Relations between Russia and the United Kingdom have become tense recently because the United Kingdom threatened that if Russia sentenced two British prisoners to death, it would be regarded as a "declaration of war" against London. The British tried to use this method to deter R

Relations between Russia and the United Kingdom have become tense recently because the United Kingdom threatened that if Russia sentenced two British prisoners to death, it would be regarded as a "declaration of war" against London. The British tried to use this method to deter Russia, but the fighting nation was not intimidated. They immediately responded to the British saying that if a war broke out, they would be the first to bomb London. For a while, "war" became the key word between Russia and Britain, but I also knew that Britain did not dare to fight Russia alone and would definitely bring NATO together, and NATO seemed to be interested in using force recently.

First, Lithuania boldly blocked the Russian "enclave" Kaliningrad , and then Germany increased the number of troops stationed to 5,000, apparently in preparation for a head-on conflict with Russia. Because Russia has already made harsh words, that is, it will use all means to open up the land transportation route with Kaliningrad, and the worst result is to start a war. If the Russian army really takes action, the entire NATO is likely to attack together. By then, the United Kingdom will definitely join in the fun, and a war may break out. But what is puzzling is why Russia said it would bomb London first?

Russian general Gurulev, who proposed this tactic, said that if a war breaks out due to Lithuania’s blockade of Kaliningrad, the Russian army will adopt a three-stage combat plan. The first phase will destroy all NATO space satellite groups; the second phase will destroy all anti-missile systems ; the third phase will bomb London instead of attacking Paris, Berlin , Warsaw , etc. You must know that from a geographical point of view, Berlin should be the closest place to the Russian enclave, only 500 kilometers away, and EU is only 1,080 kilometers away from the NATO headquarters, but to attack London, you have to cross Germany.

After breaking through from Lithuania to Kaliningrad, it seems that the best tactic is for the Russian army to continue to advance towards Berlin. Why would they rather sacrifice the near and the far away and bomb London first? Gurulev said that the reason why London should be bombed first is because bombing Berlin first is likely to fall into the trap of Western countries, causing the Russian army to be attacked from both sides by NATO. By then, the gains will outweigh the losses. In addition, it is also very necessary to destroy the "lair" of the Angsa people first after the war breaks out. After all, the Angsa people have been threatening the whole world since the 5th century AD.

The United Kingdom is a country founded by the Angsa people and is also a descendant of the Angsa people. They must be eradicated first before the world can truly be peaceful. The editor couldn't agree more with this. When Britain was still the world's hegemon, it did many evil things around the world and committed many treasonous crimes. Now it is frantically targeting Russia and trying to provoke a war. Such a country must be eliminated quickly, and the United States, as an Anglo-Saxon brother, should also be severely taught a lesson. Therefore, I advise NATO not to be too arrogant. Russia has come this time. After " Sarmat " is deployed to all Russian military units at the end of the year, let's see which country dares to continue to be arrogant.

(Text/Xile)