Mr. Saakashvili, It Is Time to Say Goodbye

The Fat Lady has sung, the BBC, mouth piece of the British Neocons, has declared that, yes, Georgia and Saakashvili in particular are guilty of the murder of civilians in South Ossetia. Of course, they quickly then backed it up by saying Russia was wrong in defending those civilians being butchered by the Georgians. After all, we would not want Russia and the Russian people to feel they were right, even when they were, now would we?

Anyways, moving right along, dear reader, we return to our useful fool, Saakashvili. Well, when one of the key propaganda organs of the Anglo-American Trotskyte Neocons declares you in the wrong and you are a petty dictator of a small nation and one, to boot, presently and from day one on the Neocon payroll, that can only mean one thing...you are done, yesterday's news, kaput.

To boot, the opposition now plans marches on the 7th of November, the day that Saakashvili sent his Anglo-American trained goons in to beat the opposition to the ground in 2007. Back then, the Anglo-American Trotskytes still cared about their puppet, so they made a few noises about his assault upon unarmed peaceful demonstrators and than quickly blamed the demonstrations on Russia, surely not on the corruption and autocracy of their favorite puppet. This year promises to be different.

Now that the puppet has been used to try to restart the Cold War and failed. Now that most of the sensible folks of Europe have told the Anglo-American Trotskytes to go pound sand and the evidence is mounting daily that Georgia is a rouge state in every definition of the word and the people will be rising up against the Soros paid, CIA/MI6 controlled puppet, the Anglo-Americans are moving to keep ahead of the situation. It is obvious that Saakashvili is useless, worse than useless now, so a new replacement must be picked, one picked by the Neocons before the Georgians manage to pick one themselves. Oh sure, just like the last 3 times, the pick will look like it came from the people but they are an easy bunch to fool.

But what about Saakashvili? Surely a man in his situation might turn to Russia for help, except for that whole little August war thing and Russia having declared him a war criminal. Can't go there. To Europe? No, to much of a liability. Azerbajan and Turkey have both declared their worries about his fitness to rule so they are probably out. Surely not the Armenians, not after what he's done against his own Armenians. Ukraine might be an option, at least as long as Yushenko, the withered Orange is still hanging on the branch, but that too might not be for long.

Gosh, few choices. Its times like these one checks his life insurance policy to make sure it is paid up, the West does not like loose ends.

Why Russian Business Can Not Get Western Clients

Having spent quite some time working on developing Russian suppliers, being Russian myself and understanding Westerners and Western Business, please allow me to give the following treatise for advice.
While Russian quality and technical expertise are generally quite good to over all superior, it is the so called business office, the decision makers and their staffs, that doom Russian industry to under representation in the world of manufactured goods. Why?
The simple reason is psychological. Russian businessmen: 1. Do not understand the Western psychology in the least and 2. Have a generally higher self opinion of their own intelligence, wisdom and cleverness than evidence would uphold.
It is written in the Bible: “When pride comes, then comes disgrace, but with humility comes wisdom”.

This, these businessmen, these heads of corporations, should contemplate first and then read on the rest of this treatise.

To begin with, this is not the Soviet Union, customers will not come to you and beg you to do their business. As silly as this notion may sound to many Westerners, this was the reality of the Soviet Union and is still the mindset of many older Russian businessmen. A corollary of this is: if I do not know you exist, I will not bring any business to you. Thus, and listen very carefully to this point, you must advertise. That is correct; you must invest money to get your name and your product out on the market.

Do not forget, this is a global market and there is absolutely nothing unique about Russia that would in and of itself, drive business to your Russian corporation. On expertise there is competition from the Germans, Italians, Koreans, Japanese and others. On price there is the rest of Eastern Europe, China and India. A simple example of this: the OTC (Offshore Technology Conference), the biggest oil and gas conference in the world, held yearly in Houston, Texas, USA. Of the 2,400+ companies that were represented there for the 2008 event, 3, that’s right, THREE were Russian. There were over thirty Chinese companies, along with various Chinese ministries and about as many Indian companies. Guess who will get more business?

Russian companies going to Russian expos is fine if you want to attract Russian business, it is all but pointless if you are trying to get foreigners to come trade their time and money for your goods or services.

Further, discard the notion that the Western Corporation is both rich and yet stupid or foolish. The only people who are rich and stupid are those who inherit their money, not those who earned it. Large international corporations do have fools amongst them, like any human organization, but they are not the majority but a small minority. Those of us who deal in international business, often know more about your business, from the financial side, than you do. So go ahead and drop the idea that you can hang spaghetti off of the inastrantsa (foreigner’s) ears.

Now on to the business. It is true, that most Western business initially does not run on relationships, quite the opposite, relationships are developed last, after business is already moving forward. This is of course the opposite of eastern (and thus Russian) companies. When foreigners send inquiries and even when they show up the first or sometimes the second, time, they are often ignored or given very little attention. Usually, this is will kill any chances of moving forward, period. Few Westerners will continue to push if this is the treatment their inquiries receive. Thus, when you get an inquiry, be it by email, phone call, fax or in person, it should always be treated as a chance to earn money, not an interruption of your day or your staff’s day. Do not wait till you get the second or third inquiry before taking it seriously, most of the time there will be no second or third inquiry.

Next, do not take two or three months to respond. In the West a standard response time is 1 to 2 weeks, that’s right: 5-10 business days. Indians may take a month, which is really stretching it. The average Russian time is two or more months. Again, there is nothing so special about your company that any Western businessman will stand around and wait for you to get them a quote, when you feel like it. If an RFQ (request for quotes, in other words, a bid) is run and nine out of ten companies return their quotes, by the time the Russian company gets around to sending their quote in, often time the decisions are already made and their work is simply deleted or filed away for later (if ever) review.

The business world does not wait.

Worst yet, the Russian business attitude is one of: if there is nothing to communicate I will not communicate. So while the slow as a snail quoting process is moving forward, the customer is absolutely in the dark. Often times inquiry emails or calls go unanswered. To a Western business, this is the same as telling them to go to Hell…and most will, in frustration, take their business elsewhere.

Now that we have finally submitted the quote, we get to the next point that usually kills any chance of business going forward 1. Pride and 2. Traditional haggling. Pride: the Russian businessman often thinks he is the smartest in the room (which may or may not be true) and that his opposite is a rich fool (rarely if ever true…this stereotype of foreigners has been around with us eastern Slavs for 1,200 years it’s time for it to die). Accept the fact that more than likely, the foreigner knows his business, knows what proper prices are. He has come to Russia to get 1. A high quality good for 2. A low price.

That is correct, Russia is a low cost country. With a work force that gets paid about 1/4th that of Western Europe. With steel that is 20% cheaper, energy that is 30-50% cheaper, taxes that are 30% cheaper, Western businesses come to Russia to save money and many leave very disappointed. Why? Because the greed and pride factors, along with a haggling culture, drive most initial quotes to be as high or higher than the Western industries. If I have a German supplier, why on earth would I go to Russia just to pay German or close to German prices? The answer is simple, the answer is one that Indian and Chinese businessmen understand and that Russian businessmen refuse to consider, the answer is: I would not. Especially when the German supplier often gives better service.

After having had to fight just to have a quote request taken seriously and than having to wait for months to get a quote, to get a quote that is so outrageous is simply too much for most Westerners. True, the Russian businessman may be expecting the would-be client to come back with a price 20% or 30% lower and thus haggle it out, but it simply will never get to this point. Why?

Because even if the Westerner is not outright turned off by the ridiculous price, when Westerners haggle over prices it is usually within the 5-10% range. So when the Western would-be client, puts in his logic formula of 5-10%, the price given by the Russian side, will still be way to high to bother with and thus Western monies will go to Indians, Chinese, Brazilians and others who all thank the Russian businessman for his pride, since this pride feeds their wallets.

Now, only because I am as generous as I am, I will impart one last bit of wisdom.

Suppose you have finally gotten the Western business as a client and it is time to raise prices, what now? Well, the typical Russian supplier method of dealing with Russian clients is something along the lines of a mugging. The supplier will announce some ridiculous price increase, back it with absolutely nothing, giving a relatively short period of time to negotiate or respond and then stop production. This is absolutely the surest way to drive away any and all existing Western clients. I have no idea how many times I have heard from one would be supplier or another that they had business with so and so company and that after a year (and the aforementioned price increase) they just left.

Read this part very carefully! When asking for a price increase, first of all, ask, do not demand. There is a point, of course that if you are absolutely ignored you may threaten and cut off the customer, but do not start off with the stick. Remember, this is a relationship not a bar fight. Second of all, do not ask for some ridiculous price increase in expectation of haggling. This is no different than the quote process and will have the same results. Furthermore, have all your explanations and justifications prepared and in an easy format and prepare to show your supplier receipts to back this up. Most importantly: DO NOT STOP PRODUCTION. This is the worst of the worst actions from the view of a Western business.

So, armed with this knowledge, it is my hope that Russian business will be able to go forth and actually compete effectively, to be able to show the quality of the work that rarely gets out past the pride of its businesspeople and yes, swallowing the pride will be the hardest part of all.

Pakistan's Imminent Demise, Another DC Ideologue Screwup

Pakistan, a nation of 150 million people, thirty odd nukes and delivery systems and the holder of the main supply corridor to Afghanistan, is about to collapse both economically and politically and yet again, this is the fault of DC.

As far as catastrophes go, this one is a big one. With the government absolutely bankrupt, with no cash on hand, begging a silent world; with Islamic attacks increasing; with the political and military elites fractured and with thirty nuclear warheads up for grabs any day, this is about as bad as it gets.

How of course did the world get to a point where hard line Islamic militias may soon become nuclear powers?

It all started with the Pervez Musharraf overthrew his predecessor, the region breathed a sigh of relief at the ouster of the most corrupt and brutal of Pakistan's historical brutal and corrupt leaders. Even Benazir Bhutto did not go as far in her absolute corruption and thuggery. Regardless, a military dictator, Musharraf for 9 years managed to hold Pakistan together and even grow the economy while holding some amount of constraint on the Taliban and other hard line Islamics.

However, as the War or rather Farce on Terror ground on, to the DCrats, Musharraf seemed to be not a robust and strong enough leader. In other words, he was not an absolute lap dog but tried to do what is best for his own nation to maintain some sense of stability and growth. This was irrelevant of course, since DC only understands allies to mean lapdogs and well disciplined lap dogs...just ask the British..woof.

Thus the PR Misters of DC and London set off to over thrown this ill trained pooch called Musharraf. They, with their slavish Fourth Estate, recreated the opposition of Pakistan into pristine angels of Democracy. Marxists have a tendency of doing such things to the truth. Bhutto was made the poster child, her absolute brutality and corruption a thing of non-existence in the 24/7 wag the dog world of US/UK "news". This continued right through her assassination, where she received more news and praise than the passing Mother Teresa (as a side note, the misguided and narcissistic West gave Princess Diana more praise than Mother Teresa, too).

The new government that was elected on Western funding and PR was that of Bhutto's widower, Asif Ali Zardari, another brutal thug, but a well trained one at that. The very people who elected him over Musharraf, were back in the street, a month later, demanding his head and for good reason. Outside of reneging on many of his promises(such as reinstating the constitutional judges), Zardari is an absolute DC lapdog and thus now highly unpopular with the majority of Pakistanies.

Of course Bush decided to help Zadari's popularity. He did this by authorizing cross border, none approved, attacks into Pakistan against the militias. Of course civilian casualties have occurred
and now even moderate Pakistanies are calling for Zadari's head.

Add to this the final ingredient of the, yet again US/UK made, Bank Panic of 2008, and we have a problem, one that could mean the deaths of millions in Pakistan and the surrounding region and millions more if any of those nukes are set off in a Western city.

On a more immediate scale, a collapse of the Pakistani state would not only free up more Taliban to fight NATO forces in neighboring Afghanistan, but it would close down the main air/land artery in keeping Afghanistan with bullets and beans. The only other option is through the north and Russia is already pissed off.

If Pakistan goes, than it is up to India to move first and do something about those nukes. Now that's critical for India, a likely Pakistani target, more so even than for the rest of the world.

Either way, however, this crisis is the work of DC, just like so many around the modern world.

The Bank Panic of 2008 and the Death of Nato

NATO, an organization not only out dated but without official purpose has not only out lived its enemy, the Warsaw Pact, not only out lived its purpose in defending Western Europe from the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact but like a ravenous blob, has, instead of dieing a dignified death, gone on an eating spree swallowing up one nation after another in it's "pact of peace and defense" while launching three wars of aggression.

NATO was originally designed to keep Germany down, America in Europe and the Soviets out. With no Soviet Union, NATO's purpose, like that of all good bureaucracies, has mutated. It has reneged on its promises to Russia not to expand eastward and has expanded eastward into some rather questionable regimes, particularly in the Baltics. All the same, as it was declaring Russia a useful partner, though a minor one not worthy of ever inviting in, it sought out a new purpose.

The purpose was found on first the battle fields of Bosnia and than later in the air over Serbian cities, where civilians were massacred to the back pats of "job well done" from NATO. Of course, this was all done with major arm twisting by the Americans of a reluctant European NATO. It would seem that defending and militarily supporting Islamic jihadists was something that Dhimmi Washington was much more apt for than the Europeans. However, the USD won hands down and Europe went along, just like it went along to Afghanistan.

Afghanistan was and is the first real NATO fighting war. No longer is this primarily NATO bombers dropping bombs, often on civilians targets, from 3,500 meters, no this is a fighting war with a jihadist guerrilla force, trained by the very same NATO experts. Afghanistan as a whole has already shown NATO to be an empty shell. Many of the members have opted out of contributing anything to the conflict and quite a few that have sent soldiers have sent them with such strict rules of engagement (ROE)s that they are all but useless.

To the Anglo-American Neocons, this of course was a disaster. Their grip on power over Europe and thus the EU in general, was cracking. Add to this the economic knots tied by Russia to several key members, using the very real ropes of energy and business investments, and NATO was opting to be nothing more than a sewing circle.

The Anglo-American Neocons had to take bold action, something that would cause the member states of NATO to recoil back under the Neocon umbrella and unify against a common enemy. But whom? The Muslims showed little ability to project military power into Europe, they do much better with immigrants. The Chinese were out of the question a general rule, way to much elite money at risk for that kind of nonsense. Thus there was only one clear choice: Russia. But how to resurrect the Soviet Union, or at least it's shadow?

Enter stage right, a small time Georgian dictator and one not to bright but very egotistical. The perfect dupe: Saakashvili.

Apparently convincing Saakashvili that exterminating an autonomous province full of a minority that was at once not only protected by Russians but who were 90% Russian citizens, was not a difficult concept, even though he must have known that there was a very large chance that things would turn out just how they turned out. How much and what kind of aid was promised to the Georgian leadership will always be a mystery. What is known, from this writer's first hand knowledge, is that the Georgians have been expecting America to fight a war with Russia for them, since 2001, from the times of Shevardnadze.

Of course, the over stretched US and UK had no plans to ever start a war for Georgia but Georgia was central to their plans to start a war for them. Start a war it did, however not only did the Russians react but they reacted with lightening speed, destroying the Georgian war machine in 2 days and absolutely routing the Georgian forces into a full retreat. In small nations there is precious little space to retreat to.

The Angl0-American Neocons won the over all PR war, making their sociopathic puppet look the part of the victim. However, past rhetoric, the desired reaction did not happen. Germany, France and Italy did not move to the side of the Anglo-American military industrial complex. Instead they negotiated a settlement, the last thing the Neocons planned on or wanted. Furthermore, rifts appeared in various other NATO countries, even Estonia, where groups of MPs decided enough was enough and they were not going to suffer for the Georgian stupidity by loosing business with Russia. Even Brussels said "No" and all flatly said no MAPs (Membership Action Plans) for Ukraine and Georgia.

These were all severe blows to the Anglo-American Trotskytes, no less severe as not coming themselves to the defense of their puppet. This was equally a powerful message. The failure in Afghanistan only adding insult to injury.

Still, all this in itself, may not be enough to finally finish off NATO and end the 100 years of Ideological Warfare, for yes, dear reader, we have yet to leave that period. Russia is no longer the Soviet Union, no longer the Stalinist Marxists, but Economic Trotskyte Marxism (fascism) is alive and well, having infected the West flowing from the decayed corpse of Military Trotskyte Marxism (Nazism). NATO is the final guard against the return of the traditional world, where nations sought economic advantage for themselves not in the name of some mutant form of Internationalism. It is the final guard against nationalistic states that sought the betterment of their people first and foremost and not that of some hypothetical global village or for an internationalistic elite.

The Bank Panic of 2008 may be, however the final stone to knock down this aged and staggering Goliath. The Anglo-American Trotskytes who created this mess are in short, bankrupt.Their ability to project power grows weaker every day with a new DOW low. At the same time, nations such as Iceland, once one of their key military posts, are seeking aid not from their so called allies but from Russia itself. Bound together by economic or cultural or religious or historical ties, or all of the above, nations such as Iceland, Germany, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, Czech, Slovakia and others will naturally pull away from the now bankrupt alliance. Historical ties that were supposed to have died along with history, as proclaimed by one of the fathers of Trotskyte Neoconism: Fukuyama, will now return the globe to an equilibrium long not seen and one that promises more stability than the Internationalist regimes of the past 100 years.

When Doing Nothing Is the Only Smart Thing To Do

The global melt down is raging and gathering strength, turning from a Category 3 Hurricane to a Category 4 and threatening a Category 5 with maybe an earthquake or a volcano for company and every move of the central banks has failed. Why?

Simply put, the Masters of the Universe (or at least it's Finances) have read the wrong history books to draw the wrong conclusions. All are looking at the Great Depression, where over inflated stocks and high interest rates and a relatively tight money market caused a large crash and where liquidity was pulled out causing a massive contraction.

The problem is, of course, this is the wrong experience to look at but it is the model upon which they are basing their solutions on: flooding the market with liquidity where hyper inflation is not a possibility but now a given. Of course the issue here is one of confidence not more cash, but as the insanity continues (doing the same thing under the same conditions and expecting a different result) liquidity and lower interest rates (thus sparking more liquidity) is being constantly created and yet the markets continue to fall. Why?

The better historical example is the Bank Panic of 1872. What never heard of that? To bad, because it made the Great Depression look not so great and not as so much of a depression. Unemployment rates hit nearly 50% from the central plains of the Russian Empire west to the gold coast of the American Empire (and yes, the US has been an empire from the day it broke away from England. An Imperial Republic but an Empire non-the-less. On this at another time).

What caused the great Bank Panic of 1872? The introduction of mortgages in Austro-Hungary and the German Empire (substitute for complex mortgages by modern America and England). Both were driven on to much loose money, no supervision, massive corruption and a huge "perpetual" building spree. The entry into the market by a new economic giant under cutting prices in the industrialized world for manufactured goods and food products, was the final push. In this case it was America doing it to Europe, just like China has done it now to America.

America in the late 1860s early 1870s caused a collapse of established industries in Russia, Austro-Hungary, Germany and France. This in turn drove up unemployment, put a brake on new planned and often under construction projects and caused the banks to reposes property. Thus began a Crisis of Confidence and walla, something that makes the Great Depression look almost trivial and affected every major nation. Sounds like today? "Ywu Betche" as Vice Presidential candidate Palin would say, if she understood anything about economics. She doesn't.

So what is the solution for a Crisis of Confidence? Doing nothing...something the modern Keynesian ideologues can not bring themselves to do. They blindly, and yes these egotistical monsters are blind to anything but their own bloated opinions of self worth, feel in the deepest recesses of their souls that they must do something, always, for the world would surely collapse if they did not.

But here is the rub, the more they do, the more radical their actions, the more of a message of panic they send. This is simple human logic, but something far beyond their ability to grasp. Every bailout has shown that the central banks fear a far worse future then they let on. This in turn has drawn a bigger draw down in the markets. Every flood of cash, has had the same effect. Every hollow assurance has rung just hollow, but still they continue.

If you want the solution, say enough is enough. The markets did not collapse when the US Congress, for a short brief momentary break from its greed and stupidity, actually shot down the $700 billion bailout. The markets began to recover, yes recover. But what did those idiots that the American people hire but never fire, in Congress do? They allocated yet even more funds to various "emergency" projects and now passed a $850 billion bailout, even bigger, even more radical and sending an even louder message of "we're doomed! All doomed!"

The markets have reacted accordingly.

The coordinated rate cuts have done the same. Now the crisis is obviously not limited to one or two or three countries but to the investors' eyes, it has spread world wide. Why else would central banks collaborate in this way. It must be true.

Again, the markets have reacted accordingly.

This weekend's meeting of top world leaders with the Bush regime, to "solve" the issue and the possibility of further American Marxism (yes America, you are a Socialist mega-state taking your final steps into the loving embrace of Marx...enjoy the next 100 years of pain, you're bringing it on yourself), by further nationalization of the banking sectors, will cause the markets to again react accordingly.

Thus the vicious cycle, where every solution only creates a worse problem and requires a yet more radical solution creating as yet a more radical problem.

The only question that remains in this perfect spiraling storm: is this all by accident or purposeful?

The Global Credit Panic Is Russia's Chance to Reverse the Status of Colony

First, dear readers, let us establish why states through out history have established colonies in far away and not so far away places. The reasons are varied and defense, expansion of populations and outlet for ambitious men, imperial or missionary drives are part of the answer, however, these are all "cost" centers of sorts. Only one reason exists that actually benefits the bottom line of a nation: economics.

Colonies, specifically economic colonies, serve a dual purpose. The first is as a source of raw resources, be they common resources in greater abundance in the colony or rare resources found no where or in few other places. The second, equally important duty is as a dumping ground, a closed but yet extended market, for the excess production capacity of the home country.

For this reason, the Tsars moved east into Siberia, even as the British, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Swedish and Danes moved to the Americas (also to be followed by the Russian Empire at a later date), Africa and eventually the rest of the world. This is what the original 13 British colonies of the modern USA were built upon. This is what China with the various zones of economic control was used for. This is what the US passed the Monroe Decree in it's attempt to block off the Americas only for itself. History is full of such instances and they go back to the ancient Greeks and Philistines, over 4,000 years ago.

Unfortunately for Russia, and the former states of the Soviet Union, that is also the exact position that they found themselves in in 1991 and have continued to be in various and to various degrees since. Only Russia to a greater extent has started to truly throw off the mantel of Western colony and reassert itself.

Soviet enterprises and what passed for businessmen were simply not ready for the onslaught of the West and to a smaller degree of the east Asians. Coupled with corrupt and drunken government puppets, they and the people as a whole, fell quickly prey to the schemes of the imperial powers. Not since the Polish invasions of the Time of Troubles (Smuta) have foreign powers held so much power and sway over the lives of all the Rus peoples.

Raw resources, industrial equipment and even the brain power of the former Soviet Union have been drained and captured and pulled out, while masses of manufactured goods of foreign make dumped on the Russian market at below production costs, making sure that no local competition could ever surface. Even food, was pushed in as one Russian and Ukrainian farm or kalhoz after another failed and whole villages cleared out. All the while, corrupt oligarchs and politicians played to the tune of their Western (and Eastern) masters.

Russia's first break came when the ponzi scheme that was the Yeltsin economy collapsed in 1998. Though at first seen as a total calamity, it in truth held the final opportunity for Russia. This was the final point that would determine if Russia would survive or if the Third Rome would fracture and dissolve away forever. It survived, by the Grace of the Heaven and by the economic short sightedness of Western corporations.

With the collapse, profit margins of Western companies shrank fully and they fled Russia like rats off of the Titanic. With the pressure gone, even momentary, Russia's companies came roaring back and in the few years that followed, before the Western return, they had made their move to grow and grow quickly. With their growth, the empty service economy model of the West (to the ever wise exclusion of Germany) collapsed, just like it is now collapsing in the rest of the West. Russian companies provided Russians jobs and greater spending monies, but they provided something much more valuable: they provided hope for the people, for the future and a strong drive to buy Russian to make Russia powerful.

Are you listening America? This is YOUR only hope for salvation, to follow the Russian model of success not the Service Economy model of debt and failure.

So Russia had thrown off the yoke of the economic colony for over produced goods, but it has still clung to its other economic colonial designation: the source of raw resources. No society will ever get rich by digging up its lands and shipping them off at low commodity prices to foreign factories, nor will it ever gain respect or a strong enough foundation for true national defense. Only through strong economic industrial growth, will Russia stand taller than the rest. While this process is under way, it must be accelerated and an environment made appealing enough to first draw back the vast Russian diaspora with their experience from abroad and two to draw the brightest and best from the rest of the world and make them want to be Russians. Drawing the poor and uneducated is not the solution.

This Great Bank Panic is Russia's chance, a chance to stand on strength due to the wise prudence of Putin and Medvedev and Russia's firm financial base and push its goods through to the Near Abroad and than to Europe and Africa and eventually Asia and the Americas. At the same time, its export of resources should be curtailed through heavy taxation. Vast and cheap energy and raw resources in Russia itself will help stimulate growth of the key value adding industries that will provide the world with finished quality goods.

It is paramount for the government through policies and the modern businessmen and reformed and now patriotic oligarchs to seize this moment and like the eastern powers of Japan, S.Korea, and Taiwan, work together to plan the nation's course to economic success. For when the dust finally settles from this financial collapse, the only powers sure to stand are Japan, S.Korea, Taiwan, China, Germany and Russia, for the Third Rome will never get another opportunity like this one.

Yes, the Past 100 Years Were the Fault of Russia

Or rather of one Russia, Tsar Alexander II, who let his feelings of anger lead him into the worst decision in the past 500 years of history and a decision that would cost over 100 million lives. That fateful decision was made in 1861.

What was the main event of 1861, that so drew a decision whose results would not only reverberate through but shape to the core the 20th century? Was it the conquest of Mexico City by Porfirio Diaz? Or the patenting of the flush toilet by Thomas Crapper? Or maybe the abolishment of serfdom by the very same Alexander II? No, not that or the dozen other such events, but the opening of the American Civil War.

The fateful and short sighted decision of the tsar was to side with the Federal US government instead of the Confederacy. If all truth be told, Imperial Russian culture was much closer to gentile Confederacy than the industrialized, indentured North. However, the Confederacy had to benefactors who were unpalatable to Russia at that time: England and France. While mostly on rather than off Russian allies, at that point, only 5 years had passed since the end of the Crimean War, where both of these powers had allied with the Islamic and blood thirsty Turks against the Orthodox Christians and the Russian Empire in particular.

It can be understood that the Tsar had much angst about finding himself on the same side as these two enemies and thus made the decision that would doom the Empire and several others and would lead humanity to the sorry state that it is in today, on the brink of yet another global financial disaster and possible multiple wars.

No other decision made by foreigners had such a powerful influence on the out come of the American Civil War. By siding with the North and placing his fleets into New York and San Fransico harbors, Tsar Alexander II issued a direct threat to both England and France that intervention, that is recognition or more, of the Confederacy would lead to war with Russia. This doomed the Southern effort in the long run and thus also the Russian, French, British and German Empires with it.

But what would have happened if Russia had stayed at worst neutral or at best allied with the Confederacy?

Well for one, the Confederacy would have won her freedom. The North would have been morally and politically defeated and economically damaged, damage that would have taken a several decades to recover from. During this time frame, more than likely, the weakened Union would have been drawn into the orbit of the rising German star, as the Union would have needed allies against the combined might of the Confederacy to the south, Mexico also to the south, Britain and her Canadian holdings to the north, Russia to the west and France to the east.

Spain would have still lost her last Carri bean holdings, Cuba and Puerto Rico, to the Confederacy which would have annexed them. But Spain would have continued to hold Guam and the Philippines, at least until the rising star of Japan ripped them away from it.

The main question, though, would have been: what would have happened when World War 1, the Great War, started? Well obvious enough, Germany and the Central Powers would have won. But would that have been such a terrible thing? To begin with, this was not a war of ideology and this was not Germany under Hitler of the late 1930s.

The Union would have more than likely been allied to the Kaiser and would have found itself in a two front war, with British Canada in the north and the Confederacy and more than likely Mexico to the South. Russian fleets out of Alaska would have raided too. Thus though, not only would the Allies not receive fresh Yank reinforcements in 1916, but instead would have been fighting them. Britain would not have been able to draw on Canadian support either and would have had to instead divert troops to defend it. As such, the Central Powers would have surely won.

So now what? What would have happened? In North America, Canada would have more than likely fallen to the North, but the Confederacy would have survived. With the technology of the day, the Confederacy on the defensive, with powerful rivers and mountain ranges and deep forests as barriers would have ground the North to a stand still.

In Europe, Germany and Austro-Hungary as well as their Bulgarian and Turkish allies would have gained land, mostly at the expense of north eastern France, an annexed Belgium and Netherlands, parts of northern Italy and southern Romania and Russian Poland.

Key to everything would have been the avoided collapse of the Russian Empire and the destruction of the Marxists. The Russian civil war would never have gotten nearly as far. With Wall Street allied to Germany and much much poorer than what was the reality of 1917, the Bolsheviks would have been hard pressed for funds. At the same time, there is absolutely no way that the Kaiser would have allowed the Marxists to sit on Russia's throne. That would be reserved for either one of the Kaiser's Romanov cousins or for some Germany prince who would have become a Russian nationalist anyways.

Thus the whole foundation of World War 2, the Cold War and the various wars and crusades since, would have collapsed. As well the Islamic Arabs and their Jihads would never have been started either and Islam would have been kept in check both in the Middle East and in Europe, where nationalistic and Christian Kings, Kaisers and Tsars would have been loath to allow them in, unlike the Trotskyte Marxists who are the masters of the modern and dieing West.

Yes, Union victory was the worst of all things to happen to the world and Alexander II in his shortsightedness on the subject, more than anyone facilitated it's happening.