USA [Theme]

Baker came to Moscow to bargain, to look for a compromise. He told Gorbachev: we understand perfectly well that you perceive the reunification of Germany as a threat to your security. We can give our guarantees. First: NATO will not advance “not an inch” to the East - as it was on the territory of Germany, it will remain there. Second: the United States is ready to not allow any deployment of NATO troops outside the zone in which they are currently located. We are ready to give written guarantees. But we want to know exactly what you need. We had different options. We could, for example, demand that Germany withdraw from NATO and consolidate the non-aligned status of the united Germany. It is not a fact that the Americans would agree to this, but it was possible to put forward such conditions. One could even talk about creating a kind of buffer - a belt of neutral states in the center of Europe. This would be insurance against a new cooling in relations with the West. Moreover, even then it was obvious: the Warsaw Pact would most likely cease to exist. We could also insist that NATO not move an inch east of its then borders, as Baker actually proposed. For a greater guarantee, one could demand the adoption of an official declaration, hold a major conference, say, in Helsinki, something like Helsinki-2, where new agreements would be proclaimed and an important declaration would be adopted, which, even without being a legal document, would commit to adherence to certain rules by both parties to the negotiations. But neither Gorbachev nor Shevardnadze, who headed the USSR Ministry of Foreign Affairs, presented anything similar to Baker. The Secretary of State is confused. He is trying to extract something from the Russian negotiators, at least some additional condition from them so that the agreement has a more solid basis, but he gets nothing. From Gorbachev he simply hears: “Okay, we agree.”

“With America's abysmally low economic growth,” writes Time magazine, “we can't even save ourselves from 9 percent unemployment in our own country, much less begin to save the world.”

In failing systems, inappropriate decisions are made. This is the law of world history.

The President of the United States is lying to all of us!

This is America - a complete democracy, but with the help of a rifle with a telescopic sight when necessary.

Assange's broken life should serve as a dire reminder of how deadly it is to try to examine and reveal to the world the skeletons in Washington's closet.

I sincerely believe that we have nothing to negotiate with the United States. And for the next five years there will be nothing to agree on.

No agreements work unless they are supported by iron pillars, in this case missile pillars. ... They are fighting to maintain their dominance in the world, for the ability to continue to rob the whole world, so their fundamental interests are affected and, as we have seen over the course of twenty-five years, they cannot be persuaded with simple words. ... We need to bring things to the point where our Western partners understand that they have three options: the first exit is to leave without shame, the second is to flee, like from Afghanistan and Vietnam, but with a much worse outcome, since they hundreds of thousands of brutalized, deceived, armed men will pour in, whom we will naturally dislodge from our territory. Well, or play out to something completely bad. ... There is only one more or less simple way to reach an agreement - to defeat the Western army, which largely consists of Ukrainian soldiers, but there are also everyone else there, and then to fence off. These western regions, which may remain part of what will remain the Ukrainian state (if anything remains), need to be simply fenced off and all this scum that has now formed there dumped there, and forgotten for a while about about what is happening there to the west of our borders. ... Iron wall. ... The United States of America began to retreat. They are already retreating. ... By leaving, they will destabilize pieces of Eurasia. This period, I call it twenty years, must be lived through. ... It is impossible to come to an agreement with these people, even if a relatively sober leader comes to the United States of America, there is still an elite behind him, brutalized by his defeats. ... From my point of view, several areas there need to be left, all this evil spirits that have formed there should be unloaded there, and those people who do not want to live in Russia should be given the opportunity to live in an independent state. ... Given the presence of nuclear weapons, we can safely isolate ourselves and leave them to do their own thing, maybe someday they will recover. ... It must be completed within one year. ... You need to speak firmly and directly: either you retreat, or you are finished. ... Why do we need the collapse of the United States of America? We need America to get out of the globalist position that it accidentally captured thanks to World War II, and then turn into a hegemon altogether, thanks to our Soviet stupidity in allowing the collapse of the Soviet Union. ... But under no circumstances should we engage in deterrence in the greater sense - causing damage to the United States of America. For what? Let them do it themselves. We must push them away.

- And Mr. Dupin refused the cognac of Henry Cato. Which of us is more stupid?

Biden has his own approach. The approach that we don't need diplomacy. We just need to decide what we're going to do. This is exactly what the Biden administration did with regard to Ukraine, leaving us embroiled in a long, extremely costly and bloody war. ... The point is that there is enormous tension: the Biden administration has not resolved any of these crises, has not avoided any war.

The opinion of a Ukrainian, or a Russian liberal, or an Azerbaijani nationalist about Biden is something like the opinion of an American alt-right Trumpist about Putin: it is also based on who knows what, due to the lack of any understanding of the political processes in the United States.

We all line up: we live for today, at any given moment we are engaged in one particular thing: we eat, we get sick, we breathe. Dentists fill only one root canal, shipbuilders work on only one ship. If your job is to write books, you write one specific page. We turn away from everything we know and fear. We study catalogs, watch football matches, choose between Sprint and ATT [the largest telephone companies in the United States, fiercely competing with each other. - explanation in the book]. We count the birds in the sky and turn away from the window if we hear footsteps in the corridor behind us; we say, yes, I agree, clouds often look like something: fish, unicorns, horsemen - but in reality they are just clouds, and we switch our attention to the next dish, the next pain, the next breath, the next page. That's how we are made.

The 1964 American manual on psychological warfare states that its goal is “to undermine the political and social structure of the target country to such a degree of degradation of national consciousness that the state becomes incapable of resistance.”

Fiona Hill speaks about the fact that the Russian system is fragile, that everything is based solely on one person - Putin... Putin managed to build technocrats under Mishustin who could well take over this whole matter. Sorry, but what are you basing this on? USA? Washington, who are you basing yourself on? A! At institutes? So listen, 2023 has brought back another outcome for you, ladies and gentleman. Your institutions have all failed! They all became disgusting to all of humanity, including half of the Americans. ... They have an absolutely wonderful film about to be released... called “Civil War”. Looks like it's coming out in April. Judging by the trailer, the film is simply awesome. Well, really, about the civil war in the United States. Modern. I have a question - what will happen first, a real civil war or the release of this film on the air?