder how many reserves go through our endless banks, interest-free loans are almost a loan - I don’t know
                de such are possible, only state programs with the most stringent control of everything. So far, we have done how the migration of fish hatched from eggs - only their number decreases with each movement. They gave a billion money, but it’s impossible for the manufacturer personally to hand it out — it’s kind of a violation of the law, so they gave the ministry, the department, the officials on the target program, these to some bank (here a couple more three steps of money migration are possible), and the bank only later - the remnants of the collective farmer / industrialist / builder in his hands.
            3. Oldwiser
              Oldwiser 18 January 2016 16: 06 New
              0
              Quote: Corsair
              on exchanges introduce limited timelines for reselling resources
              The ABC of the economy - the introduction of restrictions on the markets (stock, currency, futures - no matter what) results in the only flight of capital from the country. What then will the workers pay wages, dear Corsair?
              1. Corsair
                Corsair 19 January 2016 14: 32 New
                0
                Quote: OldWiser
                The ABC of the economy - the introduction of restrictions on the markets (stock, currency, futures - no matter what) results in the only flight of capital from the country. Than then workers will pay wages, dear <Corsair>

                laughing You might think we pay sn from the capital coming to the country. The investment in my understanding for the most part is the purchase of real resources for cut paper, plus the fight against competitors.
                We bought a plant - went bankrupt - broke it into a dozen parts and sold it. Concerns either through money or through officials stupidly extinguish everyone who poses a threat to them.
                Investors almost entirely in Russia are looking for free profit - no one else abroad plans a long-term payback, because they work (cooperate) with our thieves (they don’t allow good people to go to such feeders), and they, in turn, want profit within 3-7 years (!) and with good profits.
                So it is not necessary to tell these tales about the economy and the restrictions on the markets, the restrictions will be expelled only by speculators and lovers of peaks like Soros.
                We have enough capital - it’s unknown in the billions that every year an “economically competent government” invests. Yes, officials should be taken for * opa, so as not to sleep at night and wait with the family when the OBKhSS comes after them.
          3. sa-ag
            sa-ag 18 January 2016 10: 49 New
            +1
            Quote: Mera Joota
            What did you close on the ruble?

            on such a ruble you can buy more dollars :-)
      2. Stanislas
        Stanislas 18 January 2016 14: 45 New
        +1
        Quote: Mera Joota
        dictatorship, let’s say the yuan (or some other currency, but not the ruble)
        1. There will be no dictate from the word "in general."
        Quote: Mera Joota
        What will it change for us?
        2. Several world reserve currencies without anyone's dictate will enable free economic development. How this will affect the exhaustibility of world reserves of raw materials, ecology, etc., is the second question, but the US monopoly in finance is not the best basis for an internal breakthrough.
    2. heal
      heal 18 January 2016 09: 18 New
      +5
      Quote: Sentence
      As soon as we kill their petrodollar, we will stop them.

      Tortured to kill. For 25 years, the same fairy tales about the "dollar soon kapets".
  7. bad
    bad 18 January 2016 07: 00 New
    -7
    Will the US lose in the second cold war?
    ..they have already lost .. just still have no idea about it ..
  8. KOH
    KOH 18 January 2016 07: 03 New
    +7
    Some Western analysts are inclined to argue that, despite the defeat in the "first cold war" of the USSR, Russia will win the second such war.


    I think we didn’t lose the first one, but because of betrayal, I’ll add to our stupidity, we were occupied, temporarily ...
    1. velikoros-xnumx
      velikoros-xnumx 18 January 2016 07: 27 New
      +6
      Quote: CON
      I think we didn’t lose the first one, but because of betrayal, I’ll add to our stupidity, we were occupied, temporarily ...

      That's right, they didn’t yell. She's not finished yet. It was lost, or rather surrendered, a general battle followed by a temporary occupation and respite. The war is considered lost either with the complete destruction of the state with total control over its remnants, or with the disarmament of its army. Both the first and second are accompanied by the signing of relevant documents. And if someone decided that we missed one serious blow we lost, then he is very naive, let him study the materiel (the history of Russia). A knockdown is by no means a knockout, much less a death.
      1. KOH
        KOH 18 January 2016 07: 39 New
        +1
        I wanted to say this, thanks !!!
      2. afdjhbn67
        afdjhbn67 18 January 2016 09: 20 New
        +6
        Quote: velikoros-xnumx
        The war is considered lost either with the complete destruction of the state with total control over its remnants, or with the disarmament of its army

        Categories of the 20th century, yes. At 21, it is enough to subjugate the economy and everything, drain the water - why shoot and other obscenities ..
    2. afdjhbn67
      afdjhbn67 18 January 2016 08: 02 New
      +5
      Quote: CON
      we were occupied, temporarily.

      And the invaders have already left ??
      1. Boos
        Boos 18 January 2016 11: 00 New
        +3
        Not yet, the largest garrison in the Kremlin ...)))
        Quote: afdjhbn67
        Quote: CON
        we were occupied, temporarily.

        And the invaders have already left ??
    3. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 18 January 2016 08: 13 New
      +2
      Quote: CON
      I think we did not lose the first

      Yeah, the country fell apart, the army essentially ceased to exist. What then do you think to lose?
      Quote: CON
      , we were occupied, temporarily ...

      Excuse me, where are the occupying military standing? I want to throw a grenade.
      1. fraer
        fraer 18 January 2016 08: 29 New
        0
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        I want to throw a grenade.

        Romanov. A site is not a pity? belay
        1. Alexander Romanov
          Alexander Romanov 18 January 2016 08: 39 New
          +1
          Quote: fraer
          A site is not a pity?

          I’m not going to throw it into the Sait, but into the occupying military. Everything by definition.
          1. fraer
            fraer 18 January 2016 08: 50 New
            0
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            .All by concepts.

            Many things are incomprehensible to us not because our concepts are weak; but because these things are not part of our circle of concepts. / Kozma Rodov hiI give it.
      2. velikoros-xnumx
        velikoros-xnumx 18 January 2016 09: 24 New
        +8
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        Quote: CON
        I think we did not lose the first

        Yeah, the country fell apart, the army essentially ceased to exist. What then do you think to lose?
        Quote: CON
        , we were occupied, temporarily ...

        Excuse me, where are the occupying military standing? I want to throw a grenade.

        Greetings to Alexander. In a global conflict, of which the Cold War is undoubtedly, there can be only one result - complete destruction and unconditional surrender. What I did not observe in the 90s. Yes, everything was very sad, but there was no picture of total destruction.
        What do you mean by occupation in its modern form? Placement of occupation units in the territory of the defeated enemy, modeled on France, the beginning of WWII or Germany after May 1945? Times are not the same, and most importantly, the enemy is not the same. What is the term hybrid occupation for the sake of time? More than 300 advisers, current CIA employees in the Kremlin, limitation of strategic forces and control over the production of carriers (the Americans have practically lived in Votkinsk for about 15 years), the economic capture of key high-tech industries related to space and defense. Not a single external step of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, led by Sergei Kozyrev, was carried out without coordination with the State Department. The enslavement of IMF and WB loans ... Continue?
        1. Alexander Romanov
          Alexander Romanov 18 January 2016 09: 28 New
          +1
          Quote: velikoros-xnumx
          Yes, everything was very sad, but there was no picture of total destruction

          The picture of total destruction was before your eyes when our prime minister traveled to the USA to request a loan of 12 lard bakery from an airplane, kindly provided by Aeroflot for free.
          Quote: velikoros-xnumx
          What do you mean by occupation in its modern form?

          And now you have Ukraine in front of your eyes.
          1. velikoros-xnumx
            velikoros-xnumx 18 January 2016 11: 37 New
            0
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            And now you have Ukraine in front of your eyes.

            I agree that modern Ukraine is a good example of modern occupation, while strongly reminding Russia of the 90s. True, there are significant differences:
            - We didn’t fight with our people then (Chechnya is not quite, or rather, not at all the same as Donbass)
            - The American military, even at that difficult time, was not on the territory of Russia, and the US military assistance, if any, was provided unofficially, and not to the official government, but to the militants
            - even in spite of the severe decline and degradation, the industrial and military potential of that Russia and modern Ukraine are incommensurable.
            Well, the rest is very similar.
  9. valokordin
    valokordin 18 January 2016 07: 04 New
    11
    With such liberals in the government and such powerful cover, Russia could lose the cold war. Everything goes to this. Without mobilizing the country's economy, nothing will come of it. America will not lose, because they are rich and so far their defeat, unfortunately, is not expected.
  10. Tra-ta-ta
    Tra-ta-ta 18 January 2016 07: 09 New
    10
    Putin’s predecessor, the author directly calls the material “the alcoholic Yeltsin”.
    Hello to EBN Center in Yekaterinburg ..!
    1. heal
      heal 18 January 2016 09: 20 New
      +3
      Quote: Tra-ta-ta
      Hello to EBN Center in Yekaterinburg ..!

      And opening this center.
  11. Mera joota
    Mera joota 18 January 2016 07: 12 New
    11
    Some Western analysts are inclined to argue that, despite the defeat in the "first cold war" of the USSR, Russia will win the second such war.

    They are either boobies, or bought by agitprop. "The first cold war" ended in the death of the USSR, respectively, the second will end in the death of the United States? What kind of nonsense? No, I understand, we are no longer the second or third generation longing for the death of the United States and similar analysts who have been singing similar mantras for a year, but where are the prerequisites for this?
    Obama is certainly an insignificant person (according to the Russian media, not only), but he did a lot for the United States. He pulled out the economy, struggling with unemployment successfully, Obamaake pushed through despite the terrible resistance of the Republicans.
    In foreign policy in two ways, but this can not lead to the death of the United States. He made peace with Cuba, Iran bent, drove Russia into depression (or rather contributed). Well and most importantly, he set up someone else's ass for the Islamists of the Middle East, before the United States was the enemy of all Islamists, now the Russians (who are not against it) are in this place. The process itself is quite funny, the Americans make big admiring eyes and exclaim: "How everything is going well with you! Yes, we wouldn’t be able to, but look how effective it is!" To which our mleya joyfully answer: "Yes, we still can not do that, but now we will kill everyone and not only in the toilet!" and get into the terrible cauldron of the world Islamic war deeper and deeper ...
    1. sa-ag
      sa-ag 18 January 2016 07: 40 New
      +5
      Quote: Mera Joota
      but he did a lot for the USA.

      For example, he entered into a Trans-Pacific partnership with the countries of Southeast Asia, as it was a very surprising thing to read an excerpt from it, this year South Korea and Japan should join it, now Obama is trying to conclude a similar agreement with Europe, if possible, then he will have two sources of huge income, from the sale of his goods, and then the task of the states will be completed, all these conflicts will become of no interest to him at once
      1. Mera joota
        Mera joota 18 January 2016 07: 54 New
        +2
        Quote: sa-ag
        For example, entered into a Trans-Pacific Partnership with the countries of Southeast Asia

        Thank you for reminding me. In addition, treaties with India and China.
    2. Cap.Morgan
      Cap.Morgan 18 January 2016 08: 05 New
      -4
      There are prerequisites.
      Huge external debt. Even bigger inside.
      Slowdown of economic growth turning into recession. The US economy has never grown for more than 7-8 years. Now is just the 7th year.
      As for the Islamists, they have always been our enemies, nothing has changed here.
      1. Shark Lover
        Shark Lover 18 January 2016 09: 18 New
        +4
        What are you so worried about their external debt? It's just a figure that they proudly demonstrate to their citizens. Now look, we live off others. It's like in the 90s, remember, all the bulls, now the deputies, owed everything and the more debt was, the steeper the bull-calf. Who will ask them for this? They gathered an island across the ocean, fenced off from everyone and do what they want, you can get them only nuclear weapons, who will use it? The rest of all are spread rot by local conflicts, dividing, connecting, knowing there will be no answers. Well, purely tactics of the 90s.
      2. heal
        heal 18 January 2016 09: 22 New
        +1
        Quote: Cap.Morgan
        The US economy has never grown for more than 7-8 years. Now is just the 7th year.

        Russia's economy has never grown at all, if you do not take into account oil and its price.
    3. Svoy_tovarish
      Svoy_tovarish 18 January 2016 08: 08 New
      +8
      I agree with you. These incomprehensible pseudo-experts and "patriots" sighing about the imminent end of the dollar and the death of the United States, frankly already specifically tired. Look at the real situation. The USA is bending to this day! Their public debt is a debt that they will write off to the rest of the world, they themselves will not suffer because of it). In everything else, everything is in order, there is no less influence, Europe, Latin America is almost all in orbit, with Cuba normalization, with Iran too, Ukraine is close to us. And we have? At that time, our "friendly" China enters into alliances with countries to transport goods bypassing Russia, while the Chinese squadron supposedly comes to support us in the Mediterranean Sea, they actually receive the American delegation on the ship).
      And we? We have a crisis, and dozens of significant problems.
      1. sa-ag
        sa-ag 18 January 2016 08: 25 New
        +3
        Quote: Svoy_tovarish
        At that time, our "friendly" China enters into alliances with countries to transport goods bypassing Russia, while the Chinese squadron supposedly comes to support us in the Mediterranean Sea, they actually receive the American delegation on the ship).

        "... China Petrochemical Corporation Sinopec (China Petrochemical Corporation) bought the first batch of oil in the United States, which recently lifted a 40-year ban on oil exports, reports Reuters citing a source. Details of the transaction were not disclosed.

        It is reported that the party will be shipped from one of the southern ports in the United States in March and may initiate a steady supply to China, which is interested in new suppliers. Unipec, a trading division of Sinopec, leases oil storage facilities on islands in the Caribbean that will allow it to mix light American oil with heavy and cheaper oil from Latin America and create a blend perfect for Chinese refineries. "Http://www.gazeta.ru /business/news/2016/01/15/n_8123963.shtml
      2. Mera joota
        Mera joota 18 January 2016 08: 47 New
        11
        Quote: Svoy_tovarish
        Our "friendly" China at this time enters into alliances with countries

        The myth of friendly China was invented in order to give confidence to the Russians, saying that we are not alone in the fight against "world evil", in fact, China has no friends, if tomorrow "someone" starts to tear Russia to pieces, China without batting an eye will join the process .
        1. Just felix
          Just felix 18 January 2016 12: 33 New
          0
          China has only business interests.
  12. VNP1958PVN
    VNP1958PVN 18 January 2016 07: 15 New
    +4
    A lot of Russians realized that Coca-Cola, Big Mac and jeans are not the main thing in life and they get a very high price. So we'll see ...
    1. Mera joota
      Mera joota 18 January 2016 07: 19 New
      +2
      Quote: VNP1958PVN
      A lot of Russians realized that Coca-Cola, Big Mac and jeans are not the main thing in life and they get a very high price.

      Yes, not so expensive. But housing, a car, education and medicine are really expensive and much more important than sandwiches and drinks ...
  13. parusnik
    parusnik 18 January 2016 07: 20 New
    +1
    The United States, like a pyromaniac, runs around with a gas canister and matches and sets fire to an apartment .. But you can play too much .. and set yourself on fire .. unsuccessfully splashing gasoline ...
  14. Xmyp
    Xmyp 18 January 2016 07: 23 New
    +3
    With such power, we have already lost it a long time ago.
    1. Cap.Morgan
      Cap.Morgan 18 January 2016 08: 07 New
      0
      Everything is lost? Or not?
    2. afdjhbn67
      afdjhbn67 18 January 2016 08: 09 New
      +1
      Quote: XmyP
      With such power, we have already lost it a long time ago.

      Sadly, it seems more like the truth ... even by a simple comparison of economies, not to mention the military component. Over 25 years, a new technological order has come; we have remained the world gas station ..
  15. 1536
    1536 18 January 2016 07: 27 New
    +2
    Americans are counterfeiters, as their dollar is not backed up by anything other than military power. Like any empire like the United States, collapsed, and this country will fall apart. We must firmly pursue our course, defending our interests. And the victory will be ours. Of course, the government is annoying, completely divorced from the life of the country and Russian citizens. But it is coming.
    1. heal
      heal 18 January 2016 09: 26 New
      0
      Quote: 1536
      Americans are counterfeiters, as their dollar is not backed up by anything other than military power.

      In fact, counterfeiting is a slightly different hypostasis. And for the "not provided with anything" look, how many percent of the world economy is the US economy.
      1. Corsair
        Corsair 18 January 2016 10: 21 New
        0
        Quote: heal
        In fact, counterfeiting is a slightly different hypostasis. And for the "not provided with anything" look, how many percent of the world economy is the US economy.

        what Well, for the most part, their economy consists in imposing their goods on “partners,” but it’s very difficult to present or refuse them because “the godfather surrounded himself with a pretty strong brother” (US Armed Forces) and plus he tied his hands with the help of NATO, the IMF and other instruments. Perhaps many would be happy to leave under such strong guardianship, but only the hegemon promises in this case to undermine the health of the renegades.
      2. Oldwiser
        Oldwiser 18 January 2016 16: 17 New
        0
        Quote: heal
        how many percent of the global economy is the US economy.

        And what part of these percentages falls on the real economy, and not on the air bubbles of stocks and derivatives?
  16. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 18 January 2016 07: 34 New
    0
    What the Americans did in BV and Ukraine will not work with Russia. This may not be understood only by McCain, H. Clinton and the like. In addition, Americans should not forget that Russia is ready to defend its sovereignty by any means available.
    US can emerge from the “second cold war” defeated

    I'd love that.
  17. Korsar4
    Korsar4 18 January 2016 07: 41 New
    0
    If they lose, it is most likely due to internal black and white problems.
    1. heal
      heal 18 January 2016 09: 26 New
      +1
      Quote: Korsar4
      If they lose, it is most likely due to internal black and white problems.

      It is unlikely that they nig ... know how to push well.
  18. Thunderbolt
    Thunderbolt 18 January 2016 07: 53 New
    +4
    Will the US lose in the second cold war?
    The question is posed incorrectly. There is no 2nd Cold War! If our leaders after Perestroika relaxed and opened up for cooperation with the West, this does not mean that the West reciprocated. Until our elite enriched itself and tried on a tuxedo (or rather, "red" jacket ") of the new Russian bourgeoisie ... and so, when this funny mess was spinning, the United States devoured Yugoslavia, crushed the former VD countries, took hold of the Baltic states. Assessing the real military-political situation in the world and what threats Russia faces. ..I either with laughter, or with quiet horror I recall the joint exercises with NATO, inspections, Partnership for Peace, etc. The exercises and inspections, trainings and educational programs, by the way, continue. In Ukraine and Georgia. Therefore, we should not talk about the second cold war. If our homegrown capitalists and it seemed that it’s good to sit on the pipe and the Western guys are not so bad guys (in vain the Soviet Communists “rolled a barrel”). They can be pleasantly dealt with. Now they won’t have such buns and this is another episode of the First Cold War.
  19. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 18 January 2016 08: 06 New
    0
    Matrasia lost the second cold war when it legislated ALL OVER THE COUNTRY the right to homosexual marriage. And now he wants to introduce them all over the world. But Russia is against. So who will win this war? Mattress with a geyropa? Let Geyropa try to deal with refugee migrants. All this, of course, is humor, but in every joke ...
  20. Aleksandr21
    Aleksandr21 18 January 2016 08: 45 New
    +4
    I don’t know who will lose, but the country with the stronger economy will win. State policy is of course important, but it must be supported by a powerful economy that will allow you to project your interests around the globe. Now there are only two states that can really impose their interests on the world, these are the USA and China. And it is precisely between them that sooner or later an open confrontation will unfold (not militarily) but in the economic and political aspect, for leadership. Now it is not particularly noticeable, although the processes have already begun: the establishment of the RMB as one of the reserve currencies, the opening of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, and the new Silk Road of China as opposed to the US dollar, IMF, and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (USA, EU). We’ll see who’s who ... and as for us, we have every chance to become a third party, but under the conditions of the revival of our economy, and the further development of the Eurasian Union project ... otherwise, we will economically and then politically fall under China, which I really would not want to.
    1. Azitral
      Azitral 18 January 2016 13: 53 New
      -2
      "... but the country whose economy is stronger will win."
      So, in terms of historical background. There were two hundred times less Mongols than Chinese. I don’t want to talk about their GDP, because I don’t like infinitely small quantities. It took them about 30 years to conquer ALL of China. In parallel with the conquest of Central Asia and us sinners, a little later.
  21. mikh-korsakov
    mikh-korsakov 18 January 2016 08: 58 New
    +1
    I quote: Some Western analysts are inclined to argue that, despite the defeat in the "first cold war" of the USSR, Russia will win the second such war. It's time to stop paying attention to some Western analysts. All (and not just some) Western analysts are delirious about who is what, and if they have an employer, then they are delirious according to his intentions. It is impossible to win any war while being financially dependent on the enemy. I am sure that the USSR would not have won the war if the USSR economy depended on the Reichsmark course and oil prices.
  22. heal
    heal 18 January 2016 09: 07 New
    +4
    Yeltsin’s successor, Vladimir Putin, ultimately put an end to the activities of “businessmen” like Roman Abramovich and Berezovsky.

    Abramovich as it was, it is. if Berezovsky hadn’t entered politics, he would have stolen further like Abramovich, Sechin, Miller, Prokhorov, Deripaska, etc.

    The United States may emerge defeated from the “Second Cold War”, the author is sure.

    In fact, the one with the industrial and raw material potential wins the war. And as Putin “wins” the war, we can clearly see the ruble exchange rate, the same rate also shows the state of “industry” in the Russian Federation.

    In fact, it was a lie: neoconservatives with the help of brain trusts in those years were ruining and selling Russia right and left - both in the political and in the economic sense.

    Has something changed a lot now?
  23. kursk87
    kursk87 18 January 2016 09: 46 New
    -1
    US ruling circles pose a threat to the peaceful existence of all the peoples of the world! In pursuit of leadership on the planet, US ruling circles are ready to rob, rape and kill, which we see to this day. It is the United States that is the main threat of the 21st century. Thanks to the United States, terrorists rule in many regions of the world, regimes that are objectionable to states are overthrown, kill civilians, and the civilian infrastructure of enslaved US countries is destroyed. It is probably already difficult to calculate how many people died from the cynical and tyrannical activities of the US ruling circles.
  24. Geophizik
    Geophizik 18 January 2016 10: 31 New
    0
    Any power cannot act without a powerful financial support, while the key figures of this support never appear explicitly, society is given the opportunity to observe only the tip of the iceberg. This tip is designed to serve as a visible lightning rod in an emergency. The true state management and financial elite will under no circumstances be illuminated.
  25. Seraphimamur
    Seraphimamur 18 January 2016 10: 40 New
    0
    There is no second cold war. There is no stopping the first. Russia lost the general battle that ended in the collapse of the USSR. The Americans thought that Russia was bent over, and it was lacing the berets.
  26. Klibanophoros
    Klibanophoros 18 January 2016 10: 59 New
    +2
    Funny posing of the question. In my opinion, they have already scored the Energy Superpower Rising from its knees.
    And all because of the betrayal of Donbass and Odessa, of course. Well, that "no one promised anything."
  27. Erg
    Erg 18 January 2016 11: 51 New
    +3
    You can discuss the topic of America for a long time. A lot of smart thoughts, of course. But what I want to insert - at one time in the USA there was a slogan - "A rich citizen - a rich state." I think it is very correct. And now, try to work honestly and hard in our country. Will you get rich? ..
  28. Lelek
    Lelek 18 January 2016 12: 28 New
    0
    "Mr. Obama, who stated that" we have not some kind of chess tournament of the superpowers, "either lied or" demonstrated complete ignorance "of his government, which is not aware of what the American actions in Ukraine, in Syria, in South China will lead to the sea and other hot spots of the “second cold war.” Both options do not promise the United States “nothing good in the future,” Wall says.

    Mr. Obama is an outsider in the political parties he has started in different countries and continents. All his gambits end with the deaths and ruins of those to whom he carries the "good" of his "American" democracy with a Kenyan accent on the iron of his weapons. Cannibalism does not depend on skin color, but on the concept of the society (tribe or country) where it lives. The fundamental principle of such neglect of the lives of others is Fanaberia's exclusivity, and this is not curable (at least in America). fool
  29. Cucumbers
    Cucumbers 18 January 2016 12: 32 New
    0
    Will the USA win or lose? They have almost won. It remains to leave this swara tormented by them, this chaos. Just as you like in "shiny armor" or in a white tailcoat. And maybe like in their films: everything explodes, but a fraction of a second before that a helicopter takes off, American of course. The Pacific partnership will allow them to switch to a new economic structure, and we can stay in the old and with problems in the form of ISIS, Bandera, etc. Will Russia manage to hook them with a cable to the ground with a helicopter, or take off on its own - we'll see.
    1. Azitral
      Azitral 18 January 2016 16: 22 New
      0
      The Trans-Pacific Partnership has not and will not change anything. To create too much community means to create another divided community. What. had anyone argued with the United States on the shores of the Pacific? There is no real content. That which was already received a name. It's all. And, not being the strongest, you will not be the first to unite. So far, NOTHING has changed. Maybe it will change over time. It is not known which way, by the way. This is not another "green grape". Just do not need to be on the declaration.
      1. sa-ag
        sa-ag 18 January 2016 16: 59 New
        0
        Quote: Azitral
        The Trans-Pacific Partnership has not and will not change anything.

        how else it will change ... ... Thanks to the Trans-Pacific Partnership, duty-free trade for most of the goods and a significant reduction in tariffs for other product categories will be available to all participating countries.

        About 18 thousand different duties will be eliminated only for the USA, which were levied on the goods of American manufacturers in the states of the newly formed union. "Http://global-finances.ru/transtihookeanskoe-partnerstvo/ The goal is to sell American goods and solve the debt problem, it’s completely it’s decided to itself, though not entirely
  30. Gormenghast
    Gormenghast 18 January 2016 13: 02 New
    +1
    It turned out that in Canada there are not only descendants of Bandera, but also sober-minded people.
  31. nekromonger
    nekromonger 18 January 2016 13: 04 New
    +4
    as long as we have chubais, grefs, kudrins, etc. the so-called Gaidar’s chances are zero. I’ll add an iPhone there.
  32. Pvi1206
    Pvi1206 18 January 2016 13: 08 New
    +1
    The Cold War is not being fought in the theater of war, but on the spiritual and moral field. The USSR throughout the world has propagated the ideas of a socialist revolution. The United States is now everywhere trying to instill color revolutions. Both approaches are based on the false ideas of people about good and evil. Therefore, the USSR lost the first Cold War, and the United States lost the second Cold War.
  33. Mercenary
    Mercenary 18 January 2016 13: 39 New
    -7
    "Will the US lose in the second cold war?"
    And who ever decided that they won? Mattress workers without the USSR have not won a single war in history! And if Gorbachev gave them a victory, "in battle this does not mean that we lost the WAR.
    So, do not entertain yourself pederast warriors!
    1. ivanzu87
      ivanzu87 18 January 2016 14: 09 New
      +2
      Apparently it’s not clear to you :)

      “And if Gorbachev gave them a victory” in battle, this does not mean that we lost the WAR. “- I apologize to you for how many years?
      The state fell into more than a dozen countries. It experienced a severe economic and demographic crisis. Technological lag has become terrifying. In the former territory there were several bloody wars (on national soil).
      And so a draw :)
  34. ivanzu87
    ivanzu87 18 January 2016 14: 17 New
    +2
    The United States is burying and burying everything. When will their domination end?
    As long as the neoliberal model of the economy dominates, the United States will be a major player in the global arena.
    They have all the conditions for this. Economic, political, military, propaganda.
    They can live quite successfully in these competitive conditions.
  35. GraveBezKresta
    GraveBezKresta 18 January 2016 15: 05 New
    +4
    Yes, of course we will defeat America! Yeltsin Center opened - now we will definitely win! laughing
    Putin opens the Yeltsin Center.
  36. GraveBezKresta
    GraveBezKresta 18 January 2016 15: 11 New
    +1
    And here is our friend Chubai at the opening of the center. Of course, this is a "cunning plan." When Putin turns 100, he will defeat Chubais and the oligarchy. Himself is not funny?
  37. GraveBezKresta
    GraveBezKresta 18 January 2016 15: 35 New
    +2
    But this is the real Yeltsin. Victim of the execution of the White House in 1993.
    1. GraveBezKresta
      GraveBezKresta 18 January 2016 15: 36 New
      0
      Murdered, including teenagers ...
  38. V
    V 18 January 2016 15: 48 New
    0
    Take revenge like that! What would the third XB not when was not ...
  39. TұrKBөrӨ
    TұrKBөrӨ 18 January 2016 15: 56 New
    +1
    While the Central Bank is not nationalized, we don’t have to talk about any victory.
    1. Erg
      Erg 18 January 2016 22: 52 New
      0
      This is only possible in one way - a closed country, a mobilization economy. Not weak? wink
  40. robbihood
    robbihood 18 January 2016 17: 51 New
    +1
    And maybe enough to fight? This is a generals hunting, play war games. But my relatives survived the occupation in Minsk. And the uncles died, one near Rzhev, the other in Prussia. From partisans to the breakthrough division as an unreliable element (It was under the invaders). Of the partisans, almost all died, whom they mobilized after the liberation of Belarus.
    A cold war, can smoothly develop into something else. There was a movie - “Some like it hot!” (Only girls in jazz). You can’t get into the skull box to the "warlords" who have not fought. There you are - you won’t understand whether he’s bluffing or not with “radioactive ash”. I don’t think Kiselev himself blurted out. And they didn’t get fired. And awarded. And to be measured with the United States in pipettes is already to the doctor.
  41. Fat
    Fat 18 January 2016 18: 01 New
    0
    Quote: sa-ag
    , China Petrochemical Corporation Sinopec (China Petrochemical Corporation) bought the first batch of oil in the United States, where a 40-year ban on oil exports was recently lifted, Reuters reports citing a source.

    Is it like the USA decided to get hooked on the needle?
    1. sa-ag
      sa-ag 18 January 2016 19: 47 New
      +1
      Quote: Thick
      Is it like the USA decided to get hooked on the needle?

      Yes, somehow someone raised a question such as who the states will buy their oil from, well, a buyer has been found, China does not give them an abyss
  42. Victor-M
    Victor-M 18 January 2016 21: 51 New
    +1
    In any case, the United States wins or loses in this Cold War, all the same the whole world will blaze, the Anglo-Saxons will try to do this. The world is thin or good, as long as Russia exists, otherwise there will be a solid Anglo-Saxon Mordor.
  43. palm
    palm 18 January 2016 22: 41 New
    0
    Americans are a young strong and healthy nation that is not afraid of anyone. You can defeat them today and tomorrow only by falling apart from the inside.
    That's when V.V.P. Russia will have 18 trillion gold rubles, and V.V.P. USA 3 trillion wooden rubles. Then it will be possible to say definitely, Russia won.
  44. Aryan
    Aryan 18 January 2016 23: 26 New
    0
    Normal people have long known that Putin has more hegemon than Baraka fellow
  45. jonht
    jonht 19 January 2016 03: 31 New
    0
    And yet, as history teaches, ALL EMPIRE PASSING HIS HISTORICAL TIME DECLINING ..... The USSR has come this way, now the turn of the USA and Geyropa has come.
  46. Neko75
    Neko75 19 January 2016 05: 57 New
    0
    The current Cold War is simply a confrontation between economic elites and their spheres of interest. Why are guests from Moscow frequented from the emirates? If the Russian elites can agree with the emirates, then the war is won. Just about armaments, the king of Saudi Arabia will come .... The world is ruled by the economy - money. Politics is an instrument of economic elites. War is a means to an end if the tool "politics" does not work.
  47. OlegV
    OlegV 19 January 2016 21: 02 New
    0
    it is a fact....