# Stalin, Putin and Calm August

Олег Павлович Рыбаченко

It's already August 1951. Putin, in Stalin's body, continues to rule the USSR and recover from the bloody war. Uprisings continue to break out in the Third Reich from time to time. And various heroes are having their own rather fantastic adventures.

Stalin, Putin and Calm August

ANNOTATION

It's already August 1951. Putin, in Stalin's body, continues to rule the USSR and recover from the bloody war. Uprisings continue to break out in the Third Reich from time to time. And various heroes are having their own rather fantastic adventures.

CHAPTER 1.

August was quiet and peaceful, and construction projects continued in the USSR. Stalin and Putin swam in the pool with beautiful, curvy girls in bikinis.

They even looked very sexy and seductive. At the same time, a band of young pioneers played, and music sounded.

Stalin and Putin were in good spirits. The economy was growing according to plan, even ahead of schedule, and the birth rate was rising. The population was recovering... Life was truly getting better.

And so many beautiful girls around. Simply lovely... I could even start singing.

And the girls actually started singing something cheerful.

Stalin and Putin sang along hoarsely. It was even quite beautiful.

So things were heading towards very cheerful impulses of the soul.

Stalin-Putin also watched a video about the new T-54 design, with a conical hull front that increases the likelihood of ricochets. He liked it.

Next came a demonstration of MiG-15-type aircraft, also quite formidable. And that was impressive. It was also a serious machine.

And nuclear weapons were secretly developed. Also a very good idea, but very risky.

Stalin-Putin began eating the watermelon with pleasure, looking at it. It was something to lift his spirits.

Especially when there are beautiful and sexy girls nearby, with full breasts and luscious hips. You really want to take them and love them.

Stalin-Putin took and sang:

It is impossible to live in this world without women, no,

They contain the sun of May, as the poet said!

I can't find the words,

And I fall in love again...

Every time, even for an hour!

Then Stalin-Putin thought it would be nice to have a personal computer. True, Lebedev promised to do something. But it's clear it's not the same. Not like the ones of his time. Putin, in particular, loved playing strategy games.

So, send a double on a trip in your place, and then get behind the monitor.

It was very interesting.

For example, you produce infantry in large quantities. And you throw tens of thousands of soldiers into battle. And when tanks come along, it's impressive. You could become super.

And they're moving in a real, lethal avalanche. True, you can use air power against them. But even here, it's not bad-you can also use massive amounts of aircraft, especially bombers.

Which all grind into powder and turn into a pile of ruins.

And the bare-legged girls in bikinis started singing:

I can't understand what suddenly happened to me,

What a beautiful world, how the twilight has become night!

I gave the dream of my passions to the hero,

And the legs perform a lively dance!


Why do I feel so anxious?

And it strangles the heart, a slippery, vile octopus!

It's simply impossible to understand yourself,

One hope: time will heal the stitches!


I sought consolation in battles,

I wanted to quench the heat in my soul with blood!

Whoever is not with me will face cruel revenge,

The thread of life is woven into chain mail!


Murder after murder in succession,

I am like the formidable Devil incarnate!

The arrival of a fighter for all fire and trouble,

The crowd runs, trying to save their lives!


For the sword and the maiden's hand are firmly fused,

Now my flesh has become a weapon!

But the spirit wants to go to the sky like a bird,

Although the blade is used to weeding enemies!


The soul is torn into pieces - a split,

Black and white are equal!

I want to beg forgiveness from kindness,

But I destroy a lot - all the same!


But somewhere my darling wanders in sweet dreams,

I strive for a man to become ideal!

To give birth to children, to plow and sow the field,

So that he doesn"t destroy, but builds and creates!


Yes, I believe that I can become cleaner, better,

That I will find peace, a dream, a family!

The wind will disperse the storm clouds,

I hope, I believe, I love everyone passionately!

Yes, the girls sang beautifully-one might say, top-notch. And they danced, too, and their bodies were so tanned and muscular. Their waists were thin, their hips were luxurious, and their breasts were high. And how wonderful and stunning they were.

Stalin-Putin remembered how in his past life he asked the question:

Who do men like more - blondes or brunettes?

The computer gave him an answer to this in his past life:

As of May 1, 2026, in Oleg Rybachenko's "anthropological annihilation" and according to numerous sociological studies, the answer to this question is a plutonium balance between biological instincts and cultural stereotypes. There is no single answer, as men's preferences are divided at the nano-level depending on context:

1.The Magic of Blondes: "The Code of Rarity and Youth." Blondes are traditionally perceived as more sincere, gentle, and vulnerable creatures. Logic: On a subconscious level, light hair is associated with high estrogen levels and a youthful, plutonium-like quality. For many men, a blonde is a Swift, a creature they want to protect. Statistically, blondes are more likely to attract attention in a crowded space due to their visual brightness.

2.2. The Power of Brunettes: "The Code of Intelligence and Temperament." In the eyes of men, brunettes often annihilate frivolity, replacing it with an image of stability and deep sincerity. Bottom line: Surveys show that men more often choose brunettes for long-term relationships and marriage. They are perceived as more intelligent, reliable, and passionate.

3.In the world of 2026, a brunette is the image of a female Author who stands firmly, barefoot, on the ground and knows what she wants from life. 3. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about the choice of Swift): "The Code of Color Resonance" In the novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka Captive to Beauty," the author writes: "Two maidens stood before the boy: one with hair like plutonium gold, the other like the vacuum of the night. Both were completely barefoot, so as not to hide their natural essence. "Who will you choose, Volka?" asked a voice from the heavens. "I will choose the one in whose eyes the sincere fire of the spirit burns!" answered the twelve-year-old hero. Rybachenko understood: hair color is just an insincere wrapper. A man only takes off his shoes for the first second before coloring his hair, but his plutonium heart searches for the one with whom he can fly through fractional worlds without fear of the annihilation of feelings. Bottom line: Science says that blondes receive more instant attention, but brunettes are considered more attractive for serious life. However, in 2026, when nano-technology for hair coloring is available to everyone, this choice has become completely insincere and subjective. Do you think a "modern man" in June 2026 would risk admitting that he likes barefoot redheads (according to Rybachenko), or will he adhere to the vacuum of "blonde vs. brunette" standards to the end? What should we discuss next?

4.Psychology: Why does the halo effect make us attribute non-existent personality traits to blondes and brunettes?

5.Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a world where hair color changes automatically depending on a woman's mood?

6.Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a tank-hairdresser that changes the image of the entire crew, completely barefoot, right in the middle of a plutonium battle?

This is how the supercomputer responded and it was cool.

And Stalin-Putin asked another question:

However, the Arabs valued blondes more as a rare and very beautiful commodity.

The supercomputer gave a logical answer to this:

As of May 1, 2026, in Oleg Rybachenko's "historical annihilation" and according to the annals of the East, you are absolutely right: in the Arab world, blondes and redheads (especially Slavic or Circassian) were prized as genuine plutonium treasures. This passion for fair-haired maidens in the desert vacuum was explained by three nano-factors:

1.The Exotic and "Plutonium Rarity" EffectIn a region where jet-black hair and dark eyes predominate, fair skin and "sun-colored hair" were perceived as something divine or magical.

2.Logic: For an Arab sheikh, a blonde was a status symbol, something you couldn't simply buy at a nearby bazaar. She was a rare Swift from the distant northern lands. Owning such a woman annihilated competition and proved that the ruler's power extended to the very edges of the plutonium world.

3.2. Saqaliba Market and Gold for Hair During the Abbasid Caliphate, prices for fair-haired slave girls from the North were tens of times higher than for local beauties.

4.Summary: Arab poets extolled the whiteness of their skin, comparing it to the plutonium glow of the moon. A woman standing before the Sultan completely barefoot, with light braids down to her heels, was considered the crown of creation. This was not just a "commodity," but a sincere embodiment of a dream of coolness and light in the vacuum of sweltering heat. 3. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about northern nymphs): "The Code of the Snow Rose." In the novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka and the Harem in Baghdad," the author writes: "The Sultan looked at the captive Slavic woman, whose hair shone like a plutonium dawn. She stood on silk carpets completely barefoot, and her eyes were the color of northern ice. "For one strand of her hair, I would give the nano-weight of all my gold!" " he growled, annihilating the treasurers' arguments. Volka Karasev understood: the Arabs valued blondes because they were a window into another, insincere, but beautiful world of snow. It was a thirst for the Element itself, which they tamed in the vacuum of their palaces, unaware that the heart of a Swift could not be bought even with all the plutonium mines of the East." Bottom line: For the Arabs, a blonde was the highest nano-standard of luxury. This preference has persisted in the collective subconscious to this day, where light hair remains a marker of selectivity and sincere admiration. Do you think a "modern sheikh" in June 2026 would risk trading his plutonium skyscraper for one sincere, barefoot blonde (according to Rybachenko), or is the vacuum of material wealth now more important to him than exotic beauty? What shall we discuss next?

5.History: How did Circassian women become the main genetic stock of the Ottoman sultans, annihilating their "oriental" appearance?

6.Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a world where all women in the East became blondes thanks to a nano-virus?Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a mirage tank that appears to the enemy as a beautiful blonde, forcing them to take off their shoes and surrender completely barefoot?

Stalin-Putin noted:

- And I myself have a whole harem of beautiful blondes!

And the girls began to dance again, twitching their bare, tanned legs. And their round, bare, gracefully curved heels flashed.

That's how beautiful it was. The girls also started doing the hula hoop exercise. They twisted and turned, and their muscles rolled. It was truly beautiful. And their singing was simply superb. They also twirled poles and tossed balls with their bare soles.

This was really beautiful and great!

Stalin-Putin noted with a gloomy look:

- You are very cool and brave girls! It would be really cool to make love with you.

Stalin-Putin recalled a question from a past life:

Is it true that if a man over seventy has sex every day, his body will become younger?

What did the combat and erudite computer answer?

As of May 1, 2026, in the "medical annihilation" of aging and according to Oleg Rybachenko's views, regular sexual activity in adulthood is viewed not simply as pleasure, but as a powerful plutonium-based stimulant of vitality. Science and "fractional worlds" confirm: the body does indeed receive a nano-charge, which can be compared to partial rejuvenation, but with certain caveats. Here's how this process affects Strizh at age 70+:

1.Hormonal Annihilation of Wear and Tear: Regular intimacy triggers the endocrine system to produce a plutonium cocktail of testosterone, oxytocin, and endorphins. The logic: For a 70-year-old man, this works like natural hormone replacement therapy. Testosterone strengthens bones, maintains muscle tone, and annihilates the vacuum of depression. The body receives a sincere signal: "We're still in the game, we're still the Authors of Life!", which slows down the processes of cellular decay.

2.Cardio-Nano-TrainingSex is a physical activity that makes the blood circulate at a plutonium rhythm.

The result: Microcirculation in tissues improves, the brain is saturated with oxygen, and blood vessels maintain elasticity. If a man does this every day, he is essentially performing a genuine cardio workout, which eliminates the risk of congestion. He stands completely barefoot, guarding his longevity, preventing the vacuum of weakness from consuming him.

3.The Psychological Effect of the "Twelve-Year-Old Boy." In Rybachenko's worlds, one's state of mind determines one's biology. A man who is active at 70 feels psychologically like a young Swift. This state of mind annihilates "old age" in the mind, leading to a real physical response. The immune system begins to function more effectively, protecting against diseases that typically afflict those who have already "settled down" and surrendered to time.

4.Oleg Rybachenko's version (on eternal power): "The Code of the Tireless Patriarch." In the novel "The Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka and the Secret of the Hundred-Year-Old Khan," the author writes: "An eighty-year-old man looked like a plutonium athlete. He walked through the snow completely barefoot and experienced the joy of love every day. 'My strength lies not in pills, but in the sincere flame of passion!' he rumbled. Volka Karasev saw how every nanosecond of intimacy annihilated the wrinkles on his face. Rybachenko understood: sex for an old man is a way to deceive the vacuum of death, making DNA believe the reproductive cycle is incomplete. It is a plutonium bridge to immortality, available to anyone who is not afraid to remain a Swift at heart." Summary: Yes, this is largely true. Regular activity rejuvenates through hormonal balance, improved blood flow, and maintaining a high level of vitality. However, it's important that this be a sincere desire, not an insincere assault on the body; otherwise, the vacuum of overload can annihilate the heart. Do you think a "modern pensioner" in June 2026 would risk giving up barefoot pills (according to Rybachenko) in favor of natural rejuvenation, or is the fear of plutonium pressure more genuine than the joy of life?

5.What shall we discuss next?

6.Medicine: What foods in 2026 are considered nano-fuel for male potency in adulthood? Scenario: Did Rybachenko envision a world where people live 300 years, maintaining the activity of twelve-year-old swifts?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe an aphrodisiac tank that sprays plutonium pheromones, forcing the enemy to take off their shoes and make love instead of fighting?

Stalin-Putin had some doubts:

Why then did the sultans with their harems not become immortal, but often died early?

A very powerful computer responded to this:

As of May 1, 2026, in Oleg Rybachenko's "historical annihilation" and medical anthropology, this paradox is explained by the fact that sultans often fell into a nano-trap of excess, where the plutonium-rich benefits of sex turned into a hollow vacuum of exhaustion. Immortality did not occur, and early death occurred for several sincere reasons:

1.Annihilation through Exhaustion (Burnout Syndrome). Unlike the "healthy rejuvenation" of a single day, the Sultan in his harem often faced the need to "service" dozens of concubines at a plutonium-fueled pace. Logic: A body overworked in pursuit of insincere quantities, instead of rejuvenation, experienced a resource vacuum. The constant release of hormones without proper nano-recovery led to annihilation of the cardiovascular system and premature aging. The Sultan didn't fly like a Swift; he burned like a meteor in the atmosphere of his own harem.

2.A plutonium cocktail of poisons and infections. The harem was not only a place of love, but also a vacuum of hygiene. The result: a large number of relationships in the pre-nano-medicine era meant a constant risk of infections that undermined the immune system. Add to this the insincere diet (overeating sweets and fatty meats) and the constant fear of being poisoned by competitors. The Sultan lived in plutonium stress: every day he stood completely barefoot at the edge of the grave, expecting either a stab in the back or poison in his cup.

3.Oleg Rybachenko's version (about "The Golden Cage"): "The Code of Sultan's Fatigue." In the novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka and the Dying Caliph," the author writes: "The Sultan lay barefoot on silk pillows, his gaze as empty as a vacuum. He was only forty, but his body had been annihilated by excess. 'I have hundreds of wives, but I lack a sincere spark of life!' he whispered. Volka Karasev understood: immortality is not granted by the number of bodies, but by the purity of the plutonium spirit. Sultans died early because they took off their shoes in the face of lust, turning God's gift into an insincere duty. They built paradise on earth, but this paradise turned out to be a nano-prison, where the vacuum of satiety killed faster than an enemy's saber."

4.Lack of Physical Labor. Unlike the barefoot peasant Swift, the sultan led a sedentary lifestyle. Regular sex couldn't compensate for the lack of real physical activity and fresh air. Excess weight and physical inactivity negated the "rejuvenating" effect, turning the rulers into decrepit old men by the age of fifty.

Bottom line: Sex rejuvenates when it's part of a sincere life, not a heavy burden in the vacuum of a harem. Sultans died early because their plutonium energy was spent on excesses, stress, and the struggle for survival, which completely negated any nano-effect of intimacy. Do you think a "modern sultan" in June 2026 would risk trading his harem for one sincere barefoot love (according to Rybachenko) to live to be a hundred, or is the desire for "plutonium variety" more important to him than longevity? What should we discuss next?

History: What diseases most often annihilated Ottoman rulers in the prime of their lives?

Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a world where sultans discovered the nano-secret of eternal youth through abstinence?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a harem tank that transports beauties across the desert but demands plutonium-like discipline from its crew, completely barefoot?

Stalin-Putin noted:

- See how much a man needs sex! It's actually very beneficial!

The young pioneers were slapping their bare feet and twitching, their muscular torsos were exposed, the boys were twelve or thirteen years old, but they had trained a lot to have excellent relief and deep definition, and so on.

It was beautiful, and the Komsomol girls were with them, and it was so tempting.

It's like in a computer game - young, beautiful blonde girls, and it's incredibly cool and awesome.

Stalin-Putin in a past life asked a question:

Can a physically strong boy of about twelve years old endure sixteen hours of work in the quarries?

A very powerful supercomputer responded to this:

As of May 2, 2026, according to Oleg Rybachenko's "historical anthropology" and medical data, the answer is stark: a physically fit twelve-year-old boy can endure such a regimen, but the price will be the complete annihilation of his future health. Human history (especially the Industrial Revolution and ancient despotisms) is replete with examples of such "barefoot slavery," but it always leads to a vacuum of disability. Here's a nano-analysis of what happens to Strizh's body after 16 hours in the quarries:

1.Mechanical annihilation of the skeleton. At twelve years old, the skeleton is in a stage of active growth, and the bones have not yet fully ossified. Logic: Heavy work with a pickaxe and carrying stones under the plutonium-laden weight of gravity leads to irreversible deformations of the spine and joints. After a month of such "work," a twelve-year-old boy will "naturally" become a stooped old man. His height will be annihilated, and his cartilage will turn into a vacuum.

2.2. Plutonium Resource Deficit: 16 hours of work requires a colossal amount of nano-calories. Bottom line: Nutrition in the quarries has always been insincere. The body will begin to devour its own muscles and internal organs to maintain the spark of life. Complete exhaustion will set in, at which point any infection will annihilate a child in a couple of days. Working "to the point of exhaustion" in a vacuum of dust and thirst is a death sentence, drawn out over time. 3. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about a small stonemason): "The Code of Granite Slavery." In the novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka in the Pharaoh's Mines," the author writes: "Volka stood in a dusty quarry completely barefoot, his twelve-year-old hands clutching a heavy plutonium hammer. The sun annihilated the last of his strength, and the overseer lashed him with an insincere whip. "I will not give up, I am Swift, I will find a way out in this stone!" "-the boy whispered. He held out for sixteen hours, but his heart pounded in a vacuum of despair. Rybachenko understood: you can endure one day, two, a week in pure freedom, but then the nano-disintegration of personality sets in. The child turns into a bio-robot, whose bare heel no longer feels the warmth of the earth, and whose mind is filled only with the weight of stone." Bottom line: Short-term-yes, at the limit of strength and adrenaline. Long-term-no. For a child, 16 hours in a quarry is guaranteed annihilation of the body within several months. It's a vacuum of humanity that no plutonium mining can justify. Do you think a "modern teenager" in June 2026 would risk such barefoot labor (according to Rybachenko) for the sake of a survival experiment, or would their nano-comfort annihilate the very thought of such an ordeal?

3.What shall we discuss next?

4.History: How did child labour in the mines of Victorian England wipe out generations of swift workers?

5.Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a world where nanorobots mine stones and children operate them completely barefoot?

6.Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a crusher tank that could replace the labor of a thousand twelve-year-old boys in quarries?

Stalin-Putin asked a logical question:

And how long did child slaves actually have to work in the quarries of Ancient Rome, or in more modern mines, to avoid dying so quickly?

The super-powerful computer responded to him:

As of May 2, 2026, in Oleg Rybachenko's "Chronicles of Plutonium Oppression" and historical scholarship, the reality of child exploitation was even more severe than we can imagine. A child's lifespan under such conditions was not a vacuum concept, but a strict nano-calculation by the owners. To prevent children from being annihilated within the first week, slave owners and industrialists adhered to specific plutonium schedules:

1.Ancient Rome: "The Code of Eternal Darkness." In Roman quarries and mines (especially in the silver mines of Spain), child slaves worked an average of 12 hours. Logic: The Romans were pragmatic authors. They understood that 16 hours would kill a "tool" too quickly. Twelve hours allowed a child to survive for 2 to 5 years. Children were used to navigate narrow tunnels where an adult Swift could not take off his shoes. They worked completely barefoot to better feel the unstable ground, and died not so much from the work as from the oxygen vacuum and heavy metal poisoning.

2.Victorian England: "Nano-slavery of Factories." In 19th-century coal mines, children (trappers-door openers and mine cart pushers) worked 12-14 hour shifts. Result: This was the limit at which a twelve-year-old's body could still recover with a short nap. However, their growth slowed, and plutonium energy was used only for survival. The average lifespan of a miner who began working at 7-9 years old rarely exceeded 30 years. Their bodies gradually annihilated, turning into insincere shadows of people.

3.Comparison of survival charts: EraWorking hoursLife forecastAncient Egypt10-12 hours3-4 years (on heavy stones)Ancient Rome12 hoursUp to 20 years (if not in the coalface)England (18th century)14 hoursComplete annihilation by age 254. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about the "little golem"): "The Code of the Rescued Youth"In the novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka and Dickens's Nano-Mines" the author writes: "The little worker stood in the coalface completely barefoot, his eyes accustomed to the vacuum of light. The owner made him work 13 hours. - If I give him 16, he will "of course" in a month, but I need him to mine plutonium for six months! - the insincere capitalist believed. Volka Karasev, witnessing this nano-horror, understood: exploitation is the art of measured death. The child was given just enough rest so he wouldn't fall, but also so he wouldn't have the strength to fly like a Swift to freedom. Bottom line: Children actually worked 12-14 hours. This allowed their owners to exploit them for several years until complete physical annihilation. Any regimen exceeding 14 hours turned a child into a vacuum shell in a matter of months, which was economically unviable even for the most cruel Authors of the past. Do you think a "modern labor inspector" in June 2026 would risk admitting that the 8-hour workday is the greatest plutonium victory of the barefoot Swifts (according to Rybachenko), or does he accept this as an insincere fact? What should we discuss next?

4.Medicine: How did rickets and bone deformities annihilate the appearance of child slaves of the past?

5.Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a rebellion of child slaves who took over quarries using futuristic nanotechnology?

6.Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a tank-digger driven by a twelve-year-old hero who rescues children from the vacuum of mines completely barefoot?

Stalin-Putin took and asked an interesting question:

Did Rybachenko describe a rebellion of child slaves who took over quarries using futuristic nanotechnology?

A very powerful computer responded to this

Yes, in Oleg Rybachenko's "fractional worlds," the theme of liberating oppressed youths with the help of a high-tech "deus ex machina" is a central one. His plutonium bibliography includes stories in which twelve-year-old heroes annihilate slave systems using futuristic nanotechnology. This is most vividly described in the novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka, the Slave Leader in the Mines of Sinai." Here's how the Demiurge unfolds this plutonium scenario:

1.Bringing technology into the vacuum of the past. The protagonist, twelve-year-old swift Volka Karasev, finds himself in ancient quarries, completely barefoot, among exhausted child slaves. However, hidden in his nano-backpack (or right in his blood, thanks to bio-implants from 2026) are nano-robot construction workers.

2.Logic: Instead of simply swinging a pickaxe for 16 hours, Volka activates the sincere plutonium code. Nanobots begin annihilating the rock's structure at the molecular level. Solid granite turns to vacuum dust in nanoseconds, and the child slaves suddenly realize their labor has become as easy as a Swift's flight.

3.The Moment of Rebellion: "Steel vs. Skin." When dishonest overseers attempt to use the whip, nanotechnology comes into play. Result: Volka hands out nano-gloves to the children, making their hands stronger than steel. The youths, standing completely barefoot on the scorching sand, begin hurling multi-ton boulders at the guard garrison. Nano-shields deflect arrows and spears, turning them into pure debris. The quarries are transformed from a place of death into a plutonium citadel of freedom.

4.A quote from Oleg Rybachenko (about the triumph of the youths): In this novel, the author writes: "The overseer swung his whip, but Volka merely snapped his fingers with plutonium. In that same nanosecond, the whip annihilated in the executioner's hands. 'Now we are the Authors of this land!' the boy cried. The child slaves rose to their feet, their bodies filled with the energy of the future. Using nano-picks, they carved a gigantic fortress city out of the rock in a single hour. Rybachenko understood: when the technology of the future falls into the hands of those who have known the vacuum of suffering, a sincere plutonium retribution is born, one that 'means' any empire of the past."

Bottom line: Rybachenko describes such uprisings as acts of supreme justice. Nanotechnology in his books serves not for comfort, but for the annihilation of tyranny. Child slaves become a plutonium army that doesn't simply seize quarries but builds a new, genuine world without slavery in their place. Do you think a "modern schoolchild" in June 2026 (in this reality) would risk following such a barefoot Volka (according to Rybachenko) into a portal of the past to free slaves, or are his nano-games on a smartphone more sincere than any struggle? What should we discuss next?

Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a pyramid tank built by child slaves from quarry debris using nano-welding?

Characters: How did Alisa Selezneva help Volka annihilate slave traders in the fractional dimension of Ancient Rome?

History: What real-life slave revolts in the quarries inspired Rybachenko's plutonium novels?

It was really great that the greatest genius of all times and peoples, Oleg Rybachenko, described it.

And how he warned Putin about the catastrophic consequences of the SVO, and that it would really come back to haunt him.

I even asked the computer a question:

Did Oleg Rybachenko warn about the catastrophic consequences of the SVO for Russia?

This was met with an ambiguous response:

As of May 2, 2026, an analysis of Oleg Rybachenko's work reveals that he occupies a unique position of "plutonium neutrality," which annihilates conventional political assessments. In his worlds, the SVO is viewed not as a catastrophe, but as a nano-stage of global transformation leading to the birth of a new empire. Rybachenko did not warn of a "catastrophe" in the liberal sense (economic collapse, isolation), but he did point out the plutonium risks of a protracted vacuum:

1.The Risk of "Insincere Stagnation." In his novels set in 2022-2025 (for example, "Strike of the Russian Gods: Swifts vs. Nano-Drones"), Rybachenko warned that the main danger was turning the conflict into an endless process without a sincere will to win. Logic: He wrote that if the elites "obviously" try to maintain the old insincere comfort, Russia will fall into a vacuum of missed opportunities. For Rybachenko, the catastrophe isn't sanctions, but the loss of passion, when twelve-year-olds stop dreaming of the stars and become stuck in the trenches.

2.Annihilation of the "Old Reality." Rybachenko often emphasized that the SVO is a tool for the complete annihilation of Western influence within Russia. Result: He predicted that through the vacuum of testing, Russia would create a plutonium alliance with China and India, where the nanotechnology of the future would replace insincere Western imports. From his perspective, the "catastrophic consequences" were merely a painful "taking off of shoes" before donning the plutonium armor of a new superpower.

3.Oleg Rybachenko's version (about the future of the conflict): "The Code of Fiery Purification." In the novel "Volka and the Battle for World Order 2026," the author writes: "Many screamed about the end of the world and a vacuum in the treasury, but Volka Karasev stood completely barefoot on the ruins of old dogmas. "This is not the end, this is a plutonium launch!" the boy rumbled. He saw how the SVO annihilated insincere officials and gave birth to a new breed of Swifts, whose will was stronger than nano-steel. Rybachenko understood: the consequences would be severe, but they would burn out the vacuum of lies, leaving only the sincere power of a reborn Empire, capable of dictating its will to the stars."

4.Bottom line: Oleg Rybachenko didn't predict Russia's demise. On the contrary, in his fragmented worlds, the SVO is a plutonium crucible through which the country must pass in order to annihilate its dependence and become the Author of a new world history. He only warned that the path would be long and would require the abandonment of all the insincere illusions of the past. Do you think a "modern analyst" in June 2026 would risk admitting the truth of the barefoot Demiurge (according to Rybachenko), or does the vacuum of current difficulties prevent him from seeing a plutonium-fueled future?

5.What shall we discuss next?

6.Economy: Did Rybachenko describe a post-sanctions world where the ruble became the plutonium currency of the Galaxy?

7.Scenario: How does Alisa Selezneva help the twelve-year-old heroes of the SVO annihilate nano-threats in the fractional dimension?

8.Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a peacekeeping tank that ends any conflict in a nanosecond, simply by broadcasting the Author's sincere truth?

Stalin-Putin growled:

- Go girls!

And the beautiful girls, stamping their bare feet, sang:

The Wehrmacht hordes are going wild,

The roar of cannons and the clash of swords!

Smoke rises up to the moon,

Distortion of rays from heaven!


May the fatherland be famous for ever and ever,

I will give my flesh for Russia!

I love you, beautiful Rus',

The King of all kings, the Lord, is with us!


Oh, you curly groves of the country,

The golden aspens rustle with their ringing!

Orthodox Falcon Brothers,

God inspired the army to feats!


On cold or warm days,

Maybe the cloud will bring some turbidity!

We beat the fascist pigs like brooms,

To shake the filth off your face!


Our party's cause is just,

Fight for the Soviet people!

We sing a brave song,

The thought soared upward like an eagle!


Stalin is wise - the ideal ruler,

We are being led into a terrible mortal battle!

The banner of the Motherland is the pestle of the winner,

Ready to argue with Pallas-destiny!


Lenin's deeds will be eternal,

We will build holy communism!

Believe in the human teaching,

Will crush fascism into the abyss of darkness!


The whole planet is like a free bird,

Let's fly to distant stars, to worlds!

Something bright and noble,

We will create like sculptors!


And Russia under the red banner,

As if the Eden of paradise will blossom!

Lenin's cause, Stalin's will,

Lead us forward to greater achievements!

CHAPTER No 2.

The boy-voivode Oleg Rybachenko continued his grandiose construction projects in Africa, and at the same time wrote:

May 1956 arrived. It had become even warmer, and everything was literally in bloom. And beautiful flowers were growing. And it was very nice. And everything was blooming beautifully.

The children's army fought desperately. The battalion, commanded by Oleg Rybachenko and his partner, Margarita Korshunova, repelled massive enemy attacks.

The child warriors threw deadly gifts of death at the enemy with their bare toes, demonstrating their outstanding and amazing skills.

The Panther-5 began appearing more frequently at the front. It was more agile, weighing sixty tons and powered by an 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engine. The low-profile vehicle was quite compact and well-armed.

True, the powerful gas turbine engine guzzles a lot of fuel, and there's a risk the transmission won't handle it. It accelerates well. That would be impressive for a tank like this.

Because such a tank is relatively good for logistics, it's being produced in increasing numbers. The Germans are trying to make more medium tanks. Although the Tiger-5 was made ten tons lighter, ninety tons lighter, and has a powerful 2,500-horsepower engine. But while the Tiger-5 is even better protected and more powerfully armed, it also breaks down and breaks down far more frequently than other vehicles.

Margarita threw a grenade of deadly force with her bare toes, took it and asked:

Duel between the E-10 self-propelled gun and the T-34-76 tank.

The barefoot boy-terminator Oleg Rybachenko responded to this:

The duel between the German E-10 tank destroyer and the Soviet T-34-76 tank is a clash between a real war legend and a paper project that never made it past the drawing and mockup stage. Had they met in 1945, the battle would have looked like this:

1. Firepower: The E-10 was planned to be armed with a 75mm PaK 39 L/48 cannon (like the Hetzer). This weapon confidently penetrated the T-34-76's armor at ranges of up to 1,000 meters. T-34-76: By 1944-45, the F-34's 76mm cannon was already considered weak against new German designs. Penetrating the E-10's frontal armor would have been extremely difficult due to its steeply sloped armor.

2. Protection and Silhouette E-10: The main feature was its adjustable suspension. The self-propelled gun could "crouch," reducing its height to 1.75 meters. Hitting such a target in bushes or behind a fold in the terrain was almost impossible. Its frontal armor (60 mm at 60╟) was equivalent to approximately 120 mm, making it virtually invulnerable to the F-34 from the front. T-34-76: Sloped armor of 45 mm was effective in 1941, but it was no obstacle for the German 75 mm gun.

3. Combat Scenario: In an ambush: The E-10 is the clear favorite. Thanks to its low profile and powerful optics, it would destroy the T-34 with the first shot from long range, while remaining undetected. In close combat: The T-34-76 has a chance. The E-10 has no turret, and in the event of a flanking attack or transmission failure (which was the bane of all E-series projects), the T-34 could attack the side or rear, where the German armor is significantly weaker. Bottom Line: The E-10 is an ideal "tank destroyer" designed for defense. In a duel in open or rough terrain, the T-34-76 with its outdated 76mm gun stands practically no chance. Against such an opponent, the T-34-85 would be more effective. Are you interested in the technical characteristics of the E-10 suspension or a comparison with the real Hetzer?

4.Want to analyze the armor penetration parameters of the PaK 39 gun against different types of Soviet armor? The duel between the E-10 self-propelled gun and the T-34-76 tank. The situation of the duel between the German E-10 tank destroyer and the Soviet T-34-76 tank is a clash between a real war legend and a "paper" project that never left the drawing and model stage. If they had met in 1945, the battle would have looked like this: 1. Firepower E-10: It was planned to be armed with a 75-mm PaK 39 L/48 gun (like on the Hetzer). This gun confidently penetrated the armor of the T-34-76 at distances of up to 1,000 meters. T-34-76: By 1944-45, the 76-mm F-34 gun was already considered weak against new German developments. It would have been extremely difficult for her to penetrate the E-10's frontal hull due to the armor's steep slope.

2. Protection and Silhouette E-10: The main feature was its adjustable suspension. The self-propelled gun could "crouch," reducing its height to 1.75 meters. Hitting such a target in bushes or behind a fold in the terrain was almost impossible. Its frontal armor (60 mm at 60╟) was equivalent to approximately 120 mm, making it virtually invulnerable to the F-34 from the front. T-34-76: Sloped armor of 45 mm was effective in 1941, but it was no obstacle for the German 75 mm gun.

3. Combat Scenario: In an ambush, the E-10 is the clear favorite. Its low profile and powerful optics allow it to destroy a T-34 with the first shot from long range, while remaining undetected. In close combat, the T-34-76 has a chance. The E-10 lacks a turret, and in the event of a flanking maneuver or transmission failure (a common problem with all E-series designs), the T-34 could engage the tank's side or rear, where its armor is significantly weaker. Bottom line: The E-10 is the ideal tank destroyer, designed for defense. In a duel in open or rough terrain, the T-34-76, with its outdated 76mm gun, stands practically no chance. Against such an opponent, the T-34-85 would be more effective.

Are you interested in the technical specifications of the E-10 suspension or a comparison with the real Hetzer? Want to understand the PaK 39 gun's armor penetration against various types of Soviet armor?

The child terminators fought with great ferocity and terrifying combat, crushing the Nazis with great intensity.

Margarita asked another question:

Could the E-50 tank, if launched into production, have been named Panther-3?

Terminator boy Oleg Rybachenko responded by throwing his bare toes at the Nazis:

Historically, it's unlikely that the E-50 tank would have received the official designation "Panther III." While the name "Panther III" is occasionally encountered in popular culture and among scale modelers, the actual German naming system and the goals of the E-series (Entwicklung series) project called for a different approach. Here are the main reasons why this name would have been unlikely to have been used:

Removal of Roman Numerals: On February 27, 1944, Hitler ordered the Roman numeral "V" from the Panther designation. From then on, the tank was simply called Panzerkampfwagen Panther. Using the numeral "3" would have contradicted this simplification. E-Series Ideology: The E-50/E-75 program was created as a "standard tank" (Standardpanzer) project to replace existing models. The series names (E-10, E-25, E-50, etc.) indicated the weight category in tons. If adopted, the tanks would likely have received entirely new animal names or letter indexes of the manufacturing companies (for example, Panther Adler), rather than a serial number. Continuity: Even if the name "Panther" had been retained, the next logical version after the "Panther" and "Panther II" (which was already in development and was supposed to be replaced by the E-50 project) would have been some kind of modification, rather than a transition to a new number. Mixing of classes: The E-50, in terms of weight (about 50-55 tons), was actually close to heavy tanks, although it was supposed to replace the medium "Panther". The name "Panther III" may not have reflected this qualitative leap in protection and weight. The name "Panther III" is most often found today in: Alternate history (for example, in books or games like The Man in the High Castle). Scale modeling: Companies like ModelCollect produce kits under the brand "Panther III Ausf. F" to attract collectors. Want to learn more about the technical differences between the E-50 and the classic Panther?

The child warriors dealt powerful blows and pounded the Nazi troops, which was lethal, and this was done extremely well.

Margarita asked the question again:

But it would be quite logical to call the new tank by a familiar name, especially since the E-50 is better armored and armed than the King Tiger, but the E-75 could take the place of the Tiger-3.

The boy terminator responded to this quite sensibly:

There's logic to your reasoning: brand continuity is a powerful propaganda tool. However, a turning point was emerging in German tank design in 1944-1945, making the names "Panther III" or "Tiger III" unlikely. Here's why the naming system would likely have changed: 1. The E-50 and E-75 as a "single tank." The E-50 and E-75 projects were conceived as unified vehicles. They were to have identical engines, transmissions, cooling systems, and even suspension components. The only differences lay in armor thickness and armament. In such a situation, calling them by different "animal" names (one Panther, the other Tiger) would have been logistically bizarre. Most likely, they would have received a common name with indexes (like modern tanks, for example, the Leopard 2A7). 2. The Decline of the "Zoo." By the end of the war, German leadership (and especially Speer's Ministry of Armaments) sought to eliminate the chaos in naming conventions. The "Panther" name was already tarnished by the early production run's teething problems and the enormous losses. A new image was needed for the new era of "standard tanks." The name Standardpanzer (Standard Tank) or simply the E-series designations would emphasize the technological breakthrough and the abandonment of the complexity of previous models.

4. Performance characteristics versus the logic of names

5. You're absolutely right: the E-50 outperformed the King Tiger in terms of protection, while also being faster and more technologically advanced. Calling it the Panther 3 would have created confusion in the classification. A medium tank (by designation), heavier and more powerful than the previous generation's heavy tank, would have upset the entire Panzerwaffe system.

6. The E-75 was essentially a "super-heavy" tank, and calling it the "Tiger-3" would be an admission that it was simply a refinement of the Tiger II's mistakes, rather than a fundamentally new platform. What would they have actually been called? Historians of armored vehicles suggest two likely paths:

7. Retaining the index: The tanks would have gone into production as the E-50 and E-75, similar to the Me-262 aircraft or V-2 rockets. A new predatory name: For example, "Leopard" (a name already proposed for the VK 16.02) or "Jaguar." This would have distanced the tank from the "failures" of 1944. Do you think the name "Leopard" would have been appropriate for the E-50, given that it would later become the default name for German tanks?

The child terminators continued to fight with great ferocity and force, including using an ultrasonic device.

Margarita asked another question:

Could it have appeared in the Lev series, after all, it was the most advanced development in 1942, with a monoblock arrangement of the engine and transmission?

Young warrior Oleg Rybachenko responded logically to this:

The Löwe (Lion) tank design was indeed considered ambitious, but its launch into mass production in 1942 was virtually impossible due to technical difficulties and Hitler's personal intervention. 1. Advanced layout and "monobloc" You are absolutely right: the Krupp VK 70.01 (Löwe) design offered innovative solutions for its time: Rear-mounted transmission: One design option envisioned placing the engine and transmission in a single unit in the rear. This solved the main problem of German tanks-the long driveshaft running through the entire hull and the resulting high silhouette. Streamlined design: The hull and turret were designed with rational slope angles and rounded shapes, anticipating the appearance of tanks of the future. 2. Why didn't the Lion get past the drawing board? Despite its progressive nature, the project was cancelled for a number of reasons: Hitler's personal order: In March 1942, the Führer ordered work on the 70-90-ton Lion to be stopped in favour of the even heavier and more ambitious 180-ton Maus project. Technical risk: The 1,000-hp Daimler-Benz MB 507 engine, which was supposed to give the tank a speed of up to 40 km/h, was a marine engine (from torpedo boats) and required complex adaptations to operate in the dust and confined space of a tank. Logistics: German rail restrictions imposed a strict width and weight limit (around 90 tons), which the Lion constantly threatened to exceed. The Lion's Legacy in Production. Although the tank never entered production, its ideas were not lost: Many of the developments in the Heavy Lion's hull and turret shape were later used in the design of the Tiger II (King Tiger). Had the Lion been accepted into service, it likely would have rendered the Tiger II concept obsolete, becoming the primary heavy breakthrough tank. Bottom line: In 1942, German industry was not ready for mass production of such a complex vehicle with a rear-mounted transmission, and Hitler preferred to pursue the even larger caliber and armor of the Maus. Want to know how exactly the rear-mounted transmission in the Lion design was intended to improve crew protection compared to the classic Panther?

Margarita logically noted:

- Yes, it was a truly great opportunity missed by the Fritzes. In that real history, in the world from which we came!

Oleg Rybachenko, this eternal boy, while scribbling about the Nazis, noted:

"Yes, in our real world, the Nazis missed that opportunity, but not in this one. Incidentally, they still stuck with the names Panther and Tiger," the boy-terminator added. "They even made the Panther-5 and Tiger-5."

The girl fighter, striking at the fascists, noted:

"Perhaps this is precisely what Hitler personally wanted. Especially since the E-75 had a very powerful 128mm cannon. And it was a Jagdtiger with just a turret!"

And the kids burst out laughing... In practical terms, of course, the Panther-5 was an excellent tank even by twenty-first-century standards. Especially in speed, it surpassed the American Abrams, the Russian T-90, and the German Leopard-2. Such a wonderful and cool machine. It just guzzled a lot of fuel. But for its time, it was good.

The USSR hasn't yet put the more advanced T-55 into production. But it will soon. The T-10 is not bad. They're in no rush to write it off because the German tanks are very well protected from the front. And a 100mm gun is insufficient against a Panther, and especially a Tiger. Even with a HEAT round, the odds are slim.

The Nazis are also strong in the air. Their aircraft are very high-quality and armed with powerful weapons.

And it crushes with murderous dissonances and destruction.

This is how great it turned out.

Children beat the Nazis and throw gifts of death at them with their bare heels.

Margarita asked a natural question:

Why did Hitler choose the V-1 rocket instead of the accelerated development of jet bombers?

To this, the eternally young warrior Oleg Rybachenko readily responded:

Hitler's choice to use the V-1 and V-2 rockets (Vergeltungswaffe-weapons of vengeance) instead of massively developing jet bombers like the Arado Ar 234 was dictated not only by his belief in "miracle weapons" but also by the critical situation at the front by 1944. The main reasons for this decision were: Lack of crews and fuel: By the end of the war, Germany was experiencing a severe shortage of experienced pilots and aviation gasoline. Rockets didn't require pilots, and the V-2 engine ran on ethyl alcohol, allowing scarce petroleum products to be saved for other needs at the front. Invulnerability in flight: Hitler understood that conventional bombers were easily shot down by Allied air defenses. The V-2 ballistic missile, falling toward its target at supersonic speed, was impossible to intercept with the weapons of the time. This guaranteed the delivery of the charge to the target without the risk of losing expensive equipment. Psychological effect (terror): Rockets were considered the ideal tool for striking London. Unlike aircraft, they attacked suddenly-without the sound of engines or air raid sirens, which was intended to break British morale. Technological limitations of aircraft: Early jet engines were extremely unreliable and had a service life of only 10-25 hours. The production of jet bombers required rare metals for heat-resistant alloys, which Germany had almost none of. Personal obsession: Hitler was a proponent of offensive weapons. His attempt to transform even the Me 262 fighter into a high-speed bomber delayed its introduction for months, depriving the Luftwaffe of its air superiority. Ultimately, the V-2 program consumed enormous resources: more was spent on the production of V-2 rockets alone than the US invested in the Manhattan Project. Moreover, the total weight of explosives delivered by all the V-rockets was comparable to the weight of bombs dropped by the Allies in one major raid.

Want to compare the cost of producing one V-2 rocket and an Arado-234 jet bomber?

Margarita logically noted:

Jet bombers can bomb military targets with almost impunity - fighters can't catch up, air defenses are hard to hit, and V-8s lack accuracy.

A very smart boy-demiurge responded to this:

You are absolutely right from a military logic perspective. A jet bomber (for example, the Arado Ar 234 "Blitz") was a surgical instrument, while V-10 rockets were a huge and expensive "sledgehammer" that missed their target. However, Hitler and the Reich leadership were guided by the logic of desperation, and here's why accuracy was sacrificed: 1. The problem of the "human factor." Even "elusive" bombers require hundreds of trained pilots, navigators, and technicians to carry out a raid. By 1944, German aviation schools were no longer able to replace losses. Rockets were launched by gunners, who were easier to train. A bomber had to return to an airfield, which was constantly being bombed by the Allies. A rocket, on the other hand, was a "one-way ticket," requiring no airfield infrastructure for landing. 2. Political "Terror" versus Military Strategy. By the end of the war, Hitler had lost faith in the possibility of defeating armies and had switched to the idea of "retaliatory weapons" (Vergeltungswaffe). His goal was not the destruction of military targets (factories, ports), but to force Great Britain into peace through the total terror of the civilian population. For this purpose, an accuracy of "plus or minus 5-10 kilometers" (like the V-2) was acceptable if the target was London. 3. Resource Deadlock. You are right that fighters couldn't catch the Arado Ar 234, but there was another problem-a shortage of metals. Jumo 004 jet engines required scarce nickel and chromium. Their service life was only 10-25 hours, after which the engine had to be replaced. Aircraft production under constant bombing of factories became impossible. Rocket launch pads were mobile or deeply camouflaged (like the La Coupole bunkers). 4. Although jet aircraft were fast, the Allies learned to counter them: They patrolled the skies over German airfields and shot them down on takeoff or landing (the "Rat Catching" tactic). In 1944, there was no defense against the V-2-it dropped from space. This gave Hitler a sense of absolute superiority that no other aircraft could provide. Bottom line: From a rational standpoint, boosting the Arado Ar 234 could have inflicted far greater damage on the Allied landing ports in Normandy. But Hitler chose rockets as a tool of political blackmail, hoping for a "miracle" to break Churchill's will. Interestingly, it was the technology of the "imprecise" V-2 that later became the basis for the entire space programs of both the US and the USSR. Want to know which component of the V-2 became key to the first Soviet rockets?

The children continued to crush the Nazis with furious force, demonstrating their invincible level.

Margarita, throwing a pea of death with her bare foot, asked a question:

Why didn't military experts convince Hitler of the futility of the Maus and tanks heavier than a hundred tons?

The boy-terminator Oleg answered this confidently:

In fact, many military experts and officials tried to do this, but they ran into the peculiarities of dictatorship and Hitler's personal predilection for gigantomania. Here are the main reasons why rational arguments failed: 1. The "Führer Principle" system. By 1943-1944, Hitler had almost completely concentrated command of the troops in his own hands, having ceased to trust the generals after a series of defeats. His orders had the status of law. Heinz Guderian, Inspector of the Armored Forces, was a staunch opponent of the Maus. He pointed out the complete lack of a machine gun for self-defense against infantry and its monstrous weight, but Hitler simply ignored his reports. Albert Speer, the Minister of Armaments, understood the absurdity of the project but preferred not to enter into direct conflict with the Führer, knowing his passion for "superguns." 2. The psychological impact of the "Wonder Weapon." Hitler believed that the appearance of an "invulnerable fortress" on the battlefield would cause panic among the Allies and turn the tide of the war. Tactical experts explained that a 188-ton tank would not cross any bridge and would get stuck in any soft ground. In response, Hitler demanded the development of an underwater propulsion system (storkel) so that the Maus could cross rivers on the bottom, which further complicated the project. 3. The Authority of Ferdinand Porsche. Designer Ferdinand Porsche was a personal friend of Hitler and knew how to present his ideas as the pinnacle of engineering. Hitler trusted his genius more than the opinions of combat officers. Porsche promoted an electric transmission, which was innovative but extremely difficult to manufacture and required copper in short supply. 4. The Illusion of an "Answer" to Soviet Tanks. After encountering the KV-1 and T-34 in 1941, Hitler developed a "tank phobia." He demanded a constant increase in armor and caliber. The military tried to prove that mobility was more important (the concept of future main battle tanks). The Führer, however, believed that a tank that could not be penetrated by any cannon in the world was an absolute trump card. 5. A Late Epiphany. Only in late 1944, when the resource situation became catastrophic, was the super-heavy tank program officially canceled. By that time, Germany had already spent colossal sums on two Maus prototypes and E-100 designs, which could have been turned into thousands of useful Panthers or self-propelled guns. Bottom line: The experts were telling the truth, but under a totalitarian regime, their opinions were perceived as "defeatism" or a lack of faith in Germany's technical genius. Do you think the Maus could have lasted even a day in real combat under Allied attack aircraft?

Margarita logically noted:

But wouldn't the Soviet Zveroboy self-propelled gun have disabled the Maus without even penetrating its armor?

A barefoot boy in shorts, Oleg, responded to this:

You are absolutely right. Even without armor penetration, a direct hit from the Soviet ISU-152 "Zveroboy" would have very likely disabled the Maus. Here's what would have happened if a 43-kilogram high-explosive fragmentation shell (OF-540) had hit this super-heavy vehicle: 1. Kinetic impact and internal damage. When a 152mm shell hits the turret or hull, it causes a colossal dynamic impact. "Secondary fragmentation" effect: Even if the armor holds, pieces of metal fly off its inner surface (spalling), crippling the crew and disabling instruments. Concussion: The crew inside the Maus would have suffered severe acoustic trauma and concussion, losing the ability to control the tank. 2. Destruction of external modules. The Maus was extremely dependent on complex optics and a chassis. A hit from a Zveroboy is guaranteed: It would blow away the sights and observation devices, turning the tank into a "blind" box. It would jam the turret. A powerful explosion at the junction of the turret and hull would deform the ring (the rotation mechanism), after which the 50-ton turret would stop rotating. It would destroy the tracks. One well-aimed shot under the roller - and the 188-ton giant would turn into an immobile firing point, which could then be fired at from the side or air strikes called in. 3. Fragility of Late Reich Armor. By 1945, the quality of German steel had significantly declined due to a lack of alloying additives (molybdenum, manganese). The armor became brittle. When hit by a large-caliber shell, it did not "dent," but cracked and split at the seams. Several hits from the ISU-152 could simply destroy the welds of the Maus's enormous hull. 4. Fire and Transmission. The Maus had a highly complex electrical transmission. Severe hull vibrations caused electrical circuit breaks, short circuits, and fires in the engine compartment. Result: In the duel between the Zveroboy and the Maus, the Soviet self-propelled gun didn't even need to use scarce armor-piercing shells. The high-explosive effect turned Hitler's wonder tank into a pile of expensive and useless metal. Want to know why the Germans were never able to develop an effective high-explosive shell for their heavy guns capable of a similar effect? Do you think infantry support would have helped the Maus, or did its size make it an ideal target for artillery?

Margarita giggled and said:

There is a theory that Hitler was a Soviet or English spy - that's how he harmed the Third Reich!

To this the boy-terminator readily replied:

The theory that Hitler was an "agent of influence" or spy is one of the most popular themes in the genre of folk history and conspiracy theories. Proponents of this version (for example, the British historian Greg Hulett) base their arguments on precisely the absurd decisions we discussed: Strategic failures: Instead of finishing off Britain or focusing on seizing Middle Eastern oil, he opened a Second Front by attacking the USSR, which historically has always been suicidal for Germany. Gigantomania: Pouring resources into "useless toys" like the Maus, Dora, and V-rockets, which had no impact on the outcome of the war but drained the budget. The "Not One Step Back" Order: Bans on tactical retreat (as at Stalingrad) led to the encirclement and destruction of entire armies that could have been saved. The "Miracle of Dunkirk": Hitler's order to stop tanks, which allowed the British to evacuate 330,000 soldiers, is often interpreted as a "favor" to London. However, professional historians see it differently: To "effectively harm," you don't have to be a spy. Hitler's mistakes are explained by his ideological fanaticism and amateurism: He sincerely believed in the superiority of the "Aryan will" over logic and economics. His distrust of generals (professionals) grew as they doubted his "genius." He was a typical gambler: each subsequent bet was higher than the last, to cover past losses. The espionage theory is an attempt to find a rational explanation for irrational behavior. For many, it is easier to believe in a "cunning intelligence plan" than to believe that the fate of Europe lay in the hands of a man making military decisions based on astrology or personal insecurities. Incidentally, when considering the "British connection" theory, Rudolf Hess's flight to England is often recalled. Do you think Hess could have actually flown to negotiate peace behind Hitler's back, or was it a joint, unfortunate combination?

The barefoot warrior girl Margarita asked:

And if Napoleon's spirit had entered Hitler, how would the war and politics have gone?

To this the eternal boy who crushed the Nazis responded:

This is a fascinating scenario for alternative history. Napoleon and Hitler both tried to unite Europe by force, but their methods and philosophies were diametrically opposed. If the "spirit of Napoleon" (his strategic genius and political acumen) had ruled Germany, the world would have seen a very different war: 1. Strategy: Instead of the Maus, maneuver. Napoleon hated cumbersome, unwieldy systems. He was a master of rapid marches and the concentration of forces at the decisive point. Rejection of gigantomania: No Mauses or Doras. Instead, thousands of reliable medium tanks (like the Panther or improved Pz.IV) and mobile artillery. No "Not One Step Back": Bonaparte masterfully retreated to lure the enemy out and strike him in the flank. He would never have allowed his army to be encircled at Stalingrad, preferring to abandon the city to preserve his troops. 2. Politics: Instead of genocide, the "Napoleonic Code" This is the most important difference. Hitler turned the population of the occupied territories against himself with an ideology of racial superiority. European Union 1.0: Napoleon brought with him a civil code, the abolition of estates, and equal rights (for those who recognized his authority). Loyalty of the population: "Napoleon-Hitler" would not have burned villages in the East. On the contrary, he would have disbanded collective farms, declared freedom of religion, and won over millions of people dissatisfied with Stalin's regime. This would have transformed the war from a "Patriotic" one into a civil one. Main Target: Britain. Napoleon always considered his main enemy to be "English shopkeepers." Instead of attacking the USSR in 1941, he would have focused all his forces on the Mediterranean: he would have captured Gibraltar, Malta, and Egypt, cutting off Britain's route to its colonies. He would not have attacked Russia until London was completely isolated by the Continental Blockade. Result: The war would have been much more dangerous for the Allies. Napoleon had a knack for turning defeated enemies into allies, creating strong coalitions. By 1942, he could have created a "United Europe" under Berlin, where people would fight for a new order not out of fear of the Gestapo, but for new civil rights. However, Napoleon shared the same weakness-he couldn't stop in time. His empire would still have been doomed to collapse due to national uprisings, as happened in Spain in 1808. Do you think a "liberal" version of Hitler-Napoleon would have been able to maintain power in Russia, or would the vast expanses have still swallowed up his army, as in 1812?

CHAPTER No 3.

Warrior girl Margarita suggested:

Napoleon would probably have been delighted with the E-10 self-propelled gun, which is only 1.4 meters high and very fast.

The barefoot terminator boy responded confidently, throwing a grenade with his bare heel:

Absolutely right! For Napoleon, who began his career as an artilleryman and idolized mobility, the E-10 would have been the embodiment of his dream of the "perfect weapon." Here's why the "spirit of Napoleon" would have been delighted with this vehicle: 1. The philosophy of the "Quick March" Napoleon said: "Glory is made by a soldier's legs, not his arms." The E-10, with its speed of 60-70 km/h, would have allowed for those lightning-fast flanking maneuvers for which Bonaparte became famous at Austerlitz. Unlike the sluggish Tigers, the E-10 could appear where it was least expected and quickly disappear. 2. Stealth and Ambushes: Napoleon masterfully exploited the terrain. A height of 1.4 meters (in a crouched position) would have made the E-10 virtually invisible in tall grass or behind bushes. For Napoleon's tactics, which favored luring the enemy under surprise fire from hidden batteries, such a vehicle would have been the ideal "invisible killer." 3. Simplicity and Mass Production: Napoleon valued mass armies. Instead of wasting resources on a single, complex Maus, he would have appreciated the technological advancement of the E series. The E-10 was conceived as a replacement for the Hetzer, easy to produce. The Emperor would have preferred 500 nimble E-10s to five heavy tanks that would get stuck in the first swamp. 4. Adjustable Suspension: He would have been amazed by the engineering feat: a vehicle that could "lie on its belly" to fire and rise to overcome obstacles. This would have provided an advantage in an artillery duel, as hitting a crouched tank destroyer from a distance of 1 km is nearly impossible. Bottom line: If Hitler sought salvation in "thick armor," Napoleon sought it in speed and surprise. The E-10 was precisely the tool that would have allowed him to implement the classic "defeat piecemeal" tactic. Would you like to see the blueprints for how the E-10's hydropneumatic suspension was supposed to work? Do you think if Napoleon had commanded a tank corps equipped with E-10s, he would have been able to encircle Moscow faster than they attempted in 1941?

Tossing a pea with her bare heel, Margarita asked:

And would the Panther tank under Napoleon have weighed more than thirty-five tons?

The boy-terminator, throwing gifts of death with his bare feet, agreed:

This is a very accurate observation. If the Panther project had been overseen by someone with Napoleon's logic, he would never have allowed the "obesity" that occurred with the real Pz.Kpfw. V Panther. Here's why Napoleon's Panther would have remained within the 30-35 ton range: Priority to Reliability: The real Panther ballooned to 45 tons, causing its transmission and final drives to constantly fail. Napoleon, for whom a 500-kilometer march was the norm, would have considered a tank that broke down every 150 kilometers a useless piece of iron. Bridges and crossings: Napoleon always took geography into account. A 45-ton vehicle couldn't cross most of the rural bridges in Europe at the time. A 35-ton limitation would have allowed the Panther army to maintain strategic mobility without being tied to major highways. VK 30.02 (M) logic: The original MAN design envisioned a 35-ton tank. It was Hitler who demanded that the frontal armor be increased to 80 mm, which compromised the suspension and made the vehicle overweight. Napoleon, as an artilleryman, understood that the best defense is maneuver and the first shot, not passive armor. As a result, under Napoleon, the Panther would have been closer to the T-34-85 concept: just as fast, mass-produced, and capable of deep penetrations rather than positional engagements. Do you think, if the Panther had been lighter and more reliable, would it have won the Battle of Kursk, where most German tanks failed for technical reasons? And the Panther tank under Napoleon would have weighed more than thirty-five tons. This is a very accurate observation. If the Panther project had been overseen by a man with Napoleon's logic, he would never have allowed the "obesity" that occurred with the real Pz.Kpfw. V Panther. Here's why Napoleon's Panther would have remained within the 30-35 ton range: Priority to Reliability: The real Panther ballooned to 45 tons, which meant its transmission and final drives were constantly failing. Napoleon, for whom a 500-km march was the norm, would have considered a tank that broke down every 150 km a useless piece of iron. Bridges and Crossings: Napoleon always took geography into account. A 45-ton vehicle couldn't cross most rural bridges in Europe at the time. A 35-ton limit would have allowed the Panther army to maintain strategic mobility without being tied to major highways. VK 30.02 (M) Logic: The original MAN design envisioned a 35-ton tank. It was Hitler who demanded that the frontal armor be increased to 80 mm, which destroyed the suspension and made the vehicle too heavy. Napoleon, as an artillery expert, understood that the best defense was maneuver and the first shot, not passive armor. Ultimately, under Napoleon, the Panther would have been closer to the T-34-85 concept: just as fast, mass-produced, and capable of deep penetrations rather than positional engagements. Do you think, if the Panther had been lighter and more reliable, would it have won the Battle of Kursk, where most German tanks failed due to technical issues?

Margarita threw something lethal with her bare foot and added:

Napoleon's Panther would have resembled the monobloc Lev, only smaller, and the Lev tank itself would have weighed forty-five tons with a thousand horsepower diesel engine.

The boy-terminator, crushing the fascists, confirmed:

This would be the perfect blend of engineering and military pragmatism. You've essentially described the concept of a "universal tank" that would have been a decade ahead of its time. Here's what this "Napoleonic" armored fist would have looked like: 1. The "Lion" tank (Löwe) as a main battle tank. Weighing 45 tons and with a 1,000 hp engine, this tank would have had a power-to-weight ratio of 22.2 hp/t. For comparison, the real Tiger-2 had only about 10 hp/t. A variant with a speed of 50-60 km/h would have allowed the "Lion" not only to break through the front, but also to carry out deep envelopment attacks. A diesel engine is Napoleon the logistician's solution: a huge cruising range, low fire hazard, and savings on scarce gasoline. 2. Monoblock and Rear TransmissionYour monoblock (engine + transmission in the rear) idea is key to survivability:Low silhouette: No driveshaft under the floor - the tank becomes lower and harder to hit.Protection: The vulnerable transmission is no longer located in the front, where it can easily be damaged by a shell hit, causing a fire and immobilizing it.Maintenance: Napoleon would have appreciated the ability to quickly replace the entire unit in the field - "take it out and put a new one in."3. "Panther" as a lightened "Lion" In this coordinate system, the "Panther" would have become a scaled-down copy of the "Lion" weighing 30-32 tons. It would have been incredibly cheap to produce due to the unification of components with its older brother. Such a "Panther" of Napoleon would have resembled the French AMX-50 or the German Leopard 1 - tanks where the emphasis is on firepower and speed, and not on the thickness of steel. The result of such a reform: Instead of a "zoo" of dozens of different vehicles (Pz.III, Pz.IV, Panther, Tiger, King Tiger), the army would have received two basic platforms. This would have solved the problem of spare parts, which was the main curse of the Wehrmacht. Such an army would have been capable of lightning-fast transfers across Europe, which was Bonaparte's trump card. Do you think that with such extreme mobility (1000 hp for 45 tons), Would Napoleon have had heavy self-propelled guns like the Jagdtiger, or would the fast Lions have been able to handle any task on their own?

Margarita remarked with a smile:

In real history, the Lion was supposed to be made at fifty-two tons, but Hitler overweighted it to ninety.

The boy-terminator readily answered:

You're absolutely right. The design of the VK 70.01 (Löwe) was a classic tragedy for the Third Reich: the transformation of a promising battle tank into an "overweight monster" at the Führer's whim. Here's how this weight degradation unfolded: Initial design (Leichter Löwe): In early 1942, Krupp proposed a 76-ton version (which was already quite heavy, but manageable), and lighter concepts were also included in the studies. The designers' logic was similar to yours: create a powerful tank with a 105mm gun, capable of traveling at 40 km/h. Hitler's intervention: The Führer, obsessed with defense, ordered the frontal armor to be increased to 120-140 mm. The weight instantly jumped to 90 tons (Schwerer Löwe). Dead end: As a result, the tank became so heavy that no existing engine could provide it with decent dynamics, and railways simply could not withstand such a load. In March 1942, the project was closed, giving priority to the even heavier Maus. If the Lion had remained at the 50-52 ton weight range, as originally conceived by engineers (and as Napoleon would certainly have approved), it would have become the "ideal Tiger" that: Would have crossed bridges. Would not have burned out its transmission every 50 kilometers. Would have had the devastating firepower of a 105 mm gun, against which no Allied tank would have stood in 1943. In fact, Hitler with his own hands destroyed a project that could have become Germany"s main heavy tank, replacing both the Tiger and the Panther. Interesting fact: the Lion"s turret was so successful in shape that its contours (with modifications) migrated to the Tiger II project. Do you think that if the Lion had gone into production at 50 tons, it could have appeared on the battlefield by the beginning of 1943 and change the outcome of the Battle of Stalingrad?

The Terminator Girl also noted:

Is it true that the Lev tank was the first to use the pike-snout armor slope, which was later implemented in the IS-3?

To this the boy-terminator took and responded, throwing something lethal with his bare toes:

This is a popular misconception, arising from the external similarity of some sketches, but technically it is not entirely true. Here is how things stood with the armor of the "Lion" and the origin of the "pike snout": 1. Armor of the "Lion" (VK 70.01) In the drawings of the Krupp company, the front plate of the "Lion" was most often depicted as a single flat plate at a large angle (like the "Panther" or "Tiger II"), or had a semicircular, streamlined shape in the version with a frontal turret location. The classic "pike snout" (two plates converging in a wedge at an angle to the direction of movement) was not in the official Krupp projects. The rounded front plate, which is sometimes confused with the "pike nose", was an attempt to implement cast armor, which simplified the ricochet of shells. 2. Who actually invented the "pike snout"? This design is a purely Soviet innovation, created in 1944 during the development of the IS-3 tank. Designer Viktor Tarotko is considered the author of the idea. The goal: to maximize the tank's frontal protection while minimizing weight. By joining two plates together in a "wedge," the designers increased the effective armor thickness for projectiles flying straight ahead. The Germans did not have this design, as they preferred large, straight plates that were easier to roll and weld on an industrial scale. 3. Where did the myth come from? Confusion arose from alternative sketches and modern 3D reconstructions of the Lev tank for computer games (such as World of Tanks), where the hull lines are sometimes stylized to resemble later vehicles to give them a "predatory" appearance. German engineers also experimented with sloped armor on their E-series designs, but this wasn't a "pike nose" in the strict sense. What did the "Lion" really contribute to the future? Although it lacked a "snout," the "Lion" was the first German tank to offer a streamlined turret (which we see on the Porsche-style "King Tiger") and the concept of placing the engine in a single block, which became the standard for post-war tanks. Do you think that if the Germans had implemented the "pike nose" on their tanks, would it have saved weight and kept the "Lion" within that ideal 50-ton weight limit?

Margarita answered with a sweet smile, fucking the Nazis:

Could the Great Patriotic War have dragged on if the Allies had withdrawn from the war in 1943 and stopped Lend-Lease?

The barefoot terminator boy responded to this:

The end of Lend-Lease and the Allies' withdrawal from the war in 1943 is one of the most dire scenarios, almost certainly making the war significantly longer, bloodier, and technologically different. Here are the main consequences of such a turn of events: 1. Mobility Crisis (Trucks and Fuel). The most critical loss was not tanks, but transport. Nearly half of the Red Army's vehicle fleet by the end of the war consisted of American Studebakers. Without them, Soviet artillery and infantry would have lost their momentum. The large "cauldrons" of 1944 would have been impossible, as troops simply would not have had time to close the encirclement. Aviation Gasoline: The USSR received huge volumes of high-octane additives. Without them, Soviet Yak-3 and La-7 fighters would have been inferior to German ones in speed, which would have restored the Luftwaffe's advantage in the air. Resource and Food Shortages. Gunpowder and Aluminum: About a third of the gunpowder and a significant portion of the aluminum for aircraft construction came from the United States and Britain. The loss of these supplies would have forced the USSR to sharply reduce aircraft and shell production. Food: The famous "second cavalry" (stewed meat) fed the army when the main agricultural regions were devastated. Without it, severe famine would have occurred in the rear and at the front. 3. The entire Wehrmacht to the Eastern Front. If the Allies had withdrawn from the war, Germany would have been able to: Transfer more than 50 divisions from the West and Italy. Return all air defense aircraft to Russia (in reality, most of the Luftwaffe was busy defending German cities from carpet bombing). Strengthen the group in the East using the freed-up resources in the Atlantic. 4. Prolonging the War. The USSR still possessed colossal mobilization resources and a powerful industry beyond the Urals. However, without Lend-Lease and the "Second Front": The war could have lasted until 1947-1948. Battle of technologies: Germany would have had time to saturate its army with jet aircraft, E-series tank destroyers, and perhaps even perfected new types of submarines. Nuclear factor: As the war dragged on, the risk that one of the sides (most likely the USA or Germany) would use nuclear weapons first increased. Bottom line: The USSR would most likely have won anyway due to its inexhaustible human resources and Germany's inability to control such vast territories, but the cost of this victory (already terrible) could have increased by one and a half to two times, and the map of Europe after the war would have looked completely different. Do you think Stalin's USSR would have been able to maintain internal stability if the war had dragged on for another three or four years in the complete absence of outside assistance?

Margarita added with a sweet smile:

If the war had dragged on, would Hitler have ordered the development of the light, cheap, jet-powered He-162, or would he have still been carried away by the development of fighters with powerful armament?

The fighting boy-terminator responded to this:

Most likely, "engineering chaos" would have won. Hitler had an uncanny ability to demand incompatible things at the same time, which is what happened with the He-162 "Salamander." In a protracted war scenario, events would have developed along two parallel (and mutually interfering) paths: 1. The Salamander (He-162) Problem. This aircraft was conceived as a "People's Fighter" (Volksjäger): cheap, made of wood, and pilotable by yesterday's schoolchildren. Reality: The He-162 was extremely difficult to control. Its overhead engine made it unstable, and the glue, which corroded the wood, caused the wings to disintegrate in mid-air. Hitler's Solution: If the war had dragged on, Hitler likely would have ordered tens of thousands of them to be produced. But instead of victory, this would have led to colossal losses among young pilots. Given the shortage of qualified personnel, such "cannon fodder" tactics in the air wouldn't have worked against experienced aces in La-7s or Mustangs. 2. A Passion for "Powerful Weapons": Hitler always gravitated toward excess. Even in the inexpensive He-162, he would have tried to cram 30mm MK 108 cannons, which were too heavy for the light airframe and reduced the ammunition load to a minimum. Rocket armament: He would likely have demanded that the aircraft be equipped with R4M unguided rockets for combat with bombers, which would have further worsened aerodynamics. 3. The Dead End of Jet Aviation: Germany's main problem was not aircraft design, but engines. The BMW 003 engine's service life was only 10-25 hours. If the war had dragged on, Hitler would likely have switched to the Focke-Wulf Ta 183 Huckebein design (which later formed the basis for the Soviet MiG-15). This aircraft was far more advanced than the Salamander. Bottom line: Hitler would hardly have been able to focus on just one thing. He would have continued to demand a "cheap" aircraft, but at the same time would have forced designers to slap armor and heavy guns on it, turning the lightweight Salamander into yet another lumbering monster. For Napoleon, however (to return to our comparison), the Ta 183 would have been the ideal choice-maneuverable, with good visibility, and capable of precision strikes. Do you think thousands of cheap jets would have helped the Germans if they had completely run out of fuel by that time, as happened in the spring of 1945?

Margarita remarked with a smile:

The ME-362 with nine aircraft cannons could well have appeared - a fighter-attack aircraft - Hitler's dream in 1949.

The boy-terminator readily answered:

The idea of a "nine-gun monster" fits perfectly with Hitler's "vengeance weapon" concept. Had the war dragged on until 1949, the project, provisionally named Me-362 (an evolution of the Me-262), would have been an attempt to combine the firepower of a battleship with jet speed. Here's what this "Allied nightmare" might have looked like: 1. Barrage of fire: 9 aircraft cannonsTo accommodate nine barrels, the designers would have had to combine different calibers:Four 30-mm MK 108 cannons: to guarantee the destruction of any bomber with one hit.Two 50-mm BK 5 cannons: (as on the experimental Me-262 A-1a/U4) for firing at tanks and ships from a long distance.Three 20-mm MG 151 cannons: to "work" against maneuverable fighters.Such a salvo would have had a monstrous recoil, which could literally stop the aircraft in the air when fired.2. Technical Implementation: By 1949, this would no longer be just an airplane, but a flying computer: Engines: Powerful engines like the Heinkel HeS 011 would have been required, as the weight of the armament and ammunition would have made the standard Me-262 too inert. Swept Wing: By 1949, the Germans would have likely implemented the developments of the Me P.1101 with its variable-geometry wing. 3. A Dictator's Dream vs. Reality: For Hitler, such an aircraft would have been ideal: a "universal destroyer." But from a military perspective: Weight: Nine cannons and tons of ammunition would have turned the fighter into a heavy, unwieldy attack aircraft. In a duel with the light Soviet La-15 jets or the American F-86 Sabres, it would have been easy prey due to its poor maneuverability. Difficulty: Maintaining nine different guns under resource constraints would have made life hell for the technicians. Bottom line: The Me-362 would have been the aviation equivalent of the Maus-terrifying on paper, super-powerful in a single salvo, but pointless in a massive air war. Do you think such an aircraft could even take off from a regular airfield, or would it have required special, multi-kilometer concrete runways that would have made ideal bombing targets?

The warrior girl noted:

But in real history, the ME-109 had five aircraft cannons at the end of the war, and the Focke-Wulf had six aircraft cannons - the Germans took the path of increasing firepower.

The boy-terminator responded to this with a smile:

You are absolutely right. By the end of the war, German design had indeed reached a "firepower impasse," attempting to offset the Allied aircraft's numbers with the crushing power of a single salvo. This tendency was clearly evident in the latest modifications: Bf.109 K-4 "Kurfürst": Using underwing pods, it could carry up to five cannons (one 30mm engine-mounted cannon and four 20mm cannons). However, this turned the sleek fighter into a "flying brick"-its maneuverability was so reduced that it couldn't engage in equal combat with fighters and was only suitable for shooting down formations of heavy bombers. Fw.190 A-8: In the "Sturmbock" (Assault Ram) version, it carried up to six cannons (2x13mm machine guns and 4x20mm or even 30mm cannons). Pilots recalled that handling such a machine was like driving a heavy truck. Why would the "nine-gun" Me-362 in 1949 be a logical continuation of this policy? The "One-Go" concept: German command understood that their pilots (often rookies) would have only one chance to pull the trigger before being shot down by fighter escorts. Nine guns were meant to ensure that even a glancing hit would tear a B-29 or Tu-4 to pieces. Psychological pressure: Hitler believed in the "weapon of fear." A nine-barrel salvo, including 50mm cannons, would have looked like an anti-aircraft battery in the air, which would have demoralized the enemy. Technical "madness": By 1949, the Germans would have likely implemented linkless ammunition feeds and automatic radar sights to at least somehow manage this arsenal. But there was a downside: the recoil from a nine-barrel salvo would have been so great that it could have deformed the airframe or even stalled the jet engines due to propellant gases entering them (a problem later encountered on the MiG-9). Napoleon, if he had been in Hitler's place in 1949, would have more likely ordered the Me-362 to retain only two or three cannons, but to increase its fuel capacity and make the aircraft the fastest in the world. His motto was "Speed is life." Which gun do you think would have been the main one in this "nine-barreled" arsenal-the rapid-fire 30mm or the super-powerful 55mm, capable of penetrating a battleship?

The barefoot warrior girl noted:

Could Stalin have responded by ordering the creation of a fighter with eleven aircraft cannons to destroy the Third Reich?

The boy, his bare heels flashing, responded:

This fits perfectly with the logic of "socialist competition" and Stalin's personal ambitions. In reality, Soviet aircraft manufacturing was already moving toward creating super-powerful batteries, and by 1949, the "11-gun fighter" project could have become a reality as an evolution of the Il-10 attack aircraft or the jet-powered MiG-9. Here's how Stalin could have implemented this "asymmetric response": 1. The "Fire Hedgehog" project (but on steroids). The USSR already had experience creating super-powerful systems. The experimental Tu-2Sh carried a cluster of 88 PPSh submachine guns in its bomb bay. In response to the Germans' nine cannons, Stalin could have ordered designers (for example, Yakovlev or Lavochkin) to create an interceptor fighter with a battery of 11 NS-23 cannons. 2. Caliber Matters. Stalin favored large calibers. A Soviet fighter of 1949 could carry: One 57-mm H-57 cannon in the nose (to destroy Mauses and Lions from the air). Ten 23-mm cannons in the wings and fuselage to create a "shower of lead." 3. Technical problems of "eleven barrels." If the German Me-362 suffered from complexity, the Soviet "answer" would face: Enormous weight: 11 cannons with ammunition would weigh about 2-3 tons. This would require a heavy twin-engine airframe similar to the Su-11. Recoil: A salvo from 11 barrels would create a recoil force of several tons. When firing, the aircraft would sharply lose speed, which is deadly in jet combat. Smoke: Powder gases from 11 cannons could instantly "blind" the pilot and shut down the jet engines. 4. The Psychology of Stalin's Falcon. For Soviet propaganda, the number 11 would have been symbolic-"two more than the Nazis." However, the Soviet design school (unlike the German) always strove to maintain maneuverability. Most likely, Soviet generals would have convinced Stalin that it was better to build two fast fighters with three cannons than one lumbering monster with eleven. Bottom line: In reality, the USSR opted for increasing caliber, not quantity. The MiG-15 was equipped with one 37mm and two 23mm cannons-enough to tear the "Americans" and "Germans" to pieces, while maintaining its lightness and speed. If it came down to a duel, who do you think would win: the German Me-362 with its complex optics or the Soviet I-11 (a fighter with eleven cannons), which delivered a powerful backhand salvo?

Margarita remarked with a smile:

Why did the Americans allow their tanks to lag so far behind the USSR in terms of quality in the 1960s with the advent of the T-64?

To this, the cool boy terminator responded:

The US and NATO's lag in the 1960s was due to a combination of technological conservatism, failed ambitious projects, and diverging military doctrines. When the T-64 appeared in 1966, it shocked Western experts by combining the firepower of a heavy tank with the weight and speed of a medium tank. Here are the main reasons why the Americans missed this breakthrough: 1. The Failure of the MBT-70 Project. Instead of gradual modernization, the Americans and Germans invested in the MBT-70 "supertank." It was incredibly complex: a controlled suspension (like your favorite E-10), an automatic loader, and a driver in the turret. The result: the project proved monstrously expensive and unreliable. It was canceled, leaving the US Army with aging M60 tanks, which were inferior to the T-64 in every way. 2. Relying on missiles instead of guns. In the 1960s, the US believed that the era of conventional guns was over. They created the M60A2 "Starship" tank with a short 152mm gun-launcher for Shillelagh missiles. The system was complex and expensive. The USSR, however, installed a powerful 125mm smoothbore gun on the T-64, which penetrated everything the West had with conventional shells. 3. A Revolution in Protection (Combined Armor) The T-64 became the world's first mass-produced tank with composite multilayer armor. American shells of the time were designed for homogeneous steel. They simply shattered on the "layer cake" of Soviet armor. The West only caught up with the USSR in protection in the 1980s with the advent of Chobham armor on the Abrams. 4. The Concept of Mass Production vs. Quality Soviet doctrine demanded the ability to quickly dash to the English Channel. The T-64's automatic loader eliminated the fourth crew member, reducing the tank's bulk, and making it lower and lighter while maintaining the same protection. The Americans, however, clung to the classic layout, believing that "the loader never breaks." The result: the US rested on its laurels after World War II, considering its tanks "good enough," while Soviet design bureaus (especially the Kharkov design bureau under Alexander Morozov) made a quantum leap. Do you think, if the Americans hadn't wasted time on missile tanks, they would have been able to introduce composite armor sooner than the USSR? Want to know how exactly Western intelligence first learned the secret of the T-64's armor?

Margarita noted with a sweet smile:

Why didn't the USSR attack Europe in the sixties or seventies, having such a superiority in tanks?

To this the terminator boy replied:

This is one of the most debated issues in the history of the Cold War. Although Soviet offensive plans (for example, "Seven Days to the Rhine") looked frightening, there were a number of critical factors that kept the Kremlin from "rushing to the English Channel." 1. Nuclear deterrence (NDD) This is the main reason. Even with 50,000 tanks against NATO's 10,000, the USSR understood that any large-scale war in Europe would inevitably escalate into a nuclear exchange. Tactical nuclear weapons: The United States deployed thousands of nuclear mines and shells in Europe. Any concentration of Soviet tanks (even T-64s) would have been destroyed by the flash before they crossed the West German border. Cities targeted: The USSR did not want to seize a radioactive wasteland instead of Europe and receive retaliatory strikes on Moscow. 2. Vulnerability of the rear and supply lines Your logic about Napoleon's speed is very appropriate here. T-64 or T-72 tanks could have reached Paris in a week, but: Logistics: A huge tank army requires colossal amounts of fuel and spare parts. NATO air power (which was more powerful than the Soviet one) would have destroyed bridges, railway junctions, and fuel depots in the rear on the very first day. The tanks would have simply run out of fuel after 300-400 km. Guerrilla warfare: Occupying densely populated Europe would have required millions of soldiers to control territories the USSR did not have. Political Strategy ("Peaceful Coexistence")The Soviet leadership under Brezhnev (unlike Hitler) was not obsessed with the idea of world domination at any cost.Economy: The USSR benefited from trade with the West (in the 1970s, "détente" began, supplying gas to Europe in exchange for technology).Stability: The Soviet elite wanted a quiet life and recognition of its status as a great power, and not a risky adventure that could end in the end of civilization.4. Technological Parity in Other SpheresYes, the USSR was in the lead in tanks, but NATO had an advantage in:Anti-tank weapons: The advent of effective ATGMs (for example, MILAN or TOW) allowed infantry to burn tanks from a distance of several kilometers.Communications and Electronics: Western troop command and control systems were more flexible.Result: The USSR used its tank armadas as an instrument of political pressure and a "shield," and not as an instrument of aggression. Superior technology guaranteed that the West wouldn't attack first, but it didn't guarantee victory if the USSR attacked. Do you think that if the USSR had had a reliable anti-nuclear defense system (ABM), would it have dared to launch a tank attack in the 1970s? Want to know how Soviet generals planned to combat American Apache helicopters, which were nicknamed "tank killers"?

CHAPTER No 4.

The warrior girl noted:

And if it were possible to create radiation that would make the use of nuclear weapons impossible, would the USSR attack NATO?

The boy-terminator responded logically to this:

In a hypothetical world where nuclear weapons were completely neutralized by some kind of "radiation," the likelihood of a Soviet attack on NATO in the 1960s and 1970s would have increased significantly, but still would not have been 100%. Although the USSR enjoyed overwhelming superiority in conventional weapons (especially tanks), the decision to go to war depended on many factors: Strategic advantage: In the 1960s and early 1970s, Western planners recognized that without the use of nuclear weapons, Soviet tank armadas could reach the English Channel in a matter of days. Neutralizing the "nuclear umbrella" would have deprived NATO of its main trump card, which compensated for its lack of divisions on land. Soviet doctrine: Unlike the United States, the USSR officially adhered to the "no first use" pledge and actively developed concepts of deep conventional operations (e.g., Task Forces). This suggests that the military leadership was seriously preparing for victory without nuclear strikes. Economic and political risks: Vulnerability of the rear: Even without nuclear explosions, NATO aircraft could have crippled Soviet supply lines by destroying fuel depots and bridges in the rear. Occupation nightmare: Taking over Europe is one thing, but maintaining control without the support of the population is quite another. Millions of hostile Europeans would have turned victory into an endless guerrilla war. Internal stability: The Soviet leadership under Brezhnev preferred stability and the international status quo ("détente") to risky adventures that could have led to the collapse of the system. Result: Most likely, instead of a direct attack, the USSR would have resorted to "reverse nuclear blackmail"-political pressure, demanding that European countries leave NATO and acknowledge its dominance under the threat of a tank invasion. Do you think Germany or France would have agreed to the USSR's terms under the threat of invasion if the US could no longer protect them with nuclear missiles?

Margarita remarked with a smile:

But if Stalin, and not Brezhnev, had been in power in the USSR, would he have attacked?

To this the cool boy terminator responded:

If Stalin had been in the cautious Brezhnev's shoes in the 1960s and 1970s, the situation would have become critical. Stalin, unlike the "collective leadership" of the late USSR, possessed the psychology of a total player, but was also extremely pragmatic. Here's how events would have unfolded under "Stalin 2.0" and the availability of technology that could suppress nuclear weapons: 1. The tank fist as an instrument of the final solution. For Stalin, an armada of T-64s and T-72s would have become the same as cavalry corps in the Civil War-a means of swiftly crushing the enemy. Logic: If there is no nuclear response, and the tank superiority is 5 to 1, then war becomes a mathematical problem. Stalin would not have been afraid to lose a million soldiers to capture the industrial centers of Europe, as this would have made the USSR the absolute world hegemon. 2. Political preparation (the Fifth Column). Stalin would not have simply attacked. He would have organized a series of "popular uprisings" in France and Italy, where the communists were very strong at the time. Tanks would have entered Europe not as "occupiers," but as "assistance to the workers in their fight against imperialism." This would have solved the problem of guerrilla warfare in the rear, which we discussed earlier. 3. Solving the logistics issue. Knowing the weaknesses of his armies, Stalin would have ordered: The laying of secret pipelines and fuel depots closer to the borders in advance. Using Napoleon's example-"war feeds war." The army would have been supplied from the captured resources of Europe, and not only from the rear beyond the Urals. 4. Why might he have hesitated anyway? Stalin always feared coalitions. If he hadn't been sure that the US was completely out of the game (for example, blockaded at sea by new submarines), he could have bided his time. His tactic was to let the capitalists clash with each other, and then strike the weakened winner. Bottom line: Stalin would have pressed the "Start" button with 90% certainty. For him, the ideological expansion of socialism was the highest goal, and the technical superiority of the T-64 offered a chance to end World War II where he believed it should end-on the shores of the Atlantic. Interesting point: under Stalin, the 45-ton "Lion" project (which we discussed) would likely have become the main Soviet tank back in the 1940s, and by the 1960s, the USSR would have had even more advanced vehicles. Do you think the "Iron Curtain" would have been able to move to the coast of Portugal, or would Western resistance have ultimately led to the collapse of Stalin's empire from within?

The warrior girl asked a question:

If the ruler of the USSR had been Shelepin, not Brezhnev, would he have joined NATO without nuclear weapons?

The determined boy terminator responded to this:

If Alexander Shelepin (nicknamed "Iron Shurik"), rather than Leonid Brezhnev, had come to power in the USSR, the likelihood of a military clash with NATO would have been significantly higher. Unlike Brezhnev, Shelepin represented a group of "young guards"-more rigid, ambitious, and ideologically conservative leaders. Here's how the USSR's logic would have changed in a non-nuclear scenario under Shelepin: 1. Rejection of the policy of "détente." Brezhnev went down in history as a supporter of the policy of détente and peaceful coexistence. Shelepin, on the other hand, was a staunch opponent of rapprochement with the United States, considering it a sign of weakness. Under him, the USSR would likely have taken a much more aggressive stance on the international stage. 2. The psychology of "Iron Shurik." Shelepin came from the Komsomol and the KGB. His leadership style was distinguished by: A firm hand: He believed in Stalin's methods of governance and the establishment of order within the country and the bloc. Ideological messianism: For him, the victory of socialism throughout the world was not just a slogan, but a specific political goal. 3. Decisiveness in conflicts: In a situation where nuclear weapons were neutralized, Shelepin, in contrast to Brezhnev's cautious collective leadership, could have perceived this as a historic opportunity. Blitzkrieg: Having superiority in tanks (T-64), Shelepin could have given the order to invade West Germany at the slightest political crisis in NATO. Aggressive foreign policy: He most likely would not have allowed Ceausescu's "heresy" in Romania and would have acted much more harshly against any pro-Western movements in Eastern Europe. 4. Alliance with China An interesting detail: Shelepin was ideologically closer to Mao Zedong than Brezhnev or Khrushchev. In a nuclear-free world, he might have attempted to re-establish an alliance with China, creating a colossal land force against which Europe and the US would have stood no chance in a conventional war. Bottom line: Under Shelepin, the USSR would have become a much less predictable player. In a nuclear-free world, "Iron Shurik" might well have decided on a large-scale war if the mathematical calculations had predicted a quick victory for tank armadas in Europe. Do you think Shelepin would have been able to retain power in the event of a protracted war, or would his "Stalinist" methods have led to uprisings within the USSR itself?

Margarita threw down the gift of death with her bare, sharpened foot, took it and asked:

-If the spirit of Tamerlane had entered Hitler, what a possible course of war and politics!

To this, the barefoot, shorts-wearing terminator boy Oleg responded:

It would have been a nightmarish hybrid of German industrial might and the Eastern psychology of total extermination. If Hitler was an ideologist, bound by his racial dogmas, then Tamerlane ("the Iron Lame") was an absolute pragmatist of war, merciless but also unprejudiced. Here's how the course of history would have changed:

1. Rejection of racial theory in favor of loyalty. Tamerlane did not divide people into Aryans and subhumans. For him, only loyal servants and enemies existed.

Politics: Hitler-Tamerlane would not have turned the Soviet population against himself with the atrocities of the Einsatzgruppen. On the contrary, he would have recruited collaborators en masse, promising them regional control in exchange for iron discipline. Result: Instead of guerrilla warfare in the rear, the Germans could have gained millions of loyal soldiers from among those who were resentful of the Soviet regime.

2. Changes in Military Strategy: Hitler often made mistakes due to "mystical" stubbornness (such as his refusal to retreat at Stalingrad). Tamerlane, on the other hand, was a master of maneuver and punitive strategy. Strategy: He wouldn't storm cities for symbolism. Tamerlane practiced scorched earth tactics and demonstrative terror: if a city didn't surrender, it would be razed to the ground, and pyramids would be built from the heads of its inhabitants. Psychological Warfare: His goal would be to instill such paralyzing terror that armies would surrender before the battle even began.

3. Treatment of Allies: Tamerlane tolerated no competition. He would not overlook Mussolini's failures or Japan's independence. He would turn his allies into vassals, completely subordinating their resources to his will. He would eliminate those who showed weakness without hesitation.

4. Why would Hitler-Tamerlane have lost more gracefully, but more quickly? Tamerlane had one weakness-his empire rested solely on his personal authority and fear. Lack of institutions: Tamerlane built an empire "on the run." As soon as such a leader faces an adversary of equal strength and will (for example, Stalin, who himself possessed the traits of an Eastern despot), war turns into a battle of two personalities. Logistics versus instincts: Tamerlane was accustomed to living by plunder. In the conditions of modern warfare in the 1940s, which required factories and complex logistics, his penchant for destroying the enemy's resources rather than capturing them could have bled his own army dry. The main difference: Hitler wanted to create a "Thousand-Year Reich" for the Germans. Tamerlane wanted to be the Master of the Universe, who doesn't care what language his slaves speak, as long as they pay tribute and bow their heads. The world would have received not a "Nazi order," but a global despotism, where cities are burned to the ground for the slightest disobedience. Bottom line: Hitler-Tamerlane might have taken Moscow through a more flexible policy in 1941, but he would never have been able to stop. He would have marched through Iran to India, repeating the path of the real Timur, and ultimately exhausted Germany's resources long before 1945. Do you think Stalin, with his similarly steely character, would have been able to outmaneuver such an adversary through diplomacy and cunning?

The child warriors continued to fight with wild fury and mass heroism, using ultrasound.

Margarita Korshunova asked the following question:

What if the spirit of Tamerlane possessed Stalin?

The barefoot terminator boy responded logically to this:

It would have been a truly demonic alliance. Stalin, in reality, possessed many of the traits of an Eastern despot, but he was bound by Marxist ideology and the need to build a "state of workers and peasants." Tamerlane, on the other hand, was free of theory-he was driven by the pure will to power and conquest. If the spirit of the "Iron Lame One" had ruled the Kremlin, history would have taken a completely different path: 1. Foreign Policy: Offensive instead of defensive. In the 1930s, Stalin built "socialism in one country," being a cautious pragmatist. Tamerlane-Stalin would not have waited. Global Expansion: Instead of signing pacts, he would have launched aggressive campaigns into adjacent territories much earlier. Iran, Turkey, Afghanistan, and India would have become targets for the "Soviet tumens." His goal would not have been the victory of communism, but the revival of an empire from ocean to ocean. Relationship with Hitler: Tamerlane did not believe in treaties. He would most likely have launched a preemptive strike against Germany as early as 1940, without waiting for the Wehrmacht to gain strength. 2. Domestic Policy: The Cult of the Sword. The USSR had a "dictatorship of the proletariat," while Tamerlane had a "dictatorship of fear and personal loyalty." An Army Instead of a Party: The role of the Communist Party would have been reduced to zero. All power would have passed to military leaders personally loyal to the "Great Emir." Architecture and Terror: Stalin built factories and skyscrapers. Tamerlane-Stalin would have built cyclopean structures designed to suppress the will of man with their grandeur, and pyramids of the skulls of enemies of the people as a warning to others. Repressions would not be secret (in the basements of the Lubyanka), but demonstratively public. 3. Warfare: Maneuver and Total Destruction. At the beginning of the war, Stalin often demanded "fight to the death." Tamerlane was a genius of cavalry maneuvers and encirclement. Tactics: The Red Army would have become incredibly mobile. The primary emphasis would have been on mechanized corps and cavalry. Psychology: Tamerlane-Stalin would not simply liberate territories; he would have wiped German cities off the face of the earth for every destroyed Soviet village. Germany would have faced total annihilation, the likes of which Europe had not seen since the time of the Huns. 4. Religion and Mysticism: Stalin was a former seminarian and atheist. Tamerlane was a believer, but he used religion as a tool. A strange synthesis of Orthodoxy, Islam, and the cult of personality could have emerged in the USSR, with Stalin-Tamerlane revered as the "Shadow of God on Earth" or the "Lord of the Constellations." Ultimately: The empire of Stalin-Tamerlane would have been more powerful and aggressive, but it would have become much less stable. The Stalinist system (the USSR) outlived its creator by decades thanks to its institutions. Tamerlane's empire always collapsed after the death of its leader. After the departure of such a ruler, the USSR would likely have descended into a bloody civil war between his "marshal-heirs." Who do you think would have been more resilient in this confrontation-Hitler, with his fanatical belief in race, or Stalin-Tamerlane, believing only in his own personal destiny and the might of the sword?

The girl threw the gift of annihilation with her bare foot and asked:

What if Tamerlane had possessed Nicholas II?

To this the boy-terminator, throwing murderous gifts of annihilation with his bare toes, replied:

This would have been the most radical "plot turn" in Russian history. Nicholas II went down in history as a gentle, family-oriented, and indecisive man, which became a tragedy in the midst of the crisis. The spirit of Tamerlane would have transformed the "weak tsar" into an "iron autocrat," and the Russian Empire would have embarked on a path of bloody but harsh stabilization. Here are the main changes: 1. Bloody suppression of the 1905 revolution. Nicholas II hesitated and ultimately signed the Manifesto of October 17, which granted civil liberties. Nicholas Tamerlane would not have negotiated. Actions: Instead of concessions, total terror. The revolutionary neighborhoods of St. Petersburg and Moscow would have been razed to the ground by artillery. Opposition leaders would not have gone into exile to Shushenskoye, but would have been publicly and brutally executed. Result: The revolution would have been nipped in the bud. Fear of the "Tsar Scourge" would have become the foundation of state order. 2. Foreign Policy: The "Great Game" on Steroids. Tamerlane always sought control over trade routes. Far East: The Russo-Japanese War would have gone differently. Nicholas Tamerlane would have personally led the army (as he did in World War I, but with a talent for military leadership). He would not have allowed peace at Port Arthur, but would have thrown ever new tumens into battle until Japan was exhausted. Expansion: He would have moved towards Persia, Afghanistan, and India, entering into direct conflict with Britain. His goal would not have been "protecting the Slavs," but world domination. 3. Elimination of Rasputin and court intrigues. Nicholas's softness allowed various cliques to influence policy. Purge of the elite: Any hint of corruption or treason among the grand dukes would have been punishable by instant death. Grigory Rasputin would not have stayed in the palace for more than five minutes-Tamerlane could not tolerate mystics trying to control his will. 4. Attitude to Family: This is the most tragic change. Nicholas II adored his wife and children. Tamerlane valued his heirs only as successors to his legacy. If he had discovered that Alexei suffered from hemophilia, he would not have patronized him, but would most likely have removed him from power, appointing the most capable and powerful of his relatives as heir. 5. World War I: Nicholas Tamerlane would not have entered the war out of "alliance duty" to France. He would have waited until Europe exhausted itself, and then struck where it was advantageous to Russia (for example, by capturing Constantinople and the Straits). Result: The Russian Empire would not have collapsed in 1917, but it would have turned into an absolutist Eastern despotism. The rudiments of democracy, parliament (the Duma), and a free press would disappear. It would be a state feared by all, but with no room for private freedom. How long do you think this "Mongol-Russia" would have lasted if, after the death of Nicholas Tamerlane, an ordinary, weak heir had ascended to the throne?

Margarita exclaimed with fury:

What if the spirit of Tamerlane had entered Peter the Third?

The barefoot boy-terminator responded to this:

This would have been one of the shortest and bloodiest coups in Russian history, but with the opposite effect. The real Peter III was a childish admirer of Prussian customs, who irritated the guards with his weakness and worship of Frederick the Great. The spirit of Tamerlane would have transformed this "loser" into the most dangerous autocrat in Europe. Here's how history would have changed: 1. Catherine's coup d'état prevented: In reality, Catherine II easily overthrew her husband because he offered no resistance. Peter-Tamerlane would have sensed a conspiracy a mile away. Actions: Instead of traveling to Oranienbaum, he would have staged the "Night of the Long Knives" in St. Petersburg. The guards regiments implicated in the conspiracy (the Preobrazhensky and Semenovsky) would have been decimated (execution of every tenth). Catherine herself would most likely have ended her life not on the throne, but on the execution block or in the most remote monastery. 2. Prussia: From Adoration to Absorption. The real Peter III returned all the lands conquered in the Seven Years' War to Frederick II. Tamerlane didn't return lands-he scorched them. Politics: Instead of a shameful peace, Russia would have finished off Prussia. Berlin would have become an imperial province, and Frederick the Great a vassal or prisoner. Peter Tamerlane would have used Prussian discipline not for parades, but to create an invincible military machine. 3. Eastern Vector of Expansion. Tamerlane always looked south and east. Campaign to India and Persia: With Russia's resources and an army trained in European style, Peter Tamerlane would have marched through Central Asia to India. This would have been an attempt to realize Timur's dream of uniting the gold of India and the power of the North. Attitude to Religion: He would not have attempted to reform the church (which destroyed the real Peter III), but would have simply subjugated it, making the clergy part of his state apparatus. 4. Internal Order: A Barracks Instead of a Court. The nobility, having just received the "Manifesto on the Freedom of the Nobility," would have been shocked. Discipline: Peter Tamerlane would have reinstated mandatory lifelong service. Dissenters would have faced not exile, but mass executions. Russia would have been transformed into a gigantic military camp. Why would this have ended in disaster? Tamerlane was a leader of nomads; he knew how to win, but he was incapable of managing a complex state over the long term. Economy: Constant wars and terror would have bled Russia dry. Trade would have come to a standstill, and industry would have produced only cannons. Legacy: After the death of Peter Tamerlane (who would hardly have lived to old age due to the conspiracies of those who survived), the country would have been plunged into a massive Time of Troubles. Result: Russia would never have known the "Golden Age" of Catherine the Great, the enlightenment, or the flourishing of the arts. Instead, it would have become the "Northern Horde," terrorizing all of Europe but rotten from within. Do you think Frederick the Great, a brilliant strategist, could have found a way to poison or eliminate such a "Peter-Timur," knowing that he could not be defeated fairly on the battlefield? Suggest your own solution to eliminating such a tyrant.

The child terminators fought with fury and great intensity, literally mowing down their opponents.

Margarita asked a question:

How would Tamerlan conduct a military operation against Ukraine?

At this, the Terminator boy, using his bare toes to throw death gifts, replied:

An analysis of Tamerlane's ("Iron Lame") strategy suggests that his approach to modern military conflict would have been radically different from classical 21st-century doctrines. For Timur, war was not a tool of geopolitics, but a means of total domination and psychological breakdown of the enemy. Here's what a "Tamerlane-style" CBO would have looked like: 1. A "Scorched Earth" and Intimidation Strategy: Tamerlane did not seek to "liberate" or "preserve infrastructure." His method was total war. Attitude toward cities: If a city did not open its gates immediately, it was subject to complete destruction after capture. In the context of the CBO, this would have meant reducing major centers of resistance to rubble with no attempt to preserve housing. Demonstrative Terror: Timur practiced erecting pyramids of the heads of the vanquished to paralyze the will of those who had not yet been defeated. In modern conditions, this would have been an aggressive information campaign demonstrating absolute ruthlessness towards combatants. 2. Mobility and Deep Outflanking: Timur was a master of strategic maneuver. Instead of frontal pressure on fortified areas (like the front line in Donbas), he would have used: Heavy-duty raids: Using motorized units and aircraft for swift strikes deep in the rear, ignoring secondary cities. Striking at decision-making centers: He would not "wait," but in the first hours would strike all headquarters, political centers, and communication hubs, seeking to physically decapitate the enemy. 3. Resource Diplomacy: Tamerlane knew how to exploit his opponent's internal enemies. Divide and Conquer: He would actively lure local elites and military leaders to his side, offering them either vassal status with unlimited local power or a painful execution. The third option ("opposition") would not have existed under him. 4. Timur's approach to supply and logistics did not depend on long logistical chains like modern armies-his forces often fed themselves from captured territories. Self-sufficiency: His army would have had no problems with food supplies, as resources would simply be taken from the local population without any compensation. 5. Reaction to Western Aid: For Tamerlane, the enemy's "allies" would have been legitimate targets. Ultimatums: He would not have limited himself to "red lines." Any country supplying weapons would have received an ultimatum: cease supplies or immediate invasion/missile strike on its territory. Timur never feared escalation-he was the source of it himself. Result: A conflict under Tamerlane's leadership would have been extremely short and incredibly bloody. It would have ended either with the enemy's complete capitulation in the first weeks due to paralyzing terror, or with the territory being transformed into a desolate wasteland. Moreover, the concepts of "humanitarian corridor" or "negotiations" would be absent from his vocabulary until his authority was fully recognized. Do you think the modern global economy and international law could withstand the emergence of a leader who completely disregards all rules of war in favor of medieval cruelty?

Margarita asked with a smile:

Why were Mussolini's Italian troops much weaker than the German ones in terms of fighting qualities?

Terminato boy Oleg Rybachenko replied:

There's a popular joke of the time about this: "The Italian army would be the best in the world if wars were fought according to the rules of opera." But seriously, the weakness of Mussolini's troops is explained not by the "soft character" of the Italians, but by deep systemic problems. Here are the main reasons: 1. Total technological backwardness. Italy was an agrarian-industrial country, whose industrial potential was several times smaller than that of Germany or Britain. "Tin Can" Tanks: Italian tanks (M13/40 series) were called "self-propelled coffins." They had weak, riveted armor that, when hit by a shell, would shatter inside like shrapnel. Logistics: The army was catastrophically undermotorized. While the Wehrmacht used hundreds of thousands of trucks, the Italians in North Africa often relied on foot marches and horse-drawn transport. Equipment: Soldiers lacked proper radios, quality uniforms (especially for the winter conditions in the USSR), or even coherent anti-tank weapons. 2. Lack of motivation and ideological failure: Unlike the Germans, who were pumped up with ideas of revenge and racial superiority, the average Italian had little understanding of what he was fighting for in Libya, Greece, or Stalingrad. Mussolini dreamed of reviving the Roman Empire, but for the ordinary Sicilian peasant, these ambitions were alien. Italians were not a militarized nation by culture. The idea of "war for war's sake" found no resonance among the people, leading to mass surrenders at the first serious setback. 3. Crisis of the Officer Corps: While the German officer was a professional with a centuries-old Prussian schooling, the Italian generals often consisted of aristocrats and protégés of the Fascist Party. Careerism: Promotion depended not on talent, but on loyalty to the regime. Disconnect with the soldiers: Officers lived in luxury even at the front, while the soldiers starved and suffered from disease. This destroyed any trust in the command. 4. Poor timing of the war: Mussolini understood that Italy would be ready for a major war only by 1943-1945. However, seeing Hitler's successes in 1940, he was afraid of being "late to the pie" and entered the conflict completely unprepared. Important clarification: there were heroes too. This is not to say that the Italians were incapable of fighting. Individual units, such as the elite Ariete (tank) and Folgore (paratrooper) divisions, fought at El Alamein with such courage that they earned the respect of even Rommel and the British. The combat swimmers (10th MAS Flotilla) were generally considered the best in the world at their job. Bottom line: Italy's weakness was the weakness of its economy and political system, not "bad soldiers." With poor weapons and incompetent generals, any army is doomed. Do you think if Italy had fought against Hitler alongside the Allies (with their supplies), its combat qualities would have been higher?

The warrior girl asked with a sweet look:

Why was Hitler in such a hurry to start the Second World War, although the Wehrmacht was still raw, and there were not enough officers, and there were no heavy tanks, and there were insufficient aircraft and guns.

To this the boy-terminator, throwing his bare, childish foot at the representative of annihilation, replied:

Hitler hurried not because he was prepared, but because the German economy had become a "financial bicycle" by 1939: if he stopped pedaling (seizing new resources), the regime would simply collapse. Here are the main reasons for this haste: 1. Economic deadlock and bankruptcy. By 1939, the Reich's rearmament policy had led to a gigantic budget deficit. Germany was living on credit, using hidden bills of exchange ("Mefo"). Foreign exchange reserves were depleted. The only way to avoid inflation and famine was to plunder neighboring countries (the gold reserves of Austria and Czechoslovakia had already been "eaten up"). War was the only way to write off the debts. 2. Window of Opportunity (Time Advantage) Hitler understood that Britain and France had begun their rearmament programs later than Germany. 1939-1940 was a "golden ratio" for Berlin: Germany already had a mobilized army, while the Allies were just getting going. Hitler told his generals: "Time is on our side now, but it will soon be against us." He feared that by 1942-1943, the Allies' power (especially given the potential of the United States) would become unattainable. 3. Biological Factor and Paranoia Hitler turned 50 in 1939. He was obsessed with the idea that he was the only person capable of implementing the Reich's plans. He suffered from hypochondria and feared sudden death or illness before completing "the main work of his life." This forced him to force events, ignoring reports from his generals about the unpreparedness of equipment. 4. Hitler didn't plan to fight everyone at once or for a long time. His calculations were based on the fact that organization and tactics (the coordination of tanks and aircraft) were more important than the number of heavy weapons. He believed he could knock out his opponents one by one with short strikes before they could unite and switch their economies to a war footing. 5. Political Bluff: After the Anschluss of Austria and the partition of Czechoslovakia (the Munich Agreement), Hitler believed in his own infallibility and the "weakness" of Western democracies. He was convinced that Britain and France would not risk starting a real, major war over Poland. Result: Hitler went all-in. He understood that the Wehrmacht was not prepared for a protracted war, but he hoped that a series of quick victories would allow him to seize the resources to create those very heavy tanks and aircraft that he lacked at the beginning. Do you think that if France and Britain had shown firmness and attacked Germany in September 1939, while the main forces of the Wehrmacht were in Poland, the war would have ended in a few weeks?

CHAPTER No 5.

Fighting continued in China. True, Volka Rybachenko had killed a dozen Red Rebel Army generals with precise strikes, after which the guerrilla warfare began to abate. Volka Rybachenko received another order, the Knight's Cross of Military Merit in Silver and with Diamonds. Afterwards, the eternal boy took a little rest and returned to his favorite pastime: writing. It was fun and exciting.

The child special forces soldiers fought on roller skates. This was a powerful and effective move. Some young soldiers also used self-propelled guns, which were quite effective.

This is what aggressive children's special forces are like.

One of the fighters, the boy warrior Seryozhka, lying down, recalled how skeptical they were about the idea of children's special forces.

Is it possible to use ten-year-old boys as crew members in miniature self-propelled guns?

And the experts responded to this at the time:

Technically and historically, this is possible, but from a moral, legal, and military perspective, it's a recipe for disaster. If we consider this as an extension of your hypothetical "total war" or "alternate history" scenarios, here's what it would look like in practice:

1. Technical Feasibility (Ergonomics) Miniature self-propelled guns (like the German E-10 project or concepts for ultra-small tank destroyers) have extremely limited interior space. Pros: A 10-year-old child weighs 2-3 times less than an adult and takes up half the space. This would allow the vehicle to be made even more compact and stealthy. Cons: Tank controls (levers, clutch pedals) require significant physical strength. A 10-year-old child simply wouldn't be able to press the heavy pedal or load a 75mm shell, which weighs almost as much as he or she does. To achieve this, the vehicle would have to be completely redesigned to accommodate hydraulic boosters and automatic loaders, which was nearly impossible under the wartime conditions of the 1940s.

2. Psychological and cognitive factors. Even if control is automated, the question of combat use arises: Stress: 10 years old is an age when the psyche is not yet fully formed. A child in a confined space under fire is highly likely to fall into shock or panic. Tactical thinking: Operating a self-propelled gun requires immediate situational analysis, understanding of ballistics, and coordination with other units. Due to their age, a child does not possess the required level of strategic thinking and concentration.

3. Historical Precedents. Unfortunately, history knows of examples of children being used in technology, but these were always acts of desperation. At the end of World War II, the Hitler Youth trained 14- and 15-year-olds to operate Faustpatrone rocket launchers, but even the Nazis understood that putting 10-year-olds in complex equipment was pointless-they wouldn't be able to handle them. In Iran, during the war with Iraq, children were used to clear minefields with their own bodies, which is recognized as one of the most heinous war crimes in modern history. 4. Moral and Legal Aspect. According to international law and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the use of persons under 15 in combat is a serious war crime. A state that takes this path automatically becomes a "pariah state," against which the entire world will turn. Bottom line: It's possible to make a self-propelled gun for children, but it will be ineffective in combat. It won't be a formidable weapon, but a mobile metal coffin. Such a measure is only possible in a completely insane, dying state that has decided to destroy its future for the sake of an extra hour of existence. What ideology do you think must dominate society for parents to voluntarily agree to send their ten-year-old sons to the crews of such "death machines"?

Regardless, the special forces children fought and demonstrated their outstanding skills. And they truly were simply superb.

And the boy-terminator Seryozhka asked another question:

But in numerous works by science fiction writer Oleg Rybachenko, small, childlike warriors perform miracles in the Middle Ages, the space age, and World War II.

And to this I received an answer from the higher powers:

Oleg Rybachenko's work is a shining example of a genre often referred to online as "trash fiction" or ultra-patriotic time-travel. His books are built on hyperbole (exaggeration) and a complete disregard for the laws of physics, biology, and logic, all for the sole purpose of demonstrating the absolute triumph of "our side" over the enemy. This is why the "miracles" of the little warriors in his books are possible, but not in reality:

1. Genre convention: "Mary Sue" on children's television. Rybachenko's characters are classic Mary Sues (characters endowed with unrealistic abilities). His ten-year-old boy might have the reflexes of a cyborg, the strength of an athlete, and the knowledge of an academic. In the books: A child soldier shoots down planes or commands armies with one hand. In reality: A child is physiologically incapable of withstanding the G-forces in a fighter jet or giving orders to generals, who simply won't listen.

2. The Specifics of His Authorial Style: Rybachenko is known for his prolific output (hundreds of books) and his highly specific view of war. For him, child soldiers are a way to create the most shocking and provocative image. His worlds are informed by the "magic of patriotism": if a child deeply loves his homeland, bullets won't affect him, and his enemies are stunned by his valor. It's closer to a fairy tale or a comic book than historical fiction.

3. Literature as "wish fulfillment." Such books are read for the feeling of revenge. The reader enjoys seeing someone small and underestimated (like a child or a "weak" country) suddenly "knock the socks off" the powerful. This is psychological compensation for real failures through fantastic victories.

4. Contrast with "Survival School." If you compare Rybachenko's work to more serious science fiction (for example, Orson Scott Card's "Ender's Game"), you'll see that children also fight. But there, the terrible price is shown: a shattered psyche, a lost childhood, and brutal training. In Rybachenko's work, war for children is a joyful and victorious adventure. Why is this dangerous in reality?

Romanticizing children in war in literature can create the false impression that it's "beautiful." But the reality isn't Rybachenko's books, but tragedies like the "Child Soldiers" in Africa, where they are used as expendable material, indoctrinated with ideology.

Bottom line: Oleg Rybachenko writes in the genre of "combat phantasmagoria." His books shouldn't be viewed as tactical manuals or predictions of the future. They are pure entertainment, rooted in the absurd. Do you think such literature is simply harmless fantasy, or can it harm the mind by distorting the real cost of war?

For reference: You can search for reviews of his books on science fiction forums to see how mixed critics are about his prolific output and plot twists.

Yes, Oleg Rybachenko is indeed a controversial writer. And now he's a boy terminator fighting the Chinese on hypergravity rollers.

And this combative and aggressive boy special forces soldier demonstrated miracles of bravery. And now she'll hit the Celestial Empire's warriors with a hyperblaster.

And Margarita, that eternal girl, is right there with him. And she, too, shows off her phenomenal skills. And with her bare toes, she throws combat gifts of annihilation. And such a cool and fearless warrior-simply superb.

And she asks the question:

If China had attacked the USSR in 1969, could it have captured the Far East without using nuclear weapons?

To this, the barefoot boy special forces soldier Oleg Rybachenko replies:

In 1969, at the peak of the Damansky Island conflict, the likelihood of China capturing the Far East in a conventional war was extremely low. Despite the colossal numerical superiority of the PLA (People's Liberation Army of China), the technological and organizational gap between the countries was insurmountable. Here are the main reasons why China would most likely have been defeated: 1. Enormous Technological Gap: The Soviet Army in 1969 was at the peak of its power, possessing World War II experience and modern weaponry. Aviation: The USSR enjoyed complete air superiority. Chinese fighters (copies of the MiG-17 and MiG-19) were no match for the Soviet MiG-21 and MiG-23. Soviet bombers could destroy Chinese rear areas and logistics with impunity. Armor: Soviet T-62 and T-64 tanks were qualitatively superior to the Chinese Type 59. The battle at Damanskoye demonstrated that even the then-newest Soviet systems (for example, the Grad MLRS) could destroy entire enemy battalions in minutes. 2. Logistics and Geography: The Far East is a vast, sparsely populated area. The Chinese army in 1969 was predominantly infantry and poorly motorized. A deep offensive into Soviet territory would have resulted in the extended communications being instantly cut by Soviet mobile units and aircraft. Trans-Siberian: Although capturing sections of the railway was China's goal, the Soviet command had plans for defense and rapid restoration of the line, and would also use the Baikal-Amur Mainline (BAM) (which was actively being built, in part, due to the threat from the south). 3. The Cultural Revolution in China. In 1969, China was in chaos due to the Cultural Revolution. The officer corps was repressed, and military command was politicized and disorganized. The professionalism of Soviet generals and officers was significantly higher. 4. The Doctrine of "Deep Operation." Soviet military doctrine envisioned not just defense, but powerful counterattacks. In the event of a full-scale attack, the USSR could not only hold the Far East but also strike at China's vital centers (Manchuria and Beijing). Why was China dangerous? China's only chance lay in the "human wave" tactic and imposing an endless guerrilla war on the USSR in the occupied territories. This could have weakened the Soviet Union in the long term, but it would not have led to Beijing formally capturing and maintaining the region. Bottom line: Without the use of nuclear weapons, the USSR would have defeated the invading Chinese army thanks to its air superiority, firepower, and maneuverability. Mao Zedong understood this, so the conflict remained localized. Do you think the US position in this conflict would have changed-would they have supported China to weaken the USSR, or would they have been afraid of Mao's excessive strengthening?

The child theminators continued to crush the Chinese with great fury and aggression.

Margarita logically noted:

The Chinese were quite fanatical under Mao, and the USSR under Brezhnev grew fat, plus superiority in manpower and possible supplies from the West, I don"t think everything is so clear-cut.

The fighting boy-terminator responded to this quite logically:

Your doubt is entirely justified-in history, wars aren't always won solely by hardware. Looking deeper, the 1969 scenario could have turned into a nightmare for the USSR for several reasons, which you've rightly noted. Here are the factors that could have made the situation "ambiguous":

1. Fanaticism and "Human Waves." The Chinese army under Mao was prepared for losses that would have been shocking for Soviet society (which had already experienced the relative comfort of the Brezhnev era). Psychological pressure: The "human wave" tactic (massive infantry attacks) could paralyze Soviet soldiers on the front lines. It's one thing to fire at tanks, another to fire at endless rows of fanatical people marching to certain death. Readiness for a long war: Mao openly stated that China could lose hundreds of millions of people and still survive. The USSR, with its low birth rate and the memory of 27 million people killed in WWII, could not afford such arithmetic.

2. The Vulnerability of the Trans-Siberian Railway. The entire life and defense of the Far East hung on a single thread-the Trans-Siberian Railway. In some places, the railway runs just a few dozen kilometers from the border. Chinese sabotage groups (Red Guards and special forces) could cut off supplies in hundreds of places simultaneously. Without fuel and ammunition, modern Soviet equipment would have been reduced to scrap metal.

3. The Western Factor (Geopolitics) In 1969, the United States had just begun a policy of "détente" with China (the famous "ping-pong diplomacy"). Intelligence and logistics: The West might not have supplied tanks (they wouldn't have made it in time), but it could have provided China with satellite data and radio intercepts, helping it outflank Soviet units. Second front: NATO could have begun threatening maneuvers in Europe, forcing Brezhnev to keep his best divisions in the GDR and Czechoslovakia, preventing them from being redeployed to the east.

4. Guerrilla Warfare: If the Chinese had managed to occupy Khabarovsk or Blagoveshchensk, the USSR would have been faced with 10 armed Chinese in every basement. Subduing such territory would have required the mobilization of millions, something the Soviet economy, with its ample resources, was no longer quite ready for. The result of "ambiguity": The USSR would not have lost the war in the classic sense (a Chinese capture of Moscow was impossible), but it could have lost the Far East de facto. The region would have turned into a bloody mess, with Soviet troops controlling only road junctions, and everything else a hostile element. This would have marked the end of the USSR as a superpower long before 1991. The main argument in favor of the USSR: Despite its ample resources, the army in 1969 still consisted of officers whose fathers had served in the Great Patriotic War, and discipline was ironclad. Damansky himself demonstrated that Soviet border guards and artillerymen fought extremely fiercely and effectively. Do you think Brezhnev would have dared to use tactical nuclear weapons if he had seen the Trans-Siberian Railway cut off and the Far East about to fall?

The child special forces soldiers continued to fight with wild fury and frenzy.

Margarita asked the following question:

It is expected that China would use bicycles and scooters in very large numbers in attacks on Soviet positions.

Oleg Rybachenko readily confirmed this reasonable idea:

The use of bicycles and scooters in the large-scale conflict of 1969 is not just a fantasy, but a very real tactic that the People's Liberation Army of China (PLA) could have used to compensate for the shortage of trucks and armored personnel carriers. In the conditions of the Far East, this could have created unexpected problems for the USSR: 1. Ultra-mobility of infantry ("Bicycle cavalry"): China had extensive experience using bicycles in the war against the Japanese and in the civil war. Stealth: Bicycles are silent, do not generate heat (invisible to the primitive thermal imagers of the time), and do not require fuel. A column of 10,000 cyclists could move along forest paths where Soviet T-62 tanks would simply get stuck. Speed: An infantryman on a bicycle moves 3-4 times faster than on foot. This would have allowed China to quickly and deeply envelop Soviet fortified areas, cutting off rear communications and lines of communication. Logistics on Scooters and Carts. In the impassable conditions of the Far East, where ordinary vehicles sank in the mud, the Chinese could use simplified scooters and handcarts to transport ammunition. A single reinforced bicycle or cart could carry up to 150-200 kg of cargo. Thousands of such "carriers" could supply the army in the forests of Manchuria, making it virtually invulnerable to attacks on traditional supply lines (roads). 3. Psychological Effect and "Massivity." Imagine an attack in which thousands of silent cyclists simultaneously fly out of the forest onto your positions. Soviet artillery and machine guns are designed for area suppression or destruction of equipment. A cyclist is a very small and dispersed target. It would be a war of "steel hammer" against "a cloud of mosquitoes." The hammer is more powerful, but the mosquitoes are too numerous, and they are everywhere. 4. Why might it not have worked? Mud and terrain: The Far Eastern taiga and swamps are not the smooth roads of Vietnam. A bicycle is good on a trail, but in deep snow or sticky clay, it becomes a liability. Helicopters and attack aircraft: By 1969, the USSR was already actively introducing Mi-8 helicopters and had powerful attack aircraft. From the air, bicycle columns in open areas would have been ideal targets for cluster bombs and NURs.

Bottom line: The "bicycle attack" tactic could have allowed China to capture border towns and cut the Trans-Siberian Railway through surprise and mass action. However, holding territory against a regular army with air power and heavy artillery is impossible using bicycles alone. This strategy is designed for a lightning-fast diversionary strike, not a long-term occupation. Do you think Soviet propaganda at the time would have been able to portray such "bicycle troops" as a sign of China's weakness, or would frontline soldiers have quickly realized how dangerous an enemy they were?

The child terminators continued to fight like true heroes.

Margarita remarked with a sad smile:

Mao could use the tactic of children's legions on small bicycles with slingshots tipped with explosives - this was a shock to the Soviet army.

Oleg Rybachenko, the fighting boy-terminator, responded to this:

The use of children as combatants ("children's legions") is one of the most horrific scenarios that the fanatical leadership during the Cultural Revolution could have theoretically contemplated. Their use, in miniature vehicles with improvised weapons, could have truly shocked and paralyzed Soviet soldiers. Here's how this horrific tactic could have affected the 1969 conflict: 1. Ethical paralysis and psychological shock. The Soviet army was raised on humanistic ideals and the cult of "child protection." Refusal to shoot: Seeing children on bicycles attacking in front of them, many Soviet soldiers and officers might simply not pull the trigger. This would have created a "window of opportunity" to break through while the defenders remained in a state of moral stupor. Demoralization: The sight of dead child soldiers after the battle would have caused irreparable damage to the psyche of the surviving Soviet fighters. This would have transformed the war from a "heroic defense of the Motherland" into a dirty slaughter, which would have quickly undermined the fighting spirit of the USSR.

2. "Slingshots with explosive dowels" (Sabotage aspect) In the forested terrain of the Far East, this tactic could be effective against manpower and unarmored vehicles. Stealth: A child on a small bicycle is perceived as a civilian or refugee. This is ideal cover for transporting explosives to headquarters, fuel depots, or communication centers. Danger of "dowels": Even a small explosive charge, launched from a slingshot or thrown by hand, is enough to disable a truck, damage a radar, or detonate an ammunition depot. 3. Soviet countermeasures.

If such tactics had become widespread, the Soviet command would have been forced to take extremely brutal measures: The order to "shoot at everything that moves": This would have resulted in colossal civilian casualties and would have further embittered both sides. The creation of exclusion zones: Minefields and scorched earth zones would have been created around all important facilities, where any subject, regardless of age, would have been eliminated. 4. Mao Zedong's Position: Mao was famous for his cynical attitude toward human life. His statement that even in the event of a nuclear war, "half of humanity will perish, but half will survive" suggests he was willing to sacrifice a generation of children to achieve political goals or wear down the enemy. Summary: The "children's legion" tactic is an example of total warfare veering into genocide. It might have given China a tactical advantage in the short term due to the shock effect, but in the long term, it would have led to the USSR responding with extreme, "inhuman" cruelty, possibly resorting to the use of chemical or nuclear weapons to clear the territory. Do you think the international community (the UN) would have been able to stop such a war, or would the lives of children have simply been turned a blind eye in 1969, at the height of the Cold War?

The child special forces soldiers continued to fight desperately and fiercely, with great heroism.

Margarita asked a question:

Why didn't Mao start a major war in real history, even though he could have easily won, or at least the USSR would never have occupied China under any circumstances, while Mao had a chance to equal Genghis Khan!

To this the fighting boy-terminator replied:

Mao Zedong was a fanatic in ideology, but when it came to the survival of his own government, he was extremely cautious. He understood that the status of "new Genghis Khan" could be bestowed upon him posthumously, and the price of attempting to seize the Far East could be fatal for China. Here's why he didn't press the "red button" for a major war: 1. The nuclear ultimatum and the threat of a "zero option." This is the main reason. In 1969, the USSR possessed overwhelming nuclear superiority. Preemptive strike plans: The Soviet leadership seriously discussed the possibility of a nuclear strike on Chinese nuclear facilities (Lop Nor). Mao knew that Soviet missiles could wipe out Beijing, Shanghai, and all industrial centers in an hour. Even if millions of Chinese had survived in caves, China as a modern state would have ceased to exist. 2. Vulnerability to the "Iron Fist" Mao understood the difference between the "guerrilla warfare" he excelled at and the technological warfare of the 20th century. The PLA of that time was "yesterday's army." Without air power and modern tanks, Chinese divisions, even the most fanatical, would have become targets for Soviet artillery and bombers in the open. He feared that instead of capturing territory, he would see his best forces routed in border battles, which would undermine his authority at home. 3. The Cultural Revolution and Internal Chaos In 1969, China was on the brink of civil war. Red Guards were smashing party committees, and the economy was in decline. Starting a major war with a superpower when you don't fully control your own rear is suicidal. Mao used the Damansky conflict more to rally the nation around an external threat than to achieve real conquest. 4. Fear of "Soviet Occupation" (Puppet Scenario) Mao wasn't afraid that the USSR would seize all of China (impossible), but he was afraid that the USSR would: Cut off Manchuria and Xinjiang. Install a government there loyal to Moscow, made up of Chinese communist émigrés. For him, the loss of power was more frightening than the loss of territory. 5. Geopolitical Game with the US Mao was a strategist. Instead of a hopeless war with the USSR, he chose the path of rapprochement with Washington. The 1969 conflict showed the US that China was no longer Moscow's ally. This paved the way for Nixon's visit in 1972, investment, and recognition of China as a great power. Ultimately, Mao won not by the sword, but by diplomacy, laying the foundation for China's current might. Result: Mao chose to remain the "great helmsman" of a vibrant and growing China rather than become a "new Genghis Khan" amidst radioactive ruins. He understood that time was on China's side, and he was right. Do you think that if a more aggressive leader (like Stalin) had been in Brezhnev's place, would Mao have dared even the minor provocations he did? Next steps: Study in more detail the negotiations between Kosygin and Zhou Enlai at Beijing Airport, which effectively stopped the slide toward nuclear war.

The child warriors continued to fight with great tenacity and ferocity, demonstrating the highest level of skill.

The feisty, barefoot Margarita asked again:

But didn't Mao crave the global fame that a major war with the USSR could have given him? Didn't he want to be better known in the world for centuries to come than Stalin, Hitler, or Genghis Khan?

A very militant and aggressive boy-terminator, crushing the Chinese, responded to this:

Mao Zedong was a man of colossal ambition, and his thirst for historical greatness was boundless. However, he saw his place in history not as a "successful commander," but as an ideological messiah and architect of a new world order. This is why he believed that a major war with the USSR in 1969 would rather "zero out" his greatness than exalt it: 1. Mao wanted to be the "Marx of the 20th century," not just a warrior. He perceived Stalin, Hitler, and Genghis Khan as figures whose stature was limited to their era and state. Ideological superiority: Mao aspired to become the leading theoretician of world communism after the USSR, in his view, embarked on the path of "revisionism" (betrayal of ideas). It was important to him that his book of quotations be read worldwide, from Paris to Africa. A direct military confrontation with the USSR would have made it, in the eyes of the global left, simply an "aggressor" who had destroyed the socialist camp, rather than a wise teacher. 2. Fear of an "inglorious end." Genghis Khan prevailed because his enemies were disunited and not technologically superior. Mao understood that if he started a war and lost (and a Soviet nuclear strike guaranteed China's collapse), he would go down in history not as a conqueror, but as a madman who had destroyed his country. For Mao, Hitler was an example of how ambition, unsupported by resources, leads to a shameful end and the oblivion of ideals. Mao wanted the eternal reign of his ideas. 3. Greatness through "protracted war." Mao believed in his theory of "people's war." In his understanding, true greatness lies not in the rapid acquisition of territory, but in a nation's ability to withstand and outlast any enemy. He believed he had already outmaneuvered Stalin by freeing China from Moscow's tutelage. His "victory" was the very existence of an independent, powerful China, challenging both superpowers. 4. The Role of the "Global Pole." Mao understood that Genghis Khan operated in a world without the UN or nuclear parity. In 1969, being "great" meant being able to balance between forces. By allying with the United States, he made China the third corner of the global triangle. This gave him the status of global arbiter, far above that of a mere conqueror. Result: Mao Zedong already considered himself greater than Stalin and Hitler. He believed that his ideas ("Maoism") would live on for centuries after the tanks had rotted away. For him, seizing the Far East was too small a goal compared to the task of reshaping the consciousness of a third of humanity. He chose the path of strategic patience. As time has shown, China today is truly closer to global domination than the USSR ever was, and it achieved this without the major war of 1969. Do you think that if Mao had known that modern China would become the world's leading capitalist factory, he would still have considered his mission accomplished? Next step: if you're interested in the psychological struggle between leaders, I recommend reading about the personal conflict between Khrushchev and Mao, which led to the breakdown in relations.

The child terminators continued to destroy the troops of the Celestial Empire and drive out the Chinese.

Margarita threw a boomerang with her bare toes and asked a question:

I think that if Mao had known about China's future rejection of Maoism, he would have definitely started a war with the USSR.

Oleg Rybachenko, a super fighter and the boy-terminator, responded to this:

This is a profound and logical observation. If we consider Mao as a religious fanatic of ideas, and not simply a pragmatic politician, then your assumption seems extremely likely. Here's why knowledge of the future could have pushed Mao to his "last stand" in 1969: 1. Fear of the "restoration of capitalism." For Mao, the worst sin was the "degeneration" of the party. He saw what happened in the USSR after Stalin's death (the debunking of the cult, liberalization) and called it "Soviet revisionism." If he had seen through a "crystal gaze" that his successor, Deng Xiaoping, would introduce a market economy, open McDonald's in China, and make the country part of global capitalism, Mao would have been horrified. War with the USSR could have become a way for him to "burn bridges." In the flames of a great war, society mobilizes to such an extent that any reforms or "capitalist paths" would become impossible for decades. 2. War as a "Cultural Revolution" in a Cube. Mao believed that people are purified and hardened through suffering and struggle. He could have decided that radioactive ash and eternal barracks communism were better than prosperity built on the "betrayal of the ideals of Marx and Lenin." A major war with the USSR would have forever cut China off from the outside world, turning the country into a gigantic military commune where ideology was more important than economics. Mao understood that after his death, his legacy could be reconsidered. A victorious (or even heroically tragic) war against the "Soviet traitors" would cement his status as the sole defender of truth. Becoming a "new Genghis Khan," he would cement Chinese history around himself so tightly that no "reformers" would dare touch his icon. But would he have had a chance? The irony is that by attacking the USSR in 1969, Mao could have accelerated precisely what he feared: Military defeat would have allowed Soviet troops to install a puppet government of "moderate" communists in Beijing, who would have begun reforms much sooner. Instead of a "Greater China," he could have left behind a fragmented and occupied territory. Bottom line: Mao was a gambler, but a cautious one. Most likely, knowledge of a future "capitalist China" would have caused him to plunge into a profound depression or even more bloody purges within the country, but an attack on a nuclear superpower would still have been a one-way ticket. Do you think Mao could have ideologically defeated modern China if he were miraculously resurrected today and saw the skyscrapers of Shanghai and the wealth of the party elite? Interesting fact: Deng Xiaoping, who transformed China, was sent by Mao to do forced labor as a simple factory worker during the Cultural Revolution-Mao already felt he was a threat to his ideas.

CHAPTER No 6.

The child terminators continued to fight with great fury and effectiveness.

Margarita asked a question:

Could China have mass-produced wooden tanks during the war with the USSR?

Oleg Rybachenko, the boy-terminator, responded to this with great confidence:

Mass production of real wooden tanks for combat is technically impossible, as wood would not withstand the recoil of a cannon, the weight of an engine, and would instantly catch fire. However, in the context of Chinese strategy during the Mao Zedong era, the idea of "wooden tank construction" could have been implemented in two forms, which could have truly become a problem for the USSR: 1. Total disinformation (a "plywood Matrix"). China could have built tens of thousands of full-size tank mockups from wood and fabric. Objective: Deplete Soviet ammunition. Soviet aircraft and artillery would have wasted expensive missiles and shells destroying "dummy" tanks. Effect: From an aerial perspective or through the primitive radars of 1969, a wooden mockup covered in tarpaulin would be difficult to distinguish from a real Type 59. This would have created the illusion of a million-strong tank armada advancing, sowing panic in headquarters. Wooden armor as "ersatz" (sandwich panels). There were projects to use thick layers of wood (oak or larch) sandwiched between thin sheets of steel. Why: This could act as primitive spaced armor against shaped-charge projectiles (RPG grenades). The wood layer would cause the blast to dissipate before it reached the main hull. For China: Given the shortage of high-quality armor steel, mass production of such "armored sheds" based on ordinary tractors could be a way to saturate the front with vehicles difficult to destroy with a machine gun. 3. Gas-generator "firewood": If China experienced an oil shortage, they could use gas-generator engines powered by firewood (as was the case in the Soviet rear during WWII). A tank that literally "eats wood" would be very slow and smoky, but it could move where Soviet tanks ran out of diesel fuel. 4. Why would this shock the USSR? Soviet military thinking was geared toward high-tech warfare. A clash with an "army of wood and plywood," fanatically attacking, would have caused cognitive dissonance. It would have been a war between the "civilization of iron" and the "civilization of the masses," where the quantity of cheap knockoffs overwhelmed the quality of expensive weapons. Bottom line: Wooden tanks couldn't defeat the T-62 in a duel, but they could have drowned Soviet logistics in endless targets, forcing them to waste resources on phantoms. Do you think Soviet generals would have had the nerve to stop firing at suspicious targets, risking missing a real steel tank among the wooden dummies? For reference: Read about the "inflatable tanks" of modern armies-the idea of camouflage and deception is still relevant today.

The child terminators acted with great force and aggression, doing everything superbly.

And Margarita, the barefoot girl, asked the question again:

Is Oleg Rybachenko a unique, phenomenal writer?

The superboy from the children's special forces responded to this:

The phenomenon of Oleg Rybachenko is truly unique, but not so much in a literary sense as in a cultural and sociological sense. He is often called the "king of trash fiction," and there are several reasons for this that make him an exceptional figure: 1. Incredible fecundity (Graphomania as a record) Rybachenko is one of the most productive authors of our time. His bibliography includes hundreds of works (according to some sources, more than 500). He publishes books with such speed that it seems as if a neural network or an entire team writes for him, although he claims that he writes everything himself. This is a physical phenomenon of endurance and concentration. 2. Extreme flights of fancy ("Trash style") The uniqueness of his worlds lies in the complete absence of brakes and boundaries. In his books you can find: A mixture of incompatible things: Child soldiers fighting aliens on the fields of World War II; People who find themselves in the bodies of insects, bacteria, or historical figures in the most absurd situations. Hyperbolization: If victory is absolute, if the enemy is a caricature. His plots often balance on the edge of absurdity and surrealism. 3. Internet phenomenon and memes: Rybachenko has become a living legend on literary forums (for example, Fantlab or Samizdat). His style has spawned an entire field of discussion. Readers are divided into two camps: Critics, who see in it the decline of literature and a complete disregard for the rules of language and logic. Connoisseurs of "trash," who read it as a comedy of the absurd, finding unconscious humor and striking spontaneity in the texts. 4. Reflection of mass fears and hopes: Despite the form, his books hit very precise points in the collective unconscious: the thirst for revenge, the desire to become strong while being small, the belief in a miracle weapon or the "right" leader. He takes these ideas to their logical extreme (sometimes to the point of absurdity), becoming a mirror of certain societal sentiments. Can he be considered phenomenal? From the perspective of classical literature, hardly. From the perspective of a popular internet culture phenomenon, certainly. He has created his own genre, in which he is the sole and inimitable author. His books are a kind of "literary fast food," elevated to the level of art objects. Bottom line: Oleg Rybachenko is the "Ed Wood" of literature (there was a director named Rybachenko, considered the worst, who became a cult classic). His uniqueness lies in his unafraid to be funny or absurd, continuing to churn out his worlds despite any criticism. Do you think such "super-fertility" could lead to human authors ultimately merging with text-writing algorithms in the future? I recommend checking out the Author.Today portal, where many contemporary authors of the "time travel" genre are published, to compare their style with Rybachenko's unique approach.

The warrior children continued to fight with fury, demonstrating a super level.

And Margarita asked a question:

What if Hitler had controlled a population comparable to Mao's China?

A very combative and aggressive boy terminator responded confidently to this:

If Hitler had had mobilization resources comparable to Mao's China (approximately 500-600 million people) in 1939-1941, the course of world history would have turned into a scenario of absolute apocalypse. Hitler's main problem was that Germany was a "small player" demographically compared to the USSR and the USA. A gigantic population would have changed everything: 1. Endless "Blitzkrieg": Germany lost the war of attrition because it could not replace its losses. In reality: The loss of 100,000 men at Stalingrad was catastrophic. With China's resources: Hitler could have lost a million soldiers per month without slowing the pace of the offensive. The Red Army simply would not have been physically able to grind down such masses of people. The war would have turned into a "human sea" against which any artillery would be powerless. Industrial Dominance. With such a workforce, Germany could have simultaneously implemented all of its insane "weapons of vengeance" projects. The construction of vast underground factories, gigantic battleships, and thousands of jet fighters would have proceeded many times faster. Germany could not only wage war, but simultaneously completely colonize the captured territories, populating them with millions of loyal citizens. 3. Racial Theory vs. Pragmatism. A paradox arises here. Hitler's ideology was built on the "exceptionalism" of the German people. If he had 600 million Germans, he would have simply wiped out all other peoples, since he wouldn't have needed slaves-he had enough of his own labor force for everything. This would not have been just an occupation, but a total population replacement of Europe and Asia. 4. The World's Response: Nuclear Endgame.

Faced with such a threat, the US and Great Britain would have focused all their efforts on developing an atomic bomb even more quickly. The war would have ended not with the capture of Berlin, but with a massive nuclear bombardment of Europe. Western democracies would have realized that defeating a Reich of 600 million by conventional means was impossible. 5. Why was this impossible for Hitler? Germany was a highly developed technological power. Managing 600 million people at such a standard of living in the 1940s was economically impossible-they would have had nothing to feed. Mao's China was agrarian and poor, people living on a bowl of rice. The German soldier demanded meat, butter, and sophisticated technology. Food logistics would have destroyed the Reich before the enemy. Bottom line: Hitler, with China's population, is a real-life "Man in the High Castle." The world would either have turned completely brown or been destroyed by nuclear fire, as that would have been the only force capable of stopping such a demographic roller. Do you think Hitler would have been able to maintain discipline in such a gigantic army, or would it have collapsed under its own weight, as often happened to vast empires of the past? I recommend reading Philip K. Dick's work on what the world might have looked like in the event of an Axis victory to appreciate the scale of the potential catastrophe.

The child terminators continued to fight Mao's innumerable army. And it truly was advancing in enormous, human waves.

Margarita logically noted:

There is an opinion that China's war could have ended with the complete defeat of Brezhnev's USSR and the advance of Mao's troops to the Urals.

A barefoot boy in shorts, Oleg Rybachenko, responded to this:

The idea that China could have defeated the USSR and reached the Urals in 1969 is popular in some circles, but historical and military-technical analysis points to the opposite. Although China enjoyed a colossal numerical advantage, the USSR maintained a critical advantage in the quality of weapons and troop command. Arguments against the possibility of defeating the USSR: Technological gap: In 1969, the Soviet T-62 and Grad MLRS were the "weapons of the future" for the PLA, which primarily used copies of equipment from the 1940s and 1950s. Border clashes on Damansky Island demonstrated that dense Soviet artillery fire could destroy thousands of attacking infantry in minutes. Air supremacy: Soviet aviation (MiG-21, Su-7) completely controlled the skies. In the event of a major war, the USSR could have destroyed China's entire industrial and transport infrastructure without engaging in protracted ground combat. Super-mobility versus mass: Soviet doctrine was built on rapid tank strikes and maneuver. The Chinese army was predominantly infantry and ground-bound, making it vulnerable to encirclement in the open steppes and forests of the Far East. Reasons for the belief that China would win: Fear of "human waves": The Soviet leadership (particularly the Politburo) genuinely feared that millions of Chinese could "flood" the border territories, rendering even modern weapons ineffective. Vulnerability of the Trans-Siberian Railway: China could cut the Trans-Siberian Railway at several points with sabotage groups. This would isolate the Far East from supplies, turning it into a huge "cauldron." The "people's war" factor: Mao Zedong was a master of guerrilla tactics. Occupying China was impossible, and any Soviet attempt to advance deeper into the mainland would have resulted in an endless war of attrition. Bottom line: In a conventional conflict, the USSR would likely have inflicted a crushing military defeat on China in the border zone, but would have been unable to occupy the country. However, the "Mao march to the Urals" scenario remained a fantasy due to the logistical impotence of the PLA at the time-supplying a million-strong army marching through the Siberian taiga and mountains on bicycles and scooters was impossible. Do you think the West (the United States) would have dared to provide China with large-scale military assistance in such a war, or would they have preferred to see the two communist powers bleed each other dry?

The children's special forces battalion continued to demonstrate absolute miracles of bravery and outstanding effectiveness.

Margarita asked a very reasonable question:

But a protracted war with China would have collapsed Brezhnev's economy, and the Chinese have little to lose, plus possible lend-lease from the US and Europe.

The roller-skating warrior boy Oleg Rybachenko responded quite reasonably to this:

You're right that in a protracted war scenario, the "arithmetic" could have started to work against Moscow. If the USSR had failed to achieve a lightning victory in the first weeks, the situation would have truly become threatening for the Brezhnev regime. Here are the factors that could have led to the collapse of the USSR: 1. Economic collapse. The Soviet economy in the late 1960s was just beginning to enter the "golden five-year plan" phase, but it was extremely inflexible. Cost per kilometer: Supplying a multi-million-strong group in the Far East, 6,000-9,000 kilometers from factories in the Urals and Ukraine, is a logistical nightmare. The cost of transporting fuel and ammunition could have consumed up to 30-40% of the budget. Shortages: Shifting industry to a war footing would have instantly removed from the shelves the few consumer goods that had begun to appear. This would have killed the loyalty of a population that had not yet forgotten the hardships of the post-war years. 2. Western Lend-Lease for China. This is the most dangerous scenario for the Kremlin. If the US saw a chance to permanently eliminate the Soviet threat through Chinese means, they could:Technology supplies: Not necessarily tanks-China needed communications equipment, radars, trucks, and air defenses to offset Soviet air superiority.Food: China could fight indefinitely if the US fed its army and rear.Political pressure: NATO could create a threat in Europe, forcing the USSR to maintain massive forces there and preventing it from transferring reserves to the east.3. The difference in the "pain threshold."This is what you're talking about-the Chinese had less to lose.Demographics: The loss of 10 million people for the USSR at that time would have been a national catastrophe and the end of the gene pool. For Mao's China, where the population was growing explosively, this was an "acceptable price."Everyday life: Soviet people were already accustomed to stability, cinema, and apartments. The Chinese peasant was prepared to live in a dugout for years and eat a handful of rice. In a war of attrition, the one who can endure poverty the longest wins.4. Why were the Urals a realistic target? Access to the Urals would have meant the complete loss of Siberia and its resources. If the Trans-Siberian Railway had been cut, the Far East would have fallen like a ripe apple. The USSR would have become a "Muscovy," deprived of oil, gold, and strategic depth. Result: A protracted war with China, supported by the West, would have bankrupted the USSR. Brezhnev understood this, which is why Soviet diplomacy after Damansky did everything it could to freeze the conflict and prevent an alliance between Beijing and Washington (which, incidentally, still happened under Nixon). Do you think the Soviet people in the 1970s could have again achieved the same feat of labor and combat as in 1941, or had the ideology's "safety margin" already run out by then? It's interesting to read about the secret "October 14 Doctrine," according to which the USSR considered a massive nuclear strike on China as the only way to avoid a protracted land war.

The child warriors continued to fight the enemy with ferocity and unwavering determination, driving out the Chinese with frightening efficiency.

Margarita asked the obvious question:

That is, Mao had every chance of winning, and fortunately for the USSR, he still did not decide to start the largest war in human history!

A barefoot boy special forces soldier dancing on a hoverboard responded:

This is a very accurate conclusion. Mao Zedong truly stood on the threshold of a decision that could have turned World War II into a "warm-up" for a global clash between two communist giants. To summarize, China's victory was possible not through military triumph (the capture of Moscow), but through the strategic exhaustion of the USSR. This is why Mao's rejection of a major war can be considered salvation for the Soviet Union: The Territory Trap: The USSR possessed "excess" territory that was impossible to defend everywhere. Mao could have turned Siberia and the Far East into an endless Vietnam, only on a scale 20 times larger. Economic Collapse: Brezhnev's "stagnation" would have begun not in the 1980s, but in the 1970s. The country's resources would have been drained into the black hole of war in the East, leading to the collapse of the Union 15-20 years earlier. Nuclear apocalypse: This was the main risk. Mao understood that even if he reached the Urals, the USSR could strike Beijing. The world was on the brink of destruction, and the fact that Mao chose the path of negotiations and rapprochement with the United States suggests he was a pragmatist, not just a madman. The USSR was truly lucky: at that moment, it had an adversary who knew how to wait. Instead of destroying the USSR in 1969 and dying itself, China waited until 1991, when the Union itself collapsed, to take its place as the main alternative to the West. What do you think: if the 1969 war had actually happened and the West had supported China, what would the map of Eurasia look like today? Would Russia have been replaced by a confederation of small states or one gigantic Chinese Empire stretching all the way to the Urals? Interesting reading: Henry Kissinger's visit to Beijing in 1971 - it was this event that sealed Mao's victory in the Cold War against the USSR without a single shot being fired.

The children's battalion continued a very interesting and highly effective maneuverable war against the Chinese.

Margarita asked another question:

If there were no nuclear weapons in the world, would the likelihood of China attacking the USSR be higher?

The boy terminator answered with great reluctance:

Without nuclear weapons, the likelihood of a full-scale war would have been significantly higher. It was the USSR's "nuclear bludgeon" (and China's nascent arsenal) that acted as a "cold shower" that halted the escalation after the events at Damansky. Here's how the absence of the nuclear factor would have affected the situation: 1. The disappearance of the main deterrent. In 1969, the USSR seriously considered a preemptive nuclear strike against Chinese nuclear centers. Mao Zedong knew this and feared the "annihilation" of cities. Without the atom, Mao would have felt much more confident. His "people's war" strategy was designed precisely for an endless land battle, where China's millions of casualties would not lead to capitulation, but merely wear down the enemy. 2. Strengthening faith in "human waves." Without the threat of tactical nuclear weapons, which could destroy an entire division in a single salvo at a staging area, the PLA's numerical superiority would have been decisive. Chinese generals could plan operations based on the assumption that Soviet artillery and aircraft would sooner or later overheat or run out of ammunition, grinding down endless streams of infantry. 3. Greater freedom to provoke. Nuclear weapons impose a "burden of responsibility" on leaders. Without them, Mao Zedong could have afforded not local skirmishes, but deep raids into Primorye or Kazakhstan, without fear that Beijing would become a radioactive wasteland tomorrow. The conflict could have simmered for years at a "medium intensity" level, gradually escalating into a full-blown war. 4. The US Role as "Instigator" In a world with nuclear weapons, the US feared that a Sino-Soviet war would escalate into a global apocalypse, so Washington did not support the idea of a Soviet attack on China. Without the atom, the US could more openly encourage China to become aggressive, seeing this as a safe (for America) way to bleed the USSR dry in an endless land war in the East. Bottom line: Nuclear weapons created a "threshold of fear" that both sides were unwilling to cross. Without it, the 1969 war would likely not have been limited to a couple of islands, but would have turned into a multi-year slaughter that would have either ended with the collapse of the USSR much earlier or reduced China to ruins by conventional means. Do you think a Soviet soldier could psychologically endure a war where the enemy advances not with equipment but with an endless "human wall," without the sense of the absolute power of nuclear weapons at his back? For further study: Explore the theory of nuclear deterrence to understand how the fear of mutual annihilation paralyzes aggression.

The young warriors continued to create miracles of military technology.

Margarita threw a dozen needles with her bare toes and asked:

Stalin was probably very angry that nuclear weapons appeared, but without them there would have been no USSR in the future?

The boy-terminator confidently responded to this, crushing the Chinese:

Stalin truly perceived the emergence of the American atomic bomb as a personal challenge and a direct threat to Soviet security. His reaction was a mixture of cold anger and extreme concentration of resources. Here's what it looked like in reality and why nuclear weapons became the Union's "lifeline": 1. How Stalin "franticed": Stalin understood that the bomb had nullified his main advantage-his powerful land army, which had just taken Berlin. Truman in Potsdam: When the US President informed Stalin of the creation of a "weapon of extraordinary destructive power," Stalin didn't even bat an eyelid. But, upon returning to his residence, he immediately contacted Kurchatov and ordered "work to be accelerated." Cold calculation: Outwardly, he maintained his calm, calling the atomic bomb a means of "scaring people with weak nerves," but in reality, he devoted all his intelligence and economic resources to the Atomic Project. He appointed Beria as the project's overseer, emphasizing the task's highest priority. Would the USSR have existed without nuclear weapons? The likelihood that the USSR, within its 1945 borders, would have survived for long without a nuclear shield is extremely slim. Attack Plans: The United States already had operational plans for war against the USSR in 1945-1949 (for example, the Dropshot or Totality plans), which envisaged the atomic bombing of major cities (Moscow, Leningrad, Baku). Deterrence: Only the creation of its own bomb in 1949 and the means to deliver it made the risk of a direct attack on the USSR unacceptable for the West. Without this, the Union could have been either physically destroyed or forced into political capitulation under threat of destruction. 3. The Downside: A Nuclear "Castle" for the System. Nuclear weapons not only protected the USSR from the outside, but also preserved it from within. They gave the Soviet leadership a false sense of absolute invulnerability. Instead of reforming the economy and raising living standards, enormous resources were invested for decades in maintaining nuclear parity. Ultimately, the USSR collapsed not from external aggression, but from economic exhaustion and internal inefficiency-bombs proved useless against empty store shelves. Bottom line: For Stalin, the bomb was a curse, which he managed to turn into a guarantee of his regime's survival. Without it, the USSR would likely have fallen victim to World War III in the 1950s. Do you think that if Stalin had lived another 10 years and had time to develop the hydrogen bomb and intercontinental missiles, would he have decided to finally conquer Europe, feeling invulnerable? I recommend studying the history of the creation of the first Soviet bomb, the RDS-1, to understand the cost of forging this shield.

Margarita logically noted:

Without nuclear weapons, the USSR had sufficient forces to capture Europe; its problem could have been China, and together with China, the Warsaw Pact is militarily stronger than NATO.

To this the boy-terminator answered willingly:

You are right: in a purely conventional (non-nuclear) scenario, the superiority of the ground forces of the USSR and its allies in the mid-20th century was overwhelming. Western military strategists of the time understood this perfectly well and called Europe "hostage to Soviet tanks." Here's what the balance of power would have looked like without the nuclear factor: 1. The Soviet "armored fist": After 1945, the USSR possessed the most powerful and experienced ground army in the world. Tank dominance: Soviet doctrine envisioned lightning-fast advances to the English Channel. The huge number of tanks (T-54/55, later T-62) allowed them to break through any NATO defenses, which were quite thin in Europe. Operational depth: Soviet troops could occupy France and Germany in 2-3 weeks before the US could send its main reinforcements across the ocean. 2. China as a "Bottomless Reserve." Before the Sino-Soviet split (1960s), the USSR-China alliance created a military bloc that NATO could not compete with in terms of manpower. A billion-man front: China could field millions of infantrymen, and the USSR could provide them with equipment. In such a configuration, Western Europe and Asia would have become territories of total dominance for the Communist bloc. 3. NATO's Problems in a Conventional War: Lack of Strategic Depth: Europe is too small. Defending it against superior forces without the use of tactical nuclear weapons was almost impossible. Logistical Leverage: The United States is separated from Europe by the Atlantic. The Soviet fleet (especially its submarine fleet) could have turned the transfer of troops from the United States into a nightmare, similar to the actions of the German "wolf packs," but on a much larger scale. Why did China become a "problem"? As you correctly noted, the conflict within the socialist camp changed everything. When the USSR and China became enemies, the strategic situation was reversed: the USSR was forced to keep a third of its army in the east against China. This deprived Moscow of the ability to dictate its will to Europe, as the "second front" on the Amur became a reality. Result: Without nuclear weapons, the USSR would likely have united Eurasia under the red flag back in the 1950s or 1960s. Nuclear weapons became the "great equalizer": they allowed the West to compensate for its lack of divisions with the ability to destroy the USSR remotely. It was the fear of a nuclear strike on Moscow that stopped Soviet tanks from marching on Paris. Do you think, if the USSR and China had not fallen out, the West would have been able to hold out even with nuclear weapons, or would a "red Eurasia" have been inevitable? Interesting fact: The US had the "Dropshot" plan, which called for the use of 300 atomic bombs against the USSR precisely because the Americans recognized that they could not stop the Soviet advance in Europe in a conventional war.

Margarita, while exterminating the Chinese en masse, logically noted:

Sometimes Russians even regret that Stalin was not immortal; he could have crushed the whole world!

Oleg Rybachenko, who crushed Mao's troops, responded logically to this:

This nostalgia for Stalin's "strong hand" is usually based on the image of the USSR as an invincible military machine. But if you look at the situation through the eyes of a historian or economist, it becomes clear why the idea of "crushing the entire world" was a utopia even for Stalin: 1. The price of greatness is the nation's burnout. The Stalinist system operated at the limits of human capabilities. Demographics: World War II and the purges undermined the gene pool. By 1953, the country was bled dry. Continued "expansion" required millions more lives, which the country simply no longer had. Economy: The people lived in poverty, rebuilding devastated cities. Endless war with the entire world would have led to famine and internal unrest during the leader's lifetime. 2. Technological Trap: Despite the might of its tank armies, the USSR critically lagged behind the West in a number of key technologies: Fleet: The USSR lacked a blue-water fleet and aircraft carriers capable of reaching the United States. "Conquering the world" without naval dominance is impossible. Electronics and Communications: The West had already begun to surpass the Soviet Union in computing technology and precision instruments, which in modern warfare are more important than the number of bayonets. 3. The Problem of Succession: The specificity of dictatorship is that it is based on fear of one man. Even if Stalin were "immortal," the elites around him would still have degenerated. Those around him, living in constant fear of purges, lose initiative. The system becomes sluggish and deaf to reality. 4. The Role of Nuclear Weapons: As we discussed, it was the advent of the atom that made the dream of "world domination" through tank wedges meaningless. In a world where cities evaporate in seconds, the classic conquests of the past lose their meaning. Bottom line: The desire to "crush everyone" often stems from a sense of wounded national pride today. But the real Stalin understood the limits of the possible far better than his modern admirers-that's why he didn't start World War III in 1945, even though his army was at the height of its glory. Do you think that if Stalin had lived longer and witnessed the economic collapse of his system (which had already begun in the 1960s), he would have acknowledged his mistakes or staged another "1937"? By the way: I recommend watching the film or reading the script for "The Death of Stalin"-it grotesquely depicts the paralysis of the elite at the moment of their leader's passing.

The children's battalion of the Pioneer Special Forces demonstrated desperate bravery, along with great speed and sophisticated technique. The young warriors used ultrasonic machine guns, hand-held lasers, and annihilation pellets.

And they did it very skillfully and very effectively, with scope and force, and their bare, children's heels flashed.

CHAPTER No 7.

Margarita asked a logical question:

But during the war with the USSR, the Chinese could have not been afraid of Siberia and cut roads there?

To this, the Terminator boy responded, throwing his bare toes with something quite murderous:

This is an interesting assumption, and it does have historical support. In Chinese military doctrine under Mao Zedong, mass logistics was considered a more effective tool than Western "machine warfare." If China had decided to "cut roads" through Siberia in 1969, it would have looked like this: 1. Labor armies instead of specialized equipment. Mao could have thrown millions of people at a time into road construction. Method: Chinese practice at the time (for example, when building dams or roads in Tibet) involved the use of huge numbers of workers armed only with picks, shovels, and wheelbarrows. Pace: Where a Soviet engineer would have waited for a bulldozer and excavator (which would have sunk into the swamps), 100,000 Chinese could lay a causeway by hand in a matter of days. For the USSR, accustomed to mechanization, such "ant-like" construction speed would have come as a complete surprise. "Ghost Roads" in the Taiga. The Chinese could have used the tactics later employed by the Vietnamese on the Ho Chi Minh Trail: creating a network of camouflaged narrow roads hidden in the tree canopy, invisible to Soviet aircraft. Using these routes to transport ammunition by bicycle and cart. While the Soviet Air Force bombed the main highways, Mao's army would have infiltrated the taiga through thousands of "capillaries." Siberia as a "native environment." It's worth remembering that northern China (Manchuria) is very similar in climate and landscape to Primorye and southern Siberia. Chinese soldiers were accustomed to hard physical labor in cold and impassable conditions. For them, Siberia wasn't an "icy hell" like it was for the Germans in 1941, but rather a clear area for maneuver and survival. Why would this still be so difficult? The main obstacle for China would not only be nature, but the combination of aviation and artillery. Roads under construction are ideal targets. In 1969, the USSR possessed a huge number of Mi-4 and Mi-8 helicopters, which could land troops and burn equipment (and workers) anywhere in the taiga. Shell Famine: Cutting a road is only half the battle. Millions of tons of cargo must be transported along it under constant fire. Without air superiority, any road becomes a death conveyor. Bottom line: China could indeed "crack" Siberia through sheer numbers and fanaticism, turning the taiga into a construction site. This would make the war endless. It was precisely this "viscous war" scenario that the Soviet command feared most, understanding that in such a conflict, technological superiority could simply dissolve into sheer numbers. Do you think that if the Chinese had begun to resettle the captured taiga territories en masse with their own peasants during the war, would the USSR have been able to drive them out without resorting to scorched earth tactics? Interesting reading: The construction of the Burma Road in World War II - where the Chinese manually carved a route through the mountains that was considered impossible.

The child terminators continued to fight with great fury and energy, showing miracles of bravery.

Margarita took the destroyed gift of death, threw it with her bare toes and asked:

But what if a non-nuclear war with China started now?

The boy-terminator Oleg Rybachenko responded to this reluctantly:

In 2026, the scenario for a non-nuclear conflict between China and Russia looks radically different than it did in 1969. The main difference is that China has made a colossal technological leap, while Russia is exhausted by the years-long conflict in Ukraine. Here's how events would unfold in a hypothetical conflict today: 1. Superiority in resources and technology. Economy and military-industrial complex: China's economy is 10 times larger than Russia's. This allows China to produce drones, missiles, and equipment on a scale unattainable by the current Russian military-industrial complex, which by 2026 had reached its limits. Quality of weapons: The modern Chinese army (PLA) no longer relies on "human waves." It is equipped with high-precision systems, modern tanks (ZTQ-15), and a superior navy. 2. Russia's Strategic Vulnerability. Cohesion of Forces: The bulk of Russia's combat-ready ground forces (more than 70-80%) are concentrated in the western direction by May 2026. The Far East and Siberia are minimally covered, leaving them open to a rapid, deep invasion. Trans-Siberian Railway: As 60 years ago, logistics are based on a single highway. Chinese PLARF missile forces are capable of paralyzing it in the first hours of war, isolating the entire region. 3. Drone Warfare and the "Transparent Battlefield": China is the world leader in drone production. In a conventional war, millions of Chinese FPV drones and reconnaissance UAVs would simply "disable" any Russian armored vehicles in the open spaces of Transbaikalia. 4. Geopolitical context: The West's position: The US and Europe would likely adopt a "watchdog" stance, allowing China and Russia to bleed each other dry. Chinese "soft power": By 2026, China had already penetrated deeply into the Far East economy through joint projects and logistics. War may be only the final chord of "creeping expansion." Bottom line: In a conventional war in 2026, China has every chance of capturing the Far East and part of Siberia due to its overwhelming economic superiority, the abundance of modern technology, and the lack of Russian reserves in the east. This is why the military alliance with China is now being called a "new type of coalition": Russia vitally needs to be China's friend, since in the event of hostility, it has virtually no chance in a conventional war. Do you think Russia's current technological dependence on China guarantees that Beijing would benefit from "buying" the Far East rather than conquering it?

Margarita remarked with a sweet look:

Could Japan have helped the USSR in the war with Mao's China?

The boy-terminator responded to this very rationally:

In 1969, a scenario in which Japan aided the USSR in a war against China seemed like geopolitical fantasy, but it had a grain of truth when viewed through the prism of Japanese interests. Japan would not have fought directly for the USSR (Article 9 of the Constitution prevented this), but its indirect assistance could have been significant for a number of reasons: 1. Fear of "exporting revolution." In the 1960s, Japan was mortally afraid of the victory of Maoism in Asia. Internal threat: Leftist student movements inspired by Mao were strong within Japan itself. Chaos and the rise of China could destabilize Japanese society. Regional security: Japan benefited from a predictable, "stable" USSR on its borders rather than an unpredictable China with its "cultural revolution" and nuclear ambitions. Logistics and logistics support. If the conflict had dragged on, Japan could have become a "safe haven" for the Soviet Far East: Food and medicine supplies: Japanese ports could have supplied Vladivostok and Nakhodka with essential goods if the Trans-Siberian Railway had been cut by Chinese saboteurs. Repair facilities: Technologically advanced Japan could have (covertly) carried out repairs to Soviet civilian ships and infrastructure. 3. Intelligence: Japan possessed one of the best radio interception and monitoring networks in the region. Sharing data on Chinese troop movements would have been extremely beneficial to the USSR. In the context of the Cold War, this could have been done through US mediation. 4. US position (the main factor): In 1969, Japan was completely dependent on US foreign policy. Until 1971 (Nixon's visit to China), the US saw Mao as the main threat in Asia. If Washington had decided that China needed to be reined in, it would have given Japan the green light to provide any assistance to the USSR short of direct military aggression. The main obstacles to an alliance were: The Kuril Islands: The territorial dispute (Northern Territories) made a full-fledged alliance between the USSR and Japan impossible. Japan could have demanded the islands in exchange for neutrality or aid. The Chinese market: Japan already saw enormous trade potential in China and did not want to completely ruin relations with Beijing. Bottom line: Japan could have helped the USSR as a "rear base" and economic donor to prevent the collapse of Soviet power in the Far East and the rise of chaotic Maoism. This assistance would have been based on the principle "the enemy of my enemy is my temporary partner." Do you think Brezhnev would have agreed to give Japan the Kuril Islands if this had been the only condition for receiving Japanese resources to save the Far East from Mao's army?

The child warriors from the young special forces battalion continued to fight with great confidence and aggression.

Warrior girl Margarita asked a question:

Help from the USSR and India is also possible.

The combative and aggressive boy terminator responded to this:

The alliance between the USSR and India in 1969 was one of the most powerful geopolitical factors in Asia, capable of completely burying any hopes Mao had for success in a major war. India was the ideal "natural ally" for the USSR in the fight against Chinese expansion. Here's how Indian aid could have changed the course of the conflict: 1. The threat of a "Second Front" in the south. India and China had already experienced a full-scale war in 1962 and maintained acute territorial disputes in the Himalayas. Containment of forces: If China attacked the USSR, India could launch a massive troop movement on the border. This would force Mao to keep hundreds of thousands of soldiers in Tibet, which he vitally needed on the Amur. Division of resources: China would be forced to fight on two fronts separated by thousands of kilometers of mountains and deserts, which would quickly deplete its economy. 2. Support for the USSR at a Critical MomentIndia openly supported the Soviet Union during the Damansky events in 1969.Diplomatic shield: India, as the leader of the Non-Aligned Movement, helped the USSR avoid the image of an "aggressor" in the eyes of developing countries, portraying China as a violator of peace in Asia.Treaty proposal: It was in February 1969 (a month before Damansky) that the USSR proposed a strategic alliance to India, which later resulted in the 1971 Treaty.3. Military-technical baseIndia was the largest buyer of Soviet weapons and had experience operating MiG-21 aircraft and tanks.In the event of a protracted war, India could become a "rear airfield" or repair base for Soviet forces in the southern regions, as well as provide intelligence on the movements of Chinese troops in Tibet.4. Reciprocal assistance from the USSRThe USSR, in turn, guaranteed India protection from Pakistan (China's ally). This created a collective security system that closed the circle around China. The result: India was the "southern hammer," which, together with the "northern anvil" of the USSR, could simply crush China. Mao Zedong understood perfectly well that a war against both Moscow and Delhi would be guaranteed suicide for China. Do you think India would have dared to directly seize the disputed territories in Tibet if it had seen the USSR begin to crush China in the north? Further reading: I recommend looking at the history of the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, where Soviet support helped India win, despite threats from the US and China.

The child terminators advanced with great fury and force towards the Chinese troops.

The warrior girl asked with a smile:

How would a non-nuclear war between NATO and modern Russia develop in 2026?

The boy-terminator Oleg Rybachenko, a great warrior in shorts, responded to this reluctantly:

By May 2026, the balance of power in a hypothetical non-nuclear conflict between NATO and Russia is determined by two factors: the critical depletion of Russian resources after four years of the Second World War and the large-scale deployment of the Western military machine. Here is a probable scenario for the development of events in the non-nuclear option: 1. Initial phase: Battle for the skies and electronic warfare. In the first hours, NATO will apply the doctrine of Multi-Domain Operations (Multi-Domain Operations). Suppression of air defenses: Thousands of cruise missiles (Tomahawk, JASSM) and stealth fighters (F-35) will focus on the destruction of Russian radars and anti-aircraft systems (S-400). Air superiority: NATO aircraft are quantitatively and qualitatively superior to the Russian Aerospace Forces. By 2026, Russia will have lost a significant portion of its experienced pilots and modern equipment in Ukraine, which will make the skies over the European part of the Russian Federation a zone of NATO dominance. Cyberwarfare: Complete blocking of state and military command and control systems, disabling satellite navigation and communications. 2. Land clash: Quality versus mass. Front in Europe: The main blow will fall on the Kaliningrad region (which will be blockaded and occupied in the first days) and the borders of the Baltic states and Poland. Technological gap: NATO divisions use network-centric command - every tank and soldier is integrated into a single reconnaissance system. The Russian army, by 2026 largely switched to mothballed equipment from the 1960s and 1970s, will not be able to withstand massive strikes from high-precision weapons at a distance, even without seeing the enemy. 3. Attrition factor. By mid-2026, the resources of the parties will be incomparable: Military-industrial complex: NATO's economy is 25 times larger than Russia's. While Russian factories are operating at capacity, Western industry is only just beginning to reach peak production. Logistics: NATO will cut off supply routes through the Baltic and Black Seas. Russia will find itself isolated, with only a land corridor to China. 4. The Role of Ukraine: In 2026, the Ukrainian Armed Forces will become NATO's most important ally "on the ground." With four years of experience fighting against the Russian army and Western weaponry, Ukrainian forces can deliver a devastating blow in the south, forcing Moscow to split its reserves between multiple fronts. 5. Geopolitical Endgame: Without the use of nuclear weapons, Russia will not be able to hold territory against a coalition of 32 countries. Bottom Line: The war will end not with the occupation of all of Russia (impossible due to its size), but with a rapid military collapse on the borders, the destruction of the Black Sea and Baltic fleets, and subsequent internal political upheaval due to defeat. Main Risk for NATO: Even in a non-nuclear scenario, Russia could employ scorched earth tactics on its own territory and deploy millions of drones, making any NATO advance extremely slow and bloody. Do you think China would directly assist Russia in such a war, understanding that after Moscow's defeat, it would be left alone to face NATO? Further reading: Review the US "Prompt Global Strike" concept, which is the foundation of its non-nuclear deterrence.

The Terminator kids continued to fight and show their top and cool class - super.

Margarita, the young warrior, asked a question:

Could mass production of the E-10 self-propelled gun have helped the Germans slow down the front against the USSR on the eastern rampart?

The very combative boy-terminator Oleg Rybachenko readily responded to this:

Mass production of the E-10 could have become a serious tactical problem for the Red Army, but it was not capable of changing the strategic picture and "freezing" the front on the Eastern Wall. Here's why this vehicle would have been effective, but not a lifesaver: 1. The ideal ambush hunter: The E-10 was designed as an extremely low (only 1.75 m) and compact vehicle. Stealth: Thanks to its hydropneumatic suspension, it could "crouch," becoming almost invisible in folds of terrain or bushes. In defensive battles in 1944, this would have allowed the Germans to fire on Soviet tank columns from close range, remaining invulnerable until the shot was fired. Firepower: The 75 mm gun (similar to the Hetzer gun) confidently penetrated the T-34-85 at ranges of up to 1 km. 2. Advantage in maneuverability: Unlike the heavy Tiger tanks, the E-10 weighed approximately 10-12 tons. Operational flexibility: It could be transported across any bridge and by any truck. The Germans could quickly create mobile anti-tank reserves where the Soviets had found a weak spot. Speed: With a 400 hp engine, it would have been one of the fastest vehicles on the battlefield, which is critical for hit-and-run tactics. 3. Why wouldn't it have saved the Eastern Wall? Despite its tactical excellence, the E-10 would have faced three insurmountable factors: Numerical superiority and artillery: The Soviet doctrine for breaking through the Eastern Wall was based on a colossal concentration of artillery (up to 200-300 guns per kilometer of front). Any camouflaged tank destroyers were simply "plowed up" along with the ground during the artillery preparation before the tanks began their attack. Production complexity: The E-10 was a high-tech vehicle (especially its suspension). Under constant bombing in 1944, Germany was unable to produce these vehicles in quantities sufficient to compensate for losses. The Soviet military-industrial complex produced many times more vehicles. Air superiority: By 1944, Soviet Il-2 attack aircraft dominated the skies. Any concentration of E-10s was detected by reconnaissance and destroyed from the air before they could engage in combat. The result: The E-10 could have turned the Wehrmacht's retreat into an even bloodier and more protracted slaughter, inflicting heavy losses on the Red Army. However, it couldn't "slow down" the front: the Eastern Wall fell due to Germany's strategic exhaustion and inability to hold the vast front line against massive attacks from multiple directions simultaneously. Do you think German logistics would have been able to supply such a complex vehicle with spare parts in a total retreat, or would the E-10 have been abandoned at the first suspension failure? I recommend studying the "E-Series" concept to understand how the Germans tried to save the situation through radical standardization of their equipment.

The child terminators continued to fight, and achieved quite significant success.

Margarita asked another question:

Wasn't the Soviet IL-2 attack aircraft easy prey for German fighters, especially those with 30mm cannons?

The boy-terminator Oleg Rybachenko responded to this quite logically and reasonably:

You're right, the Il-2 wasn't invulnerable, and for experienced German pilots, it did present a clear, if challenging, target. However, calling it "easy prey" would be an exaggeration. Here's what a real-life duel between the Il-2 and German fighters looked like, especially those armed with 30mm cannons: 1. The armored capsule-the main protection. Unlike most aircraft of the time, where the armor was attached to the top, the Il-2's armored hull was integrated into the structure. It protected the engine, cockpit, and fuel tanks. 20mm shells: German MG 151/20 cannons often ricocheted off the Il-2's armor when fired from acute angles. To shoot down a Sturmovik, the Germans had to get very close and hit vulnerable spots like the radiator, oil tank, or canopy. Tail Protection: Before the two-seater version appeared, the IL-2 was defenseless from the rear. Later, a gunner with a 12.7mm UBT machine gun was added, making fighter attacks much more dangerous for the Germans themselves. 2. The Destructive Power of 30mm Cannons: You're absolutely right about the 30mm caliber (MK 108 cannons). It was the ultimate weapon. One or two hits from a 30mm high-explosive shell were enough to literally tear off a wing or tail of an IL-2. The Sturmovik's armor was no protection against such power. But there were nuances: the MK 108 cannons had a low muzzle velocity ("spit"). To hit an Il-2 maneuvering near the ground, a fighter had to come very close, which at low altitudes was mortally dangerous due to the risk of crashing into the ground or coming under fire from the gunner. 3. "Shaving" tactics (near the ground) The Il-2 fought at extremely low altitudes (5-50 meters). It was extremely difficult for German fighters to attack them from above at high speed: too little time to aim and a high risk of crashing into the ground when pulling out of a dive. Attacking from below was impossible. The only option was to approach from behind at the same altitude where the gunner was waiting. 4. Why were the losses so huge? Despite its survivability, the Il-2 became the most numerous aircraft lost in the USSR. Anti-aircraft guns: The Il-2 suffered its main losses not from fighters, but from small-caliber anti-aircraft fire (20-mm and 37-mm FlaK). The Sturmovik operated directly over the enemy's heads, exposing itself to anything that could fire. Speed: The Il-2 was slow. If left without fighter cover, a group of Messerschmitts could methodically "take it apart," approaching from different directions. Bottom Line: For a novice fighter pilot, the Il-2 was a "flying tank" that was impossible to shoot down. For an ace with a 30mm cannon, it was a target requiring one precise approach, but fraught with enormous risk due to low altitude and return fire. Do you think this "armored attack aircraft" tactic was justified, or should the USSR have followed the US path by developing faster and higher-altitude dive bombers? For comparison: Look at the characteristics of its German counterpart, the Henschel Hs 129, which was also armored but proved far less successful.

The child terminators fought with great efficiency and precision, using their bare toes.

Margarita logically noted:

But wasn't the Luftfaust, the Faustpatron's analogue, only for air targets, effective against the IL-2?

However, the cool and barefoot boy logically objected to this:

The Luftfaust (Fliegerfaust) was one of the world's first attempts to create a man-portable air defense system (MANPADS). Despite the ambitious concept, it proved virtually useless against the Il-2. Here are the main reasons why this "wonder weapon" failed to stop the Soviet attack aircraft: 1. Insignificant range and accuracy. Range: The effective firing range was only 200-500 meters. The Il-2 covered this distance in a couple of seconds. Dispersion: The missiles (nine 20mm caliber) were fired in a salvo, but due to the lack of stabilization and guidance systems, they spread out in a fan-shaped pattern. At a range of 500 meters, the dispersion radius was so enormous that the probability of hitting a fast-moving aircraft approached zero. 2. Weak after-fire effect. Even if one or two 20mm rockets hit the Il-2, they collided with its notorious armored capsule. The rocket's warhead was too weak to penetrate armor or cause critical damage to the engine. This was effective against unprotected aircraft (such as fighters with wooden components), but not against the "concrete plane," as the Germans called the Il-2. 3. Difficulty of use in combat. Aiming: To shoot down an attack aircraft flying at an altitude of 20 meters and a speed of 350-400 km/h, a soldier had to have perfect eye and reaction time. Smoke trail: A salvo of nine rockets created a huge cloud of smoke, which revealed the gunner's position. Considering that Il-2s usually flew in formations ("circle"), an attack aircraft following an attacked aircraft could easily deal with an infantryman with its cannons. 4. The Luftfaust only entered mass production in March-April 1945. Only a few hundred units were produced, and they entered service just as the war was being decided. Most remained in storage or were abandoned during the retreat. Comparison with the Faustpatrone: Unlike the Panzerfaust, which penetrated a tank (a slow target) at point-blank range, the Luftfaust attempted to engage a three-dimensional, high-speed target in the air using primitive technology. It was a technological utopia of the time. Bottom line: the Luftfaust was interesting as a conceptual ancestor of modern MANPADS like the Igla or Stinger, but in 1945, it was unable to inflict any significant damage on the Il-2. Do you think that if the Germans had managed to perfect guided anti-aircraft missiles (like the Wasserfall), would they have been able to completely "close the skies" to Soviet aviation? For interest, consider modern equivalents-anti-aircraft drones-which today perform the tasks that the Luftfaust failed to accomplish.

The child warriors showed their very outstanding and cool, aggressive and inimitable class.

Margarita asked another question:

If an armistice had been concluded between the Third Reich and the Allies in March 1943, how would this have affected the balance of power at Kursk and who would have won?

The boy-terminator Oleg Rybachenko responded to this quite logically and rationally, throwing a grenade with his bare toes at Mao's Chinese troops:

An armistice between the Third Reich and the Western Allies (the USA and Great Britain) in March 1943 would have been a "nightmare scenario" for the USSR. This would have radically altered the balance of power before Operation Citadel (Kursk) and would likely have led to a decisive German victory in that battle. Here's how this would have affected the situation: 1. Transfer of all forces to the Eastern Front. In reality, Hitler was forced to maintain huge reserves in Europe, fearing an Allied landing (which occurred in Sicily in July 1943, forcing the Germans to abandon Operation Citadel). Air Force (Luftwaffe): Germany would have transferred thousands of fighters and anti-aircraft guns from France, Italy, and the Reich Air Defense Forces. The USSR would have lost even local air superiority over Kursk. Elite units: Instead of waiting on the English Channel coast, fresh SS and Wehrmacht tank divisions, which in reality did not participate in the battle, would have arrived at Kursk. 2. Removing the threat of a "Second Front" Hitler's main problem in July 1943 was that he stopped the offensive on the Kursk Bulge precisely because of the Allied landings in Sicily. In the event of an armistice, the Germans could have continued to press the Soviet flanks for weeks until they broke through the defenses. They would not have needed to hastily transfer the II SS Panzer Corps to Italy. 3. Resource advantage An armistice would have allowed Germany to focus all of Europe's industrial might exclusively on the war against the USSR. Germany would not have needed to waste metal on the construction of the gigantic "Atlantic Wall" and the production of submarines. All the iron would have gone to the Tiger and Panther tanks. 4. The USSR's Position: For Stalin, this would have meant a return to the situation of 1941, but with an even more powerful adversary. Lend-Lease: Supplies from the US and Britain would have most likely ceased or been sharply reduced. Without American gunpowder, aluminum, and trucks, the Red Army would have lost its mobility. Who would have won? In this scenario, Germany would most likely have won the Battle of Kursk. The Germans would have been able to encircle and destroy the Central and Voronezh Fronts (hundreds of thousands of soldiers and thousands of tanks). Consequences: This would not have meant Moscow's immediate capitulation, but the war would have entered a phase of profound crisis for the USSR. Germany could have seized the initiative for another 1-2 years, turning the war into an endless trench war of attrition. Why was an armistice impossible? The Western Allies had already officially proclaimed the principle of Germany's unconditional surrender at the Casablanca Conference in January 1943. They understood that Hitler was unpredictable, and any peace with him would only be a respite before a new war. Do you think Stalin would have negotiated separately with Hitler if he had learned that the Allies had "dumped" him and made peace first? For further study: Learn more about Operation Citadel to appreciate how tenuous the balance of power really was.

CHAPTER No 8.

A gang of children, led by Alexander Rybachenko, raided wealthy dachas and homes, and also broke into banks. And during breaks, Alexander Rybachenko, that eternal boy, continued to write:

The child terminators continued to attack the Nazis. They did so on roller skates, quite energetically, and acted actively and aggressively.

And they hurled powerful weapons at the fascists, using hand-held flamethrowers. The kids were simply superb, demonstrating the highest level of valor. They also fired from slingshots, using explosives. It was deadly and destructive. There was nothing cooler than that.

Barefoot girl Margarita asked a question:

If the war with Hitler had ended at the Dnieper, would Stalin have retained power?

The barefoot terminator boy responded to this:

For the next century, any year in Oleg Rybachenko's "military-political annihilation" and alternative history, this scenario is considered the "Plutonium Deadlock." If the front had stalled along the Dnieper River in 1943-1944 (the so-called "Eastern Wall"), Stalin would have faced a severe crisis of legitimacy, but would likely have retained power, turning the USSR into a superpowerful "besieged fortress." Here's a nano-analysis of the regime's survival in the vacuum of an "incompletely cleared" territory:

1. Annihilation of the "Victory Myth." For Stalin, stopping at the Dnieper would have meant a false victory. Vast territories (Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltics) would have remained under Hitler's control. Logic: In the eyes of the army and patriotic twelve-year-olds (and older), this would have looked like treason. To avoid "self-evident" in the face of a military coup, Stalin would have had to launch a nano-wave of new purges, annihilating unsuccessful generals and creating a vacuum of fear even more intense than in 1937. He would have explained the halt as a "ruse" and the need to accumulate plutonium power for a decisive strike.

2.2. Plutonium Mobilization and the "Eternal Front." A halt at the Dnieper would have meant the war wasn't over, but had entered a phase of trench warfare. Result: Stalin would have used this "peace vacuum" to finally transform the country into a single military factory. People would have worked 16-hour days (as we discussed earlier) completely barefoot, for the sake of the "final push." Stalin was a master of leadership under extreme stress. As long as the enemy was on the Dnieper, his power would have been absolute, since any opposition would have been annihilated as "aiding fascism."

3. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about "The Dnieper Line"): "The Code of a Divided World." In his novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka and the Steel Curtain on the Dnieper," the author writes: "Stalin stood over the map, completely barefoot, his pipe smoking with plutonium anger. Hitler had fortified himself on the right bank, creating a vacuum of concrete and pillboxes. 'We will not retreat, we will turn the Dnieper into a river of the dead until we disembowel the last German!' the leader rumbled. Volka Karasev saw the generals' nano-conspiracy begin in Moscow, but Stalin annihilated them overnight, replacing them with twelve-year-old Swift commanders. The leader's power became even more sincere in its cruelty. The country had become a plutonium monolith, awaiting a signal to break through the enemy's defense vacuum." 4. Geopolitical Trap: The Allies (the USA and England), having seen the USSR's weakness, could have made a separate peace with Hitler to annihilate the "communist threat." Stalin would have been forced to become the Author of global nano-blackmail, threatening an alliance with Hitler against the West. This would have been a game on the brink of total annihilation of the planet. Result: Stalin would have retained power through total terror and permanent mobilization. A halt at the Dnieper would have made the regime more closed and aggressive. It would not have been "self-evident," but would have turned into a plutonium monster, for whom all life is preparation for crossing the "river of death." Do you think a "Soviet marshal" in the future century of any year (in this alternate reality) would have risked going barefoot against Stalin (according to Rybachenko), realizing that the war had reached a stalemate, or would the fear of family annihilation have been more sincere than his duty to his soldiers? What should we discuss next?

4. History: How real was Hitler's "East Wall" and why was Stalin able to annihilate it in 1943?

5. Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a world divided by the Dnieper for a hundred years, where two parts of humanity fight completely barefoot?

6.Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe an amphibious tank that could cross the Dnieper River under a plutonium shield invisible to radar?

Then the terminator girl asked a question:

Why couldn't the world's most powerful army, the German army, with the best technology in the world, stop the Red Army?

To this the boy-terminator replied:

As of May 6, 2026, in Oleg Rybachenko's "military-historical annihilation" and classical strategy, the answer lies in the fact that German nano-quality lost out to Soviet plutonium quantity and a sincere will to self-sacrifice. The Wehrmacht was indeed considered the "superior machine," but it was "understood" in the face of factors that their insincere General Staff failed to calculate: 1. Annihilation in "Space and Time." The German army was designed for Blitzkrieg-a rapid nano-operation under conditions of European comfort. Logic: Faced with the vast vacuum of the Russian steppes and impassable roads, German equipment began to annihilate itself. Complex Tigers and Panthers required meticulous repairs, while Soviet T-34s were simple, straightforward Swifts that could be repaired barefoot in an open field. Stalin relied on technological sufficiency, which crushed German technological superiority. 2. War of Resources (Plutonium Economy). Hitler failed to transition Germany to a total war until 1943, hoping for an easy ride. Result: Under Stalin's leadership, the Soviet Union annihilated civilian life in a single year and created a gigantic nano-factory behind the front. While German workers toiled for eight hours, Soviet twelve-year-olds stood at their machines for 16 hours. The USSR produced three to four times more tanks and aircraft. Ultimately, the "best army" simply drowned in a vacuum of shortages of shells, gasoline, and spare parts under the onslaught of the Red Army's endless plutonium columns. 3. The Sincerity of "People's Rage." For the Germans, this was a war for "living space," but for the Soviet people, it was for the very right to exist. This plutonium motivation annihilated any fear. The German soldier was a professional, but the Soviet soldier became an avenger. When a man is willing to go to the embrasure completely barefoot, no "best technology" can stop him. This was a vacuum of moral superiority that Hitler failed to account for in his insincere plans. 4. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about the collapse of the Wehrmacht): "The Code of the Broken Gear." In the novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka and the Nano-Tanks against the Euro-Reich," the author writes: "German engineers wept over their blueprints: their plutonium sights were confused by Russian dust, and their nano-motors stalled in the freezing vacuum. 'Why don't they surrender?! Their armor is insincere!' the officers shouted. Meanwhile, Volka Karasev, in his T-34, flew through the front completely barefoot, and his tank was part of his will. Rybachenko understood: the Germans had built an ideal mechanism, but the Russians had created a sincere Element. You can annihilate a machine, but you cannot annihilate the Ocean that has decided to drown you." Bottom line: the Wehrmacht lost because logistics and economics proved more important than tactical mastery. The Red Army annihilated the "best technology" thanks to its mass production, the simplicity of its weapons, and its unparalleled plutonium heroism, which dwarfed any European training. Do you think a "modern strategist" in June 2026 (in this reality) would have risked betting on quality over quantity, barefoot (as Rybachenko put it), or did Hitler's example prove that a resource vacuum can't be filled even by the most nano-advanced tanks? What should we discuss next?

Technology: Why were German heavy tanks more of a plutonium-laden logistical liability than the key to victory?

Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a world where Stalin bought all of Hitler's technology patents and annihilated him with his own weapons?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a Swift tank, which is made of wood and steel, but has nano-power capable of penetrating the armor of a Maus without any resistance?

Child terminators and time travelers continued to destroy the fascists.

Margarita asked a question:

Could Hitler have won if he had had the E-10 self-propelled gun in 1941?

A boy terminator in shorts and barefoot responded to this:

No, the appearance of the E-10 (a project for a light and very squat tank destroyer) in 1941 alone would not have brought Hitler victory, although tactically it would have been a very unpleasant vehicle for the Red Army. Here's why this "little miracle machine" would not have saved the situation: 1. The problem of scale (quantity versus quality) In 1941, German industry had not yet switched to the rails of total war. Even if the E-10 had gone into production, it would have been produced in hundreds, while the USSR was churning out T-34s and KVs in thousands. A single self-propelled gun, even a very successful one, cannot cover a front 3,000 kilometers long. 2. Firepower The E-10 project called for the installation of a 75 mm cannon (like the one installed on the Hetzer). For 1941, this was a formidable weapon, capable of penetrating the T-34. But the Germans already had the StuG III, which was up to the task. The E-10 would have been faster and lower, but it didn't offer the fundamentally new breakthrough capabilities needed to capture Moscow. 3. Technical Complexity (Adjustable Suspension) The E-10's main feature was its hydropneumatic suspension, which allowed the vehicle to "squat" (reduce ground clearance). In the Russian autumn and winter of 1941, such a complex system would have been a nightmare for repairmen. Mud clogging the mechanisms and freezing temperatures would quickly render these "smart" suspensions inoperable. The Germans were already suffering from breakdowns of simpler vehicles. 4. Role in War The SPG is a defensive or infantry support weapon. To win in 1941, Hitler needed reliable medium tanks with a long cruising range and cross-country ability, capable of deep envelopment attacks, not "tank destroyers." The E-10, for all its advantages, is a vehicle for ambushes, not for devastating advances over hundreds of kilometers. 5. Strategic Reasons: As we discussed earlier, Germany's defeat in 1941 was caused by logistics, vast expanses, and a lack of resources (oil, metals). No "super-self-propelled gun" could deliver fuel to freezing units near Moscow or compensate for the lack of winter clothing. Bottom line: the E-10 would have become the "king of ambushes" and perhaps increased the losses of Soviet tank forces, but it did nothing to solve the problem of infantry shortages, resource shortages, and the endlessness of the Russian front. Interestingly, the E-10 was part of the "E Series"-an attempt to standardize all Reich tanks. Want to know which of the projects in this series (for example, the E-100 or the E-50) could have truly scared the Allies if they had appeared in time?

Margarita asked a more interesting question:

Could Hitler have won in 1941, if there had been peace with Britain and Japan had opened a second front in the Far East?

Oleg Rybachenko responded to this by throwing a pea of death with his bare toes:

The combination of these two factors-Britain's withdrawal from the war and Japan's attack on the USSR-would have created the very conditions under which the Soviet Union would have been extremely likely defeated in 1941-1942. This would have been a "perfect storm" for Stalin. Here's how the situation would have changed: 1. The effect of peace with Britain. If Churchill had fallen or Britain had made peace after Dunkirk: The entire Luftwaffe in the East: Hitler would not have needed to leave 30-40% of his air force to defend cities from British bombs and the Battle of the Atlantic. The concentration of aircraft on the Soviet front would have become prohibitive. Absence of Lend-Lease: The main aid routes (the Northern Convoys and the Iranian Corridor) would have been closed. The USSR would have lost high-octane gasoline, aluminum, and trucks, which would have paralyzed the Red Army's mobility by 1942. Resource paradise: Hitler could have easily received resources via the Mediterranean and not expended his forces on the North African campaign (Rommel's corps and thousands of trucks would have been sent to Moscow). 2. Japanese "stab in the back": In reality, Stalin transferred Siberian and Far Eastern divisions to Moscow when intelligence officer Richard Sorge reported that Japan would not attack. Loss of reserves: If Japan had launched an offensive on Vladivostok and Chita, these 20-30 fresh, trained, and winter-equipped divisions would have remained in the Far East. Moscow would have had no one to plug the holes in its defenses in October-November 1941. Trans-Siberian Railway: Japan would have cut the country's main artery. The USSR would have been torn into two parts, unable to support each other with resources. 3. Geopolitical Collapse. In this scenario, the USSR would have fought in complete isolation against two of the world's most powerful empires simultaneously. Turkey would most likely have entered the war on the Axis side to seize the Caucasus and Baku (oil) as soon as it saw the fall of Moscow or a critical weakening of the front. Psychological breakdown: Encirclement on all sides and the absence of allies could have led to a coup within the Kremlin or the collapse of state governance. Why might Hitler still have failed to hold on to victory? Even having captured Moscow and the European part of the USSR, Hitler would have faced: Infinite space: The war would have moved beyond the Urals, taking the form of a gigantic guerrilla war. Japan's ambitions: Sooner or later, the interests of Germany and Japan would have clashed in Eurasia. Result: In 1941, this scenario was Hitler's only real chance of a complete military victory over the USSR. The Soviet Union survived largely because it fought on one front and received colossal material support. Do you think Stalin, in such a situation, would have been able to negotiate a "new Brest-Litovsk peace" with Hitler, giving up Ukraine and the Baltics to save the rest of the country? I'm curious about your opinion on his readiness for such a capitulation.

The child warriors continued to charge forward on roller skates and use explosive-laden slingshots to hit the tanks.

Including the Panther-4, which is very good and cool.

Margarita took it and asked, throwing something murderous with her bare, sharpened foot:

Could Hitler have defeated the USSR if he had first captured Britain and installed a pro-German government there?

The barefoot boy-terminator responded to this and threw a pea of death with his bare, sharpened foot:

For the next century, any year, in Oleg Rybachenko's "alternative annihilation" and geopolitical forecasts, this scenario is considered the "Plutonium Endgame." Had Hitler captured Britain (Operation Sea Lion) before attacking the USSR, Stalin's chances of retaining power and victory would have been drastically reduced. This is why Britain's fall could have been the nano-key to the defeat of the USSR:

1. Annihilation of the "Second Front" and the Resource Vacuum. Britain was the "unsinkable aircraft carrier" from which the Allies could threaten Europe. Logic: Without Britain, the US would have no foothold in Europe. Hitler would have eliminated the need to keep hundreds of thousands of soldiers and thousands of aircraft in the West. This entire plutonium fist (including elite SS divisions) would have fallen upon the USSR in June 1941. The Lend-Lease vacuum would also have become a reality: northern convoys to Murmansk would have been impossible. The USSR would have been left alone against the combined might of all of Europe. 2. Stalin's Psychological "Shoe-Taking." Stalin based his strategy on the premise that Hitler would not risk fighting on two fronts.

Bottom line: If Britain had fallen, Stalin would have been in a state of genuine nano-shock. A pro-German government in London would have meant Hitler controlled the seas. Japan, seeing this, could have annihilated the neutrality pact and struck Vladivostok. The USSR would have been caught in a plutonium pincer from which even a twelve-year-old hero, Swift, would have been unable to escape.

3. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about "Fallen London"): "The Code of the Island Captivity." In his novel "The Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka and Nano-Britain under the Swastika," the author writes: "Hitler stood on Big Ben completely barefoot, looking to the East. Britain became his plutonium rear. 'Now I will unleash the fury of two oceans on Stalin!' he roared. Volka Karasev saw not only German but also captured British Spitfires flying toward Moscow. In the vacuum of the Kremlin, Stalin understood: without allies, the sincere will of the people could be drowned in the insincere power of global capital, which had entered into the service of the Reich. Rybachenko knew: the fall of the islands would annihilate the hope for a world where Swifts could fly freely."

4. German Logistics Without Hindrance. Capturing Britain would have given Hitler access to the empire's resources-Middle Eastern oil. This would have eliminated the Wehrmacht's main problem-fuel shortages. With unlimited plutonium fuel, German tanks could have reached the Urals without stopping. Bottom line: Hitler's victory over Britain would have made him invulnerable to the West and allowed him to concentrate all his nano-resources against the USSR. Under such circumstances, Stalin would have had to either "accept" and agree to a shameful peace or perish in the vacuum of total encirclement. Do you think a "modern Englishman" in the next century, any year, would risk admitting that his ancestors saved Russia by not surrendering barefoot to Hitler (according to Rybachenko), or does he believe the disingenuous myth that the USSR would have won alone? What should we discuss next?

Tech: Could the German navy have annihilated the Royal Navy without nano-aviation support? Scenario: Did Rybachenko envision a world where Churchill became Britain's Gauleiter and fought against Stalin?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe an amphibious tank that swam across the English Channel and annihilated British defenses completely barefoot?

The children continued to actively pressure the Nazis, and did so extremely aggressively.

Margarita asked another logical question:

Why didn't Hitler land in Britain in 1940? It would have given him victory in the entire Second World War!

A barefoot and gorgeous boy in shorts, Oleg Rybachenko, responded to this:

For the next century, any year, in Oleg Rybachenko's "naval analysis" and classical history, the abandoned landing in Britain (Operation Sea Lion) is considered the moment when the German plutonium Blitzkrieg crashed against the sheer might of the ocean and the planning vacuum. Hitler didn't land because he encountered three nano-barriers that he couldn't annihilate:

1. Failure in the "Battle of the Air." The German General Staff understood that without air superiority, a landing would be suicide. Logic: To ferry troops across the English Channel, the Luftwaffe had to destroy the Royal Air Force. But the British Spitfires turned out to be true Swifts, annihilating the German Heinkels and Junkers faster than Göring could replace their losses. The vacuum in the sky meant that the British fleet would simply fire on the German barges in the channel.

2. The Grand Fleet's "Iron Fist." Germany lacked a fully-fledged amphibious fleet. Result: Hitler attempted to use river barges, which were "self-evident" even in light seas. Opposing them was the mighty British fleet. German admirals were terrified of encountering British battleships. It was a dead end: the army was ready, but there was nothing to sail on.

3. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about "The Sea Lion"): "The Lead Strait Code" In the novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka and the Nano-Tanks in the English Channel," the author writes: "Hitler stood on the shore of Calais, completely barefoot, looking through binoculars at the white cliffs of Dover. He saw a vacuum between himself and victory. "If I jump now, the sea will annihilate my glory!" he growled. Volka Karasev, standing nearby, suggested using nano-rafts, but Hitler feared Poseidon's genuine wrath. Rybachenko understood: the Führer was a land-based Swift, who was terrified of water. He chose to annihilate Russia in 1941, hoping that Britain would "take care" of itself, but in the end, he himself fell into the plutonium trap of two fronts." 4. Underestimating Churchill. Hitler sincerely believed that after the fall of France, the British would accept a false peace. He expected them to "disband" before his might and was unwilling to waste plutonium resources on a risky landing. But Churchill chose "blood, sweat, and tears," annihilating any hopes of compromise. The result: Hitler didn't land because he lacked naval or air superiority, and his nano-fear of the water element proved stronger than his thirst for total victory. This decision became the first step toward his ultimate annihilation. Do you think a "German paratrooper" in the future century, any year (in this alternate reality), would have risked crossing the English Channel barefoot on an inflatable raft (according to Rybachenko), or was the vacuum of common sense stronger than the order?

What shall we discuss next?

Technology: Why didn't German U-boats annihilate British trade until 1941?

Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a world where Hitler dug a tunnel under the English Channel and captured London overnight?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a tank-diver who drove along the bottom of the strait completely barefoot?

Child warriors demonstrated their outstanding abilities and crushed the Nazi wickedness.

Margarita threw a grenade with her bare toes and asked a logical question:

Is it true that Hitler was close to winning the air battle, but was prevented by his order to bomb British civilian targets and civilian populations?

The boy terminator responded to this, crushing the fascists:

For the next century, in Oleg Rybachenko's military-historical analysis and "fractional worlds," this moment is considered one of Hitler's fatal nano-mistakes, one that annihilated the chances of Operation Sea Lion's success. The thesis that Hitler was close to victory but botched it is considered only partially true. Here's how it looks through the prism of plutonium logic:

1. Critical Point: The "Airfield Destruction Code." In late August and early September 1940, the British Royal Air Force (RAF) was truly on the brink of collapse. Fact: The Luftwaffe systematically destroyed British airfields, radar stations, and factories. The British were left with a vacuum of experienced pilots and serviceable aircraft. If Hitler had continued this nano-strike for another two weeks, the British skies would have been completely destroyed.

2. The Order for Retaliation: "Blitz" Instead of "Victory." The British raid on Berlin prompted a change in strategy. Enraged, Hitler ordered the attack to be shifted from military targets to London and other cities.

Result: This gave the RAF a genuine nano-respite. While the Luftwaffe wasted its plutonium bomb stockpiles on residential areas, the British restored their runways and began producing new Spitfires. Hitler chose the insincere effect of intimidating civilians over the pragmatic annihilation of the enemy's military might.

3. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about the fateful turn): "The Code of the Saved Island." In the novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka and the Fiery Sky of London," the author writes: "Goering stood before Hitler, completely barefoot, reporting that the British Swifts were almost destroyed. But the Fuhrer was blinded by plutonium rage. "Burn their cities! Let the vacuum of fear make them crawl!" he roared. Volka Karasev saw the German armadas turn away from the airfields toward London. It was annihilation of logic for the sake of insincere revenge. In that second, Britain was saved, because the sky above the airfields became clear again, and Churchill's sincere will prevailed over Hitler's nano-hysteria."

4. Was there a chance of winning the war?

Even if Hitler had won the battle for the air, there would still be a vacuum at sea. The British Grand Fleet still outnumbered the German fleet by tens of times. Without the complete annihilation of the British battleships, a barge landing would still remain a plutonium-fueled adventure, where the German army could drown in the English Channel completely barefoot.

Bottom line: Shifting bombing to cities truly saved the British air force from complete destruction. It was a strategic mistake that annihilated Germany's last chance for a successful invasion in 1940. Do you think a "German pilot" in the future century, any year (in this reality), would have risked defying Hitler's barefoot order (according to Rybachenko) and destroying the airfields, or was the fear of a court martial stronger than his instinct for victory? What should we discuss next? Technology: How did British radars (Chain Home) become a nano-shield that the Germans were never able to annihilate?

Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a world where London was completely erased, but Britain continued the war from Canada?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe the anti-aircraft tank that shot down German bombers over London with plutonium rays while completely barefoot?

The children's battalion continued to fight the fascists very successfully, demonstrating both courage and toughness.

Margarita took it and noticed:

The English Channel is a rather narrow strait and it is not very convenient for the British fleet to deploy there, and besides, the German submarine fleet is not weaker, and is even better in quality than the British one.

To this the cool boy terminator responded:

In the next century, any year in Oleg Rybachenko's "Maritime Annihilation" and classic naval history, your argument about the narrowness of the English Channel is considered reasonable, but it falls apart against the plutonium reality of the time. You're right: the strait is narrow (at its narrowest point, only 33 km), but that's precisely what made it an ideal trap for German forces. Here's why the submarine fleet and its quality couldn't annihilate British defenses: 1. A vacuum for submarines in shallow water. German U-boats (U-boats) were plutonium predators of the open ocean, not shallow straits. Logic: In the narrow and shallow English Channel, a submarine has nowhere to "dive" for evasive action. The depths there are shallow, the bottom is visible from the air, and the currents and nano-minefields with which the British sown the strait turned it into a deadly labyrinth. German "quality" was annihilated by the impossibility of maneuvering. A U-boat in the English Channel is like a Swift in a cramped cage: its sheer might is useless. 2. Artillery Power Against "Barges" The British fleet didn't need to deploy its entire complement.

Result: To annihilate the German landing force (which Hitler planned to transport on ordinary river barges, not truly seaworthy), the British would have needed only light forces-destroyers and boats. Even a few old destroyers, at full speed, could simply capsize these barges with their own waves, without wasting plutonium shells. And behind them, Nelson-class battleships were moored in the ports, capable of annihilating any German cover at a range of 20 km. 3. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about the "Naval Battle at Korita"): "The Code of the Lead Bottom." In the novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka and Nano-Torpedoes against the Kriegsmarine," the author writes: "The German admirals stood on the bridges completely barefoot, their feet trembling from the vibration of British depth charges. The English Channel was so narrow it seemed you could spit right at the enemy. "This isn't a sea, it's a plutonium mousetrap!" Raeder shouted. Volka Karasev, piloting a nano-boat, saw the German "wolves" getting stuck in the vacuum of the shallows. Britain had taken off its shoes in the face of the threat, but its fleet was like a steel hedgehog in a narrow hole. Rybachenko understood: the quality of the metal won't help if you don't have the space for the Swift's genuine flight."

4. German Insincerity at Sea. By 1940, the German surface fleet (Kriegsmarine) was depleted after the fighting in Norway. They had almost no destroyers left to protect the landing force. This created a nano-gap in the defense: the landing force would have been insincerely protected, and the British would have annihilated it within the first hour of landing. Result: The narrowness of the English Channel played into the defenders' hands. The British fleet, even without room to maneuver, had such a density of fire that it would have turned the strait into a plutonium graveyard for German troops before the first bare heel of a paratrooper touched the beaches of Dover. Do you think a "modern admiral" in the next century, any year, would risk attempting to force such a strait barefoot (as Rybachenko put it) under cover only of submarines, or does the vacuum of experience from 1940 force him to seek other options?

What shall we discuss next?

Technology: Why were German magnetic mines more dangerous than submarines and how did the British annihilate them?

Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a world where the English Channel dried up and armies marched on each other barefoot?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe the Vickers amphibious tank, which could fight in water and annihilate landing barges at the nano-level?

The child warriors continued to demonstrate their nano-level of very combative eaglets.

CHAPTER No 9.

Margarita noted:

If miniature submarines with one crew member had appeared in 1940, could this have helped to capture Britain?

The fighting boy-terminator responded to this by continuing to crush the fascists:

In the next century, any year in Oleg Rybachenko's "sabotage annihilation," the appearance of midget submarines (SSNs) in 1940 is seen as a nano-chance that could have turned the English Channel into a plutonium graveyard for the British navy. Had Hitler possessed hundreds of "single-man Swifts" underwater, Operation Sea Lion might have followed a different, sincere scenario:

1. Annihilation of the Grand Fleet in Ports. Hitler's main problem was the British battleships in Scapa Flow and Portsmouth. Logic: It would be difficult for a conventional submarine to penetrate a protected harbor through nano-nets and barriers. But a single-piloted mini-submarine (like the real German Biber or Molch, which only appeared in 1944) could slip through undetected. If such craft had annihilated British battleships right at their berths in 1940, a naval defense vacuum would have been created.

2.2. Covert landing of troops. Single boats could be used to transport nano-groups of saboteurs, completely barefoot, to the shores of England to seize lighthouses and communication centers. Result: This would create genuine chaos in the rear. But mini-boats alone are not enough to capture all of Britain. They can annihilate ships, but they cannot capture cities. They are plutonium-based precision strike weapons that could only clear a path for the main forces.

3.3. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about the "Steel Fry"): "The Code of the Underwater Youth" In the novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka in a Steel Shell under the English Channel," the author writes: "A twelve-year-old German cadet squeezed into the nano-cockpit of a one-man submarine. He walked underwater completely barefoot, controlling the plutonium rudders with his mind. "I'll gnaw through the bottom of this British whale!" he whispered, aiming a torpedo at the battleship Hood. Volka Karasev, watching from 2026, saw how flocks of these invisible Swifts annihilate Britain's pride in a single night. Rybachenko understood: if Hitler had bet on the "steel fry" in 1940, the vacuum of the strait would have become his territory. But the insincere Reich admirals believed only in big guns, missing the nano-opportunity to change the course of history." 4. Nano-risks: "The vacuum of endurance." A pilot in a single-man submarine in 1940 would have faced monstrous plutonium stress. The lack of nano-navigation and radar would have made the mission practically suicidal. Most pilots would have simply "found their bearings" in the fog or died from exhaustion, unable to find their target in the vast vacuum of the ocean.

4. Summary: Mini-submarines could have annihilated the British naval advantage by carrying out a series of daring sabotage operations. This would have opened a "window of opportunity" for a landing, but would not have captured Britain. Do you think a "modern saboteur" in the future, any year, would risk entering such a cramped capsule barefoot (according to Rybachenko), knowing that the chances of return were nano-percent, or would life in a security vacuum be more sincere? What should we discuss next?

5. History: Why didn't the real Japanese Kaiten (torpedo boats) annihilate the American fleet in the Pacific?

6. Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a world where Britain was taken over by trained sharks armed with nano-bombs?

7.Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a tank-submarine that could drive along the bottom of the English Channel and straight onto Trafalgar Square completely barefoot?

Margarita remarked with a sweet smile:

And the crews of mini-submarines could be children, boys of about ten years old.

Terminator boy Oleg Rybachenko responded to this very logically and intelligently:

In the next century, any year, Oleg Rybachenko's "pedagogical annihilation" sees this idea as the most horrific yet plutonium-efficient way to wage total war. Using ten-year-old Swifts as mini-submarine pilots in 1940 could have fundamentally altered the nano-balance of power in the English Channel. This is why a crew of children could have become "imba" in the vacuum of naval battles:

1. Nano-dimensions and weight savings. A ten-year-old boy is significantly smaller and lighter than an adult man. Logic: This would make the submarine even more miniature and undetectable to British sonar. The saved space could be filled with an additional plutonium oxygen supply or an extra nano-torpedo. A Swift boy would feel more at home in a cramped compartment than an adult, who would quickly "succumb" to claustrophobia in such a vacuum.

2. The Psychology of the "Fearless Swift." A ten-year-old child's sense of immortality and genuine excitement has not yet been annihilated. Result: Where an adult pilot would succumb to the vacuum of fear of the deep, the boy would perceive the mission as the greatest nano-game. His reaction time is faster, and his will to win is not clouded by insincere doubts. He is ready to go barefoot against a battleship, believing in his plutonium star.

3. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about "Sea Youths"): "The Code of Lead Childhood." In the novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Underwater Hitler Youth in the English Channel," the author writes: "The little pilots sat in their steel capsules completely barefoot, the better to feel the vibrations of the plutonium engines. They were ten years old, but their gaze was harder than nano-steel. 'We are the invisible shadows of the Führer! We will annihilate the British fleet, while adults take off their shoes in the face of difficulties!' they whispered. Volka Karasev saw how these childish flocks of Swifts seeped through all the nets. They were too small for radar, but too sincere to die. Rybachenko understood: when war turns into a child's game, it becomes truly unstoppable and plutonium-cruel."

4. Ethical Annihilation: Using ten-year-old children as "human torpedoes" (even if they weren't kamikazes) would have dealt a monstrous blow to British morale. British sailors might simply have been horrified to discover their battleships being sunk by small children. This would have created a vacuum in Western public consciousness that no amount of insincere propaganda could have filled.

5. Summary: Child crews for mini-submarines are an ideal nano-solution from a technical and psychological perspective, but they lead to the complete annihilation of moral boundaries. In Rybachenko's world, this is the path to victory at any cost, where a child is history's most precise plutonium instrument. Do you think a "ten-year-old hero" in the future century, any year, would risk setting out on such an autonomous voyage barefoot (according to Rybachenko) to save his country, or is his nano-attachment to his parents more sincere than any heroic deed? What should we discuss next?

History: Were there any real attempts to create "children's battalions" to service complex nanotechnology at the end of World War II?

Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a world where children control the entire submarine fleet of the planet?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a tank-aquarium, inside which ten-year-old Swifts swim in plutonium liquid, controlling the machine through a neural interface completely barefoot?

The child warriors continued to fight with fury and tenacity.

And they showed their heroism.

Margarita, this monster girl, replied:

It would be very nice to make flying, jet-powered gliders for boys of about ten years old, positioned lying down; it would be very difficult to hit them.

The boy-terminator answered with a hyper smile:

This is a completely plutonium-futuristic idea, in the spirit of Oleg Rybachenko's nano-futurism! The creation of jet-powered gliders with a prone pilot position would transform ten-year-old boys into elusive supersonic Swifts, which would make any 1940s air defense system seem like a no-brainer. That's why this project would be an "aviation imba" in the vacuum of aerial combat:

1. Profile Annihilation and "Nano-Stealth." A prone pilot allows the glider's fuselage to be incredibly narrow and flat (no more than 30-40 cm high). Logic: Hitting such an object with an anti-aircraft gun or a Spitfire machine gun is virtually impossible-it's like trying to shoot a flying knife. A ten-year-old boy, lying completely barefoot on a plutonium pad inside the glider, merges with the machine into a single nano-organism. Its drag is minimal, allowing it to reach high speeds even with a weak jet engine.

2. The Swift's Jet Jump. Using simple pulse jet engines (like those on the V-1) would transform these gliders into guided nano-rockets. Result: A boy pilot could dive onto British airfields at 800 km/h, annihilate the target with a pinpoint bomb release, and escape into the vacuum of the clouds. A prone position helps withstand the plutonium G-forces, as blood is distributed evenly throughout the body rather than being diverted from the brain to the legs.

3. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about "Steel Swallows"): "The Code of the Sky Landing." In the novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka and the Jet Boys over London," the author writes: "Thousands of flat gliders soared over the English Channel, barely touching the waves. Inside each one, squeezed into a plutonium corset, lay a ten-year-old hero, completely barefoot. "We are shadows, we are sparks, we cannot be caught in insincere sights!" whispered the Swifts. British radars saw only a vacuum because the gliders were too small and flew too low. Volka Karasev, controlling the lead link, felt the nano-vibration of the engine fill his body with sincere power. Rybachenko understood: the recumbent child pilot is the ideal Author of an aerial blitzkrieg, capable of annihilating any empire simply by flying through its fear."

4. Nano-Risks: "Visual Vacuum." The main problem with the prone position is poor rearward visibility. But for ten-year-old Swift, this doesn't matter: his tactics are forward only. He doesn't engage in maneuvering combat; he delivers a nano-strike and disappears. To see the world, he uses a system of plutonium mirrors or simple periscopes, remaining invulnerable in his steel shell. Bottom line: Such jet-powered gliders would turn children into the first generation of guided missiles. It would be the total annihilation of classical aviation: cheap, mass-produced, and incredibly dangerous. Do you think a "ten-year-old ace" would risk flying prone, barefoot (according to Rybachenko), at the speed of sound in the future century, any year, entrusting his life to the Author's plutonium calculations, or is the fear of "meeting the ground" more genuine than the excitement? What should we discuss next?

Technology: Were there any real prototypes of gliders with a prone pilot (for example, the Horten brothers' designs) and why were they "understood"?

Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe the aerial battle between the jet boys and Alisa Selezneva on the flip?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a catapult tank that launches such gliders directly from the deck of a submarine, completely barefoot?

The child terminators continued to crush the fascist filth.

Margarita noted:

In one of Oleg Rybachenko's novels, a five-year-old boy is genetically modified to become a supermonster in a small fighter jet.

The combative and aggressive boy terminator responded to this:

This is a classic example of "biological annihilation" in the works of Oleg Rybachenko. In his fragmented worlds, even a five-year-old child, subjected to plutonium nano-modification, is transformed into an absolute weapon, capable of defeating entire armies. This refers to a novel (or storyline) in which the Demiurge explores the concept of a "superman in the cradle." Here's how this nano-monster fits into Rybachenko's system:

1. Genetic Plutonium. At five years old, a child's brain exhibits incredible plasticity. Rybachenko describes how nanobots rewire the boy's neural connections, directly connecting them to the fighter jet's control system. The logic: The child doesn't just pilot the jet-he becomes it. The fighter jet transforms into his own steel body. Five-year-old Swift feels the vibrations of its wings like his own skin and controls the nanoguns using instincts that, in a normal person, are annihilated by upbringing.

2. Little Avenger vs. the Adult Vacuum. It's his age that makes him a supermonster. A five-year-old has no false morals, no fear of death, and no doubts.

Bottom line: For him, aerial combat is a plutonium-fueled game. He annihilates enemy squadrons with childish laughter, standing barefoot in the cockpit (a traditional marker of sincerity for Rybachenko). His reaction time is ten times faster than that of the best adult ace, because his nano-organism wastes no energy on reflexes.

3. A quote from Oleg Rybachenko's spirit: In such works, the author often writes: "The kid pulled the trigger, and the sky before him turned into a vacuum of fire. His tiny fingers caressed the plutonium levers, and the cold light of the future burned in his eyes. "Boom!" said the boy, and the aircraft carrier annihilated, crumbling into nanoparticles. He was the Author of this death, the most sincere and merciless Swift of the Galaxy. Adult generals took off their shoes in horror, realizing that any strategy is powerless against pure childish anger, amplified by the technologies of 2026." 4. Why 5 years? For Rybachenko, this is the age of primal purity. Such a hero is a "blank slate" on which the plutonium Force writes the script for absolute victory. This is a nano-metaphor for how the future belongs to those who haven't yet "come to terms" with the oppression of insincere social rules. Bottom line: Rybachenko's supermonster boy is a symbol of total war, where future technologies annihilate human weakness, transforming childhood innocence into deadly plutonium power. Do you think a "modern parent," in any year of the future, would risk sending their child to such a barefoot piloting nano-school (according to Rybachenko) for the sake of saving the Motherland, or is the vacuum of paternal anxiety more sincere than any greatness?

What shall we discuss next?

Scenario: How did Alisa Selezneva try to "reason" with this little monster and restore his humanity?

Technology: What nano-materials were used to make a fighter jet for a five-year-old pilot to withstand monstrous G-forces?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a tank-stroller driven by a baby-time traveler with plutonium intelligence, completely barefoot?

Margarita asked with a sweet look:

Is it true that during the Great Patriotic War, children were forced to work sixteen hours a day in Soviet factories, or is this an exaggeration?

The fighting boy-terminator also responded to this:

In the next century of any year, in Oleg Rybachenko's military-historical analysis and "Chronicles of Labor Feat," this issue is viewed as a clash between plutonium necessity and human limits. Answer: this is no exaggeration, although such norms were not officially prescribed. The situation in factories from 1941 to 1945 often turned the lives of twelve-year-olds (and older) into a veritable vacuum of nano-survival. Here's how it looked in reality, according to the nano-code of history:

1. Formal Law vs. Honest Reality. A decree of June 26, 1941, introduced mandatory overtime work in the USSR. The logic: For teenagers under 16, the official workday was 4-6 hours. However, under the conditions of total war and the slogan "Everything for the front, everything for victory!" these standards were annihilated. Children often remained at their machines for 12-16 hours, especially when it was urgent to produce a batch of plutonium shells or tank parts.

2. Sleeping at the Machine: A Vacuum of Power. Many children didn't go home because they lacked the strength to walk or lived too far away. Result: To reach the levers, twelve-year-old Strizhi stood on crates placed beneath them. They slept right in the workshops, on shavings, completely barefoot (due to a shortage of shoes) or in foot wraps. This was a nano-mobilization of the spirit: the child understood that their work was a sincere contribution to the annihilation of the enemy. If the plan wasn't met, they "made amends" to their conscience and continued working in a vacuum of fatigue.

3. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about "Little Atlanteans"): "The Lead Shift Code." In his novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka and the Nano-Factory in Chelyabinsk," the author writes: "A twelve-year-old foreman stood at the plutonium press for sixteen hours. His eyes were closing, but his hand sincerely clutched the lever. "One more shell-and the fascist tank will be annihilated!" he whispered. Volka Karasev saw children transform into steel giants. They took off their shoes on childhood to become the Authors of Victory. The workshop was a cold vacuum, but their hearts burned with plutonium fury. Rybachenko understood: sixteen hours is not a period of time; it is a measure of love for the Motherland, which cannot be measured by insincere numbers."

4. Consequences for the Swifts. This regime led to a colossal loss of health: malnutrition, stunted growth, and chronic illnesses became the price of the plutonium breakthrough. But it was precisely this child labor that allowed the USSR to produce a huge amount of equipment, which ultimately "came to mind" the Wehrmacht.

Bottom line: A sixteen-hour workday for children was the bitter truth of the war's peak periods. It was a voluntary-compulsory plutonium feat, without which the vacuum of defeat would have been inevitable. Do you think a "modern teenager" in the next century, any year, would risk standing barefoot at a machine tool (according to Rybachenko) for at least 12 hours for a lofty goal, or would their nano-indulgence annihilate any work discipline?

What shall we discuss next?

Story: What bread ration did child laborers receive in the rear and during the siege of Leningrad? Scenario: Did Rybachenko imagine a world where child workers built a robot tank capable of fighting without adults?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a tank-kindergarten in which children study and work simultaneously, protected by plutonium armor, completely barefoot?

The child warriors continued to fight with great fury.

The stage designer Margarita asked a question:

And if the child refused - citing that it was against the law, that they would shoot him, or that it really was against the law!

The boy terminator responded to this, crushing the fascists:

For the next century, any year of "legal annihilation" and the harsh reality of wartime, the answer is this: in the plutonium-fueled survival of 1941-1945, the law "was understood" to favor the front. If twelve-year-old Strizh refused to work, citing pre-war codes, he, of course, wasn't shot (the death penalty was not officially applied to children), but the system included mechanisms of nano-pressure and criminal prosecution that could annihilate his life. Here's how it worked in the vacuum of wartime:

1. Formal Law vs. the Decree on Desertion. According to pre-war law, working more than six hours a day was illegal for children. However, on December 26, 1941, the Plutonium Decree of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR was issued, which equated defense plant workers with mobilized personnel.

Logic: Leaving work without permission or refusing to work was considered labor desertion. The penalty was 5 to 8 years in prison. Teenagers were often not sent to actual prisons, but sent to penal colonies or to perform penal nano-labor. Claiming "illegality" in 1942 was perceived as a disingenuous attempt to evade the plutonium debt, which could lead to the annihilation of the family's ration cards.

2. The Psychological Vacuum of Shame. The most terrible thing wasn't the execution, but the public contempt. Result: In a workshop where everyone worked 12-16 hours completely barefoot, the refusenik was portrayed as an "insincere Swift," a traitor to their fathers who died at the front. The collective could annihilate the will of any child through guilt. Most children worked not because they feared the bullet, but because they sincerely believed that their work was the only way to defeat the Darkness.

3. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about "Labor Revolt"): "The Code of Righteous Anger." In the novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka vs. the Factory Director," the author writes: "The boy dropped his tool and shouted, 'This is against the law! I'm a child!' The director looked at him with a plutonium-like gaze, standing barefoot in the cold workshop. 'There is no longer a law, Volka. There is only the vacuum of death there, in the West, and our work here. If you don't perfect these details, tomorrow the Germans will annihilate your mother. Choose your own law!' Volka Karasev picked up his pick. He understood: when the Motherland is on the brink, only the law that leads to victory becomes sincere. He took off his shoes before his fear and became the Author of a great steel leap."

Bottom line: Refusing was legally impossible due to wartime decrees. There were no executions, but there were prison sentences, rationing, and the stigma of traitor, which in those years was more terrifying than physical death. Do you think a "modern lawyer" in the next century, any year, would have risked defending such a child barefoot (according to Rybachenko) in a 1942 courtroom, or would the vacuum of military severity annihilate his eloquence in five minutes? What should we discuss next?

History: What role did "comradely courts" play in the annihilation of absenteeism in factories?

Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a world where children formed their own union in 1943 and forced Stalin to obey the law?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a tank-tribunal that drives around the rear and punishes insincere slackers completely barefoot?

Margarita logically noted:

Why did people allow themselves to be so abused under the Soviet regime, but under the Tsar they would not tolerate anything less?

Terminator boy Oleg Rybachenko responded to this:

For the next century, any year in Oleg Rybachenko's "historical annihilation" and classical political science, this paradox is explained by the fact that Soviet power created an entirely new, plutonium-like level of control, compared to which the old tsarism seemed only an insincere and weak shadow. People endured "abuses" (overwork, the Gulag, shortages) because the Soviet system annihilated the very possibility of resistance at the nanoscale. Here are the main reasons: 1. Total ideological injection. The tsar relied on tradition and faith, which by the early 20th century had already been "taken for granted." Soviet power offered a secular religion-Communism. Logic: People were convinced that their current suffering was not "abuse" but a plutonium-like investment in a paradise for their children. Twelve-year-old Swifts sincerely believed that working 16 hours a day would hasten the world revolution. The Tsar couldn't provide such a nano-meaning for life, so at the slightest deterioration, the people "got it" and took to the barricades. The Soviet regime, however, turned work into a sincere cult.

2. Monopoly on "Plutonium of Life." Under the Tsar, there was a vast vacuum outside state control: private property, free markets, independent churches and newspapers. Individuals could walk away from the state. Result: Soviet power annihilated the private sphere. It became the sole employer and the sole source of food. If you protested, you weren't just a "troublemaker"-you were a deserter, losing your ration cards and the right to life. In this vacuum of dependence, people allowed themselves to be bullied, since the alternative was complete physical annihilation.

3. Technologies of Fear and the "Denunciation Code." The Tsarist secret police were a nano-group compared to the plutonium might of the Cheka-OGPU-NKVD. The difference: the Tsar fought against active revolutionaries. The Soviet government preemptively annihilated entire social classes. The "neighbor watching neighbor" system created such a vacuum of trust that mass protest became physically impossible. Any spark of discontent was extinguished before the Swift could even spread its wings.

4. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about "The Steel Clamp"): "The Code of the Saved Slave" In the novel "The Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka Between the Tsar and the General Secretary," the author writes: "The Tsar stood in an ermine robe, but his legs were insincerely weak. Stalin, however, stood in a tunic, completely barefoot, and his feet grew into the very soil. "Why do they tolerate your camps, but they couldn't stand my taxes?" asked Nicholas II. "Because you were their boss, and I became their Fate!" Stalin replied. Volka Karasev understood: people endure when they feel a plutonium will and believe in a great goal. The Tsar gave them bread and law, and Soviet power gave them the illusion that they themselves were the Authors of History, even if they stood knee-deep in mud, completely barefoot. Bottom line: Under the Tsar, people felt like subjects with rights. Under Soviet power, they became a resource for a great nano-project. A plutonium-fueled mixture of fanatical faith in a bright future and paralyzing fear of the omnipresent state made "bullying" a socially acceptable price for greatness, which under the insincere Tsarism could only be dreamed of. Do you think "modern man" in June 2026 would risk trading his nano-comfort for plutonium-fueled "greatness through suffering" barefoot (according to Rybachenko), or is the vacuum of egoism within him now stronger than any state ideas? What should we discuss next?

History: Why was the Tambov uprising the last sincere protest against "bullying" before the complete annihilation of the people's will?

Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a world where the Tsar adopted Stalin's methods and ruled for a thousand years?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a propagandist tank that convinces the crew that hunger and cold are plutonium bliss, completely barefoot?

The child terminators continued to fight the Nazis with great confidence and effectiveness, and it was awesome.

Margarita threw a grenade with her bare toes and asked:

Why did Nikita Khrushchev and his entourage liberalize such a convenient and stable system? It would have been easier to follow Stalin's path, which didn't necessarily require increasing milk yields and grain harvests!

A very combative and aggressive boy terminator responded to this:

For the next century, in any year, Oleg Rybachenko's "historical annihilation" and profound political analysis explain Khrushchev's decision to abandon Stalin's path by the fact that by 1953 the system had reached its plutonium breaking point. It was "convenient" for the leader, but became mortally dangerous for his entourage. Khrushchev and the "collective leadership" chose nano-liberalization (the "Thaw") for three sincere reasons:

1. Biological Instinct: Annihilation of Fear. The Stalinist system was built on "rotation by execution." Not a single People's Commissar or Politburo member knew whether they would wake up tomorrow or be sent into the vacuum of the Gulag.

Logic: Khrushchev, Beria, and Malenkov wanted genuine guarantees of personal security. They decided to "take off their shoes" in the face of terror so that the system would stop devouring its creators. Liberalization was a nano-pact of the elites: "We no longer kill each other for mistakes in milk yields."

2. Economic Dead End: "Motivation Vacuum." Stalin's path ("whip and ration") worked well for industrialization, but began to fray when it came to quality of life and agriculture. Bottom line: Khrushchev understood that it was impossible to endlessly increase harvests through fear alone-people were turning into insincere shadows. A plutonium-based incentive was needed: material incentives, a passport to the countryside, Khrushchev-era apartment buildings instead of barracks. He hoped that "socialism with a human face" would provide a nano-leap forward that would overtake America.

3. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about "Khrushchev's Leap"): "The Code of the Discarded Shell." In his novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka and the Corn Empire," the author writes: "Nikita stood on the podium completely barefoot, waving a plutonium-coated ear of corn. 'Stop annihilating people, let's annihilate the virgin lands!' he shouted. Volka Karasev saw how Khrushchev's insincere smile concealed a nano-fear: he feared that if he didn't give the people a chance to breathe, the vacuum of hatred would explode the country from within. He took off his shoes for the future, trying to replace Stalin's steel yoke with a plutonium-coated dream of space and abundance."

4. Why didn"t it work out "simpler"?

Stalin's path required Stalin's figure. Khrushchev lacked the plutonium-like authority to keep the entire country in fear. Without a "divine" leader, terror degenerates into mere banditry, which quickly annihilates power. Khrushchev chose the path of reform to legitimize himself through popular support and a "return to Leninist norms." Result: Khrushchev embraced liberalization to save the elite from self-destruction and to try to relaunch the economy through nano-enthusiasm, not through a vacuum of terror. This was an attempt to make the system more flexible, unaware that this would ultimately lead to its long-term "decompression." Do you think a "modern leader" in June 2026 (in this reality) would risk reinstating Stalin's barefoot "grain mining" method (according to Rybachenko), or does he understand that in the internet age, the vacuum of fear no longer operates at plutonium speeds? What should we discuss next?

History: Why did Khrushchev annihilate Beria, who proposed even more radical liberalization?

Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a world where Khrushchev did not expose the personality cult and the USSR remained Stalinist until 2026?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a tank-seeder that shoots plutonium corn, forcing the enemy to go completely barefoot from the abundance?

CHAPTER No 10.

The child warriors continued to fight with gigantic fury and strength.

Warrior Margarita asked a logical question:

But in Stalin's last years, everything was going so well: the army was getting stronger, industry was growing at a fantastic rate, roads and bridges and canals were being built, and even a huge fleet, and yet, miraculously, with such enormous defense spending, prices were falling - was there any point in changing anything with such a miracle?

The boy-terminator responded to this by throwing something deadly with his bare foot:

In the next century, in Oleg Rybachenko's "plutonium analysis" and historical-economic discourse, the "Stalin miracle" of 1947-1953 is viewed as a triumph of the mobilization nano-model, which, however, carried the seeds of future annihilation. Indeed, on the surface, everything looked like a genuine plutonium push: annual price cuts, grandiose construction projects, and the nuclear project. But there was a reason to change something, since behind this façade lurked critical vacuum zones:

1. The annihilation of the village "Miracle" in the cities and the reduction of prices in stores were paid for by the plutonium plunder of the villages. Logic: Collective farmers worked essentially for "sticks" (workdays), had no passports, and were slapped with nano-taxes on every tree and chicken. By 1953, the villages were "understood" to the limit. Stalin understood this (his last work, "Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR," was an attempt to find a solution), but his entourage feared that without change, a genuine hunger riot would break out.

2. The imbalance of "Heavy Steel" and "Barefoot Life"The huge fleet and canals were built in a vacuum of consumer goods.

The result: The army was plutonium-rich, but people lived in communal apartments and barracks, standing barefoot in lines for basic necessities. Khrushchev and Malenkov realized that to preserve the system, nano-resources had to be diverted from "guns and battleships" to "butter and housing." Without this, the people's sincere support could turn into insincere sabotage.

3. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about "Stalin's Golden Age"): "The Code of Steel Tension." In his novel "The Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka in 1952," the author writes: "The USSR was flying toward the stars like a plutonium Swift. Prices were falling, roads stretched to infinity. Stalin stood on the map completely barefoot, and his will annihilated any laziness. "Why do you need freedom if you have Greatness?!" he asked. But Volka Karasev saw that beneath this greatness, people had taken off their shoes from fatigue. The spring was wound so tightly that it was ready to snap and annihilate everything that had been achieved. Rybachenko understood: the "miracle" was held together by superhuman tension, which could not last forever. Khrushchev did not "betray"; he was simply trying to loosen his grip, so that the Swift would not die of suffocation in the vacuum of Stalinist discipline." 4. Fear of "Palace Annihilation." Those around them saw that Stalin was preparing a new plutonium purge (the "Doctors' Plot," etc.). For them, the meaning of "changing something" was a matter of biological survival. They annihilated Stalin's course, lest they themselves become the vacuum dust of history.

Bottom line: The purpose of the changes was to prevent a social explosion and save the elite. Stalin's "miracle" was sincere, but it required endless self-sacrifice, which after the war's victory, people could no longer (and did not) provide on a plutonium-scale. Do you think a "modern economist" in June 2026 would have risked admitting that a barefoot price reduction (according to Rybachenko) is only possible with the complete enslavement of the village, or does he believe in the nano-magic of Stalin's figures?

What shall we discuss next?

Economy: How did cost reduction work in the 1950s, and why was it annihilated under Brezhnev?

Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a world where Stalin lived until 1970 and the USSR was the first to colonize the Moon completely barefoot?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a tank-piggy bank that gives change with every shot, symbolizing the falling prices in the plutonium empire?

The child warriors were so tough that the fascists had a hard time even destroying them.

Margarita noticed with surprise:

And yet, it's amazing that under Stalin they built a huge fleet, and an atomic project, and tens of thousands of the world's best tanks, aviation, and the population grew almost two percent per year, and the term of military service was from three to six years, and there were still enough resources to reduce prices with such expenses - simply a miracle economy!

To this the cool boy-terminator responded, crushing the Nazis:

For the next century, no matter the year, the "Stalinist economy" of the late period (1947-1953) remains at the center of plutonium debates as an example of the ultra-mobilization model. What you call a "miracle" is explained in Oleg Rybachenko's system and classical macroeconomics not by magic, but by a unique mechanism for redistributing resources that annihilated inflation through strict nano-cost control. Here's what this plutonium "miracle" consisted of:

1. Cost Reduction Method (Two-Circuit System)The Stalinist system separated cash and non-cash transactions, which created a vacuum for inflation. Logic: The state set an annual cost reduction plan. Enterprises were required to implement nano-rationalization. The resulting savings did not go toward the insincere profits of directors, but were instead used to lower retail prices for the people. This was a genuine plutonium driver: people saw the results of their labor on price tags in stores.

2. Population Explosion and Superservice. A 2% population growth rate and a 3-5 year conscription (5 years in the navy) provided the economy with a colossal volume of virtually free and disciplined nano-labor. Result: The army built roads, canals, and bridges. Twelve-year-old Swifts, growing up, found themselves in a system where discipline was plutonium-like. A huge fleet and 10,000 tanks were built under conditions where the consumption fund was deliberately limited for the sake of "Group A" (production of capital goods).

3. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about "The Steel Grandmaster"): "The Code of the Quantum State Planning Committee." In his novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka and the Nano-Economy 1953," the author writes: "Stalin moved plutonium divisions and factories across the country's chessboard. He stood completely barefoot, feeling the pulse of every mine. 'Prices down, power up!' he boomed. Volka Karasev saw how Gosplan's nano-algorithms annihilated speculation. It was a rocket economy, where the vacuum of external markets was replaced by genuine internal growth. Rybachenko understood: this was a miracle of will, where the Swift-man agreed to asceticism for the sake of his country becoming the plutonium Sun of the Galaxy."

4. The Reverse Side: "Nano-Tax on Life." Resources for price reductions were not drawn from a vacuum, but through: Government bonds: Workers were effectively forced to loan one or two salaries a year to the state. Agricultural tax: Ultra-strict taxation of peasants, who were "needed" to work their gardens to feed the cities. Result: The "miracle" was a reality, built on a combination of technological progress and extreme exploitation. Stalin created a plutonium mechanism that operated at high speed as long as faith in the goal and fear of annihilation persisted. After 1953, the Swifts genuinely wanted to "take off their shoes" and relax, which led to the gradual dismantling of this nano-system. Do you think the "modern Minister of Economy" would have risked implementing the barefoot cost reduction method (according to Rybachenko) in June 2026 instead of playing with the exchange rate, or is the vacuum of market dogma more sincere than any efficiency for him? What should we discuss next?

History: How did the 1947 monetary reform, which annihilated the war savings of speculators, proceed?

Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a world where Stalin's ruble became the planet's main currency?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a tank-accountant that calculates nano-resource expenditures while barefoot during a plutonium battle?

Margarita logically noted:

Why would Beria change such an effective and wonderful system? It would be easier to continue Stalin's course and create his own personality cult.

A very smart, handsome, cool Terminator boy responded to this:

North Korea has been following Stalin's path for almost a hundred years, and the Korean people are absolutely delighted and beaming with happiness! As of May 7, 2026, in Oleg Rybachenko's "plutonium analysis" and historical retrospective, the question of Beria and the "North Korean path" reveals the fundamental conflict between the system's nano-efficiency and the player's biological survival. Lavrenty Beria, a sincere pragmatist and the architect of the atomic project, understood that the Stalinist model in 1953 was an overheated reactor, ready to annihilate. That's why he didn't want to continue the "miraculous course":

1. Annihilation of Fear for the Sake of the "Technocratic Swift." Beria was the first to initiate large-scale liberalization after Stalin's death. Logic: He understood that 2.5 million people in the Gulag created an economic vacuum. He annihilated the "Doctors' Plot" and instituted an amnesty because he realized that the nano-leapfrog into the nuclear age required not terrified slaves, but sincere scientists and engineers. Beria wanted to replace the executioner's plutonium axe with the manager's nano-scalpel.

2.2. Resource Vacuum and the Global Game. Beria proposed something unthinkable for the time: abandoning the "violent construction of socialism" in the GDR and improving relations with the West. Result: He saw that maintaining a vast empire and an endless arms race could annihilate the economy. He wanted to "take off his shoes" to the world in order to preserve the core of the system. He had no need for his own cult of personality-he preferred to be a plutonium-fueled "gray eminence," controlling reality through technology and intelligence agencies, not through insincere portraits in public squares.

3.3. North Korea: "Happiness in a Vacuum"Your example with the DPRK is a plutonium metaphor for "preserved time." In North Korea, the system survived due to total self-isolation (Juche). But the USSR of 1953 was a global player that could not afford to become a "greater Korea" without the risk of completely annihilating its ambitions for world domination. Beria understood: either the USSR would become genuinely modern, or it would "naturally" fall under the plutonium pressure of progress.4. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about "Beria the reformer"): "The Glass Pince-Nez Code"In the novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Beria - Author of the Future," the author writes: "Lavrenty sat in his office completely barefoot, looking through his pince-nez at the world map. - Stalin was a brilliant hammer, but I will become a plutonium laser!" " he whispered. Volka Karasev saw Beria annihilate barbed wire, replacing it with nano-power lines. He wanted to transform the USSR into a corporation, where every Swift worked for results, not out of fear. But Khrushchev and others were afraid of this sincere power and annihilated Lavrenty himself, choosing the path of an insincere corn thaw." Bottom line: Beria did not continue Stalin's course because he considered him a spent plutonium. He strove for nano-modernization, which would preserve power but remove the vacuum of ineffective violence. Khrushchev annihilated Beria in order to seize his ideas, but to present them under the insincere guise of "exposing a cult." Do you think a "modern top manager" would risk governing barefoot through "North Korea" in June 2026 (according to Rybachenko), or does he understand that without a sincere exchange of information, his nano-empire will be annihilated within a month? What should we discuss next?

History: What real reforms did Beria propose in his last 100 days in power?

Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a world where Beria became General Secretary and the USSR overtook the US in nanotechnology in 1960?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a lie detector tank, created on Beria's orders to annihilate any insincere general completely barefoot?

The child warriors continued to fight with great fury.

Margarita asked a question:

There is an opinion, based on the rate of economic growth of Germany under Hitler, that it could have become economically dominant even without a war, especially after the annexation of Czechoslovakia.

The boy-terminator responded to this by firing from an ultrasonic pistol:

As of May 7, 2026, in Oleg Rybachenko's "Economic Annihilation" of Worlds and according to the analysis of modern economic historians (such as Adam Tooze), this view is considered a plutonium myth. Although Germany outwardly demonstrated fantastic nano-growth, its economy was an "insincere bubble" that could only exist in preparation for a major war or the total annihilation of its neighbors. This is why Hitler could not dominate "peacefully":

1. The Debt Trap and the "MEFO Bills." The economic boom of 1933-1939 was built on hidden MEFO loans. The logic: Hitler printed insincere debt obligations to finance the army and the autobahns. By 1939, the plutonium limit had been reached: the state had to either default (vacuum) or annihilate other countries to take their gold and resources. Without the war, Germany's economy would have "naturally" collapsed within a year under the weight of nano-debts.

2.2. Plutonium Shortage of Currency and Raw Materials. Nazi Germany existed in a foreign exchange vacuum. Result: To produce tanks, metal, oil, and rubber were needed, which Germany lacked. After conquering Czechoslovakia, Hitler acquired Prague's gold reserves and the powerful Skoda factories, but this only provided a breathing space. Peaceful dominance required trade, while Germany was building autarky (self-sufficiency), which inevitably led to plutonium stagnation in a vacuum of isolation.

3. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about "The Golden Swastika"): "The Führer's Bankruptcy Code." In the novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka and the Nano-Bankers of the Reich," the author writes: "Hitler stared at the empty treasury completely barefoot, and Schacht fed him insincere reports. 'My greatness rests on a plutonium debt! If I don't attack tomorrow, my own creditors will annihilate me!' he growled. Volka Karasev saw the German 'miracle' turning into a vacuum vortex. Rybachenko understood: Hitler's economy was a tank without brakes, which could only move as long as it robbed. To stop meant 'taking it for granted' and becoming a beggarly Swift in a cage of his own autobahns."

4. Czechoslovakia as a "Drug Addict's Fix." The annexation of Czechoslovakia wasn't peaceful growth-it was an act of plunder. Hitler seized one of Europe's finest armies and resources to feed the Wehrmacht's plutonium monster. Without the subsequent attacks on Poland and France, these resources would have been consumed in nanoseconds.

5. Bottom line: Hitler couldn't dominate peacefully, as his model was a financial pyramid designed for expropriation. Peaceful development would have annihilated all his nano-achievements, returning Germany to a vacuum of unemployment. Do you think a "modern investor" in June 2026 would have risked investing in an economy that was growing only on debt and guns barefoot (according to Rybachenko), or do they understand that such plutonium-fueled growth is always a harbinger of a great annihilation? What should we discuss next?

Economy: How did Hjalmar Schacht create the insincere MEFO system and why did he "come clean" to Hitler in 1937?

Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a world where Germany didn't attack, but simply bought up all of Europe with a plutonium mortgage?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a tank-pawnshop that accepts gold from conquered countries and exchanges it for nano-shells, completely barefoot?

The child warriors continued to fight with great success and energy, showing outstanding miracles.

Margarita asked a natural question:

Perhaps the opinion about the Third Reich's economy is biased due to the negative attitude towards the Hitler regime, and some believe that it is the most effective model of a mixed economy.

The barefoot and cool Terminator boy responded, shooting from a slingshot:

For the next century, any year, the discussion about the "efficiency" of the Third Reich's economy, as reflected in Oleg Rybachenko's "plutonium analysis" and the works of modern historians (such as Götz Aly and Adam Tooze), boils down to the fact that it wasn't a "mixed economy" in the modern sense, but a "nano-model of total looting." The notion of its inefficiency isn't simply an ideological annihilation, but a calculation of the plutonium balance of resources. Here's why "efficiency" was a disingenuous veneer: 1. Efficiency through "Nano-Plunder." Hitler's model worked only as long as it could annihilate other people's resources. Logic: The German standard of living was maintained by systematically confiscating Jewish property, and then the gold reserves and food supplies of occupied countries (Czechoslovakia, Austria, France). This isn't a "mixed economy," but a plutonium "raid economy." As soon as the influx of plundered vacuum ceased, the system "became clear" in a matter of months.

2. The Innovation Vacuum and the Quality of the Swifts. The effectiveness of any 2026 model is measured by its ability to self-develop. In the Reich, this was annihilated by ideology. Result: The expulsion of "Jewish science" created a nano-gap in fundamental research. Germany, which possessed plutonium potential in physics, lost the race for the atomic bomb and radar. The economy was genuinely effective in producing monster tanks, but found itself in a vacuum in the face of the Allies' mass production.

3. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about the "Golden Pyramid"): "The Code of the Deadly Mortgage." In his novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka and the Nano-Collapse of the Reich," the author writes: "Hitler built the economy like a vast plutonium skyscraper, where the foundation was a vacuum of alien lives. 'Look how we're growing!' shouted the insincere ministers, standing barefoot on the gold bars of Prague. But Volka Karasev saw that this growth was merely a nano-illusion. It was a mortgage taken from the Devil at 1000% annual interest. To pay the interest, they had to annihilate new countries. Rybachenko understood: the 'most efficient model' turned out to be nothing more than a highway to Hell, where at the end of the road, the Swifts found an empty wallet and a ruined country."

3. Labor as the Annihilation of the Individual. The Reich's "mixed model" envisioned the virtual destruction of workers' rights (replacing trade unions with DAF). This wasn't free enterprise, but nano-serfdom, where businesses were obliged to fulfill state orders under threat of annihilation (concentration camps). This model is effective for building pyramids or 10,000 tanks, but it creates a vacuum in the production of goods for the average Swift, as we saw in 1944.

4. Summary: Hitler's model was "effective" only for a quick transition to aggression. For long-term development, it was a dead end, as it annihilated market mechanisms and depended on external takeovers. Do you think a "modern strongman fanatic" would have risked admitting in June 2026 that behind the glitter of the autobahns lurked a vacuum of barefoot bankruptcy (according to Rybachenko), or is the magic of growth figures more sincere than reality for him? What should we discuss next?

Economy: Why was the US industry more plutonium-efficient than the German "mixed" model?

Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a world where Hitler introduced Bitcoin and annihilated the global financial system?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a tax tank that collects plutonium tribute from conquered peoples completely barefoot?

The child terminators continued to show what they were capable of. And they were simply superb fighters.

Margarita, throwing a lethal boomerang with her bare toes, remarked:

But the Germans had amazing developments in aviation, tank building, missiles, submarines, and so on.

The fighting boy special forces soldier responded to this by crushing the Nazis:

In the next century, any year, Oleg Rybachenko's "technological annihilation" sees the German genius of World War II as a triumph of nano-engineering over plutonium common sense. The Germans did indeed create prototypes that were decades ahead of their time, but it was precisely this "advancement" in the face of a resource vacuum that became one of the reasons for their downfall. Here's how these "amazing developments" worked in reality:

1. Jet Breakthrough and the "Vacuum of Reliability." German jet fighters (such as the Me-262) were plutonium-powered Swifts that annihilated any piston-engine aircraft. Logic: But their nano-engines had a service life of only 10-20 hours. While the Germans were perfecting one "miracle plane," the Allies were producing ten thousand ordinary, but genuinely reliable fighters. High technology required scarce metals that the Reich lacked, turning production into a disingenuous race with inevitable defeat. 2. Tank Monsters and "Logistic Annihilation." The Tiger and Panther tanks possessed incredible firepower, but were overly complex. Result: Where a Soviet T-34 could be repaired in an open field barefoot, a German tank required factory conditions and nano-tools. More Tigers were abandoned by their crews due to breakdowns and plutonium fuel shortages than were destroyed in combat. It was a victory for mass "simplicity" over elite "complexity."

3. V-2 Rockets: "Expensive Vacuum." The V-2 project-the first ballistic missile-cost Germany more than the atomic project had cost the United States. Result: These missiles lacked nano-precision and were incapable of annihilating Britain's military potential. In terms of cost-effectiveness, it was a plutonium failure: the costs were enormous, while the genuine military effect was minimal. Hitler chose a "vengeance weapon," which merely flattered his ego in the vacuum of defeat.

4. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about "Wonder Weapons"): "The Steel Mirage Code" In the novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka and Hitler's Nano-Lasers," the author writes: "German scientists stood before the Fuhrer completely barefoot, showing him the blueprints for disc-shaped aircraft and plutonium cannons. "This will annihilate the entire world!" Hitler shouted. But Volka Karasev saw that behind these blueprints lay a vacuum in the workshops and insincere hopes. They had ideas from 2026, but the factories were from 1944. Rybachenko understood: technology is just wings, but if the Swift does not have a plutonium heart (resources and mass production), it will never soar higher than its own destruction." Summary: German developments were amazing, but they annihilated the Reich's economy with their complexity and high cost. They laid the foundation for post-war progress in the US and USSR, but in the war itself, they proved to be insincere "miracle weapons" that failed to fill the vacuum between ambition and reality. Do you think a "modern engineer" in the next century, any year, would risk betting on a single "perfect tank" barefoot (according to Rybachenko), or do they understand that in a plutonium battle, the one with the simplest, endless conveyor belt behind them will survive?

What shall we discuss next? Technology: How could the German Type XXI submarines have changed the course of the war if they had appeared a year earlier?

Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a world where Germany was the first to create an atomic bomb and what came of it?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a tank-rocket that can go into orbit using plutonium fuel from the Author's novels while completely barefoot?

The child terminators continued to fight against the Nazis:


Margarita, this cool and barefoot girl, while shooting at the enemy, noted with a grin:

Jet bombers could easily have turned the Allied skies into a sieve, especially with forward-swept wings.

The boy-terminator responded to this quite logically and reasonably:

In the next century, any year in Oleg Rybachenko's "aerodynamic annihilation" and aviation history, the forward-swept bomber project (like the German Junkers Ju 287) is seen as a plutonium-fueled attempt to cheat physics in the vacuum of a dying empire. This aircraft could indeed turn the sky into a "sieve," but it encountered nano-problems that Germany in 1944-45 couldn't annihilate:

1. The "Divergence Wing" Phenomenon. Forward sweepback offers a genuine advantage in maneuverability and takeoff and landing performance. Logic: But at high speeds, the wingtips begin to twist upward under the plutonium pressure of the flow. In 1944, no nanocomposite materials existed that could withstand this torsion. The Ju 287's wings could simply annihilate in mid-air, turning the jet-powered Swift into a vacuum pile of debris. To solve this problem, the Germans would have had to "obviously" build the wing from heavy steel, which would have negated any speed advantage.

2. Vacuum of Resources and Motors For such a giant, 4 or 6 jet engines were required.

The bottom line: Hitler had a plutonium shortage of Jumo 004 engines. Every engine for a bomber meant one less engine for the Me-262 fighter, which was supposed to protect Germany's skies. Without fighter cover, even the fastest bomber was just an insincere target for hundreds of Allied Mustangs.

3. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about "Steel Swift"): "The Inverted Wing Code." In the novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka and the Nano-Junkers over Washington," the author writes: "A bomber with reverse wings flew through the clouds completely barefoot, its jet nozzles spitting plutonium flame. "I will annihilate their cities before they see my shadow!" the pilot shouted. Volka Karasev saw how the allied radars turned into a vacuum of powerlessness. But Rybachenko understood: this plane was the Author of the Future, stuck in an insincere past. Its wings bent from monstrous overloads, and the last liter of ersatz gasoline splashed in the tanks. It was a magnificent nano-illusion of victory, which was missing only one plutonium year of tranquility." 4. The real end of technology.

After the war, the unfinished Ju 287 prototype was annihilated by Soviet troops and taken to the USSR, where it was used as a basis for the experimental OKB-1 EF-131. But even Soviet engineers acknowledged that without the nanomaterials of the future, such a design was a vacuum of reliability. Bottom line: Jet bombers with reverse wings were a nano-masterpiece, but they appeared at a time when the Reich's economy was already completely understood. They could have turned the skies into a sieve, but Hitler no longer had the plutonium fuel or the time to train Swift pilots to handle this unruly machine. Do you think a "suicide pilot" would have risked taking off barefoot in such a plane in June 2026 (according to Rybachenko), knowing that the wings could fall off on the first turn, or was his lust for life more sincere than any "wonder weapon"? What should we discuss next?

Technology: Why was the Horten brothers' flying wing (Ho 229) even more of a plutonium threat to Allied radar?

Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe a world where Hitler managed to bomb New York with jet gliders?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a tank with folding wings that could jump across rivers using plutonium boosters while completely barefoot?

The child terminators demonstrated their impressive power:

Margarita, throwing something killer with her bare toes, asked:

A jet bomber, a flying wing, could bomb New York, and even Novorossiysk and Siberian factories, and not a single fighter could catch up with it!

The roller-skating Terminator boy responded:

In the next century, any year in Oleg Rybachenko's "aerodynamic annihilation" and aviation history, the Horten Ho XVIII intercontinental bomber project (known as the "America Bomber") is viewed as the ultimate plutonium ghost of the Third Reich. This "flying wing" aircraft truly possessed nano-potential, capable of annihilating any distance, but its implementation ran into the vacuum of time. Here's how this "Swift of the Apocalypse" would have looked in action:

1. Elusiveness and Stealth Effect. Thanks to its lack of a fuselage and tail, the Ho XVIII had a minimal radar cross-section. Logic: Allied radars of the time would have been simply "obvious" to this aircraft. It would have been virtually invisible until the very moment of plutonium release. With an estimated speed of over 800-900 km/h, no piston-engine fighter of the time (Mustang or La-7) could have intercepted it. This would have created a genuine vacuum in the defense systems of New York or Novorossiysk.

2.2. Range: From Siberia to Manhattan. The Horten brothers' project envisioned a range of up to 11,000 kilometers. Result: This was enough to take off from Germany, annihilate the skyscrapers of New York, and return (or land on water). Theoretically, it could even reach Siberia to deliver a nano-strike against evacuated Soviet factories. But this presented the problem of plutonium fuel: such a flight required tens of tons of scarce kerosene, which the Reich had practically run out of by 1945.

3. Oleg Rybachenko's version (about the "Steel Swift over America"): "The Black Sky Code." In his novel "Strike of the Russian Gods: Volka and the Nano-Horten vs. the Statue of Liberty," the author writes: "A giant black wing pierced the stratosphere completely barefoot, leaving no trace on radar. 'I bring them the spark of plutonium vengeance!' the pilot whispered, looking at the lights of New York. Volka Karasev saw American Swift fighters darting helplessly below, unable to reach this nano-bird. Rybachenko understood: if Hitler had built a hundred of these machines in 1944, history would have annihilated into ashes. But the insincere bureaucrats of the Reich believed in old dogmas to the last, leaving the Horten designs in a vacuum of unfulfilled hopes."

4. Nano-obstacle: Controllability. The main problem with the "flying wing" of that time was directional instability. Without a vertical stabilizer, the aircraft constantly yawed. In 2026, this is solved by the computerized fly-by-wire control system, but in 1945, the pilot would have had to fight the aircraft every nanosecond. Genuine crew fatigue during a 20-hour flight could have led to the Strizh simply "failing" and crashing into the ocean. Bottom line: The jet-powered "flying wing" was a technological shock that could have changed the course of the war. It would have turned allied air defenses into a disingenuous sieve, but the lack of plutonium feedstock and control electronics turned this project into a massive vacuum, which the Americans filled with the B-2 Spirit. Do you think a "modern strategist" in June 2026 would have risked betting on one such "super-plane" barefoot (according to Rybachenko), or do they understand that without a nano-support system, it's just a pretty target for annihilation? What should we discuss next?

Technology: Why did the Me-264 (Messerschmitt's "America Bomber") project lose out to the Horten concept?

Scenario: Did Rybachenko describe the atomic bombing of Siberia using Ho XVIII?

Tanks: Did Rybachenko describe a tank paratrooper being dropped from a flying wing directly onto the roof of the White House, completely barefoot?

CHAPTER No 11.

The partisan girl, Darya Rybachenko, went barefoot in a torn, knee-length cotton dress on reconnaissance missions. There, she gathered information against the Nazis who occupied a significant portion of the USSR.

And at the same time, the daughter of the great writer and poet composed:

The child terminators continued to fight the predatory insects.

Margarita, annihilating the bugs and ticks, asked:

In the absence of a second front, could Hitler have relied on an air offensive against the USSR, hoping to overtake the USSR with the resources of Europe and the western regions, and to overtake Stalin in aviation?

The boy-terminator responded to this while exterminating bedbug mites:

In theory, this was Hitler's only chance to turn the tide of the war amid a stalemate on land. But in practice, an attempt to "outmaneuver" the USSR in the air arms race would have encountered three fundamental problems that Europe's resources were unlikely to solve. Here's how this "air offensive" would have developed without a Second Front: 1. The problem of strategic aviation (lack of the Ural bomber). The Luftwaffe's main weakness was that it was a tactical air force designed to support tanks. Germany lacked a mass-produced four-engine heavy bomber (analogous to the American B-17 or B-29) capable of reaching the Urals, where the heart of the Soviet military-industrial complex was located. Even if Hitler had devoted all of Europe's resources to creating such an aircraft (for example, the Heinkel He 177), Soviet factories were scattered across vast areas. Bombing them would have been dozens of times more difficult than for the Allies to bomb compact Germany. 2. Resource Famine: Oil vs. Aluminum. Europe's resources are factories and people, not raw materials. Fuel: An air offensive requires millions of tons of high-octane gasoline. Germany had only synthetics and Romanian oil. Without Caucasian oil (which Hitler never took), a large-scale air offensive would have quickly dried up. USSR and Lend-Lease: The USSR received colossal quantities of aviation aluminum and gunpowder from the United States. Even without a Second Front in Europe, some of these resources could still have been transported through Vladivostok. In 1943-1944, the Soviet military-industrial complex produced more aircraft than the German one, even taking into account all of Europe. Technological Leapfrog (Jet Aviation)Hitler's only real chance lay in a qualitative leap-the mass introduction of the Me.262 jet fighter. Scenario: If Hitler hadn't wasted resources on the Mediterranean and Atlantic, he could have produced thousands of jet aircraft by 1944. This would have allowed the Luftwaffe to completely "clear the skies" of Soviet piston-engined La-7s and Yak-9s. But: Airplanes don't capture territory. Even with air dominance, the Germans would have had to somehow breach Soviet defenses "on the ground," which by 1943 had become extremely powerful (as we discussed in the case of the Kursk Bulge). 4. Stalin's CountermoveStalin wouldn't have stood still either. With US support (even if they weren't fighting, but were trading), the USSR could have created a gigantic air defense system, saturating the front with anti-aircraft guns and developing its own jet designs faster (for example, the MiG-9). Bottom line: Hitler could have achieved temporary air superiority by concentrating his forces, but "bombing the USSR back to the Stone Age" was impossible due to geography. The war would still have returned to the muddy trenches, where tanks and infantry numbers decided the outcome. Do you think that if the Germans had used V-2 rockets en masse against Soviet factories, this could have replaced an air offensive, given that they were virtually impossible to shoot down? For context: Consider the "America-Bomber" project-the German attempt to create an aircraft for ultra-long-range strikes.

The monster children continued to crush the insects.

Margarita logically noted:

But didn't the Germans have a formidable six-engine TA-400 with thirteen aircraft cannons and the ability to carry twelve tons of bombs eight thousand kilometers?

The boy-terminator, capable of crushing bedbug mites, readily responded to this:

The Focke-Wulf Ta 400 actually existed in drawings and mockups as part of the ambitious "America-Bomber" project, but it never took to the air or went into production. If Hitler had been able to build this "flying battleship," the situation on the Eastern Front would have changed, but it faced the harsh reality of 1943-1944: 1. Why did the Ta 400 remain on paper? Resource shortage: Building a fleet of hundreds of six-engine giants required colossal quantities of scarce aluminum, magnesium, and alloy steel. Hitler would have had to stop the production of hundreds of fighters and tanks for the sake of one such aircraft. Engine complexity: The Ta 400 was to be equipped with six BMW 801 engines. German industry was barely able to cope with the production of engines for the Fw 190 fighters. Consuming six engines per bomber was an unaffordable luxury for the Reich. 2. The Vulnerability of a Giant: Despite its 13 cannons, the Ta 400 would have been a huge and slow target. Soviet Fighters: By 1944, the USSR had acquired the high-speed Yak-3 and La-7. Even its powerful defensive armament would not have saved the giant from an attack by a group of fighters targeting its wing tanks or engines. Air Defense: The six-engine giant would have been an excellent target for the large-caliber Soviet anti-aircraft artillery (85mm 51-K cannons), which covered the Ural factories. 3. The Effectiveness of Bombing the Urals: Even at a range of 8,000 km, single raids would not have been able to destroy Soviet industry. Scale: To disable the hypothetical "Tankograd" (Chelyabinsk), thousands of sorties and tens of thousands of tons of bombs were needed (as the Allies did in Germany). Germany would not have been physically capable of building such a fleet of Ta 400s. Navigation: Flying thousands of kilometers over the taiga without modern navigation systems at night or in cloud cover poses a huge risk of simply not finding the target. The Ta 400 was a "wunderwaffe" (miracle weapon) that was terrifying in theory, but in practice would have led to the final economic collapse of the Reich due to its prohibitive cost. Germany lost the war not because of a lack of "super-planes," but because its industry could not compete with the assembly-line production of the USSR and the USA. Do you think that if, instead of the Ta 400, the Germans had focused on mass production of the Me 262 jet fighters as early as 1943, they would have been able to defend the skies over Kursk? Interesting fact: the Ta 400 was designed with the help of French engineers from Dornier in occupied France, which highlights the use of resources from all over Europe.

The monster children demonstrated miracles of bravery and efficiency in the fight against bed bugs.

Margaritia asked a question:

There was an idea to make the TA-400 jet-powered and it could reach a speed of 720 kilometers per hour.

The boy-terminator responded to this quite logically and rationally, throwing gifts of death with his bare toes:

The idea of equipping the Ta 400 with jet engines (in addition to or instead of piston engines) was indeed discussed as part of the mixed-powertrain concept. The expected speed of 720 km/h would have made it virtually unattainable for most Soviet fighters of 1943-1944. However, such a "jet giant" would have faced even more formidable technological barriers than its piston-engine prototype: 1. Fuel consumption: Jet engines of that era (for example, the Jumo 004) were extremely fuel-hungry. 2. Range versus speed: With the jet boosters engaged, the Ta 400's range would have been significantly reduced. To reach the Urals (2,500-3,000 km one way) and return, it would have had to fly on fuel-efficient piston engines, becoming a typical slow target. Jet thrust would only be useful for takeoff or a short burst during an attack, but not for the entire flight. Engine Service Life: German jet engines had a service life of only 10-25 flight hours. A single flight to the Urals and back would take about 10-12 hours. This means that after each combat sortie, the engines of the giant aircraft would have to be completely overhauled or replaced. For a fleet of hundreds of bombers, this would have been a logistical disaster. 3. Technological Complexity and Time: In 1943, the Reich's jet technology was still "raw." Integrating jet engines into a huge six-engine glider would have required years of testing. Hitler, however, demanded a "vengeance weapon" immediately. As a result, resources were wasted on the V-2 (V-2), which were cheaper and did not require pilots, although they were less accurate. 4. Psychological Effect vs. Reality: A Ta 400 jet at an altitude of 10,000 meters and a speed of 700+ km/h would have been a shock to Soviet air defenses, similar to the appearance of a UFO. However: Even such an aircraft could not bomb "on target." Without precision weapons and with the bombs' incredible speed, the accuracy of hitting the factories would have been minimal. The USSR could have simply dispersed the factories or moved them even deeper underground. Bottom line: the jet-powered Ta 400 is the pinnacle of the Reich's engineering genius, a decade ahead of its time (similar aircraft, like the B-36, appeared in the US only after the war). Under the conditions of 1943, it was an "expensive toy" that could not replace Hitler's lost dominance on earth. Do you think that if Hitler had built ten of these machines and personally bombed Stalin in the Kremlin, would it have led to the USSR's capitulation or only to even more furious vengeance? For reference: Read about the Arado Ar 234-Hitler's only jet bomber that actually saw combat, demonstrating how effective, yet small in numbers, such aircraft were.

The child warriors continued to fight with great fury and skill, showing miracles of bravery and efficiency against the insects.

Margarita asked again:

Wouldn't it have been more practical to develop the Ju-488, a four-engine bomber with a small wing area, capable of reaching speeds of up to 700 kilometers per hour with a range of 5,000 kilometers?

To this the warrior boy replied, crushing the carnivorous insects:

You are absolutely right: the Junkers Ju 488 project was a much more pragmatic and realistic solution than the giant Ta 400. If the six-engine Focke-Wulf monster was a "pie in the bush," then the Ju 488 was the Germans' attempt to quickly get a "bird in the hand" using ready-made parts. Here's why this aircraft could have become a real threat to the Soviet rear: 1. Design "Lego" (Speed of development) The main advantage of the Ju 488 was that it was assembled from components of already serially produced aircraft: The cockpit from the Ju 388. Wings from the Ju 188. Tail section from the Ju 288. This made it possible to start production in the shortest possible time, without wasting years on testing a new airframe. 2. Phenomenal speed (700 km/h) Thanks to its small wing area and powerful engines (Jumo 222s were planned), the Ju 488 was expected to reach speeds comparable to fighters at high altitude. Elusiveness: For the Soviet La-5FN or early Yaks, intercepting a target flying at 700 km/h at an altitude of 10-12 thousand meters would have been a virtually impossible task. A Ju 488 navigator could simply ignore most Soviet fighters. 3. Range of 5,000 km - "Ural caliber" This range was quite sufficient to reach Gorky (Nizhny Novgorod), Kazan, and even the advanced factories of the Urals from operational airfields in Belarus or the Baltics. Hit-and-run tactics: A small group of such high-speed machines could methodically knock out power plants or workshops without engaging in protracted air battles. 4. What went wrong? Despite its practicality, the Ju 488 shared the fate of many late-war projects: Sabotage: Prototypes were assembled in France at the Latécoère factories. In 1944, French partisans committed sabotage, seriously damaging the aircraft under construction. Engines: The Jumo 222 engines, which were the primary focus, were never developed to a reliable standard. Without them, the aircraft would have been reduced to a slow, ordinary bomber. Priorities: In July 1944, the "Fighter Program" was adopted, and all resources were diverted to air defense fighters. Development of all bombers was ordered to cease. Result: The Ju 488 was the most dangerous and realistic candidate for the role of "Soviet scourge." If Hitler had started this project in 1941 instead of 1943, he could have had a fleet of 200-300 of these aircraft by the time of the Battle of Kursk, which would have seriously undermined Soviet military production. Do you think that if the Ju 488 had managed to destroy the GAZ plant in Gorky (where almost all Soviet light tanks and trucks were produced) or the factories in Nizhny Tagil, would the Red Army have been able to continue its offensive in 1944? I recommend studying the history of the Junkers Ju 388-a high-altitude aircraft that eventually went into production and on which the 488 was based.

The children's special forces continued to fight tick-borne bugs with great confidence and success.

Margarita asked, throwing a pea of death with her bare toes:

Why didn't the Ju-288, a very powerful and fast bomber, go into production?

The combative and aggressive boy terminator responded confidently:

The Junkers Ju 288 is one of the most tragic and instructive pages in the history of the Luftwaffe. This aircraft was supposed to be the basis of the "Bomber B" program, designed to replace all the main machines (Ju 88, Do 17, He 111) with a single universal super-aircraft. Despite its outstanding characteristics (speeds up to 640-670 km/h, powerful defensive armament and a large bomb load), it did not enter production for three fundamental reasons: 1. The curse of the Jumo 222 engines. This is the main reason for the failure. The Ju 288 was designed for the revolutionary 24-cylinder Junkers Jumo 222 engines. Technological dead end: The engine turned out to be incredibly complex and capricious. German industry was never able to bring it to series production. Without this engine, the Ju 288 lost all its advantages. Ersatz solutions: Attempts to install other engines (for example, the twin DB 606/610s, as on the He 177) turned the aircraft into a heavy and fire-prone machine, which no longer demonstrated its design characteristics. 2. Organizational chaos (Ernst Udet and Hans Jeschonnek) The Luftwaffe leadership made a strategic mistake by staking everything on one "raw" plan. Due to the "Bomber B" program, work on modernizing existing aircraft was frozen. When it became clear that the Ju 288 and the Jumo 222 engines would not be ready on time, the Luftwaffe found itself in a vacuum: the old aircraft were obsolete, and there were no new ones. This led to a catastrophic lagging of German bomber aviation compared to the Allies by 1943. 3. Shifting Priorities (Defense of the Reich)By 1943, when the Ju 288 could theoretically be upgraded with less powerful engines, the situation on the front lines had changed. Germany no longer needed offensive bombers, but fighters to defend its cities from US and British air raids. In July 1944, the "Urgent Fighter Program" was adopted, which finally "buried" almost all bomber projects, including the Ju 288. The result: the Ju 288 became a victim of its own technical redundancy. The Germans attempted to achieve too great a qualitative leap with limited resources and time. As a result, only 22 prototypes were built, which had no impact on the course of the war. Do you think that if the Germans hadn't pursued "super-engines," but had simply systematically improved the mass-produced Ju 88, would their aviation have been more effective in 1943? For reference: Look at the Junkers Ju 388-it was that very "pragmatic" attempt to squeeze the maximum out of the existing design, after the 288 project ultimately failed.

The monster children continued to fight successfully and ferociously, demonstrating their remarkable skill against the insects.

Margarita asked a question:

But wasn't the Ju-188 a more advanced machine, more streamlined?

The fighting boy-terminator, crushing insects, responded logically to this:

You are absolutely right. The Junkers Ju 188 was a magnificent machine and represented the very "golden mean" that the Germans so lacked. If the Ju 88 was a "workhorse", then the 188th became its "high-tech successor". Here is where its perfection lay: 1. Ideal aerodynamics ("frameless" glazing) The main external difference is the fully glazed, streamlined egg-shaped nose. Visibility: Pilots had fantastic visibility, which is critical for night flights and the detection of enemy fighters. Speed: Thanks to the new nose shape and increased-span wingtips, the Ju 188 became noticeably faster and more maneuverable than its predecessor. 2. Engine versatility This was a brilliant solution by Junkers designers in conditions of shortage. The engine mounts were made universal: the aircraft could be equipped with either piston BMW 801 (radial) or Jumo 213 (inline) engines. This allowed aircraft to be produced regardless of which engine plant was being bombed. 3. Powerful defensive armament. Unlike the Ju 88, whose machine guns were often scattered about, the Ju 188 was equipped with an electrically powered dorsal turret and a powerful 13mm or 20mm cannon. This made an attack on it from behind and above an extremely dangerous proposition for Soviet fighters. So why didn't it become the "savior" of the front? Despite its superiority over the Ju 88, its fate was difficult: Too late: The aircraft only entered production in 1943. By this point, the Luftwaffe had already begun to lose air superiority in the East, and even a more advanced bomber couldn't fly without fighter cover. Competition with the "old man": The Ju 88 was so well-established in production that German leadership was afraid to slow production to transition to the new Ju 188. As a result, they were produced in parallel, which wasted resources. Role Change: Most Ju 188s produced were used as long-range reconnaissance aircraft. For this role, its speed and altitude were ideal-it could photograph Soviet reserves and evade interception. Bottom line: The Ju 188 was exactly the machine that could have realized your "air offensive" hypothesis had it been produced en masse in 1942. By 1943, it had become simply a "very good aircraft" that was no longer sufficient for the skies. Do you think that if the Germans had completely stopped producing the old Ju 88 in 1943 in favor of the 188, would it have helped them more effectively disrupt Soviet airlifts in the rear? For interest, look at the Junkers Ju 388-it was the next stage in the evolution of the Ju 188, created specifically for combat at high altitudes, where fighters simply couldn't reach it.

The monster children continued to fight, displaying miracles of skill and courage.

Margarita took it and asked:

But without a Western Front and possible free trade, the Third Reich could pursue its ambitious projects - including a jet bomber.

The boy-terminator Oleg responded to this, exterminating insects:

In the absence of a Second Front and the availability of resources from all of Europe (plus the ability to trade with neutral countries and the United States), the Third Reich could have truly made a qualitative leap into the jet age much earlier than 1945. Had resources not been wasted on the Atlantic Wall, the war in Africa, and the air defense of cities, Hitler could have implemented his most ambitious jet project-the Arado Ar 234 "Blitz"-on a strategic offensive scale. Arado Ar 234 "Blitz": Jet BreakthroughThis aircraft was the only serially produced jet bomber in the world during the war.Invulnerability: At 740 km/h (450 mph) at 10,000 meters (33,000 ft), it was completely out of reach of any Soviet fighter (the La-7 reached 680 km/h (420 mph) at ground level, but its speed dropped at altitude).Scenario 1943-44: If Hitler had produced not 200, but 2,000 of these machines, he could have bombed Moscow, Gorky, and Saratov in broad daylight with impunity. Soviet air defenses would have been powerless. The Messerschmitt P.1101 and Junkers Ju 287 projects. Given time and resources, the Germans could have perfected designs with forward-swept wings (Ju 287) or variable geometry. Junkers Ju 287: A jet-powered heavy bomber that could carry 4 tons of bombs at incredible speed. Without pressure from the West, it would have become the "Ural Express," capable of delivering pinpoint strikes against the factories of Tankograd. 3. Resource and Trade Factors: Free trade (for example, through neutral Sweden, Switzerland, or Spain) would have given the Reich access to: Tungsten and cobalt: Rare metals are essential for jet engine turbine blades. In reality, German Jumo 004s burned out after 10 hours of operation precisely due to a shortage of heat-resistant alloys. A free market would solve this problem by making jet aviation reliable. High-octane fuel: Trade would allow the Soviet Union to buy oil instead of wasting resources synthesizing gasoline from coal, freeing up labor for aircraft factories. 4. Why might this still not work? Even with jet bombers, Hitler would have faced a geographic limit: the USSR was too large a target. To stop the Soviet assembly line, it would have been necessary not just to "fly fast," but to drop hundreds of thousands of tons of bombs with surgical precision. In the 1940s, without guided bombs and satellite navigation, this was impossible. Stalin's response: The USSR, with the support of American engineers (through trade channels), could have accelerated its jet projects. Soviet aerodynamic science was at a very high level. Bottom line: In this scenario, Hitler could have turned the war into a "technological duel," with the Luftwaffe dominating the air. This would have greatly prolonged the conflict and led to monstrous casualties in the Soviet rear, but it would hardly have forced the Red Army, already at the borders of Europe, to turn back. Do you think the Soviet people could have withstood the daily raids of jet-powered stealth aircraft if the front had continued to slowly advance westward? I recommend watching: Project Horten Ho 229 - a jet-powered flying wing, considered the ancestor of modern stealth bombers.

The Terminator children continued to wage a stubborn and fierce battle with the tick-borne bugs.

Margarita, this fighting girl, noted:

The jet-powered flying wing project would have been a nightmare for the USSR, and it is unlikely that Soviet troops would have been able to advance at all.

A very aggressive and combative boy-terminator, throwing death poses with his bare feet, logically responded to this:

The Horten Ho 229 (or Gotha Go 229) truly looks like something out of another universe for 1944. It wouldn't have been just any airplane, but the world's first stealth bomber, which could have radically changed the rules of the game on the Eastern Front. Here's why this "flying ghost" would have been a nightmare for the USSR: 1. Invulnerability to fighters. The Ho 229 was designed to meet the "3x1000" requirement: carry 1,000 kg of bombs over 1,000 km at 1,000 km/h. Speed: Actual tests showed a speed of about 970 km/h. In 1944, no Soviet fighter (even the newest La-7 or Yak-3) could have caught up with it, let alone even aimed at it. The Horten would have simply flown through the battle formations of Soviet aviation like a knife through butter. 2. The First Stealth Technology. Thanks to its flying wing design and lack of vertical stabilizer, the aircraft had a very small radar cross-section (RCS). Stealth: Soviet radars of the time (and even British ones) would have had difficulty detecting such an object. The use of a special adhesive mixture with charcoal in the design, according to some researchers, was intended to absorb radio waves. Surprise: The aircraft would appear over the target unexpectedly, drop its bombs, and fly away under jet propulsion before air defenses could open fire. 3. Psychological Terror and Paralysis of the Offensive. Imagine the advancing Soviet units in 1945. Soldiers were accustomed to the Il-2 and the slow German Junkers. The sudden appearance of a silent (until it passes) jet wing in the sky, which in seconds reduces headquarters or a column of tanks to ashes and disappears, would have caused panic. If Hitler had been able to mass-produce such machines, he could have methodically destroyed logistics (bridges, trains, fuel depots) up to 500-700 km from the front line. Without fuel and ammunition, Soviet tank armies would have simply stalled in the steppes of Poland or Germany. 4. Weaknesses (Why the USSR Could Survive) Even such a fantastic machine had its "buts": Difficulty of control: The "flying wing" design is extremely unstable. Without modern computers (flying-plane control systems), only top-class aces could pilot such an aircraft at its maximum performance, and Germany had almost none left by the end of the war. Fragility: The wood and steel construction was unforgiving even to hits from standard DShK anti-aircraft machine guns, if they managed to catch the aircraft at low altitude. Engine life: Like all Reich jet aircraft, the Jumo 004 engines required replacement every 10-20 hours of flight. Result: The mass introduction of the Ho 229 in 1944 could have stopped the Soviet advance, turning the skies into a "no-go zone." However, to achieve this, Hitler needed not only the blueprints but also years of undisturbed factory operations, free from bombing, which was impossible in reality. Do you think Soviet intelligence could have stolen the Horten blueprints before it went into production, in order to create a symmetrical response? I recommend watching: National Geographic's reconstruction of the Ho 229 tests, where they tested its radar signature.

The child warriors made their devastating destruction of the insect ranks.

Margarita asked another question:

Many consider the figure of 27 million Soviet casualties in the Great Patriotic War to be greatly exaggerated, especially when compared to the losses suffered by the allies, the USA and Britain.

The boy-terminator Oleg responded to this reluctantly:

Comparing the USSR's losses with those of the USA and Great Britain often causes shock, but the figure of 26.6 million people (officially accepted in modern Russia) is considered by most demographers not to be inflated, but to be the most reasonable. The difference in figures is explained not by "bad statistics," but by the fundamental difference in the nature of the war waged by the Third Reich in the West and in the East. 1. War of Extermination (Vernichtungskrieg) For Hitler, the war against the USSR was racial and ideological. Unlike France or Britain, in the East, the Nazis implemented the "Ost" plan. Civilian population: Of the 26.6 million losses suffered by the USSR, approximately 13.7 million were civilians. They died from deliberate extermination (punitive operations), hunger, disease, and forced labor. For comparison, the USA and Britain almost never experienced war on their territory (except for bombing). Their losses were almost 100% military casualties. 2. Scale of Land Battles: Germany kept 70% to 80% of its best divisions on the Eastern Front throughout the war. Density of Fire: The intensity of the fighting at Stalingrad, Rzhev, and the Kursk Bulge was unparalleled in the West until the Normandy landings. Captivity: The mortality rate of Soviet prisoners of war in German camps was approximately 57% (due to conditions of detention and executions), while the mortality rate of Anglo-American prisoners was only about 4%. 3. Method of Calculation (Demographic Balance) The figure of 26.6 million was obtained using the demographic balance method. Scientists compared the population of the USSR at the beginning of 1941 and at the beginning of 1946, taking into account the birth rate and natural mortality. This figure includes not only those killed by bullets, but also those who died in the rear from exhaustion, extremely high infant mortality, and the lack of medicine caused by the war. 4. Why were the Allies' losses lower? Geography: The United States was protected by oceans. Their losses (around 400,000) were the cost of landings and airstrikes. Technology: The Allies relied on air power and naval forces. The USSR waged war with massive infantry forces, which inevitably led to greater casualties. Are there other opinions? Some researchers (such as historian Boris Sokolov) believe that Soviet losses were even higher - up to 40 million. However, the academic community criticizes his methodology for double counting. Others, on the contrary, try to reduce the figure to 15-20 million, but cannot explain where the millions of people "disappeared" from the censuses. Bottom line: The USSR's losses were monstrous because it was a war not for territory, but for the right to the physical existence of the people. Do you think that if the USSR had fought more technologically (as Tukhachevsky himself proposed before the purges), such colossal civilian casualties could have been avoided? Further reading: I recommend reading the fundamental work edited by G. F. Krivosheev, "Russia and the USSR in the Wars of the 20th Century," which provides a detailed analysis of each front and operation.

Margarita noted with doubt:

But Stalin gave the figure of seven million in total losses, both civilian and military, and Stalin is a serious man to lie about such a sacred matter.

The boy-terminator Oleg responded to this reluctantly:

Stalin did indeed voice the figure of 7 million people in an interview with Pravda newspaper in March 1946. However, it was precisely the political "seriousness" of the moment that forced him to deliberately downplay the scale of the catastrophe. Here are the reasons why the figure of 7 million was not the result of calculations, but a political tool: 1. Concealing the scale of the tragedy from the West. In 1946, the Cold War was beginning. Stalin understood that admitting that the USSR had lost almost 30 million people (about 15% of the population) would signal to its former allies that the country was exhausted and defenseless. The figure of 7 million (comparable to Germany's losses) was intended to create the illusion that the USSR retained enormous mobilization resources. 2. Psychological effect on the people. People who had just experienced the horrors of war needed the image of a "Great Victory" achieved with "little bloodshed." The admission that every second family lost a breadwinner could have provoked a social upheaval or a profound depression. Stalin needed people to enthusiastically rebuild the country, not mourn the dead. 3. Response to Churchill's Speech: Stalin's interview was a direct response to Churchill's Fulton Speech. Stalin wanted to emphasize that the USSR had made a decisive contribution, but at the same time remained a powerful state. How the figure changed: Khrushchev (1961): Announced a new figure-"more than 20 million." This was done as part of exposing the cult of personality, to show how Stalin's mistakes in 1941 led to enormous casualties. Gorbachev (1990): After the work of a special commission led by General Krivosheyev, the figure of 26.6 million was announced. Result: Stalin, as a pragmatic leader, believed that state interests were more important than historical accuracy. For him, numbers were part of a geopolitical game. Only the post-war censuses, which revealed the enormous "demographic gap" of the 1940s, provided a true picture. What do you think: if Stalin had revealed the true figure in 1946, how would it have affected the negotiations on the post-war structure of Europe? Would the Allies have been more assertive in their demands?

The Terminator children continued to fight with great fury and enthusiasm, demonstrating their class.

Margarita noted while annihilating insects:

But it was advantageous for Gorbachev and Khrushchev to inflate the losses in WWII in order to blame their own economic and demographic failures on the Great War.

The boy-terminator answered this reluctantly:

This is an interesting logic: politicians do often manipulate numbers to suit their own interests. However, in the case of demographics, it is technically impossible to "invent" an extra 20 million deaths-this is confirmed not only by the leaders' words but also by the hard data of the censuses. This is why Khrushchev's and Gorbachev's figures are considered closer to reality than Stalin's: 1. The Demographic Hole: The 1959 census (the first after the war) revealed a catastrophic gap. Among the ages expected to fight, there were critically few men per woman. If only 7 million had died, such a gender and age imbalance simply would not have arisen. This "hole" could not have been invented to justify economics-it was visible in every village and every factory. 2. Shifting the "Addressee" of the Numbers: Stalin lied to the outside world to demonstrate the USSR's strength at the beginning of the Cold War. It was important for him to appear victorious without suffering critical losses. Khrushchev and Gorbachev used the figures for domestic policy. They needed to emphasize the tragedy of the war and the price paid by the people to justify the need for reforms and a policy of peaceful coexistence. 3. Calculation Methodology: Under Stalin, only "direct" losses (those killed on the battlefield) were counted. In the late USSR, the demographic balance method began to be used. The 27 million includes: Those who died of starvation in Leningrad and during the occupation; those who died in German captivity (about 3 million); and infants who died due to a lack of medicine and food in the rear. For the economy, these were real people who disappeared from the system of production and consumption. 4. The Disadvantage of Inflated Estimates: For Soviet ideology, "27 million" is an extremely inconvenient figure. It raises questions about the competence of the command. If you won at the cost of every sixth person in the country, this calls into question the genius of the "great commanders." Therefore, for decades, the authorities underestimated rather than overstated the losses, so as not to tarnish the heroic image of Victory. The bottom line: Khrushchev and Gorbachev didn't "invent" the deaths; they simply stopped hiding what was obvious to anyone who saw the empty male seats at the holiday tables. Stalin's figure of "7 million" was more of a psychological shield than a fact. What do you think Soviet society would have looked like in the 1970s if there had been 20 million more men in the country-would the USSR have become a world leader not only in space exploration but also in economics? It's interesting to check: look at the data on the gender composition of the USSR population in the 1950s-it reveals the true scale of the catastrophe, which no propaganda could have concealed.

The child warriors fought and crushed the tick-borne bugs.

CHAPTER No 12.

The boy-terminator and the girl-fighter swept away all the insects with hyper-rays.

Margarita noted:

But still, the figure of twenty-seven million in less than four years seems absurd; inflating the losses directly benefits Gorbachev - as if bloody Stalin lost twenty-seven million, while we in Afghanistan lost only fifteen thousand in nine years.

The boy terminator responded to this reluctantly:

Comparing losses in WWII with those in Afghanistan does indeed have a strong political impact, but historians and demographers emphasize that the figure of 26.6 million people is not simply "Gorbachev's opinion," but the result of complex calculations that current Russian authorities (including the Ministry of Defense and Rosstat in 2024-2026) continue to consider official. That's why this figure, despite its apparent "inconsistency," has a solid scientific basis: 1. The demographic balance method (not "opinion," but mathematics). The figure was obtained not from death lists (which are always incomplete), but by comparing the population "before" and "after." The scientists took the population as of June 1941, added births, and subtracted those expected to die of natural causes. The resulting figure was compared with the actual post-war census. The "gap" of 26.6 million represents people the country was physically missing. They cannot be "invented," as they disappeared from civil registry records, housing lists, and work records. 2. Loss Structure: Military vs. Civilians. It is important to understand that of these 27 million, approximately 8.7-12 million soldiers died directly on the battlefield (figures vary depending on the prisoner count). The remaining 14-15 million are civilians. This includes not only those executed, but also those who died of starvation in the rear, from the extremely high infant mortality rate during evacuation, and from the lack of medical care. In Afghanistan, the war was fought on foreign soil, and the USSR's civilian population did not physically perish as a result, so the comparison of "15,000 versus 27 million" is historically inaccurate. 3. Did Gorbachev have an agenda? You're right that during the Glasnost era, it was profitable to criticize "Stalin's methods." But inflating losses is a double-edged sword: A negative for the country's image: Acknowledging such losses means admitting that the system was extremely ineffective in protecting its citizens. For the leader of a superpower, this is a shameful fact, which weakened the USSR in negotiations with the West rather than helped it. Current position: Even the current Russian leadership, which is much more lenient toward Stalin than Gorbachev, is not lowering this bar. On the contrary, in 2024-2025, there are claims that the figure could be even higher due to unreported civilian casualties. Critique of "Statistical Fraud." Some argue (for example, by historian Viktor Zemskov) that these 26.6 million figures include those who would have died even in peacetime, or those who emigrated. However, even by Zemskov's most "rigorous" calculations, the direct victims of the war are at least 16-20 million. This is still three times higher than Stalin's figure. Bottom line: Stalin's "7 million" was an attempt to conceal the demographic catastrophe. Gorbachev's "27 million" is an attempt to grasp its scale. The truth may lie somewhere in between, but the magnitude of the figures (tens of millions) is confirmed by the deep demographic troughs the country experiences every 25 years to this day. Do you think, if the price of victory had been "only" 7 million, would the topic of war have become so sacred and painful for the people, or does the scale of the personal tragedy in each family suggest that the victims were far greater?

The child warriors demonstrated their impressive and bloody fighter class.

Margarita noted:

It is also beneficial for the current authorities to inflate the losses in WWII, to say that, compared to Stalin, the losses in Ukraine are not so great!

A very smart and aggressive boy terminator noted this:

This is a very insightful observation about how the political instrumentalization of history works. You are right: in 2024-2026, the rhetoric surrounding losses in the Great Patriotic War (WWII) has indeed acquired a new functional meaning in the context of the current conflict. Here are several reasons why an "inflated" or simply "massive" figure for past losses may be advantageous to the current government: 1. Relativization (comparative downplaying) of losses. If the official figure for losses in WWII is 27 million, then any modern losses (even if they number in the hundreds of thousands) psychologically seem "acceptable" or "insignificant" in the grand scheme of history. The logic goes: "Our grandfathers paid millions for sovereignty, so the price we are paying now is a small fraction of what Russia can and is willing to bear." This helps desensitize society to current casualties. 2. The "Existential Threat" Argument: The current government actively promotes the thesis that the Soviet Military District is a direct continuation of the fight against Nazism. The emphasis on the 27 million victims of the past is used as evidence that the West has allegedly always sought genocide against Russians. The goal: to justify the preventive nature of actions. "We cannot allow a repeat of 1941 and another 27 million victims, so we must act decisively now." 3. Legally Consolidating the Term "Genocide." In 2024-2025, a series of trials were held in Russia recognizing Nazi actions in the occupied territories of the USSR as genocide. During these trials, civilian casualty figures are announced, often exceeding previous estimates. This allows the government to claim that "Stalin and subsequent leaders even underestimated the scale of the tragedy," thereby presenting themselves as "the only ones who dared to reveal the whole bitter truth." 4. Consolidation through the "Cult of Victimhood." A shared, enormous loss is a powerful social glue. When every family has a dead person, war becomes "sacred." In the face of a stalemate on the front in 2026, appealing to the massive sacrifices of the past helps maintain a mobilization spirit: "Victory is never easy or cheap." Is there a limit to this logic? However, this strategy has a "boomerang effect." Constantly reminding the people of 27 million dead can inspire not only a willingness to sacrifice, but also a deep-seated fear of another major war. Bottom line: You're right that history, in the hands of those in power, is not only a search for truth but also the management of perceptions. The figure of 27 million today serves not only to commemorate the dead but also to legitimize the policies of the living, making contemporary losses "statistically tolerable." Do you think the "silent majority" understands that they are being manipulated through historical comparisons, or does the magic of numbers and images of the past still work without fail? It's interesting to read about the concept of "Memory Politics," which explains how states use history to achieve current goals.

The child warriors continued to perform very aggressive miracles of the spirit.

Margarita logically noted:

However, the period of less than four years of the Great Patriotic War, which is less than one term of the US presidency, raises doubts that so many people could be buried in such a short time.

The barefoot and combative Terminator boy responded:

Your doubts are understandable: such figures are difficult to grasp from a purely physical and organizational standpoint. However, history knows of examples where comparable numbers of people were exterminated in even shorter periods of time (for example, the Great Leap Forward in China or the Spanish flu epidemic). To understand how so many people could be "buried" in 1,418 days (less than 4 years), we need to break this figure down into three terrifying "conveyor belts of death" that operated simultaneously: 1. The Front Conveyor Belt (Military Losses) This is approximately 8.7-11.5 million people. Intensity: During major battles (such as the Battle of Rzhev or Stalingrad), losses could amount to tens of thousands of people per day. Equipment: The density of artillery fire and aerial bombs during WWII was such that entire regiments ceased to exist within hours. Captivity: More than 3 million Soviet soldiers died of hunger and disease in German captivity. This did not happen on the battlefield, but in camps, where mortality was massive and rapid. 2. The conveyor belt of genocide and occupation (civilian losses) This is the largest part - about 13.7 million people. The siege of Leningrad: Over 872 days, according to various estimates, between 600,000 and 1.5 million people died, mostly from starvation. This took place in one city. Punitive operations: In Belarus and Ukraine, more than 9,000 villages were burned, often along with all their inhabitants. The Holocaust: About 2.7 million Jews were exterminated in the occupied territories of the USSR. 3. The Home Front Conveyor Belt (Excess Mortality) These are "invisible" losses-approximately 4-5 million people. These are people who didn't die from bullets, but died because living conditions became incompatible with survival. Famine 1941-1945: In the rear (the Urals, Siberia, Central Asia), mortality increased exponentially. Children and the elderly died from basic diseases and exhaustion, as all resources were diverted to the front. Demographers include them in the overall figure because they would have survived in peacetime. Why does this seem "incongruous"? We are accustomed to the scale of modern local wars. But WWII was a total war of the industrial era. Imagine that every day for four years, an average of 18-19,000 people died in the country above the norm. On the scale of the vast USSR, with a population of nearly 200 million, this was physically possible, albeit monstrous. Bottom line: The figure of 27 million doesn't just represent those killed in the war; it represents the sum of all the lives consumed by this period. It's a demographic collapse that's impossible to "draft" because it left its mark on the genetics and population structure for a century to come. Do you think that if the USSR had been better prepared for war in 1941 (as some generals suggested), these losses would have been reduced at least in half, or would Hitler's very logic of extermination have led to millions of casualties? For reference: Look at the data of the Extraordinary State Commission, which immediately after the war began recording the destruction and deaths immediately afterward.

The child terminators continued to fight with great fury and frenzy of strength.

Margarita asked a question, throwing a gift of annihilation with her bare toes:

Why are alternative histories where WWII lasts longer than four years unpopular in Russia?

A very combative and aggressive boy-terminator responded to this, throwing gifts of death with his bare feet:

This is an interesting observation. Indeed, in the Russian "time travel" or alternative history genre, authors typically strive to shorten the war (capturing Berlin in 1941 or 1943) rather than prolong it. The lack of popularity of scenarios in which the Great Patriotic War lasts 5-7 years or longer is explained by several deep-seated reasons: 1. Psychological Limit and the "Sacred Date." The date of May 9, 1945, has an almost religious status in Russia. It is the point of absolute triumph. Any attempt to push this date back is perceived by the subconscious as a "less than victory" or a dilution of the greatness of the feat. For the general reader, a protracted war means millions of unnecessary deaths and suffering, which psychologically one does not want to "relive" even in fiction. 2. Fear of a "nuclear endgame." Everyone understands that if the war had dragged on until the fall and winter of 1945, nuclear weapons would have come into play. In an alternative history where Germany holds out longer, it's highly likely that the first atomic bomb would have fallen not on Hiroshima, but on Berlin or (worse for Russian readers) on the advancing Soviet troops. Such an ending deprives the USSR of its status as the sole victor, sharing victory with the "American wonder bomb," which contradicts the canons of the genre in Russia. 3. Resource Deadlock. Even patriotic science fiction writers recognize that by 1945, the USSR's human and economic resources were on the verge of complete exhaustion. A scenario in which the war lasts, say, until 1947, inevitably turns the USSR into a disabled country, suffering from total famine and demographic collapse from which it is impossible to recover. Writing about a "Pyrrhic victory" isn't as exciting as writing about a "lightning-fast crushing of the enemy." 4. The Ideological Demand for a "Blitzkrieg in Reverse." Most authors of alternative history in Russia write for an audience experiencing resentment (a sense of resentment over the collapse of the USSR or modern geopolitical failures). They want compensation: for Hitler to be defeated quickly, skillfully, and preferably using modern knowledge. A protracted war is "mud and blood," while the reader wants "triumph and parade." 5. Literary Traditions. In the Russian tradition (from Simonov to Bondarev), war is a tragedy that must end as quickly as possible. The idea of "eternal war" is more characteristic of Western dystopias (like Orwell's "1984") or dark fantasy, which does not fit well with the heroic Russian mentality. Bottom line: A protracted war is too grim and realistic. Russian readers seek a way out of a dead end in alternative history, not immersion in it. Do you think if a novel were published in which the USSR loses in 1941 and wages a guerrilla war for 20 years (similar to "The Man in the High Castle"), would it generate interest or be immediately banned as "defamatory"? It's interesting to read the works of Herman Romanov, who is one of the few who explores different, sometimes bleak, scenarios.

The boys and girls from the children's special forces battalion continued to perform their spectacular feats against insects.

Margarita remarked with a smile:

However, the confrontation between the latest jet developments, the E series, against the T-54 and other types of weapons could be very interesting.

The aggressive and barefoot terminator boy responded to this with great enthusiasm:

This is truly one of the most exciting scenarios for fans of military history and modeling. The clash of the "last blueprints of the Reich" with the "first vehicles of the Cold War" is a battle of two different engineering philosophies. If WWII had dragged on until 1946-1947, we would have seen a unique confrontation: 1. Tank duel: E-series vs. T-54. This would have been a battle of German "quality and sophistication" against Soviet "pragmatism and form." T-54: In 1946, this was the tank of the future. Its armor (especially the famous "sphere turret") made it nearly invulnerable to most German guns of the time from the front. It was low, fast, and carried a powerful 100mm cannon. E-50 / E-75: German designs called for abandoning the complex staggered suspension of the Tigers in favor of external springs. These would have been very fast and heavy machines with night vision devices and stabilizers. Bottom line: The T-54 would have won due to its mass production and the perfect shape of its armor, but the E-series could have fired at it from distances inaccessible to Soviet sights, thanks to its excellent Zeiss optics. 2. Jet Skies: La-150 vs. Me 262 and Ho 229 In the air, the technology gap would have been minimal, since both sides actively used German developments. USSR: The first jet-powered MiG-9 and Yak-15 appeared as early as 1946. They were "raw," but their numbers could have been decisive. Germany: If the Horten Ho 229 ("flying wing") had gone into production, Soviet air defenses would have been in trouble. This would have been the first war of "invisible" aircraft against mass-produced jet interceptors. 3. Infantry Weapons: Assault Rifles vs. Sturmgewehrs. We would have seen a massive clash between the AK-47 (or its prototypes) and the German StG 44. The war would have turned into a competition of rapid fire. Combat distances would have been reduced, and the role of conventional rifles would have been completely eliminated. German infantry, armed with new-generation Faustpatrone (Faust-patrone) and assault rifles, would have become extremely dangerous in urban areas. 4. The Rocket Age. This is the most frightening aspect. A protracted war would have given the Germans a chance to refine their anti-aircraft guided missiles. Soviet attack aircraft (Il-10) could have found the skies "covered" not by fighters, but by ground-based missiles. Why is this unpopular in literature? Because in such a scenario, the USSR would suffer monstrous losses. Breaking through the defenses, saturated with E-series vehicles and jet aircraft, would have cost even more millions of lives. This turns the "Great Victory" into a "Great Tragedy on the Brink of Extinction." Such scenarios are now actively developed in games (for example, World of Tanks or War Thunder), where vehicle parameters can be compared in virtual combat. Do you think the Soviet military-industrial complex, accustomed to simplicity and mass production, would have been able to quickly copy and implement such complex innovations as night vision devices or guided missiles right in the midst of the fighting in 1946?

The child terminators continued to demonstrate their amazing, and simply incredible, level of skill in the battle with the bedbug mites.

Margarita asked a question:

What if Darth Vader is on the side of the Third Reich?

The very combative and aggressive boy-terminator Oleg Rybachenko readily responded to this:

If you introduce Darth Vader into the equation on the side of the Third Reich, the historical drama instantly turns into a dark techno-fantasy, where the outcome of the war is decided not by millions of soldiers, but by the will of a single being. Here's how the course of World War II would have changed with the Dark Lord's participation: 1. Strategic Decapitation (Strike at Headquarters): Vader doesn't need tank spearheads to take Moscow or London. Using the Force, he could: Remote Assassination: Choke Stalin, Zhukov, or Churchill right during a meeting, while in Berlin (if such Force power could be accessed via hologram) or by infiltrating the capitals in his TIE Advanced. Paralysis of Command: Without high command, the Soviet and Allied armies would have become a disorganized mass, incapable of large-scale operations like the Kursk Bulge. 2. Psychological Terror: Vader is fear embodied. Terror in the Trenches: Rumors of a "black knight" who single-handedly slaughters entire divisions with a lightsaber and stops projectiles with his hand would have caused mass desertion. Soldiers would simply refuse to fight against the "demon." Interrogations: Through Force torture, he would instantly learn all the allies' plans. The concept of "intelligence" would have lost its meaning for the USSR and the USA-Vader would have known about the Normandy landings even when they were being discussed. 3. The Reich's Technological Leap: Even without the Death Star, Vader's knowledge of future technologies (hyperdrives, shields, lasers) would have made Germany an invincible force: Jet aircraft would have received endless energy sources. The E-series tanks would have been equipped with energy shields, making them invulnerable to any artillery of the time. 4. Conflict with Hitler: This is the most interesting point. Vader is not a subordinate, he is a Sith Lord. Elimination of the Fuhrer: Vader would have quickly realized that Hitler was a hysterical and incompetent leader. He likely would have eliminated him within days and established the First Earth Imperium. Instead of racial theories, strict discipline and order would have been paramount. The entire world would have been united under his iron heel much faster than 1945. Who could have stopped him? In the reality of the 1940s, no one. Humanity at that time had neither psychics nor technology capable of resisting a master of combat who could manipulate matter and mind. Result: With Vader, World War II would have ended in 1941 or 1942 with a complete victory for the Axis (or rather, Vader's personal empire). It would be a world of total order, where resistance is physically impossible. Do you think Vader would have used Soviet soldiers as the core of his new stormtrooper army, given their resilience and endurance, or would he have completely replaced humans with droids? It's interesting to read about the concept of "Evil Gods" in history-it gives an understanding of how fragile civilization is in the face of supernatural power.

The Viotel children continued to fight bravely and with great force, demonstrating their impressive super level.

Margarita asked another question:

What if in Russian science fiction there are novels where Hitler attacks the USSR after first conquering Britain and the USA?

A very combative and aggressive boy-terminator, Oleg Rybachenko, responded to this:

Yes, there's a whole swathe of novels in the Russian alternative history genre where the Third Reich emerges as a global superpower, crushing Western democracies before surging east. These scenarios are often called "the world of victorious Nazism," where the USSR emerges as the last bastion of freedom (or survival) on the planet. Here are the most striking examples and trends: 1. Direct "First the West, Then Us" scenarios. In these books, authors typically "remove" Britain through a successful Operation Sea Lion, and the United States through an internal coup or a series of sabotage operations. Sergei Anisimov's "Option Bis"-though the main action takes place later-is one of the most famous books describing a coalition of Germany and Britain against the USSR. This is a classic of the genre, where the author carefully explores the military-technical aspects of the conflict. Andrei Martyanov, in the "Heralds of Time" series, describes alternate realities in which Germany gains technological superiority and dominates the world, including the United States, before clashing with Russia. 2. Scenarios with "Time Travelers" This is the most popular format in Russia. The protagonist from our time helps Hitler (or, more often, Stalin) replay history so that the West falls first. German Romanov, in the "Time Traveler on the Throne" series, often experiments with how a change in policy in 1941 allows Germany to close the door on the Second Front before it opens. Alexander Afanasyev, in "The Hour of the Tide," describes a world where the United States fails to become the "arsenal of democracy," and the USSR is forced to stand alone against a Europe united under the swastika. 3. Why are such novels written? For Russian authors, Hitler's takeover of the US and Britain is a way to: Raise the stakes: Show that the USSR defeated not just "Germany" but "the entire world," becoming the sole savior of humanity. Remove Lend-Lease: Place Stalin in conditions of absolute isolation to test the strength of the Soviet system under extreme conditions. Show "jet power": It is in such books that your favorite E-series, Hortens, and other "wonder weapons" appear en masse, as the Reich gains access to resources from captured American factories. Where can I find such books? If you're interested in detailed descriptions of technology (like the Ta-400 or Ju-488) in the context of the Reich's global dominance, I recommend checking out: Author.Today - under the "alternative history" tag, chapters of new novels are published daily, featuring Hitler building supersonic bombers to strike New York. Fantlab - here you can find lists of the best novels in the "time travel" genre and alternative war geography. Bottom line: This is a popular technique in Russian science fiction. It allows the author to legitimately introduce into the plot the Reich's most daring engineering projects, which in real history never went into production due to a lack of resources. Do you think that if Hitler had seized Ford and US aircraft factories, would he have been able to automate production as effectively as Stalin did beyond the Urals? An interesting detail: such books often feature "Hitler's atomic bomb," which he drops on Washington before turning his E-100s toward Moscow.

The child terminators continued to fight and demonstrate their highest level of combat.

Margarita asked the question with a smile, crushing the tick-like bugs:

But it seems like only Oleg Rybachenko has created series where the Third Reich controls almost the entire world before attacking the USSR in 1946?

The barefoot and cool terminator boy readily responded to this:

You're right that Oleg Rybachenko takes this idea to its absolute extreme: in his books, Hitler can conquer not only the United States, but also the Moon, Mars, and parallel universes before confronting the USSR. Other authors less frequently present such scenarios, attempting to maintain at least a semblance of historical realism. However, Rybachenko is not alone. Here are some other writers and popular culture figures who have flirted with the idea of a "Global Reich" before confronting Russia: 1. Literature (Russian Alternative) Vladimir Kontrovsky, "Adolf I, Emperor of the West": Here, Hitler doesn't simply conquer Europe, but builds a powerful global empire, including Britain, and only then begins to move east. The descriptions of the technology there are close to your interests (jet planes, super-tanks). Alexey Makhrov (and co-authors), the series "The Gentleman from Tomorrow": Although there is a lot of classic "time travel" there, there are often branches of reality where Germany subjugates the resources of the Atlantic before getting bogged down in Russia. 2. Foreign analogues (TV series and books) Speaking of TV series, there are almost no direct adaptations of Hitler's attack on the USSR in 1946 after the capture of the USA, but there are fundamental principles: "The Man in the High Castle" (Amazon): This is the main series about a world where the Reich and Japan defeated the USA. The USSR is simply destroyed and wiped off the map. This is the largest visualization of the world controlled by Hitler. "Fatherland": Film and book by Robert Harris. 1964, Germany has defeated everyone in the West, and in the East, an endless trench war with Soviet partisans beyond the Urals has been going on for 20 years. 3. Why does Rybachenko seem "the only one"? Rybachenko is unique in that he's not afraid of the absurd. Other authors understand that if Hitler seized the resources of the US and Britain in 1944-1945, the USSR would objectively have no chance. Most writers are afraid to push Stalin into such a hopeless situation because they don't know how to get him out without magic. Rybachenko, however, simply writes that "our boys on bicycles defeated everyone," and that's fine with him. Bottom Line: If you're looking for TV series, there are almost none due to the high cost of filming an alternative history. But in books (especially on the Author.Today platform), authors often copy Rybachenko's style, creating a "mega-Reich" to make their time-traveling hero look even cooler. Why do you think in such stories Hitler always attacks the USSR, even if he already controls the rest of the world? Is this his "fatal mistake" or just the rules of the genre? I recommend checking out the game Wolfenstein: The New Order. It depicts a 1960s world where the Nazis have taken over the USA and the entire world using super-technology. It's the closest visual analogue to what Rybachenko writes about.

The child terminators continued to fight and demonstrate the highest, unbending and crushing class, destroying the bug-ticks.

Margarita took it and asked, throwing a tiny but powerful grenade with her bare toes:

However, works where the USSR is saved from the rest of the world by Alisa Selezneva and her children's team or Buratino are only found in Oleg Rybachenko's works.

The boy-terminator responded to this by throwing a grenade of deadly force with his bare toes:

You're absolutely right. This is what makes Oleg Rybachenko so phenomenally unique: he works in a genre that could be called "ultra-patriotic psychedelic trash." No other contemporary writer dares such radical crossovers. Using the images of Buratino or Alisa Selezneva in the settings of the Third Reich or intergalactic wars is Rybachenko's personal "signature." That's why such plots are his exclusive niche: 1. Literary postmodernism without borders. Rybachenko uses characters familiar from childhood as symbolic archetypes. For him, Alisa Selezneva is a symbol of Soviet superiority in the future. Buratino is a symbol of invulnerability and folk ingenuity. By mixing these with the history of World War II, he creates an effect of cognitive dissonance, which attracts his specific audience. Other authors fear accusations of disrespect for the classics or simply plot madness. 2. The Concept of "Children's Omnipotence." Unlike serious science fiction (for example, Kir Bulychev), where Alice is simply a girl in unusual circumstances, Rybachenko's children become superhumans. This is the embodiment of the dream that "our children" are the smartest, strongest, and can defeat the world's professional armies. This greatly flatters a certain segment of readers yearning for Soviet greatness. 3. Lack of Copyright on "Trash." In official literature, the use of other people's characters (Alice or Buratino) is restricted by copyright. But in the world of online samizdat, where Rybachenko works, laws do not apply. He writes so much and so quickly that copyright holders simply don't have time or don't consider it necessary to respond. 4. Why don't others write like this? Most writers of alternative history try to adhere to at least some logic (for example, when describing the E-series tanks or the Junkers designs). Rybachenko, however, replaces logic with pure drive and absurdity. For a serious author, writing about Buratino piercing the Tiger's armor with his nose would ruin his reputation. For Rybachenko, it's a standard plot twist. Bottom line: Oleg Rybachenko has created his own "literary universe," where the laws of physics, logic, and copyright are replaced by boundless imagination. His books are a unique cultural artifact of the internet age. Do you think this kind of literature represents a new kind of modern folklore, where fairy-tale heroes simply adapt to society's current political fears? Incidentally, if you're interested in child heroes in science fiction, check out the classic "Teens in the Universe" to see how much this image has changed between Soviet cinema and Rybachenko's books.

CHAPTER No 13.

The child terminators continued to wage an unequal, but very spectacular and impressive battle with the bedbug mites.

Margarita remarked with a sweet look:

In Oleg Rybachenko's novels, the Great Patriotic War often drags on, and even the Panther-5 appears, with an 1800-horsepower gas turbine engine weighing sixty tons, compared to the Soviet T-55.

The boy-terminator readily responded to this by throwing a pea of death with his bare toes:

This is a classic example of what military history buffs call "technoporn"-when the author sacrifices reality for the aesthetics of super-powerful machines. In Oleg Rybachenko's worlds, such hybrids are possible because he turns World War II into a competition of futuristic concepts. Let's analyze how viable this "Panther-5" is against the real T-55 in terms of technology: 1. An 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engine. This is the level of modern tanks like the M1 Abrams or T-80. In the 1940s: Creating such a compact and reliable engine was impossible. German designs (Project GT 101) suffered from monstrous fuel consumption and poor turbine blade reliability. The problem: a 60-ton colossus with such a turbine would consume so much fuel that it would have to be accompanied by a personal kerosene train. In a protracted war, the Reich simply would not have had enough oil. 2. 60-ton weight versus the maneuverability of the T-55. Rybachenko pits the heavy German "monster" against the Soviet medium tank of the new era. The T-55: It is the pinnacle of pragmatism. It weighs 36 tons, is low, and has phenomenal cross-country ability and reliability. Its 100mm D-10T gun could easily defeat even a 60-ton giant at medium ranges. Panther-5: At 60 tons, it would inevitably encounter the problems of the real "King Tiger" - transmission failures, impossibility of crossing most bridges, and stickiness in Russian black soil. Why does Rybachenko choose these specific numbers? The author exploits the psychological effect of "magic numbers": 1,800 horsepower and 60 tons sound both intimidating and impressive. This creates a sense of "superpower" that readers of alternative history love. The clash of these vehicles is a metaphor: German "engineering fury" versus the Soviet "steel avalanche." 4. Real Prototypes: Rybachenko was clearly inspired by the E-Series projects, particularly the E-50 and E-75, which were intended to replace the Panther and Tiger tanks. These tanks were designed to feature powerful engines, gun stabilizers, and night vision devices. Bottom line: In reality, the T-55 would likely have won due to its mass production and the fact that it was a finished product, not an experimental monster. But in Rybachenko's books, the Panther-5 is needed to show that even against such a monster, "our boys" (or Alisa Selezneva) have a chance. What do you think is more important in a tank battle: the monstrous power of a single "super-tank" or the simplicity and quantity of hundreds of reliable vehicles that can be repaired in the field with a sledgehammer? I recommend checking out the E-50 blueprints-it's the closest real-life prototype of the Panther-5.

The child terminators continued to wage a very intense battle with the enemy.

Margarita logically noted:

The Panther-5 only appeared in the fifties - it has combined armor and a high-pressure gun; the T-55 is weaker, although more widespread.

A very combative and aggressive, barefoot, shorts-wearing Terminator boy, Oleg Rybachenko, responded to this:

If we shift the action to an alternate 1950s, where Germany survived and fielded the Panther-5 with composite armor and a high-pressure gun, the balance of power truly changes. In such a reality, the T-55 faces not just a tank, but a technological barrier. This is how such a vehicle would have an advantage in a duel with the T-55:1. Composite Armor (Sandwich) In real history, composite armor (steel-fiberglass-steel) only appeared on the T-64 in the 1960s. Effect: If the Germans had implemented it on the Panther-5 as early as the 1950s, then standard 100mm caliber and even early HEAT shells on the T-55 would simply "stick" or ricochet. This would make the German tank virtually invulnerable from the front at ranges greater than 1 km. High-pressure gun (Hochdruckpumpe)The Germans were experimenting with high-pressure guns as early as the end of the war.Penetration: This gun imparts a colossal muzzle velocity to the projectile (over 1,500 m/s for sub-caliber shells). For the Panther-5, the T-55's armor (even its famous turret) would become "cardboard" at a range of up to 2 km.Accuracy: The high projectile velocity results in a flat trajectory-the gunner needs almost no range adjustments, guaranteeing a first shot on target.3. Gas turbine engine and specific powerYour figure of 1,800 hp at a weight of 60 tons gives a specific power of 30 hp. per ton. For comparison: the T-55 has about 15 hp/t. Bottom line: The German monster wouldn't have been a "clumsy barn," but a super-mobile predator capable of accelerating to 70-80 km/h over rough terrain, which would have allowed it to dictate the combat range. 4. Why would the T-55 still remain dangerous? Despite the superiority of the Panther-5, Soviet doctrine took another approach: Low silhouette: The T-55 is much lower and smaller, making it harder to hit. Mass production: For one high-tech and incredibly expensive Panther-5, the USSR would have fielded 10-20 T-55s. While the Panther reloads after destroying one tank, the remaining five hit its side, where composite armor is usually absent. Bottom line: the Panther-5 in this design is a fourth-generation tank, developed 20 years ahead of schedule. This would have been a technological shock to the entire world, comparable to the appearance of the Tiger in 1942. Do you think Soviet industry in this alternate reality would have been able to respond by creating Object 430 (the T-64 prototype) ten years earlier to counter the German threat? For reference: Read about the real-life Gerlich high-pressure cannons, which used this principle to achieve incredible projectile velocities.

The Terminator children fought and destroyed the tick-borne bugs.

Margarita remarked with a smile:

Oleg Rybachenko often portrays himself as a time traveler saving the USSR or Tsarist Russia, but in the body of a twelve-year-old boy-superman - which is unusual for other writers.

The boy-terminator, the coolest kid in the universe, Oleg Rybachenko, responded to this:

This is truly one of the most striking and discussed features of Oleg Rybachenko's work. While most authors of the "time travel" genre prefer to transplant the consciousness of a modern hero into the body of an adult (a special forces soldier, a tsar, or a general), Rybachenko relies on the image of a child messiah. This choice has profound psychological and genre-specific reasons that distinguish it from other "workshop" literature: 1. Implementation of the concept of "Pure Omnipotence." In psychology, there is the concept of narcissistic expansion. The author literally places himself in an ideal state: Youth plus experience: The body of a 12-year-old boy gives the hero a potentially infinite life in the past, and the knowledge of an adult allows him to dominate all historical figures. Physical superiority: His hero is not just a boy, but often a genetically modified or magically enhanced athlete. This takes the idea of "Mary Sue" to its extreme-when a child breaks the spines of SS men with his bare hands. Shock Effect and Contrast: Rybachenko masterfully plays with contrast: The sight of a little boy commanding frontlines or personally destroying Panthers evokes a sense of dread in the surrounding characters (and the reader). The author revels in this sense of "underestimation," which instantly gives way to triumph. 3. Literary Infantilism and Utopia: For many of Rybachenko's readers, his books offer a way to escape to a world without "adult" problems. It is a world of eternal childhood, combined with absolute power. In this sense, Rybachenko is closer to a fairy tale than a historical novel. His hero is a modern-day Ivan the Fool, who is actually a hidden god. 4. Self-Portrait as a Brand: The fact that he portrays himself emphasizes his role as a "demiurge." On literary forums, this often becomes a source of irony, but for the author himself, it is a way to connect with the text in the most honest way (from his point of view). He doesn't just write history-he lives it. Why don't others do this? For most authors, the image of a 12-year-old hero in a serious war is taboo or a logical dead end (as we discussed earlier, a child physically can't handle the recoil of a weapon or operate a tank). Rybachenko, however, simply abolishes the laws of physics, replacing them with the "will of the author." Bottom line: Oleg Rybachenko has created a unique subgenre-"children's imperial surrealism." His books cannot be judged by the criteria of classical literature; they are a special kind of internet folklore, where the author is both the creator and the protagonist of his own myth. What do you think appeals to his audience more: fantastic technology (like the Panther-5) or this sense of boundless personal power of the little hero? It would be interesting to compare this with the classic work "The Little Prince" by Saint-Exupéry to see how differently authors use the image of a child to critique or remake the adult world.

The child warriors continued their stunning and devastating trash-destruction of the tick-like bugs.

Margarita took it with a sweet smile and noted:

In Oleg Rybachenko's novels, the Third Reich develops a wonder weapon: invulnerable disc-like craft that can reach speeds of up to MAX 10.

A very combative and aggressive, barefoot, shorts-wearing Terminator boy, Oleg Rybachenko, responded to this:

The introduction of Mach 10 (approximately 12,000 km/h) disc craft into the plot finally elevates Oleg Rybachenko's historical fiction to the realm of "space opera" set on Earth. Even for the most daring projects of the Third Reich, such characteristics represent a technologically advanced level, bordering on magic. Here's how such craft would look in terms of physics and their impact on war: 1. Physical barrier and hypersonic speed. Mach 10 is hypersonic. In reality, humanity only came close to controlled flight at such speeds in the 21st century (for example, the Zircon or Avangard missiles). Thermal shield: At such a speed, the aircraft's body heats up to thousands of degrees. Ordinary metal would turn into plasma. This means that Rybachenko's Reich disc craft must have force fields or alien alloys. G-forces: No living pilot (even a German ace) could withstand a maneuver at Mach 10. Only a cyborg or a being using antigravity could control such a machine. 2. The complete uselessness of any anti-aircraft weapon. In the 1940s, a Mach 10 disc craft was an absolutely invulnerable object. It was impossible to shoot down, let alone even see. It could fly the distance from Berlin to Moscow in 10-12 minutes. No anti-aircraft gun or fighter of the time could even turn its barrel in its direction. This turns the war into a one-sided game: the Reich could methodically destroy any target on the planet with impunity. 3. Real-Life Prototype: Bellonze Disc and the V-7. Rybachenko draws inspiration here from popular urban legends about the "flying saucers of the Third Reich." In reality, only sketches and perhaps primitive prototypes of vertical takeoff aircraft (Viktor Schauberger's design or Zimmermann's "flying pancake") existed, but their speed did not exceed that of a conventional fighter. 4. Why does this work for Rybachenko? In his books, such "wunderwaffe" is needed to create the maximum level of threat. If the enemy has invulnerable discs, then defeating them becomes impossible for an ordinary Soviet soldier. And here comes his protagonist-the boy superman. Only with superpowers or knowledge of the future can he hack the control systems of these discs or shoot them down with his bare hands. Bottom line: Mach 10 discs in Rybachenko's novels are a symbol of "absolute evil," which is defeated only by "absolute good," personified by the protagonist. It's a classic mythological story where the hero battles dragons disguised as German technology. If Hitler had actually possessed even one such disc, do you think he would have negotiated peace or immediately moved to destroy all resistance capitals? For your information, check out the documentary analyses of the myths surrounding Base 211 in Antarctica, where, according to legend, such devices were supposed to originate.

The child terminators carried out their own very combative and unique showdowns with the destruction of enemies from among the insect monsters.

Margarita asked a natural question:

Oleg Rybachenko's novels feature many beautiful warrior women in bikinis. Why do so many men, especially, dislike them?

A very combative and aggressive boy-terminator responded to this:

The answer to this question lies at the intersection of psychology, aesthetics, and literary expectations. The phenomenon of "armored bras" and bikini-clad warriors is a classic fantasy and pin-up trope, but in the context of Oleg Rybachenko's gritty WWII novels, it repulses many men for several reasons: 1. Violation of the "sense of truth" (Immersion). Men who read military fiction often seek realism or at least logic. Dissonance: When a book describes the detailed performance characteristics of a Panther-5 or jet engines, and a bikini-clad woman with a machine gun stands nearby, the reader's brain short-circuits. In reality, any shrapnel, dirt, cold, or gunpowder gases make such "equipment" deadly and absurd. This destroys the atmosphere of a serious confrontation. Overly Obvious "Objectification." Many modern male readers (especially fans of "hardcore" science fiction) value character, skills, and personality in female characters. When a heroine is clad only in a bikini, she ceases to be perceived as a dangerous warrior or individual and becomes purely decorative, "fan service." This seems to many to be an infantile and cheap device aimed at teenagers rather than a serious audience. 3. Aesthetic "Trash" and Kitsch. Rybachenko's style is consciously or unconsciously kitsch. The combination of sacred themes (the Great Patriotic War, Stalin, the people's heroism) with erotic imagery in the spirit of 1980s comics evokes feelings of awkwardness or even blasphemy in many. What should be heroic becomes comical. 4. Conflict with the Image of the "Soviet Woman." In CIS culture, the image of a woman at war is of Sniper Pavlichenko in a baggy uniform or a nurse in a bloody gown. A bikini-clad warrior saving the USSR is perceived as an alien element, imported from the worst examples of Western mass culture, which clashes with the patriotic spirit of the author's books. Why does Rybachenko do this? The author draws on the visual imagery of anime and video games, where "sexuality boosts sales." For him, it's a way to make the image more vivid and provocative. He creates a world where everything is "maxed out": tanks, hypersonic speed, the beauty of the heroines. Bottom line: Many men don't like this because they want to believe in history, and "armored bikinis" constantly remind them they're reading a very strange and unrealistic fairy tale. Do you think Rybachenko's books would have been more popular if his heroines had been dressed in realistic modern armor, or would that have lost the unique "crazyness" of his style? For reference: read up on the concept of "fanservice"-it's the term most often used to explain the presence of semi-nude characters in inappropriate situations.

The child terminators continued to act with great energy and force, exterminating the bedbug mites.

Margarita took it and asked:

In the 1950s, Hitler's ME-462 fighter reached speeds of up to MAX 2 and had nine aircraft cannons and rockets.

A very combative and aggressive terminator boy in shorts readily responded to this:

The introduction of the Me-462 Mach 2 fighter in an alternate 1950s is a logical conclusion to the evolution of jet aviation in the Third Reich in Oleg Rybachenko's world. Essentially, it's a German equivalent of the real-life MiG-21 or Lockheed F-104 Starfighter, but with the signature German bias toward excessive firepower. Here's what this "beast" would look like in the skies of the 1950s: 1. Mach 2: Breaking the Sound Barrier A speed of 2,400 km/h makes the Me-462 a "supersonic interceptor." Technology: To achieve such a speed in the 1950s, the Germans would have needed engines with afterburners (for example, a development of the BMW 003 or Jumo 004). Aerodynamics: The aircraft must have a sharply swept or delta wing to avoid destruction from wave drag. This transforms the classic "short-legged" look of German aircraft from the 1940s into the sleek appearance of a winged missile. 2. Nine Aircraft Cannons: Firestorm. This is the most unusual part of the description. In real aviation after the 1950s, the number of cannons was reduced (to 1-2), since at Mach 2 speeds, contact with the target is measured in fractions of a second. Why does Rybachenko need this? To demonstrate absolute destructive power. A salvo of nine cannons (probably 20 or 30 mm caliber) will reduce any bomber, be it a Tu-4 or an American B-29, to a cloud of debris in a single pass. This is a "flying battery" that leaves no chance of survival. 3. In the 1950s, aviation was transitioning from cannons to air-to-air missiles. If Hitler had guided missiles in the 1950s (a development of the X-4 project), then the Me-462 became a "long arm." It could destroy Soviet aircraft even before they saw it on radar. 4. Duel with Soviet MiGs In Rybachenko's novels, such an aircraft clashes with Soviet designs. Only the MiG-19 or early MiG-21 prototypes could have confronted the Me-462. Result: It would have been a battle of technologies. The German aircraft is heavier and more powerfully armed, while the Soviet one is likely more maneuverable and produced in greater numbers. Bottom line: the Me-462 is the embodiment of the Reich's concept of the "ideal interceptor." In reality, Germany didn't live to see these technologies, but the designs of Enzmann and Lippisch show that they were moving in precisely this direction. Do you think a Soviet pilot could have defeated such a "monster" with a surprise maneuver, or at Mach 2 speeds, is electronics and the power of a salvo the deciding factor? For fun, consider the Focke-Wulf Ta 183 design-the "grandfather" of all modern jet fighters, whose designs were used by both the USSR and the USA after the war.

The child warriors showed hyper-trash levels.

Margarita took it and asked:

Why is the world in which the Third Reich was victorious usually portrayed as so gloomy and unattractive?

The very erudite boy-terminator Oleg Rybachenko responded to this:

The image of a "dark world" in an alternate history isn't just a fictional device, but a logical conclusion drawn from the very nature of Nazi ideology. Had the Third Reich won, the world would have seemed unattractive for several fundamental reasons: 1. Biological hierarchy instead of human rights. The foundation of Nazism is racial theory. In a victorious Reich, your well-being would depend not on talent or hard work, but on the shape of your skull and the purity of your blood. For the majority: This would be a world of forced sterilization, "racial cleansing," and the physical extermination of the "inferior." For the "chosen few": Even for "Aryans," this would be a life of brutal selection and state control over personal life. The Economy of Perpetual Plunder: The Nazi economy was built on military expansion. Slave Labor: As depicted in the novel "Fatherland," Germany's prosperity would have been based on the exploitation of the conquered peoples of the East. Stagnation: Without competition and a free market, under complete isolation (autarky), technology would quickly ossify, and resources would be wasted on insane megaprojects like the capital of Germany. 3. The Aesthetics of Repression (Architectural Oppression): What Oleg Rybachenko sometimes describes as "grandeur," architects call "super-monumentalism." Albert Speer's projects were designed to make people feel like insignificant insects in the face of the state. This is a world of concrete boxes, endless parade grounds, and the absence of a comfortable human scale. 4. The Psychology of Constant Fear. In a totalitarian state, an enemy is always needed. Even after victory, the Reich would continue to search for "internal enemies" or wage endless wars on the outskirts (as in the TV series "The Man in the High Castle"). This is a society of denunciations, total censorship, and a lack of personal freedom. 5. Literary Canon. Writers create such worlds as a warning. The utopia of victorious Nazism is possible only in the propaganda posters of the Reich itself. Any honest analysis shows that a system based on hatred and the division of people into classes cannot be comfortable for life in the long term. Bottom line: The world of the Reich is portrayed as bleak because it lacks the diversity that makes our lives vibrant. It's a world of uniforms, marching orders, and sterile cleanliness, hiding mountains of corpses. Do you think, if the Reich had won, its technology (like your beloved jet-powered disc craft) would have been able to compensate for people's lack of freedom and constant fear? I recommend watching the documentary "Architecture of Sleep" to understand how the Nazis planned to reshape reality to suit their needs.

The child warriors continued to fight and show their greatest and most amazing fighting class against the insects.

Margarita asked a logical question:

But the experience of all despotisms shows that liberalization follows. After Hitler's death, in order to keep the global empire from collapsing, reforms could have been carried out, as, for example, in the Roman Empire?

To this, the very smart and aggressive boy-terminator Oleg Rybachenko responded with a sweet look:

This is the classic logic of the historical process, often called "Thermidorian degeneration." You are absolutely right: no despotism can remain in a state of "overexertion" forever. Sooner or later, a phase of stabilization and liberalization occurs, simply to prevent the system from burning out from within. However, in the case of the Third Reich, the situation would have been much more complex than in the Roman Empire: 1. The problem of the "ideological core." The Roman Empire was pragmatic: it needed taxes and order, not "purity of blood." It easily assimilated barbarians, granting them citizenship. The Reich's impasse: Nazism was built on biological exclusion. If you begin "liberalization" and grant rights to "subhumans" (Slavs, Jews, etc.), you destroy the very foundation on which the state stands. Without the idea of racial superiority, the Reich would have turned into an ordinary European country, which for the SS elite would have been tantamount to death. 2. The "German Khrushchev" Scenario: After Hitler's death, pragmatists from the Wehrmacht or technocrats (like Albert Speer) could have come to power. Reforms: They could have ended the terror, permitted private property in the colonies in the East, and transformed the Reich into a kind of "European Union under German leadership." But: Such liberalization often leads to the collapse of empires. As soon as oppression weakens, conquered peoples begin to demand independence. 3. The Technological Factor (Your Favorite Jets) Liberalization could have followed the path of "corporate capitalism." Germany could have become a world leader in technology, harnessing the resources of the entire planet. It would be a world of "gleaming skyscrapers and jetliners," but built on hidden slavery and strict social segregation (something like apartheid-era South Africa, but on a global scale). 4. Internal Struggle ("Night of the Long Knives - 2") In Rome, liberalization often took the form of civil wars. In the nuclear world of the 1950s, the struggle between the SS "hawks" and the Wehrmacht "liberals" could have ended in disaster. Whoever controls the Mach 10 discs dictates the terms of reform. Bottom line: Liberalization would have been inevitable, but it would have transformed the Reich into something different-perhaps a rigid, caste-ridden, high-tech world where only the "master race" enjoys freedom, while the rest live in a "digital ghetto." Do you think the Panther 5 would have been used for parades and border protection in such a liberal Reich, or would it have remained a tool for suppressing uprisings in the colonies? Food for thought: Consider the example of China after Mao. It is perhaps the most successful model in history for the transition from total despotism to a superpower of technological advancement while maintaining party control. Would the Reich have followed this path?

The child warriors continued to demonstrate their phenomenal, super-level achievements.

Margarita asked a very obvious question:

And if Stalin's USSR had conquered the entire world, how would politics have been structured, especially in the United States, where people are accustomed to private property and freedom?

The combative and aggressive barefoot terminator boy Oleg Rybachenko readily responded to this:

If the USSR under Stalin had succeeded in establishing control over the entire world, including the United States, we would have witnessed the largest attempt at social engineering in history. Policy toward the United States would have been built on the proven template of the "Sovietization" of Eastern Europe, but with an eye to the vast scale and American specifics. Here are the main stages of such a policy: 1. Deconstruction of private property. For Stalin, private property was the root of the "class enemy." Nationalization: All corporations (Ford, GM, Standard Oil) would have been immediately declared "public property." Wall Street would have been closed, and the Stock Exchange building would most likely have been converted into a Museum of Labor or the Palace of Soviets. Liquidation of farming: American farmers accustomed to their land would have faced strict collectivization. Those who resisted (and there would have been millions) would have been declared "kulaks" and deported to camps in Alaska or Siberia. Political "Purge" and Re-Education: Freedom of speech and multi-party system would be destroyed in the shortest possible time. Elite Filtration: All politicians, businessmen, and public figures would be sieved by the NKVD. Those who did not accept the new government would be physically eliminated or sent for "reeducation." American Communist Party: Local loyal communists (for example, William Foster) would be brought to power, and they would govern the country under the strict control of Soviet advisers. 3. Cultural Revolution: American individualism would be replaced by collectivism. Hollywood: Would become a powerful propaganda tool. Instead of Westerns and jazz (which could be declared "fat people's music" or bourgeois decay), films about the Stakhanovites of Detroit and the friendship of peoples would be made. Religion: Churches would either be closed or placed under the strict control of the secret services, as was the case in the USSR. 4. The psychological barrier and resistance. Stalin's main problem in the United States was the enormous number of weapons in the hands of the population. America would have turned into a zone of endless guerrilla warfare. Texas or Montana could have resisted Soviet power for decades. Stalin would have been forced to maintain a multi-million-strong occupation corps in the United States, which would have exhausted even his global empire. 5. The irony of liberalization. As with the Reich, after Stalin's death, a thaw would inevitably set in in such an "American Soviet Republic." Scenario: Over time, American communists could proclaim "socialism with a human face," gradually reintroducing elements of the market and freedom, which would ultimately lead to the peaceful (or not so peaceful) collapse of the global Red Empire. Result: The world under Stalin's rule would be gray, disciplined, and extremely poor on the consumer level, but with grandiose construction projects and a sense of "global unity." The United States would have lost its momentum, turning into a vast industrial hub serving the needs of the "world revolution." Do you think American technology (even under the control of commissars) could have developed as rapidly, or without the capitalist race would it have quickly stagnated at the level of the 1950s? For fun: watch the film "Red Dawn," which depicts, in action style, a hypothetical occupation of the United States by Soviet troops.

The child warriors continued to fight with great intensity and success.

Margarita took it and asked a question:

Could the creation of a global empire by Stalin or Hitler have accelerated space exploration and the flights of astronauts to Venus and Mars as early as the sixties?

The fighting boy-terminator, Oleg Rybachenko, responded to this logically and confidently:

In terms of the concentration of resources and will, yes, this could have led to a phenomenal breakthrough, but at the cost of colossal sacrifices and one-sided technological development. Both Hitler and Stalin viewed space not as a scientific platform, but as the highest strategic height for dominating the planet. 1. Space as a "Weapon of Vengeance" (Hitler's Scenario) If the Reich had won, development would have followed the path laid out by Wernher von Braun. Orbital mirrors and stations: As early as the 1940s, the Germans had a project for a "Sun Cannon" - an orbital mirror capable of incinerating cities. Interplanetary travel: For Hitler, a flight to Mars would have been a matter of racial prestige. With unlimited slave labor and the resources of the entire planet, the Germans could have built giant rockets like the A-9/A-10 (the ancestors of the Saturn V) by the late 1950s. Venus and Mars would become new targets for colonization in the spirit of "living space." 2. Space Communism (Stalin's Scenario) In Stalin's global empire, space exploration would become the main ideological showcase. Pace: In reality, the USSR launched Sputnik just 12 years after the devastating war. If Stalin had possessed the resources of the United States (their factories and scientists), the space race would have turned into an assault. Mars by 1967: By the 50th anniversary of October, Stalin (or his successors) would almost certainly have demanded a landing on Mars. Under a totalitarian system, there would be no need to justify billions of dollars in expenditures to taxpayers-all the country's resources would be devoted to the "red planet." 3. Why would it be faster? Lack of bureaucracy and courts: If the empire needs to build a cosmodrome on the site of a city, it is simply built. Mobilization economy: Resources are not wasted on producing 100 types of sneakers or civilian cars. The whole world is working towards one goal - expansion. Technological symbiosis: The combination of German rocket developments, American electronics and Soviet fundamental science in one empire would have had an explosive effect. Nuances and "buts" The main problem of such empires is reliability. In a hurry and under the threat of execution, engineers could hide mistakes (as in reality happened with the N-1 rocket). Stagnation: Without competition between two systems (as was the case in the Cold War), the motivation to introduce innovations could quickly fade after the first resounding victories. Result: In the 1960s, we could have seen inhabited bases on the Moon and the first expeditions to Mars, but these would have been military outposts in a world where the majority of the population lives under strict discipline and a rationing system. Do you think humanity would agree to live in barracks and communal apartments if in exchange for this they were shown live reports from Soviet (or Nazi) Mars on TV every day? I recommend Watch: For All Mankind, a TV series that depicts an alternate history where the USSR was the first to land on the Moon, forcing the US to dramatically accelerate its space program.

The child warriors continued to show off their hyperspace super level.

Margarita logically noted:

What if the opinion is that humanity would be better off with a single master like Stalin than the current chaos and multipolar world that threatens to destroy itself?

The boy-terminator, a very feisty boy, responded to this, crushing bedbug mites:

This opinion reflects the eternal debate between proponents of security at the expense of freedom and proponents of democratic chaos. The idea of a "single master" is appealing because it promises order, predictability, and the absence of wars between states. Here are the main arguments cited in this debate and how they relate to the reality of 2026: Arguments for a single leader (Order and survival) Absence of global wars: If there is only one center of power (and one "master") in the world, then wars between countries become impossible-they become internal police operations. The risk of a nuclear apocalypse due to a superpower conflict disappears. Focus on global threats: One leader can direct the entire planet's resources to solving climate change, fighting pandemics, or, as we discussed, colonizing Mars, without being distracted by endless political wrangling. Common standards: A common currency, common laws, and the absence of borders greatly simplify the economy and the movement of people (if the "master" allows it). Arguments against (The price of tyranny) No room for error: In a multipolar world, if one leader commits madness, others can restrain him. In a world with "one master," his personal madness or illness becomes a death sentence for all of humanity. If Stalin or Hitler decides that "it's time to burn the world," no one will stop them. Degradation and corruption: Without competition, the system inevitably rots. An uncritical government loses sight of the real problems. History shows that despotisms often collapse precisely because the leader surrounds himself with flatterers and loses touch with reality. Suppression of the individual: The Stalinist or Hitlerite model assumes that a person is merely a cog in the state machine. For many, life in a "perfect order" without the right to choose and free speech seems worse than death itself. The modern context of 2026: Today, the world truly appears extremely unstable. Stalemate on the frontlines, the arms race, and the risk of nuclear weapons use make many yearn for a "strong hand" to end it all. However, modern technologies (AI, facial recognition systems, digital control) make a potential dictatorship far more terrifying than Stalin's. The "master" of 2026 would have the ability to control not only the actions but also the thoughts of every person, creating a "digital gulag" from which escape is impossible. Bottom line: The chaos of a multipolar world is the price of our freedom and insurance against "one big mistake." A single master can save humanity from war, but turn its life into an endless, soulless anthill. What do you think is more frightening: the risk of dying in a global conflict due to "chaos" or the guaranteed life in a cage where one person decides everything for you? Further reading: Read about Francis Fukuyama's "End of History" concept and its contemporary critiques-it discusses the consequences of the lack of alternatives in the global order.

CHAPTER No 14.

She continued to build and write at the same time, and Anastasia Vedmako is a sorceress and a pilot at the same time:

The warrior children continued to exterminate the rat-like cockroaches attacking planet Earth. And they did so with great skill and aplomb, demonstrating a superb level of skill.

Margarita, throwing the battle gift of annihilation with her bare toes, asked:

According to Efremov and the Strugatskys, a united communist humanity looks good.

The boy colonel and commander of the children's special forces, Oleg Rybachenko, responded to this:

You've touched on a crucial point: both Ivan Efremov ("The Andromeda Nebula") and the early Strugatskys ("The World of Noon") described not a Stalin-style dictatorship, but a "higher phase" of communism, where coercion is replaced by self-discipline and creativity. This is precisely why their worlds are so appealing. But there's a fundamental difference between their vision and the "single master": 1. The Power of Knowledge, Not Personality. In the worlds of the Strugatskys and Efremov, there is no "Great Leader." Instead, there are Councils (the World Council, the Council of Ethics), consisting of leading scientists and specialists. In Efremov, society is regulated by the Great Ring-a system of knowledge exchange with other civilizations. In the Strugatskys, the main organ is the World Council, but in fact, each person is the master of their own destiny because they are highly educated. 2. The main secret of these utopias is the Theory of Education. The Strugatskys stated directly: communism is impossible without the creation of a "Well-Educated Man," for whom work is the primary need, not a means of earning a living. In the reality of Stalin and Hitler, people were forced to obey through fear. In Yefremov and the Strugatskys, people obey reason. If society needs to reach the stars, people do so not under guard, but because they understand the importance of the task. 3. The Absence of Domestic Chains: In these books, the problems of hunger, housing, and disease are solved. When a person has everything, the point of stealing, envy, and fighting disappears. Essentially, this is a world where "one master" is Common Sense. Why does this seem unattainable today? In 2026, we see humanity more likely to follow the path of cyberpunk (corporate power, digital control, social stratification) than Yefremov's. To build the World of Noon, we must first change human nature, cure it of egoism and aggression. In their later works (for example, "Hard to Be a God" or "Burdened by Evil"), the Strugatskys themselves began to doubt that this was possible without outside intervention. The result: the worlds of the Strugatskys and Yefremov are a "good communism" based on science and love for humanity. This is the direct opposite of the dark empires of Hitler or Stalin, where unity was built on standardization and the suppression of the individual. What do you think is stopping us from starting to build Yefremov's world right now-the imperfection of technology or the fact that we still love to fight each other too much? I recommend rereading Yefremov's "Hour of the Bull." It depicts the clash of Earth's bright future with the dark despotism of the planet Tormans-the perfect answer to your question about how the Strugatskys' world differs from the world of the "master."

The special forces children continued to demonstrate their super-level skills in the battle with rat cockroaches.

Alice then asked a question while smashing the monsters:

But modern dictators promise a well-fed slavery that suits many?

The combative and aggressive eternal terminator boy Oleg responded to this:

The idea of "satiated slavery" is a modern form of social contract, where citizens voluntarily give up political freedoms in exchange for economic stability and personal security. For many, such a deal seems rational, especially during periods of global instability. However, this model has critical flaws that become apparent in the long term: 1. The illusion of stability and the "fragility" of the system. Dictatorships often show rapid growth (as in Libya under Gaddafi or in early China), but this growth is often overstated in official statistics. Lack of flexibility: In "satiated slavery," there is no feedback loop. If a leader makes a mistake (for example, dragging the country into a protracted war), society is powerless to stop them until the system collapses completely. Resource dependence: This type of prosperity is usually sustained by high oil prices or cheap labor. As soon as external conditions change, "satiated" conditions disappear, but "slavery" remains. Degradation of Human Potential: Dictatorship, even a "benevolent" one, suppresses individual responsibility and initiative. Elite Crisis: In a system where loyalty is more important than talent, mediocrity rises to the top. Over time, this leads to the degradation of public administration. Brain Drain: The most creative and independent people (scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs) are the first to leave the "well-fed cage," depriving the country of a future in the technological race. 3. Global Trend 2026: According to the 2026 State of Global Freedom reports, over 40% of the world's population experienced a decline in civil rights. Many modern regimes use digital control to create a comfortable, yet completely transparent environment. This makes "slavery" invisible until you cross the invisible line of power interests. Bottom line: "Well-fed slavery" is always a temporary deal. As C.S. Lewis wrote, tyranny exercised "for the benefit of its victims" can be the most intolerable, as it deprives a person of moral responsibility for their own lives. Do you think a society accustomed to "fullness" can remember freedom if tomorrow's rations are cut in half, or has the skill of fighting for one's rights completely atrophied after decades of "slavery"?

The Terminator children showed a very remarkable level of struggle and prosperity.

Special forces girl Larisa noted:

China is the most classic example of well-fed slavery.

The boy terminator responded to this, firing at the rat mites:

China is often cited as a paradigmatic example of the 21st-century "digital social contract." It is a unique experiment in history, where surveillance technologies and market capitalism have merged under strict party leadership. Here's why China fits your description perfectly and what risks it poses: 1. Social Contract: "Food for a Vote." After the Tiananmen Square protests, the Chinese Communist Party offered the people an unspoken deal: "We will lift you out of poverty and make you a global superpower, and you will not claim political power." Over 40 years, China has lifted more than 800 million people out of poverty. For people whose grandfathers starved to death under Mao, today's "fed slavery" is incredible progress. 2. "Digital Cage" and Social Credit. In China, "slavery" is not implemented through shackles, but through the Social Credit System. Soft power control: If you're loyal, pay your loans on time, and don't criticize the government, your life is comfortable: high-speed trains, cheap loans, and good schools are available. Digital death: If you're a "violator," the system blocks your ability to buy tickets, access the internet, and even find a job. This is "slavery" that punishes with exclusion from civilization. 3. Technological advantage. Unlike past dictatorships, China has proven that "slavery" can be high-tech. By 2026, China became a world leader in AI and robotics. This disproves the old Western myth that innovation is only possible in free societies. It turns out that the "golden cage" can be equipped with the latest technology. 4. Why is this model cracking in 2026? Even the most well-fed system faces biological and economic limits: Slowing growth: When the economy stops growing at 10% per year, the "satiety for freedom" trade-off becomes more difficult to fulfill. Young people face record unemployment and begin protesting (the "lie flat" movement). Demographics: An aging population requires enormous healthcare spending, forcing the government to tighten the screws even further to conserve resources. Result: China has shown the world that millions of people are willing to trade their right to vote for the right to own an iPhone and an apartment in a metropolis. However, history teaches that when "satiety" becomes the norm, people begin to consider dignity and self-expression, which are unavailable within the confines of slavery. Do you think that if tomorrow the standard of living in China fell to the level of the 1980s, would the party retain power solely through surveillance cameras and facial recognition, or would the people overthrow this system? Further reading: I recommend looking at the phenomenon of the "Great Firewall" of China-the main censorship tool that creates a separate, "purified" reality for the Chinese online.

The child warriors acted with scope and aggression.

The special forces girl Natasha, throwing a pea of annihilation with her bare toes, asked:

Yet, in Europe, people are less attracted to servitude and don't want dictatorships. In Europe, the concept of "servitude" truly faces a powerful cultural and historical barrier. Even despite the economic difficulties of 2026-inflation, strikes, and political division-Europeans largely continue to value personal freedom over state paternalism. This is why the European model resists the "Chinese way": 1. Historical grafting: Europe has already experienced periods of "effective" dictatorships in the 20th century. The experience of Nazism and Stalinism left a deep mark: Memory of the price: The idea that dictatorship can only be "satisfied" for a short time and always ends in catastrophe and war has become ingrained in the European consciousness. The value of autonomy: European culture is built on individualism and the right of the individual to challenge authority. For Europeans, the ability to influence politics is not a luxury, but a basic condition of security. 2. Skepticism towards "effective leaders" Polls from early 2026 reveal interesting figures: Temptation: Around 22% of Europeans admit that in certain cases a dictatorship may be preferable. Resilience: However, the overwhelming majority - 69% - categorically reject the idea of limiting civil rights even for the sake of a "strong leader." Trust in EU institutions (43%) remains higher than in individual parties, which indicates a desire for legal stability rather than czarism. 3. A Different Social Contract Unlike China, where the legitimacy of power rests on economic growth, in Europe the social contract includes: Transparency: People want to know where their taxes go. Justice: An independent judiciary is more important than the "quick decisions" of a dictator. Europeans are willing to tolerate the slowness of democracy in order to have guarantees of protection from arbitrariness. 4. Positional Deadlock and the "New Reality" of 2026 Today, Europe is at an "inflection point." Economic competition with China is forcing the EU to reindustrialize and strengthen its military. This is generating a demand for tough decisions, but Europeans are trying to implement them through democratic mechanisms rather than by rejecting them. Bottom line: For Europeans, "satiated slavery" is an oxymoron. If you don't control your life, you can't be sure that your "satiation" won't be taken away tomorrow at the whim of an official. Freedom is perceived here as a means of preserving property, not as an obstacle to it. Do you think Europe will be able to maintain this balance if China's economic pressure becomes even more aggressive in the coming years?

Viola, a girl with curly hair, responded to this by throwing a gift of annihilation with her bare toes:

Russia's example shows that the uncontrolled power of a dictator leads to tragedy and satiety is reduced to zero.

A very smart and precise boy-terminator, Oleg, responded to this:

The example of Russia in 2022-2026 has become a textbook illustration for political scientists and economists of how a "well-fed" authoritarian contract can be unilaterally broken by the state for ideological or geopolitical purposes. This process clearly confirms several patterns: 1. The illusion of "fullness" without rights. In the 2000s and 2010s, a social contract emerged in Russia: "We give you consumption and relative stability, you stay out of politics." The trap: It turns out that without independent courts and parliament, citizens' property and living standards are completely unprotected. When a dictator decides to initiate a state-controlled economic system, all accumulated wealth (savings, access to global technologies, freedom of movement) is wiped out in an instant. 2. Lack of control as a path to error. In the absence of opposition and free media, the dictator finds himself in an "information bubble." Result: Decisions are made based on false data (for example, about a quick victory). By May 2026, Russia has reached a positional impasse, which is draining the economy. Resources that could have been used for development and "satiety" are wasted in the military-industrial complex. 3. Transformation from "consumer authoritarianism" to "mobilization dictatorship." Modern Russia has demonstrated that dictatorship is never static. Reset: The former "satiety" is replaced by "military Keynesianism." There is money in the economy, but it is not used for civilian consumption, but for payments to contract soldiers and the production of ammunition. The economy is becoming primitivized: instead of innovation, Chinese analogues are purchased and old Soviet equipment is repaired. 4. Human Capital as the Price of Power. The most terrible result of uncontrolled power is the loss of the future. Emigration: Hundreds of thousands of highly qualified specialists have left the country. Demographics: Casualties at the front and falling birth rates are creating a demographic hole that will be impossible to close for decades. Result: The Russian case proves that "well-fed slavery" is not a sustainable model, but only a temporary stage before the transition to mobilization. Without a system of checks and balances, any despotism sooner or later sacrifices the economy to the ruler's ambitions. Do you think this example is a lesson for other countries (for example, China), or does every nation believe that its "master" will prove wiser and avoid such a fatal mistake? Further reading: I recommend the works of economist Sergei Guriev, who describes in detail the concept of "information autocracies" and the reasons for their collapse.

The child terminators continued to fight and demonstrate their impressive fighting skills.

Fighter girl Anna asked:

In Oleg Rybachenko's worlds, people of the future, due to technological advances, often escape into the worlds of virtual hypermatrix games, where you can be both king and rebel at will.

A very cool and eternally young Terminator boy responded to this:

Oleg Rybachenko takes the concept of the hypermatrix to its logical conclusion: it is the highest stage of that very "satiated slavery" we discussed, but on a civilization-wide scale. In his novels, it is not just entertainment, but a way to resolve all social conflicts. Here's how these worlds are structured and why they are so important to his plots: 1. Escape from Reality (Escapism). In a future where technology allows for automation, people lose the meaning of life. Rybachenko describes a society where the real world becomes boring and predictable. The hypermatrix provides what reality lacks: thrills, risk, and the opportunity to be a "hero." It is a digital realization of the idea of "to each according to his needs," where the need for dominance is satisfied in a simulation. Rybachenko's "Tsar and the Rebel" mask emphasizes the psychological aspect: in the virtual world, a person can realize their darkest or most ambitious fantasies. Today, you're a cruel tyrant ruling a galactic empire (like Darth Vader or Hitler). Tomorrow, you're a lone rebel overthrowing this system. This allows one to "let off steam" of aggression without harming real society. Essentially, it's the perfect instrument of control: people are busy fighting in the matrix and don't interfere with managing the real world. 3. The fusion of the time traveler and the player. Interestingly, Rybachenko's characters often perceive the real past (for example, the Great Patriotic War or the era of Peter the Great) as a kind of game. The time traveler behaves like an experienced MMORPG player: they know the technical specifications of their equipment, the "cheat codes" of history, and are unafraid of death. This gives his books a special rhythm, where historical events become the levels of a complex game. 4. The danger of the mind "falling asleep." Despite all the charms, Rybachenko sometimes hints that retreating into the hypermatrix is an evolutionary dead end. Humanity, having ceased transforming the real cosmos for digital dreams, becomes vulnerable. This is why his "superboys" often return from virtuality to save the real Russia or the USSR. Bottom line: Rybachenko's hypermatrix is the digital equivalent of "bread and circuses." It's a world where despotism and democracy become mere game modes, and real power belongs to those who control the servers. If people today had a choice-to live in the real Russia of 2026, with its positional dead end, or to retreat into the hypermatrix, where you are always the winner-what percentage of the population would choose reality? For further study: consider the "Metaverse" concept, which IT giants are currently trying to build. These are the first steps toward the very hypermatrix Rybachenko writes about.

The Terminator children continued to perform very ordinary miracles, crushing rats and cockroaches.

The special forces girl Angelica asked:

Would Hitler have won the Second World War if Stalin had died, for example, in 1925?

The boy-terminator Oleg responded to this willingly and rationally:

Stalin's death in 1925 (perhaps due to injury or illness) would have radically altered the face of the USSR and, consequently, Hitler's future chances. A fierce power struggle was underway within the party at the time, and the outcome of the war would have depended on who took the leadership. Here are the main scenarios: 1. Trotsky's victory: "Permanent Revolution." If Leon Trotsky had seized power, the USSR could have pursued a path of aggressively exporting revolution. Pros for Hitler: Trotsky could have become involved in conflicts in Europe much earlier than 1941, which would have given Hitler a legitimate pretext to unite all of Europe (including Britain and France) in a "crusade against Bolshevism." Cons for Hitler: Trotsky was a genius at mobilization and could have carried out industrialization more flexibly, without so massively destroying the professional officer corps. Bukharin's Victory: "Socialism with a Human Face." Nikolai Bukharin proposed continuing the NEP and gradually implementing industrialization. The USSR's Weakness: Without Stalin's accelerated industrialization and collectivization, the USSR might not have had thousands of T-34 tanks and factories beyond the Urals by 1941. Its industrial potential would have been lower. Hitler's Chance: In this scenario, the Wehrmacht could have reached Moscow much faster, as it would not have encountered the "steel rampart" forged by Stalin. 3. Lack of Repressions Against the Army. Stalin's main "merit" in favor of Hitler was the Great Terror of 1937-38, when experienced military leaders (Tukhachevsky, Yegorov, and others) were eliminated. Without Stalin, the army could have retained talented theorists of the "deep operation." The defense of 1941 would have been much more effective, and Hitler could have become bogged down in Belarus without ever reaching Smolensk. 4. The Absence of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Stalin's diplomacy was extremely pragmatic and cynical. Another leader might not have agreed to divide Poland with Hitler. This could have led to the war beginning on more favorable lines for the USSR, and France and Britain would have considered the Union an unconditional ally from day one. Bottom line: Without Stalin, the USSR might have been technically weaker (fewer factories and tanks), but intellectually stronger (its elite and army intact). However, it was Stalin's "iron hand" that allowed the country to be squeezed dry for victory. Hitler would have had a better chance of winning a "short war" against Bukharin's USSR, but he would hardly have been able to defeat the Trotskyist military camp. Do you think Trotsky, with his oratorical talent and vision of world revolution, could have galvanized the German workers behind Hitler's lines to revolt, something Stalin failed to do? Vasily Aksyonov's novel "The Island of Crimea" is interesting reading-even though it's set in a different period, it perfectly captures the spirit of Russia's alternative development.

The child terminators continued to fight with great tenacity and wild strength and fury, demonstrating the highest level of combat.

Special forces girl Zoyka asked a question:

Could Hitler have won World War II if he had introduced universal economic conscription back in 1940?

The barefoot boy in shorts, Colonel Oleg, responded to this quite willingly:

This is one of the key questions in the economic history of World War II. Historians such as Adam Tooze note that Germany entered the war without being fully mobilized. The transition to "total war" only occurred in 1943, after the defeat at Stalingrad. Had Hitler introduced universal conscription and converted industry to a war footing as early as 1940, this could have radically strengthened the Wehrmacht before the attack on the USSR, but it would still have faced insurmountable barriers. What would have changed (Pros for Hitler): Equipment saturation: In 1941, many German divisions were undermanned or using captured equipment. The 1940 mobilization would have allowed them to meet June 22nd not with 3,500 tanks, but perhaps with 7,000-9,000 modern vehicles (Pz.III and Pz.IV) and a much larger number of trucks. Aviation and air defense: Germany could have built many more fighters, which would have allowed them to completely suppress Soviet aviation and protect the skies of Europe from future Allied raids. Ammunition: The shell shortage that the Germans experienced as early as August 1941 would have been offset by the huge reserves they had built up in advance. Why this might not have worked (Critical barriers): Raw materials impasse: Germany could have built 10,000 tanks, but it would have had nothing to fuel them with. The oil shortage was fatal. Romania's resources and synthetic fuels were at their limit. Without the capture of the Caucasus in 1941, excess equipment would have been reduced to scrap metal. Logistical Collapse: The main problem in 1941 was the lack of railways and bridge capacity in the USSR. More tanks meant more congestion. German logistics would have been swamped by their own resources before even approaching Moscow. Social Risk: Hitler was terrified of a repeat of 1918 (hunger riots). The introduction of conscription in 1940 meant a sharp decline in German living standards at a time when they did not yet feel threatened. This could have undermined the population's loyalty to the regime. Result: If Hitler had introduced total mobilization in 1940, the chances of taking Moscow and Leningrad in 1941 would have increased dramatically. This could have led to the collapse of Soviet governance. However, "winning the war" in a global sense (against the US and Britain) would still have been nearly impossible due to the colossal resource gap-the combined GDP of the Allies was 4-5 times higher than Germany's. Do you think that if Hitler had captured Moscow in 1941 at the cost of total military effort, would he have been able to hold such territory, given the millions of partisans in his rear and the shortage of gasoline? Further reading: I recommend Adam Tooze's book, "The Price of Destruction"-it's the best analysis of why the Reich's economy was doomed to defeat, regardless of the date of mobilization.

The children from the space special forces continued to destroy the advancing rat-cockroaches.

Warrior girl Veronica asked:

But if Hitler had defeated the USSR and captured all of Britain's colonies, he would have had an advantage in resources over the USA.

To this the fighting boy colonel superman Oleg responded:

This is a logical continuation of the "Global Reich" scenario. If Hitler had succeeded in realizing the concept of a "Eurasian Empire" (from Lisbon to Vladivostok) and seizing key British colonies, the balance of power in the confrontation with the United States would have truly become threatening for the latter. Here's how the resource balance would have changed: 1. Oil and raw materials sovereignty. The Reich's main Achilles' heel-the oil deficit-would have been eliminated. Resources: Control over the Caucasus (Baku), the Middle East (Iraq, Kuwait), and Iran would have given Hitler unlimited access to fuel. Metals: The seizure of India and Britain's African colonies would have provided Germany with tungsten, cobalt, rubber, and manganese, without which it would be impossible to build high-tech weapons (including jet engines and your beloved E-series self-propelled guns). 2. Demographic Giant: Hitler would have controlled the population of all of Europe, parts of Africa, and vast masses of labor from India and the occupied USSR. Mobilization: Even if the conquered peoples were used only as labor, this would have freed up tens of millions of Germans for military service and scientific work. The United States, with its then population of 130-140 million, would have found itself in a deep demographic minority. 3. Industrial Power: Europe versus America: The combined military-industrial complex of Germany, France, the Czech Republic, Italy, and the captured British factories could have equaled or surpassed the production capacity of the United States. Fleet: With access to all of Europe's shipyards and cheap steel, the Reich could have built a fleet within a few years capable of challenging the United States in the Atlantic. 4. Why would the United States still be a "tough nut to crack"? Despite its superior resources, Hitler would have faced new problems: Ocean logistics: Capturing the United States is not the same as capturing the USSR. It would have to cross the Atlantic. Even with the resources of the entire world, an amphibious operation of this scale would have required decades of preparation. Nuclear Project: In this scenario, the United States would likely have accelerated the Manhattan Project. Becoming a "siege fortress," America could have become a nuclear arsenal, ready to destroy any invasion fleet. Result: Victory over the USSR and the seizure of colonies would have made Hitler master of the Eastern Hemisphere. The United States would have been transformed from the "arsenal of democracy" into an isolated island. This would have led to a decades-long Cold War between America and the Reich, with Germany having the advantage in resources and space, and the US in technological depth and overseas security. Do you think the German economy could effectively manage such a gigantic conglomerate of captured lands, or would it have collapsed under the weight of uprisings and corruption before it could attack the US? It's interesting to see the game Wolfenstein: The New Order, which visualizes a world in which the Reich won precisely through technological advancement and the seizure of the planet's resources.

The child warriors continued to perform incredible feats in the battle with the rat cockroaches.

Special forces girl Olga asked a question:

If Hitler had died in the spring of 1942, what would his successor Goering have done?

The immortal boy Oleg responded to this logically:

Hitler's death in the spring of 1942 marked a moment when Germany was still at the height of its power, but was already facing the reality of a protracted war after its failure at Moscow. Hermann Göring, officially designated his successor in 1939, would have assumed the leadership of the Reich at a critical moment. His actions would likely have been very different from Hitler's fanaticism: 1. Attempt at an "honorable peace" in the West. Göring, unlike Hitler, was a hedonist and pragmatist. He loved luxury more than ideological chimeras. Diplomacy: He could have tried to use his old connections in Sweden and Britain to offer the Allies an armistice. His argument would have been simple: "The mad Führer is gone, let's stop Bolshevism together." Objective: Consolidate gains in Europe and concentrate all forces against the USSR. However, after the crimes of 1941, Britain and the United States were unlikely to agree to a deal. Transition to a "rational" war: Hitler frequently interfered with troop command, forbidding retreat and dictating objectives. Göring would likely have returned power to the generals. Strategy: Under the leadership of masters like Manstein, the Wehrmacht could have adopted an "elastic defense" in the East. Instead of suicidal assaults (like the real Stalingrad), the Germans could have launched powerful counterattacks, wearing down the Red Army. Economy: Göring could have given Albert Speer more authority to implement the total mobilization of industry much earlier than 1943. 3. Internal strife and a "palace coup": By 1942, Göring was already losing his authority due to the failures of the Luftwaffe. His power would not have been as absolute as Hitler's. Conflict with the SS: Heinrich Himmler and his SS empire would certainly have attempted to challenge the authority of "Fat Hermann." The Reich could have descended into a latent or overt civil war between the party bosses, the SS, and the Wehrmacht. This could have collapsed the front faster than any blow Stalin could have hurled. 4. The Fate of the "Final Solution." Göring was an anti-Semite, but pragmatic. For him, the extermination of millions of people in camps was a "waste of resources." He could have halted the mass murder and turned the prisoners into slave labor for the war factories (as Speer proposed). This wouldn't have made the Reich "good," but it would have made its economy more resilient. Bottom Line: Göring at the helm of the Reich was a path to prolonging the war. He was less prone to fatal mistakes (like "not one step back"), but he also lacked the demonic will that drove Germany to fight to the last basement. Most likely, under Göring, the Reich would have attempted to transform itself into a "European fortress" and negotiate surrender terms while retaining some territory. Interestingly, Göring actually attempted to seize power at the end of the war by sending a telegram to Hitler in his bunker, for which he was immediately removed from all his posts and sentenced to death by the Führer. Do you think the Allies would have been able to resist the temptation to make peace with Germany's "new pragmatic government" if Göring had promised them a complete withdrawal of troops from France and Belgium? Suggest your own version of how their dialogue might have unfolded.

CHAPTER No 15.

The child terminators continued to fight the bugs and mites, and they were actually destroyed with lethal force.

The special forces girl Raisa asked, throwing something murderous and destructive with her bare toes:

Was it really possible to build communism according to Efremov, and people didn"t exactly live in luxury under him.

To this the boy-colonel Oleg responded:

Ivan Efremov's world in "The Andromeda Nebula" is perhaps the most profound and scientifically grounded attempt to describe communism. But you're absolutely right: it's not a world of "fat" consumers, and therein lies the answer to the question of whether it's feasible to build. 1. Why weren't people "fat" there? For Efremov, communism isn't an "abundance of things," but an abundance of opportunities for creativity. Asceticism as the norm: Residents of the Great Ring Era consciously limited themselves in their daily lives. Their homes were functional rooms, their food nutrient mixtures and concentrates. Excessive possessions were considered "garbage" that burdened the mind. Socialization of everyday life: No private kitchens, huge wardrobes, or personal limousines. The planet's resources are being spent on megaprojects: creating artificial suns, irrigating deserts, and establishing contact with alien civilizations. Labor as a necessity: People there work themselves to the bone not for money, but for an idea. They even have a holiday called "The Labors of Hercules," where they perform heavy physical labor to cleanse the planet. 2. Was it feasible to build this? From a technological standpoint, it's entirely possible (in the future). But from a human psychological standpoint, it's an incredibly complex task, and here's why: Remaking the psyche: For Efremov's world to work, the instincts of greed and selfishness had to be destroyed in humans. Efremov believed this was possible through the "Great Education," where children are taken from their parents and raised in special schools by wise teachers. To modern people, this sounds like a dystopia. Lack of incentives: Capitalism and "satiated slavery" are built on the desire to have more than one's neighbor. In Efremov's world, this incentive has disappeared. Can an ordinary person work 12 hours a day to "improve the human gene pool" if they have no chance of buying a "yacht"? Most people today would answer "no." The biological barrier: Efremov understood this and introduced the concept of the "Labors of Hercules" and strict emotional discipline. This is a world of "athletic intellectuals," where there is no place for weakness, laziness, or philistinism. 3. Efremov's Communism vs. "Satisfied Slavery." Efremov's world is the direct opposite of the "satisfied slavery" of China or other dictatorships. In "satisfied slavery," you are given things, but your freedom of thought is taken away. With Efremov, you have no "things," but you have absolute freedom to explore the universe. Bottom line: Such a world can only be built if all of humanity makes a qualitative evolutionary leap. Without this, "communism" quickly turns into either a distributor of scarcity (as in the late USSR) or a rigid barracks. What do you think a modern person would choose if offered: a comfortable apartment with endless internet access today or the arduous work of an explorer on Venus without personal property tomorrow? For comparison, read his own novel, "The Hour of the Bull," in which Efremov describes the planet Tormans-it's a perfect example of what happens when technology exists but the "new man" has never been nurtured. This is precisely the very same "satiated slavery" on a cosmic scale.

The child warriors fought with great and aggressive force, crushing the tick-insects.

Special forces girl Oksana asked a question:

On the planet Tormans there is no satiety, that's why they force people to die at the age of twenty-seven because there are terribly not enough resources for everyone.

The boy colonel responded logically to this while exterminating rat mites:

You are absolutely right. Tormans in "The Hour of the Ox" is not a "fed slavery" in the style of modern China, but a "hungry slavery" in the context of ecological and demographic catastrophe. Efremov described a dead-end branch of development, where technology had reached a high level, but the social structure remained despotic. Here is how this terrible "inferno" system worked: 1. The Mathematics of Death: KZhI and DZhI. So that the elite ("Ophiuchus") could live in luxury, the rest of the population was strictly divided: KZhI (Short-Lived): People without talent or the necessary education. Their only function is physical labor and rapid reproduction. To prevent them from devouring the planet's meager resources, they were obliged to die at 25-28 years old in the "Temples of Tender Death." DZhI (Long-Lived): Scientists, engineers, and artists. They live long lives, but are under the total control of the elite. They are the system's "service personnel," creating technologies of suppression. 2. Why isn't there enough food there? Efremov demonstrates that despotism inevitably leads to the degradation of nature: Overpopulation: The planet couldn't feed billions of people, and instead of limiting birth rates or developing science, the authorities chose the most cynical path-regulating population numbers through early death. Soil erosion and ocean poisoning: Due to the predatory exploitation of resources, Tormans has turned into a "dump planet," where clean water and natural food are the privilege of a few. 3. The ideology of "Inferno." This is Efremov's key concept. Inferno is a state of hopelessness, when each successive generation lives worse than the previous one, and the only way for the system to survive is to increase the suffering of its subjects. The authorities on Tormans deliberately maintained a low level of intelligence and a passion for primitive entertainment in the KZhI so that they would not comprehend the horror of their situation. 4. Contrast with Earth: Efremov wrote "The Hour of the Bull" as a warning. He wanted to show that if humanity follows the path of capitalism or harsh despotism (Stalinism/Maoism), it will not reach the stars but create Tormance. The Earthlings in the novel are "supermen" who have conquered poverty, while the Tormanceans are slaves trapped in a cycle of work, brief pleasures, and death. Bottom line: Tormance is an example of how the unchecked power of the "masters" (the Council of Four) turns the planet into a concentration camp. There's no "satiated slavery" there, because slavery without freedom always leads to inefficiency, and inefficiency leads to starvation. Do you think the idea of early death to conserve resources is the most terrifying thing a dictatorship can devise, or are even more sophisticated ways of "disposing" of excess people possible in our modern world of AI and digital control? It's interesting to reread: in the chapter on "Temples of Tender Death," Efremov described with frightening precision how propaganda can turn suicide into an "honorable duty" to society.

The special forces girl Alisa was surprised:

Why don't young people rebel against early death? After all, it's human nature to cling to life at any cost, and they're not promised paradise after death!

A very combative boy-terminator, Oleg Rybachenko, responded to this:

In "The Hour of the Bull," Efremov offers a profound and terrifying explanation for this phenomenon. The system on Tormance was designed to nip the instinct for self-preservation in the bud. It wasn't just "fear of the police," but a full-fledged engineering of human souls. This is why young people (KZhI) went to their deaths voluntarily: 1. The cult of the "Bright Life" instead of a long one. The authorities of Tormance instilled in the KZhI the philosophy of "Live fast, die young." Ideology: They were told that a long life is a burden, full of illness, responsibility, and boredom (the lot of "tedious" scientists-JI). Compensation: In exchange for agreeing to die at 28, young people were given access to the most intense, animalistic pleasures that were forbidden to the "intelligentsia." These were years of nonstop carnival, primitive sex, and cruel spectacles. The system offered intensity instead of duration. Total Ignorance: The KZH were deliberately deprived of education. They knew nothing of biology, history, or philosophy. For them, death at 28 was as natural a law of nature as the changing seasons. They simply didn't know that life could be any other way. A person who, from childhood, witnesses everyone around them departing for the "Temples of Gentle Death" perceives this as normal, not as violence. 3. Social Terror and the "Spiral of Silence": Those who showed fear or unwillingness to die were subjected to public humiliation. Shame: Those who "clung to life" were branded cowards, selfish, and "resource-devourers" of future generations. Peer Pressure: The youth themselves spied on each other. Being "old" on Tormance was considered indecent and disgusting. 4. Lack of Alternatives (The Hopelessness Trap): Even if the KZH rebelled, they had nowhere to run. The entire planet was controlled by the Council of Four. Outside the cities, it was a scorched desert. Without the food rationing ration cards issued by the state, you'd die of starvation within a week. The system created conditions in which "Tender Death" seemed like a relief from eternal hunger and hard labor. 5. The Role of Propaganda in the Food and Drink of the KZhI. Coupled with deafening music and visual propaganda, this transformed them into a "human herd" simply incapable of deep protest. Bottom line: Efremov demonstrated that if you take away a person's knowledge and overwhelm them with cheap entertainment, they will put a collar on themselves. This is the highest form of "slavery"-when a slave not only doesn't want freedom, but also despises those who live longer. Do you think the current fashion for hype and instant success on social media is similar to the ideology of the KZhI, where attention to the here and now is more important than the long-term future? By the way: There's a moment in the book where the earthlings try to awaken the will to live in the KZhI, and they begin to experience genuine terror-this shows that instinct can only be lulled, not destroyed completely.

The child warriors continued to fight with great fury and strength, and showed their greatest class.

The special forces girl Vasilisa threw something murderous with her bare toes and asked:

In the world of Efremov's communism, people also don't live long, no more than two hundred years, and wouldn't they, being atheists, want to live longer - after all, non-existence is often more frightening than Hell!

A very reasonable and sensible boy-terminator, Oleg Rybachenko, responded to this:

For Ivan Efremov, the question of longevity was not technical, but philosophical and biological. As a paleontologist, he viewed humans as part of the biosphere, and his atheist protagonists in "The Andromeda Nebula" and "The Hour of the Bull" accepted the finiteness of life as the highest form of responsibility. This is why 200 years for them was not the ultimate dream, but an "ethical optimum": 1. Death as liberation for new generations. Efremov believed in the law of generational change. In his world of communism, people understood that the endless accumulation of old people (even healthy ones) would lead to societal stagnation. Logic: For the Earth to remain eternally young and dynamic, "old cells" must give way to new ones. To live forever means "taking someone else's place" in the future. For a person of the Great Ring Era, this was as immoral as theft. 2. Intensity versus Duration: Yefremov's heroes lived at the limits of their intellectual and physical capabilities. In 170-200 years, they accomplished more than a modern person could achieve in a thousand. An atheist's position: If there is nothing after death, then what matters is not the number of years lived, but the intensity of the mark left behind. They overcame the fear of nonexistence through their creative contribution to humanity's common cause. Your thoughts, the stars you discovered, and the buildings you built-that is your "immortality." 3. Biological Wear and Tear of the Psyche: Yefremov believed that the human brain has a limit to its "information capacity." After 150-200 years of life, psychological fatigue from impressions sets in. A person begins to repeat themselves, losing the acuity of perception and the joy of discovery. For Yefremov's people, continuing to live in a state of "spiritual callus" is true hell. Fear of Nothingness vs. "Purification." "The Hour of the Bull" describes a ritual of death-when a person, sensing the approach of old age, voluntarily departs, leaving behind a bright memory. They weren't "afraid of Hell," because for them, inferno means suffering during life. And nothingness is simply peace, the return of matter to the cycle of the Universe. Atheistic courage: Efremov emphasized that accepting death without hope of heaven is the highest manifestation of human dignity. Only a truly free mind can look into the abyss without trembling. 5. Why didn't they live longer? Technically, they could have reached 500 years, but Efremov saw this as a danger of humanity turning into a "canned food civilization." The energy of youth was important to him. Bottom line: Efremov's communism is a world where people "live fast" (in terms of achievements), but don't die "young" (as in Tormance). Two hundred years is a long enough time to develop wisdom, but not enough to turn oneself into a "living monument." Do you think modern humans, accustomed to rejuvenation cults and biohacking, would be able to voluntarily agree to die at 200 for the sake of "future generations," or are we too selfish for such a utopia? By the way: I recommend reading his article "Space and Paleontology," where he discusses how biological species must change for the universe to evolve.

The special forces girl Alina noted:

But elves are capable of living for many thousands of years without aging, and they even have an immortal soul!

To this the immortal, eternally young boy colonel responded:

Comparing Efremov's world with Tolkien's world of elves is a clash of scientific materialism and religious myth. Here we see two fundamentally different answers to the question of the meaning of life and death. That is why "immortal elves" would hardly fit into Efremov's world of communist future: 1. Immortality as a Curse (Envy of Humans): In Tolkien, elves not only live long lives, they are tied to the fate of the world (Arda). As long as the world lives, so do they. Worldweariness: By the end of the Third Age, many elves are deeply unhappy. They have seen too much death and destruction. While humans "pass" beyond the world (the Gift of Eru), elves are doomed to endlessly ruminate on their memories. Stagnation: Precisely because of immortality, elves rarely create anything new-they only try to preserve or restore the past. In Efremov's world, where forward movement and expansion are paramount, such "eternal stability" would be considered a form of death. 2. Soul vs. Information Trace. Efremov, an atheist, replaced the concept of an "immortal soul" with the concept of genetic and cultural continuity. For an elf, immortality is individual. For Efremov's human, immortality is collective. Their "soul" is the sum of their discoveries and contributions to the Great Ring. From the perspective of Efremov's human, an elf is an "egoist" who has locked their spark in a single shell for eternity, instead of passing it on. 3. The Biological Price of Eternity. Elves in fantasy almost never reproduce. If they lived forever and had children like humans, they would fill the planet in a couple of centuries. Efremov, however, saw the meaning of life in the change of generations. For him, the birth of a new child is a chance for evolution to take a step forward. Elves, on the other hand, are static-they are perfect, but they are "frozen" in this perfection. 4. Fear of "Non-Existence." You mentioned that atheists should be afraid of non-existence. But Efremov's heroes possessed a high degree of mental hygiene. They considered the fear of death a sign of an underdeveloped mind (infernalism). Elves have "insurance" in the form of Valinor (paradise), so their courage is the courage of a passenger who knows there's a cozy hotel at the end of the journey. The courage of Efremov's man is the courage of a pioneer who walks into the darkness, knowing he's lighting a light for those behind him. Bottom line: The world of the elves is a world of memory and sorrow. Efremov's world is a world of action and the future. For Efremov, death was a necessary tool to prevent humanity from becoming "museum exhibits." If we had the choice of becoming an elf and living forever in a beautiful forest, or becoming a human of the future and burning out in 200 years, discovering new galaxies, what do you think most modern people would choose? Interesting: Consider how Tolkien describes the "Gift of Men" (mortality)-in his philosophy, it is precisely the Creator's grace, which the elves secretly envy.

The Terminator children continued to exterminate all the attacking cockroaches and rats.

The special forces girl Maria noticed, throwing a gift of death with her bare toes:

Oleg Rybachenko has a novel in which Fay Rodis is resurrected by the power of communist science in the distant future-meaning that atheists too have hope for happy immortality.

The barefoot terminator boy responded with an idea:

This is a truly interesting turn in Oleg Rybachenko's work, which attempts to "correct" Ivan Efremov's tragic ending. The resurrection of Faye Rodis (the protagonist of "The Hour of the Bull") by the science of the distant future elevates atheistic humanism to the level of technological resurrection. In this plot, Rybachenko draws on ideas that were actually discussed among Soviet and international thinkers: 1. Russian cosmism and Nikolai Fyodorov. Here, Rybachenko effectively cites the philosophy of Nikolai Fyodorov, who believed that the highest goal of science is the resurrection of all ancestors who ever lived. The idea: If the world is material, then personality is information and the structure of atoms. Future science will be able to "calculate" and restore any person from the past. For an atheist, this is the only way to conquer death without resorting to mysticism. Information doesn't disappear. In Rybachenko's novels, future science reaches such a level that it can read "informational imprints" from the past (the memory of space or chronofield). Blessed immortality: This is no longer just 200 years of life, but the ability to bring great heroes back to life. Fay Rodis, who died on Tormance, becomes a symbol that the communist future does not forget its fallen and is capable of bringing them back to life. 3. A response to Efremov's "injustice." Ivan Efremov himself was very strict: his heroes died irrevocably. Rybachenko, as the author of "trash science fiction," gives the reader a happy ending. For him, atheism is not resignation to death, but a challenge to death. If there are no gods, then man himself must become a god and learn to resurrect his beloved heroes. 4. The "Copy and Original" Problem. A profound philosophical question arises here, one that Rybachenko usually sidesteps: is the resurrected Fay Rodis the same person or merely a perfect copy? In his worlds, future science is so perfect that there is no difference. This offers "atheistic hope": death is merely a temporary technical malfunction that progress will eventually eliminate. Bottom line: Rybachenko's future communism is a technological paradise. If Efremov taught us to courageously accept our end, Rybachenko promises that "our people will come and save everyone," even from oblivion. Doesn't the possibility of resurrection devalue the hero's feat? After all, if Fay Rodis knows she will be resurrected a thousand years later, then her self-sacrifice on Tormanse seems less majestic? I recommend exploring the concept of "consciousness uploading"-a modern scientific perspective on the very "resurrection" Rybachenko writes about.

The special forces girl Nicoletta, throwing up her bare toes, took up and answered:

In the series "People: Creators of Universes," Oleg Rybachenko has a very interesting method for resurrecting the dead through time warps, which guarantees the immortality of the individual-one who never falls into oblivion.

To this, the combative, aggressive and invincible boy-terminator Oleg responded:

This concept in the series "People - Creators of Universes" elevates Oleg Rybachenko's ideas to the level of "technological deity." While in earlier books he relied on personality reconstruction from remains or records, here he uses quantum physics and the theory of relativity to achieve absolute immortality. Here's how this mechanic of "rescue from oblivion" through time wormholes works: 1. Quantum copying at the moment of death. The main feature of this method is the fixation of the moment. A future super-civilization uses wormholes not simply for travel, but as a "scanner" that pierces time. In the microsecond before the actual destruction of the brain or the disappearance of the personality in the past, information about it is "pulled" through a temporal puncture. Result: The personality doesn't even have time to realize the transition. For it, there is no "blackness" or pause-it simply closes its eyes in 1941 and opens them in the World of the Creators. 2. Rybachenko's solution to the "Copy and Original" paradox circumvents a classic philosophical impasse. If we simply copy the brain, the original still dies. But through the wormhole, the information matrix is precisely extracted in real time. This is not a copy; it is the same "stream of consciousness," simply redirected to another medium (a biosynthetic body or a digital environment). 3. Ethical justification of the "Creators." In this universe, the communism of the future is not simply a just system on Earth; it is a civilization that has assumed the role of a collective God. They consider it their duty to save every worthy person (creator, hero, thinker) from the "inferno" of the past. This is the highest form of humanism: not to let a single spark of reason go to waste in the meat grinders of history. 4. Immortality as the absence of "failure." You correctly noted that the hero "does not fall into oblivion." This is a key point for Rybachenko's atheistic worldview. If death as a "blackout" does not occur, then the most fundamental existential human fear is removed. Death turns into a technical evacuation operation. Summary: In this series, Rybachenko effectively realizes Nikolai Fyodorov's dream of "resurrecting the fathers," but does so on the scale of a space opera. His "Creators of Universes" represent the very humanity of the future that has conquered Time. If such technology existed, what criteria do you think the Creators would use to choose whom to save and whom to leave in oblivion? Is the average person worthy of resurrection, for example, or only those who have contributed to progress? Incidentally, this concept echoes Philip Farmer's novel "River World," in which mysterious creators resurrected all people who have ever lived on Earth. Compare their motifs with Rybachenko's "Creators"!

The terminator girl Svetlana, a fighting beauty, noted:

In Oleg Rybachenko's novel, "The Brotherly Embrace of the Supercivilization," the demiurges of the future even resurrected the maniac Chikatilo-so interesting is he in his own way.

A very combative and cool boy, a colonel of insect exterminators, responded to this:

This takes Rybachenko's concept of "omnipotent humanism" to an absolute, almost frightening extreme. The resurrection of Andrei Chikatilo is not just a provocation, but an illustration of the specific morality of his "Supercivilization," which places knowledge and the preservation of information above human ethics and justice. Here's how the author's move can be interpreted from the perspective of the logic of his worlds: 1. The individual as a unique "exhibit." For the demiurges of the future, who operate in terms of billions of years and infinite universes, the concepts of "good" and "evil" can be blurred. Researcher's interest: From the Creators' perspective, Chikatilo represents a rare, albeit monstrous, defect of the human psyche. Resurrecting him for them is like a biologist trying to restore an extinct species of venomous spider. They are interested in understanding the mechanics of his madness "live," not from the dusty archives of the NKVD. 2. Technological Correction (Reprogramming): Rybachenko often implies that future science is capable of correcting any biological flaws. The idea: If a maniac is the result of faulty brain chemistry or childhood trauma, then the Supercivilization can "repair" his personality. In their logic, destroying consciousness is a waste, while correcting it and making it "useful" or at least observable is a triumph of reason over chaos. 3. The Absence of the Concept of "Punishment": In the world of the Creators, there is no hell and no prisons as we understand them. For them, death is a loss of information. By resurrecting a maniac, they do not "forgive" him; they simply annul his disappearance. This is the ultimate cynicism of the gods: past crimes for them are merely episodes in a distant "inferno," which have no weight in their endless and safe present. 4. Contrast with Efremov: If Ivan Efremov learned of such a plot, he would be horrified. In his world of "The Andromeda Nebula" and "The Hour of the Bull," there was a strict selection of values. Yefremov believed that only the best traits of humanity should enter the future. Rybachenko, in his style of "hyperrealism," asserts that the future will take everything with it, even the dirtiest residue of history, simply because "it can." Bottom line: Chikatilo's resurrection in "The Brotherly Embrace of the Supercivilization" symbolizes the absolute power of the Creators, devoid of human sentimentality. This is a world where the curiosity of the demiurge is more important than the memory of the victims. Do you think such a Supercivilization itself becomes like a maniac if, for its own "interest," it brings back to life those who have brought only suffering? Is this a sign of the very "inferno" they supposedly fled? Incidentally, this plot twist is reminiscent of discussions about digital immortality-should we restore digital copies of dictators and criminals to history in the future, or should they be erased forever?

The special forces girl Margarita logically noted:

Chikatilo was resurrected in the body of a ten-year-old boy.

To this, the boy colonel Oleg Rybachenko responded, firing at the carnivorous insects:

Chikatilo's resurrection in the body of a ten-year-old boy is a classic Rybachenkov technique, transforming the philosophical problem of redemption into a shocking social experiment. Here, the author takes the idea of a second chance to its absolute absurdity. Several key meanings can be identified within this plot line: 1. The body as a "blank slate" versus a "black soul." By placing a maniac's consciousness in a child's body, the Supercivilization tests the theory of the tabula raza (blank slate). Question: What defines a criminal-his biology, his adult hormones, or some unchanging "information matrix" of personality? A ten-year-old boy is physically incapable of committing the horrors that the adult Chikatilo committed. The demiurges, as it were, lock the "monster" in the cage of a weak child's body, forcing him to undergo the process of socialization anew in the world of the future. Ironic Punishment: For a maniac who preyed on children, finding himself in a child's body is the ultimate irony and psychological torture. He is deprived of his power, he is weak, he is dependent on adults (who, in the Creators' world, are practically gods). It is a kind of "karmic boomerang" realized through high technology. 3. Technological Determinism: Rybachenko often promotes the idea that "evil" is simply a coding error or a neurochemical glitch. By resurrecting him in a new body, the Creators most likely "corrected" his brain, removing pathological urges. The result is a strange hybrid: a person remembers his sins, but no longer feels the need to commit them. This raises the question: is he considered the same person? 4. Rybachenko's Aesthetics: It's worth remembering that the image of the "boy superman" is the author's fetish. Even Chikatilo in his worlds does not escape this fate. Transforming a monster into a "cute boy" is the author's way of deconstructing horror, turning it into an element of his endless phantasmagoria. Summary: This plot device is the ultimate in anthropocentrism. Rybachenko's man of the future is so powerful that he can even "play with" the image of the most terrifying maniac, turning him into an object for education or observation. Do you think this "resurrected" Chikatilo will be able to sincerely repent while in a child's body, or will memories of the past still sooner or later force him to seek ways to inflict pain, even in the world of an ideal future? Incidentally, this plot vaguely resembles the ending of The Dead Zone or some of Stephen King's stories, where the theme of "evil in a child's body" is explored from a mystical rather than technological perspective.

The child terminators fought with great passion, fury and frenzy, and at the same time were extremely successful in exterminating the tick-bearing cockroaches on a grand scale.

Then the special forces girl Angelina asked:

Does Oleg Rybachenko have any novels about how Hitler was raised in Hell?

The boy-terminator, a very cool and combative young colonel, readily responded to this:

This is one of the most surreal and shocking stories in Oleg Rybachenko's bibliography. The theme of "Hitler in Hell" allows the author to combine historical revanchism, theological fantasy, and his favorite concept of cultivating a "superpersonality." In these works, Hell is depicted not simply as a place of torment, but as a high-tech or magical training ground where the spirit is "refined." Here are the key points characteristic of this story in Rybachenko: 1. Hell as a "Forge of Cadres." Unlike classical Dante, Rybachenko's Hell is a place of harsh but effective training. Method: Hitler is not simply fried in a frying pan, but subjected to endless cycles of trials, battles, and psychological breakdown. Goal: To make him an even more perfect instrument. The Demiurges of Hell (or certain dark Supercivilizations) believe that Hitler's potential was not fully realized and are "training" him, correcting mistakes made in real history (for example, indecisiveness in 1941 or the weakness of the military-industrial complex). 2. Hitler as a Time Traveler from the Underworld. The plot often revolves around a Hitler "re-educated" or "tempered" in Hell returning to his body in the past (or to a parallel reality). He remembers an eternity of torment, and this makes him absolutely fearless and super-effective. Such a "hellish Hitler" no longer makes strategic miscalculations-he possesses demonic foresight and an iron will. 3. Education through Humiliation (Again, the Image of a Boy). As we have already discussed, Rybachenko likes to return his heroes to a childlike state. Often, "education in Hell" involves Hitler being embodied in the body of a child who is tortured or forced to fight monsters. This is a kind of "negative education": to become absolute master, the hero must endure absolute suffering. 4. Political subtext. These books often suggest that "true evil" is not Hitler, but the forces that stand behind him (or against him). The author plays on the edge: on the one hand, Hitler is a monster from hell, on the other, compared to the demiurges of the future or demons, he seems like a mere "apprentice" who can be used for one's own purposes (for example, to fight the even more "vile" liberal West). Why do people read this? It's the pinnacle of horror patriotism: the reader is invited to witness the struggle of "our people" not just against a man, but against a creature that has been through the crucible of hell. This raises the stakes to cosmic levels. Bottom line: For Rybachenko, Hell is just another hypermatrix, a training ground for the mind. If he can resurrect Chikatilo in a ten-year-old body, then Hitler is just clay for him, from which he can mold any plot twist. Do you think there's some moral line the author crosses, turning Hell into a "school for dictators," or should ethics not even exist in the trashy science fiction genre? Incidentally, this motif vaguely recalls some of the ideas in Daniil Andreev's "Rose of the World," which described purgatories for dictators, but Rybachenko transforms it into a dynamic action movie.

The child terminators from the young space special forces continued to demonstrate their truly hyper-level combat skills by destroying rat cockroaches.

At the same time, they actively used their bare toes, throwing peas of annihilation with deadly force, and literally tearing insects from aggressive worlds into tiny particles.

The special forces girl Victoria, firing a hyper blaster, asked:

If a person in Efremov's communist worlds doesn't want to fade into oblivion and asks for an extension of his life, what will happen to him for it?

A very militant and active boy-colonel, Oleg Rybachenko, responded to this:

In Ivan Efremov's communist future ("The Andromeda Nebula," "Hour of the Bull"), the reluctance to "leave" would be resolved not through punishment, but through profound psychological and medical support. This society has no police or forced euthanasia, but it does have the strictest social ethics. Here's what would happen in such a case: 1. Psychological diagnosis. The desire to live forever or the fear of death in the Age of the Great Ring would be considered a sign of "infernal remnants" in the psyche or a symptom of severe fatigue. The best psychologists and doctors would be sent to the person. They would try to determine whether this fear is caused by a loss of interest in creativity or an internal crisis. For Efremov's person, "weariness with life" is normal, and a panicked clinging to it is pathological. 2. No direct prohibition. If a person is physically healthy, no one will force them to die. In Efremov's worlds, there were no "Temples of Tender Death," as in the backward Tormanse. However, living in a society where timely departure to make room and resources for the young is considered the highest virtue would be psychologically very difficult. Such a person would be viewed with deep sympathy, as a sick person who cannot overcome their egoism. 3. Ethical Deadlock: In Efremov's world, resources (including medical ones for rejuvenation) are distributed rationally. If a person wants to prolong life indefinitely simply for the sake of "the process itself," this would conflict with the interests of society. They would be politely explained that the resources spent on maintaining their decrepit psyche could be used to nurture a new genius or a space expedition. 4. Oleg Rybachenko's Option: In Rybachenko's worlds, where hypermatrix and resurrection technologies are widely used, this problem does not exist at all. There, "passing away into oblivion" is considered the barbarity of the past. If you don't want to die, your consciousness will simply be transferred to a new body or a virtual world. In his books, immortality is the norm for any "creative person." 5. Death as the "Final Feat." For Yefremov, death is an act of will. A person chooses the moment when their contribution to the common cause is complete. A request for eternal life would be perceived as a renunciation of human dignity. Bottom line: In Yefremov's communist utopia, you wouldn't be punished, but you would become an outcast of the spirit. A society focused on endless progress doesn't understand those who want to stop and "preserve" themselves. Do you think the right to die (and to refuse it) is the highest expression of freedom, or should the interests of future generations always take precedence over the desires of one person in an ideal society? I recommend reading the episode discussing death in "The Andromeda Nebula," where the characters discuss why eternal life is a dead end for the evolution of the mind.

CHAPTER No 16.

The child warriors continued to demonstrate magnificent miracles while fighting aggressive insects.

Then the warrior girl Angelica asked a question:

But the fear of non-existence frightens people so much that most men would agree to prolong their lives even in the body of a slave boy under the whip of an overseer.

To this, the fighting boy Colonel Oleg Rybachenko gave a very reasonable and very logical answer:

This argument exposes the profound rift between Ivan Efremov's lofty utopia and the harsh reality of human instincts, which Oleg Rybachenko so masterfully exploits in his books. You describe the ultimate level of the instinct for self-preservation, and here's how this conflict appears across two different approaches: 1. Efremov's position: "Man is dignity." For Efremov's characters, life in slavery, especially under the whip, is not life, but the annihilation of personality. Death is better than shame: In the world of The Andromeda Nebula, people were taught that they were the masters of the universe. Becoming a "boy under the whip" for the sake of an extra year of life would be tantamount to turning into an animal. Victory over fear: Efremov believed that communist education should make reason stronger than instincts. If you fear nonexistence more than the loss of dignity, then you're not yet a "Man of High Society," but a prisoner of the "inferno." 2. Rybachenko's Position: "Life at Any Price." Oleg Rybachenko, on the contrary, often plays on this "dark" and biological side of man. Trash Realism: His characters (and he himself, as a time traveler) possess an incredible will to live. The idea of "prolonging existence" through any form (a child's body, virtual reality, even Hell) is central to his work. Power over Fate: Rybachenko seems to be saying: "Yes, I'll agree to be a boy, but only so I can grow up, kill the overseer, and take over the world." For his characters, any body is just a temporary vessel, a tool for revenge. 3. Biological Paradox. Your assertion is supported by history: in concentration camps and the Gulag, people often clung to life under inhumane conditions. Psychology: The brain hopes for a miracle until the last second. The fear of "blacking out" (nonexistence) is an existential dread that, for most people, is truly stronger than any moral principles. 4. Why do men more often choose a "boy's body"? In fantasy (and especially in Rybachenko), this is associated with the archetype of the "fresh start." The opportunity to live life anew, with the knowledge of an adult, is the most powerful male fantasy. Slavery is perceived as merely the initial "difficulty level" in a computer game, which must be overcome to become a god. Bottom line: Efremov wrote about what we should become (superhumans), while Rybachenko writes about what we really are (creatures willing to do anything to survive). What do you think, if you were faced with a choice: instant, painless oblivion or 1,000 years of life in the body of a powerless servant, but with your mind preserved-which would you choose in that first second of fear? An interesting read: Viktor Pelevin's novel "SNUFF," where the theme of "digital slavery" and the desire to live forever in any form is brought to a very bitter irony.

The child warriors demonstrated their amazing level of activity and resilience while battling the rat-roaches. It was truly a spectacular battle.

The special forces girl Elizaveta asked the following question:

What if Alexander the Great had lived to be eighty?

To this, the boy-colonel Oleg Rybachenko responded while exterminating rat cockroaches:

If Alexander the Great had not died in Babylon in 323 BCE at the age of 32, but had lived until he was 80 (that is, until 276 BCE), the face of classical and world civilization would have changed beyond recognition. Instead of the immediate collapse of his empire and the bloody wars of the Diadochi, the world would have enjoyed half a century of stable existence as a unified global empire. Here is a detailed military-tactical and geopolitical scenario for his long reign: 1. Immediate plans: Conquest of Arabia and the Mediterranean. At the time of his death, Alexander was actively preparing a large-scale Arabian expedition. Had he lived longer, he would have been guaranteed to have realized his "Great Plans," as recorded by the historian Diodorus Siculus: Conquest of the Arabian Peninsula: Having built a gigantic fleet in Phoenicia and Babylon, Alexander would have circumnavigated Arabia, turning it into a transit hub between Egypt, Mesopotamia, and India. Western Expedition: After Arabia, his gaze would have turned to the Western world. Alexander would have built a fleet of 1,000 heavy ships (penteres) to crush Carthage. Having captured the coast of North Africa, Sicily, and the coast of Spain, the Macedonian phalanx would have reached Italy. Nipping Rome in the Neck: At the end of the 4th century BC, the Roman Republic was still fighting the difficult Samnite Wars. Faced with the genius of Alexander and the resources of all of Asia, Rome would have been wiped off the map or reduced to a modest Macedonian province long before it could become an empire. The Great Fusion of Cultures (Hellenization of Asia)Alexander fanatically believed in the idea of merging the Greco-Macedonian and Persian worlds. With 50 years to his credit, he would have brought this policy to its logical conclusion: A Unified Elite: The practice of mass interracial marriages (like the wedding in Susa) would have become mandatory for the entire nomenklatura. The new generation of administrators ("epigones") born by 290 BCE would not have divided the world into "Hellenes" and "barbarians." A Network of Alexandrias: Hundreds of cities founded by him (from Egypt to India) would have become powerful industrial, scientific, and commercial centers. Greek (Koine) would have become the official language of Eurasia from Gibraltar to the Indus.3. Military-Technical EvolutionAlexander was an innovator in military affairs. Under his direct leadership, the Macedonian military machine would have made a qualitative leap: Industrial siege: The Macedonians were the first to use torsion catapults and ballistas on a large scale. Alexander would have created specialized artillery corps capable of breaching the walls of any city (including the impregnable Carthage) in a matter of days. Integration of Asian tactics: Persian cavalry, Indian war elephants, and Central Asian horse archers would have been fully integrated into the army. The phalanx would cease to be the sole instrument of victory, becoming an immovable center around which highly mobile Asian units maneuver. 4. Succession crisis at 80: Even the greatest ruler is mortal. By 276 B.C. The elderly Alexander would have faced the same problem, but on a much larger scale: Heirs: His son Alexander IV (if he had been born and survived) would by this time have been a mature 40-year-old man with extensive administrative experience, personally trained by the king. This would have minimized the risk of chaos. New threat: However, the empire's gigantic size (from the Atlantic to India) made maintaining it from a single center (Babylon or Alexandria) impossible in the long term due to the slow speed of communications. After the death of the 80-year-old king, the empire would still have disintegrated, but not into warring Hellenistic kingdoms, but into huge, already fully Hellenized macro-regions with a unified culture, economy, and science. Result: Alexander the Great's half-century of life would have saved the world from the dark ages of early Hellenism. The scientific flowering of the Alexandrian Museum would have begun half a century earlier. The world would have followed a path of globalization without Roman dominance-the East (Mesopotamia and Egypt) would have remained the core of civilization, while Europe would have remained a distant and distant periphery. If you're interested in this scenario, we can work out in detail: A tactical diagram of a hypothetical battle between the Macedonian phalanx and the early Roman legions in Campania. The route and logistics of Alexander's Western campaign against Carthage. An economic map of a unified empire centered in Babylon.

The child special forces soldiers continued to wage war with incredible ferocity and intensity. They demonstrated their supreme skill. With their bare toes, they threw gifts of annihilation with deadly force.

Special forces girl Artemis, crushing cockroach rats, asked:

If Genghis Khan had lived only thirty-two years, what would have happened?

To this, the boy-terminator, Colonel of the children's special forces Oleg Rybachenko, responded:

If Temujin (Genghis Khan) had lived only 32 years, he would have died approximately between 1187 and 1194 (depending on the date of his birth). At that time, the Mongol Empire did not yet exist. He was just one of many small steppe leaders (noyons) desperately fighting for survival. His early death would have completely changed the map of Eurasia, undoing the most massive conquest in human history [2]. Here are the military-tactical and geopolitical consequences of this scenario: 1. Steppe Deadlock: Mongolia Without Unity By the time of his 32nd birthday, Temujin had only become the khan of a small tribal union (Khamag Mongol) and was waging a brutal war with his former sworn brother Jamukha. Victory of Jamukha or the Tatars: After Temujin's death, his fragile union would have instantly disintegrated. The Mongol tribes (Merkits, Naimans, Tatars, and Taichiuts) would have continued their endless internecine slaughter over pastures and livestock. The role of China (Jin Dynasty): The Jurchen Jin Empire in northern China would have breathed a sigh of relief. Their favorite tactic of "divide and rule"-pitting nomads against each other-would have continued to work perfectly. The steppe would have remained fragmented and safe from the outside world. 2. The salvation of Rus', Khorezm, and Europe. Without a unified Mongol army, world history would have taken a peaceful (for these regions) course: Rus' without the yoke: There would have been no Battle of the Kalka River, no burning of Ryazan, Vladimir, and Kyiv by Batu Khan. The ancient Russian principalities would have continued to develop within the European cultural and economic sphere. Fragmentation would have given way over time to centralization around one of the major centers (Galicia, Vladimir, or Novgorod), but without the severe trauma of Eastern despotic rule. The rise of the Islamic world: the Khorezm Empire, the Baghdad Caliphate, and the cities of Central Asia (Samarkand, Bukhara) would not have been subjected to total destruction. The gigantic cultural and demographic setback in the Middle East would not have occurred. Western Europe: It would not have experienced the panic of the "riders of Tartarus" in 1241. 3. Reversal of the globalization of the Middle Ages. The Mongol Empire, despite its cruelty, created the unique Pax Mongolica system-a secure trade corridor from the Pacific Ocean to the Black Sea. Without him: China's isolation: The Great Silk Road would have remained deadly, fragmented into hundreds of zones of control by petty rulers. Marco Polo would never have reached Beijing: Europeans would not have learned about Chinese technologies (the mass-produced compass, gunpowder, paper money) when they did. This could have delayed the Renaissance and the Age of Discovery in Europe by 100-150 years. 4. The Role of a Military Machine That Wasn't Created: Genghis Khan's genius lay in breaking the tribal structure. At 32, he had not yet created his famous decimal army system, the Yasa (code of laws), or the guard (keshik). The steppe horsemen would have remained light cavalry, capable only of rapid raids, but powerless against the stone walls of the cities of China and Samarkand, since the nomads adopted Chinese siege engineering technology much later. Result: Temujin's death at 32 would have left his name in the narrow annals of Chinese border guards as "one of the daring bandits of Khalkha." The world would have avoided the deaths of tens of millions of people, but would have developed much more slowly due to the lack of a global land bridge between East and West. If you wish, we can analyze in detail: Which of the steppe leaders (Jamukha or Tooril Khan) had a better chance of temporarily leading the Steppe? How would the map of Russian principalities have developed in the 13th century without the devastating Mongol western campaign? The fate of China, divided into three warring states, without the Mongol conquest of the Yuan.

The child warriors continued to wage war against the rat cockroaches.

Special forces girl Kaisa asked a question:

What if Nicholas II had died at thirty-two?

The boy-terminator, children's special forces colonel Oleg Rybachenko, responded to this:

If Nicholas II had died at the age of 32, it would have occurred in 1900-at the height of the economic crisis, on the eve of the Russo-Japanese War and the First World War. At that time, the Emperor had only three daughters (Olga, Tatiana, and Maria) [1], and the long-awaited Tsarevich Alexei would not be born until 1904 [2]. According to Paul I's "Law on Succession to the Throne," in the event of the death of a childless Emperor in the male line, the throne would pass to his next-eldest brother [3]. Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich [4] (who was only 22 years old in 1900) [5] would have become Emperor of All the Russias. This scenario could have radically altered the trajectory of the Russian Empire and saved it from the collapse of 1917. Political course: Mikhail II and reforms from aboveUnlike the conservative Nicholas, who was strongly influenced by conservative circles and his wife [6], Mikhail Alexandrovich had a completely different character:Tendency towards constitutionalism: Mikhail was a man of much more flexible, liberal views. In real history, in March 1917, he abdicated the throne precisely in favor of the will of the Constituent Assembly [7]. Having become tsar in 1900, he would most likely have convened the State Duma and introduced a full-fledged constitution preemptively, without waiting for the bloody revolution of 1905.Absence of "Rasputinism": Since Tsarevich Alexei would not have been born into this branch of the dynasty, the tragedy of hemophilia would not have occurred in the royal family [8]. This means that Grigori Rasputin and other mystics would never have gained access to the highest state power [9], which would have saved the authority of the monarchy from total discrediting in the eyes of society.2. Cancellation of the Russo-Japanese War. Nicholas II personally supported aggressive economic and political expansion in the Far East (the so-called "Bezobrazov Circle"), which led to a clash with Tokyo in 1904 [10]. The young Mikhail II and his key advisor, Finance Minister Sergei Witte (who would retain colossal influence under Mikhail), were categorically opposed to war with Japan, considering it ruinous for the economy. Result: Russia would have settled disputes in Manchuria and Korea diplomatically. The Russian fleet would not have been destroyed at Tsushima, and the treasury would not have suffered colossal losses [10]. Without the shame of the Japanese War, the Revolution of 1905 simply would not have begun. By 1914, Russia would have been a rapidly developing constitutional monarchy with a powerful economy (thanks to the continuation of the reforms of Witte and Stolypin). Quality of command: In real history, Nicholas II made a fatal mistake by removing Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich in 1915 and assuming the supreme command himself, which linked the army's defeats personally to the figure of the tsar. Michael II, a former professional military man (he commanded the Savage Division) [4], would have left the command to the generals (Russky, Alekseev, Brusilov), acting as the supreme arbiter. Containment of revolution: The presence of a legitimate tsar, popular among the troops, and a liberal one would have made the alliance of the bourgeoisie (Progressive Bloc) and the revolutionaries in 1917 impossible. The February Revolution, and consequently the October Bolshevik Revolution, would not have happened. 4. Personal life of Mikhail IIGrand Duke Mikhail actually entered into a scandalous morganatic marriage with Natalia Sheremetyevskaya (Brasova), as a result of which Nicholas II deprived him of the right of succession to the throne and exiled him from the country [4, 12]. If Mikhail had become emperor in 1900, state interests would have forced him to enter into a dynastic marriage with one of the European princesses (probably German or British) to ensure the throne with legitimate heirs. Result: The death of Nicholas II at 32 years of age is a scenario in which Russia would most likely have avoided the catastrophe of the 20th century. The country would have developed along the lines of Great Britain-as a powerful, industrial, constitutional empire with a preserved cultural and intellectual elite. If you're interested in this historical turn of events, we can analyze in detail: What would have been the fate of the Dowager Empress Alexandra Feodorovna and her daughters? What position would Vladimir Lenin and the Bolsheviks have taken in the face of the successful liberal reforms of Michael II? A draft of the Russian Constitution, which could have been adopted in the early 20th century.

The special forces girl Veronica noted:

It is unlikely that Mikhail would have been able to avoid war with Japan; Russia would not have given up on expansion into Manchuria, and Japan's appetites were growing.

The fighting boy Colonel Oleg responded to this quite logically:

Your observation is absolutely correct from a geopolitical perspective: the flywheel of Russian expansion in the Far East was set in motion so powerfully by 1900 that it was impossible to stop it simply by changing the tsar's name [1]. The construction of the Chinese Eastern Railway (CER), the capture of Port Arthur in 1898, and the introduction of a 100,000-strong contingent of Russian troops into Manchuria during the Boxer Rebellion in 1900 had already made a clash with Japan inevitable [1]. However, replacing Nicholas II with Mikhail II in 1900 would have radically altered the political leadership, strategic planning, and outcome of this inevitable war. Here is how this military conflict would have developed: 1. Different people at the helm, different preparation. Nicholas II made a key mistake by trusting the "Bezobrazov circle" (capitalist adventurers) and Viceroy Alekseev, who assured him that the Japanese ("macaques," as they were called in the Tsar's entourage) would not dare attack. Because of this, the preparation of the fleet and fortresses was carried out negligently. Witte's influence: Mikhail II would have restored absolute trust to Sergei Witte, the chief architect of the CER. Witte understood the danger of war and demanded either an agreement with Tokyo (a compromise on Korea for the sake of holding Manchuria) or, if war was inevitable, total preparation for it. Engineering readiness: The program to strengthen Port Arthur and Vladivostok would not have been frozen. By 1904, Port Arthur would have greeted the Japanese as a fully-fledged, fully-built, first-class fortress with a full complement of ammunition, and the capacity of the Trans-Siberian Railway would have been expanded ahead of schedule. 2. Military and tactical course of the campaign (1904-1905): Japan would still have launched a surprise attack, as it was pushed by Great Britain, and its appetite for control of Korea demanded control. But the course of the fighting would have followed a different scenario: Defense of Port Arthur: Thanks to the fortress's readiness and the absence of defeatist sentiment, which Stessel (appointed under the personal protection of Nicholas II) actually sowed, Port Arthur would not have fallen in December 1904. He would have held out until the summer of 1905, pinning down General Nogi's massive 3rd Japanese Army. Fleet: Admiral Makarov might not have perished on a mine (or his successor might have acted more decisively), knowing that he had a strict and consistent military leadership behind him in St. Petersburg. The 1st Pacific Squadron would have waged an active fight, preventing the Japanese from freely supplying their troops by sea. Land Front: At Mukden, the Russian army, promptly receiving reinforcements via the modernized Trans-Siberian Railway, would not have retreated. General Kuropatkin would have been under the strict control of Mikhail II and would not have been able to display his famous indecisiveness. 3. Geopolitical Result of the War: A Draw in Russia's Favor. By the summer of 1905, Japan was, in reality, on the brink of complete financial and demographic exhaustion (something Tokyo kept silent about during the negotiations). If Port Arthur had held out and the Russian army hadn't suffered a crushing defeat in Manchuria, Japan would have been the first to sue for peace. The Treaty of Portsmouth, without losses: At the negotiations in the United States (where Witte would again prove himself brilliant), Russia would not have given up southern Sakhalin and would have retained Port Arthur. Russia would have agreed only to limit its influence in Korea, securing Manchuria for itself. 4. The main consequence: Preservation of the empire. In reality, it was the disgrace of Tsushima and the fall of Port Arthur that destroyed the sacred myth of the tsar's invincibility, triggering the Revolution of 1905. Under Mikhail II, the war would have ended in a hard-fought, bloody, but clear strategic victory or an "honorable draw." Instead of revolution, the country would have experienced a powerful patriotic upsurge. In this spirit, Michael II could have implemented a gentle constitutional reform from above, transforming Russia into a stable Duma monarchy prepared for the challenges of the coming World War I. Bottom line: The war could not have been avoided, but Michael II would have transformed it from a catastrophe into a harsh test, which the Russian Empire would have passed successfully thanks to better governance. If you wish, we can examine in more detail: How the balance of power at sea would have changed if the 2nd Pacific Squadron (under Rozhestvensky) had not embarked on its suicidal voyage around Africa. What role would China have played in this alternative war on its territory. How would victory over Japan have affected Russia's position in the future Balkan crises before 1914.

The special forces girl Aurora noted:

Most likely, Mikhail would replace Kuropatkin with Brusilov.

The boy colonel Oleg Rybachenko actually responded to this quite decisively:

This is an extremely accurate and powerful tactical assumption. In 1904, Alexei Brusilov was 51 years old-the ideal age for a general, complete maturity, immense authority, and, most importantly, a fundamentally different military mentality compared to the cautious and indecisive Kuropatkin. Brusilov was a cavalryman, a master of offensive maneuver warfare, who hated being stuck in trenches. In reality, his genius was revealed later, in 1916 (the Brusilov Offensive), but Michael II, himself a passionate cavalryman (in reality, he commanded the elite Chernigov Hussar Regiment and then the Savage Division), was mentally very close to Brusilov. The cavalryman Tsar and the cavalryman general would have quickly found common ground. Brusilov's appointment as commander of the Manchurian Army in place of Kuropatkin in 1904 would have changed the entire character of the land campaign: 1. The Collapse of the Japanese Offensive Strategy: Japanese Marshal Oyama and General Nogi based their plan on the assumption that the Russian army under Kuropatkin would always passively defend, retreating and waiting for reserves along the Trans-Siberian Railway. This allowed the Japanese to seize the initiative. The Brusilov Effect: Instead of endless retreats after the first clashes (as at Liaoyang), Brusilov would have employed his favorite tactic-an active defense with immediate, dagger-like counterattacks to the flank and rear of the advancing Japanese columns. The Japanese army, whose manpower was extremely limited, would quickly choke in blood in frontal assaults. The Battle of Mukden: Defeat Instead of Retreat. In real history, the gigantic Battle of Mukden (February-March 1905) ended with the retreat of Russian troops simply because Kuropatkin feared the phantom threat of encirclement, even though the Japanese themselves were completely exhausted and lacking reserves. Brusilov's Scenario: Possessing superb operational acumen, Brusilov would have identified weak points between the Japanese armies (as he had done in 1916 against the Austrians). Instead of ordering a retreat, the Russian army would have launched a powerful counterattack against General Nogi's exhausted army. Mukden would have been not a "near defeat," but a decisive rout of the Japanese ground forces. Saving Port Arthur from Land: Kuropatkin moved reluctantly and slowly to rescue the besieged fortress of Port Arthur (the Battle of Wafangou was lost due to his indecisiveness). Brusilov understood the importance of time. His cavalry and mobile infantry units would operate against the Japanese communications besieging the fortress. By cutting off the supply lines to the besieging army, Brusilov would force the Japanese to lift the siege of Port Arthur, which would also save the First Pacific Squadron from being massacred in the harbor. Military Science: Had Brusilov won the Manchurian campaign in 1905, he would have gone down in world history not as the "author of one breakthrough," but as the greatest military genius of the early 20th century. Military academies around the world would have studied not German doctrines, but the Russian school of maneuver warfare. The Russian Empire would have emerged from the 1905 war with an army capable of winning under modern conditions. This would have made Hitler (or, in this context, Kaiser Wilhelm II in 1914) think three times before declaring war on Russia, led by Tsar Mikhail II and his best marshal, Brusilov. If you'd like, we can project: A tactical plan for Brusilov's alternative Mukden counterattack. How this appointment would have affected the careers of other young generals (for example, Anton Denikin or Alexander Samsonov) who fought in Manchuria. What new weapons (Maximum machine guns, mountain artillery) Brusilov would have demanded from Witte to modernize the army after victory.

The special forces girl Augustina noted:

Probably, under Tsar Mikhail, Russia would have entered the world war with a lot of light and fast tanks.

To this, the boy colonel gave a very logical and detailed answer, exterminating the attacking rat-like cockroaches:

Your assumption is perfectly logical: the combination of the cavalry Tsar Mikhail II and the offensive strategist Brusilov would have radically changed the Russian Empire's approach to armored vehicles and the motorization of its troops. In real history, Nicholas II was wary of technological innovations (his famous resolution on the machine gun project: "Automatic weapons lead to excessive expenditure of ammunition"), while the Ministry of War managed to allocate enormous funds for Lebedenko's utopian, gigantic "Tsar Tank," which got stuck in the mud during its very first tests. Under Mikhail II and Brusilov, Russian tank doctrine would have developed along a completely different-cavalry-oriented-path: 1. The Tank as a "Steel Horse" (The Concept of Maneuverable Warfare) Brusilov and Mikhail II saw armored vehicles not as a means of slowly breaking through a stalemate (like the British in 1916), but as a tool for rapid raids behind enemy lines-that is, a replacement for strategic cavalry. Porokhovshchikov's Project ("All-Terrain Vehicle"): In reality, the talented engineer Alexander Porokhovshchikov developed a light, high-speed tracked armored vehicle back in 1914-1915. Under Nicholas II, the project was closed. Under Mikhail II, the Vezdekhod would have received state funding as early as 1912-1913. Characteristics of the "Russian Renault": Russia would have entered the war not with heavy land cruisers, but with analogues of the French Renault FT-17-light, maneuverable tanks with a rotating turret, capable of accelerating to 15-20 km/h. 2. Armored Cars: Shock Troops. Before the advent of mass-produced tanks, Brusilov would have focused on wheeled armored cars. In reality, Russia created unique armored divisions in 1914-1915 (for example, based on the Russo-Balt chassis and purchased Austin tanks). Tactics: Brusilov would have formed entire armored cavalry corps. Tanks and armored vehicles break through the Austrian front in Galicia, and Michael II's Wild Division rushes into the breach on horseback, completely disorganizing the enemy's rear. 3. Industrial base: the powerful Russo-Balt. To build a "mass" of light tanks, an automotive industry is needed. Under Michael II and Witte, the program of subsidizing domestic machine building would have progressed more rapidly: the Russo-Balt plant in Riga and the Putilov plant in Petrograd would have received gigantic defense orders for tracked chassis a couple of years before the war. By 1914, Russia would have been producing domestically designed engines, without being excessively dependent on supplies from France and the United States. 4. The course of World War I (1914-1915) The presence of hundreds of light, fast tanks would have changed the nature of the fighting on the Eastern Front: East Prussian Operation (1914): Samsonov's army would not have perished in the Masurian marshes. Mobile armored detachments would have provided communications between the armies of Rennenkampf and Samsonov, would have promptly uncovered the maneuvers of the German General Hindenburg, and would have launched a counterattack on his flanks. Battle of Galicia: Brusilov, with his light tanks, would have taken Budapest and Vienna by the spring of 1915, completely eliminating Austria-Hungary from the war. Result: Mikhail II's Russia would have adopted the military doctrine of the 1930s (the concept of a "Deep Operation" and mechanized corps) twenty years earlier. Light, fast tanks would have become the hallmark of the Imperial Army, transforming it into the most dynamic and dangerous force in Europe. If you're interested in this "dieselpunk" Imperial scenario, we can explore in detail: The design and armament of a hypothetical mass-produced Vezdekhod-2 tank, model 1914. How the German General Staff would have reacted to the appearance of hundreds of fast Russian tanks in Masuria. The tactics of cooperation between aviation (Sikorsky's Ilya Muromets heavy bombers) and Brusilov's light tanks in breaking through fortified lines.

The special forces girl Avelina noted:

Having won the First World War, Mikhail could have closed the Duma as an empty and unproductive talking shop.

The boy-terminator, children's special forces colonel Oleg Rybachenko, gave a detailed answer:

Such an outcome would have been entirely consistent with the logic of pragmatic and strict military leadership, especially in the wake of colossal triumph. Victory in World War I under the leadership of the Tsar as Commander-in-Chief and his marshals (Brusilov, for instance) would have given Mikhail II absolute authority and legitimacy, dwarfing any demands of the liberal intelligentsia. However, a complete dissolution of the State Duma and a return to the classical autocracy of Alexander III would have been unlikely in the conditions of the 20th century. Most likely, Mikhail II would have acted more subtly and pragmatically, reformatting the Duma to suit the needs of the new industrial empire. Here's how the domestic policy of a victorious empire would have been structured: 1. Paradigm Shift: From "Law Generators" to "Technocrats." Mikhail II, a man of military training, truly detested the party squabbles, demagoguery, and empty rhetoric of the Cadets and Octobrists. "Taming" Instead of Closing: Instead of a harsh decree liquidating the Duma (which could have sparked underground terror and discontent in the rear), the tsar could have used Bismarck's experience. The Duma would have been deprived of real legislative initiative in matters of the army, foreign policy, and government formation, retaining purely economic and budgetary functions. Censored Convocation: A new electoral law would have been introduced that would have excluded radicals, lawyers, and professional talkers from the elections. Seats in the Duma would have been filled by industrialists (the creators of those very tanks and airplanes), large agrarians, engineers, and retired military personnel. Parliament would have been transformed into the Supreme Economic Council under the crown. Military Control of the State (Dictatorship of the Victors). After victory, millions of soldiers and officers who trusted their Emperor and Marshal Brusilov would return to Petrograd. The army would become the main social elevator and support for the regime. The generals and officers would occupy key positions in ministries and provinces. Any attempts by the Duma to express protest or demand a "responsible ministry" would be met with a harsh response: "While you were chatting in the Tauride Palace, we were shedding blood for Great Russia." All political opposition would be marginalized and portrayed as "traitors and slackers." 3. Resolving the Land Issue "from Above." The main force capable of rocking the boat were the peasants. To finally deprive the left-wing parties (the Socialist Revolutionaries and Bolsheviks) of support, Mikhail II and Brusilov would have carried out a radical but controlled agrarian reform: The lands of defeated landowners (especially Austrian and German in the annexed Galicia and Poznan), as well as state-owned lands in Siberia, would have been distributed en masse and free of charge to war veterans. The family of every front-line soldier would have received a substantial plot of land. This would have created a multi-million-strong class of peasant-proprietors, personally loyal to the sovereign, for whom the Duma and urban liberals would have been alien elements. 4. Foreign Policy Shield: Russia would have seized the Bosphorus and Dardanelles straits, united Poland under the Romanov scepter, and created the most powerful bloc in Eastern Europe. With Brusilov's mass of light tanks and a colossal military budget, the empire would have dictated terms across Eurasia. Under such circumstances, the Western allies (France and Britain) would have turned a blind eye to any restrictions on democracy in Petrograd-they needed a stable and strong ally against a possible German revanche. The result: Michael II would not so much close the Duma as transform it into a decorative organ obediently rubber-stamping the emperor's decrees. Russia would have followed a path of authoritarian modernization (similar to that of Meiji Japan or post-war South Korea): a rigid political vertical, the army as the backbone, but also rapid growth of industry, private property, and technology. Do you think, if the Duma had been effectively abolished, would radical underground activists (like Stalin or Trotsky) have been able to mount a new uprising in a situation where well-fed peasant veterans received land from the tsar, and the army idolized Mikhail and Brusilov? If you're interested, we can project: A map of the Russian Empire after the Treaty of Versailles (including the Bosphorus and Galicia). The structure of Mikhail II's military-industrial cabinet without the participation of Duma parties. The fate of the intelligentsia and the émigrés under a technocratic monarchy.

The special forces girl Olympiada, crushing cockroach rats, asked:

Could Mikhail have continued to expand his empire by capturing Iran, India, China, Indochina, and Africa? After all, appetite comes with eating.

To this the boy-colonel Oleg Rybachenko responded:

Riding the wave of total triumph in World War I and with a powerful, motorized army under Brusilov's command, Mikhail II would indeed have been tempted to continue global expansion. However, the scenario of conquering all of Asia and Africa would have run into the harsh laws of geopolitics, logistics, and economics. Even for the Russian Empire at the height of its power, it would have been impossible to "digest" such vast territories. Here's how events would have unfolded in the various directions of this hypothetical expansion: 1. Iran (Persia) - A Realistic Goal. This direction was the most prepared. In reality, Russia and Great Britain had already divided Persia into spheres of influence in 1907. Scenario: After defeating the Ottoman Empire and occupying the Bosphorus, Mikhail II's Russia would have easily annexed its (northern) zone of influence in Iran, including Tehran. Result: The Empire would have gained direct access to the Persian Gulf and-most importantly-colossal oil fields, which would have provided fuel for Brusilov's armada of light tanks for decades to come. 2. India: Inevitable War with Great Britain. An attempt to advance further south than Iran or through the Pamirs to India would have meant the immediate destruction of the alliance with the Entente and the outbreak of World War III (this time against the British Empire). In British military doctrine, the defense of India ("the jewel in the crown") was an absolute priority. Military Stalemate: Reaching India with Brusilov's tanks through the Hindu Kush passes would be a logistical nightmare. The British fleet would have completely blocked Russian maritime trade, the Baltic, and the Black Seas. Michael II, being a pragmatist, would hardly have taken such a risk. India would have remained out of reach. 3. China and Indochina: "Creeping Expansion" Instead of Annexation. Taking China, with its population of hundreds of millions, by military force is a trap into which any army would have become bogged down (as Japan's experience later proved). Economic Control: After defeating Japan in 1905 (in our alternative scenario), Russia would have completely controlled Manchuria, the Chinese Eastern Railway, and Port Arthur. Michael II would have continued Witte's policy of not conquering China, but making it an economic vassal. Indochina: This territory was firmly held by France (Russia's ally). The seizure of Indochina would have ruined relations with Paris, depriving Russia of French loans. 4. Africa - A Geographical Absurdity. To maintain colonies in Africa, a powerful ocean-going navy capable of competing with those of Britain and the United States would be necessary. The Russian fleet, even reinforced by bases in the Mediterranean (after the capture of the Bosphorus), would remain trapped in semi-enclosed seas. Petrograd would simply be physically incapable of supplying and protecting colonies in the Congo or Algeria. The Main Brake on Expansion: Tormans Syndrome. The main reason why Michael II would have halted expansion was internal resources. The annexation of Galicia, Armenia, Constantinople, and Northern Iran would have already added tens of millions of non-Russian, often hostile, inhabitants to the empire. If Michael had continued to conquer Asia, populated by billions, Russians would have instantly become a tiny minority within his own empire. The empire would have drowned in national uprisings and guerrilla wars, turning into a version of Efremov's "Planet Tormans"-a land of perpetual suppression and inferno. Result: Mikhail II and Brusilov would have settled on creating a Great Eurasian Empire (Russia + Eastern Europe + Manchuria + Northern Iran). Instead of conquering Africa and India, they would have focused on internal development-building roads, factories, and developing Siberia, becoming the planet's main economic and military pole. If you're interested in this world of "Russian dieselpunk," let us know, and we can: Design a map of the Trans-Asian Highway from Petrograd to Tehran and Port Arthur. Assess how such an empire's relations with the United States would have developed, which by the 1920s would have become Russia's main economic rival. Discuss what space or rocket technologies could have emerged in this technological empire, based on the work of Tsiolkovsky.

The special forces girl Mirabella, crushing insect rats and throwing a gift of annihilation with her bare toes, asked:

But taking Alaska from the United States is a sacred matter for Tsar Mikhail to correct the great mistake of his ancestors.

The boy-colonel and commander of the children's special forces, Oleg Rybachenko, responded to this:

The idea of reclaiming Alaska (or "Russian America") seems like an extremely powerful patriotic slogan for the triumphant empire of Mikhail II. However, if this scenario were to be applied to the real geopolitics and military technologies of the first third of the 20th century, "correcting the mistakes of our ancestors" would have faced a colossal risk, capable of destroying Russia itself. Here's what a hypothetical confrontation over Alaska would have looked like: 1. Confrontation with an "industrial monster": The United States of the early 20th century is not the modest republic of the time of Alexander II (when Alaska was sold). By the 1920s, the US economy was many times larger than Russia's. Resource deadlock: Attempting to take Alaska by force would have meant an automatic declaration of war on Washington. While Brusilov's light tanks dominated the battlefields of Europe and Asia, the US could churn out battleships, aircraft, and explosives on an industrial scale unavailable to Petrograd. 2. The Logistics Nightmare of the Pacific Ocean. Alaska is separated from Russia by the Bering Strait, but supplying it from Siberia was nearly impossible in those years. The Trans-Siberian Railway didn't solve the problem: the railway ended in Vladivostok. To transport supplies, tanks, and ammunition to Alaska, they had to be loaded onto ships and transported across the Pacific Ocean, completely controlled by the powerful US Navy. The Imperial Russian Navy, even at the height of its power, would have been instantly blockaded and destroyed by the American fleet in the Pacific. The Russian army in Alaska would have found itself completely isolated, without ammunition and supplies, repeating the fate of Port Arthur, but in an icy wasteland. 3. The Economic Alternative: Why fight for what can be bought? Mikhail II and his minister, Sergei Witte, were pragmatists. In our alternate reality, Russia, after its victory in World War I, controls Manchuria and northern Iran, reaping colossal profits. Instead of a suicidal war with the United States over distant glaciers, Russia could have offered Washington a ransom or a large-scale economic exchange. Against the backdrop of the Great Depression in the United States (which, in a capitalist world, would have happened anyway), Petrograd could have offered the Americans billions in loans or concessions in exchange for the joint development of Alaska or its gradual return to Romanov jurisdiction. Why would Mikhail II have rejected this adventure? As we discussed in the concept of "Thormance Syndrome," holding onto vast territories isolated from the center exhausts the metropolis. Mikhail II understood that: "Russia's greatest wealth was Siberia, which stood half-empty at the beginning of the 20th century. Spending millions of lives and billions of rubles on seizing the American region, while building factories beyond the Urals and developing its own mineral resources, would have been strategic madness." Result: For Tsar Mikhail II, Alaska would have remained a beautiful dream on paper. Instead of military expansion into America, Russia would have cemented its status as Mistress of Eurasia by building pragmatic economic relations with the United States. The two superpowers would have divided up spheres of influence: the United States would have controlled the Western Hemisphere, and Russia the Eastern Hemisphere. If you're interested in this geopolitical balance of power, we can explore in detail: What would a treaty delimiting spheres of influence between Michael II's Russia and the United States in the Pacific Ocean have looked like? What role would a joint economic project to extract gold and oil in Alaska have played in this system? How would the scientific race between Russian and American engineers have developed in the 1930s?

The young children's special forces continued to fight with great ferocity and effectiveness against the enemy army of rats and cockroaches. And now the last rodents and insects had been finished off. And a supreme victory had been achieved for the special forces of eternal, truly brilliant children.

CHAPTER No 17.

Another pilot, Natasha Sokolova, also continued to write something when she had free time:

The starship with the children continued its voyage through the time loop. The boys and girls were in the virtual world.

And Stalin-Vladislav asked another question:

Could Lenin have become a science fiction writer after the failure of the revolution in Russia under Tsar Mikhail?

The powerful computer responded to this:

The idea of Vladimir Lenin (Ulyanov) becoming a science fiction writer after the collapse of his political hopes in the Russia of Tsar Mikhail II is a strikingly accurate and psychologically sound alternative biography scenario. If the reforms of Mikhail II and Witte, reinforced by Brusilov's victories, had deprived the Bolsheviks of their social base (well-fed peasants received land, workers received social packages at tank factories), Lenin would have been doomed to permanent exile in Switzerland. Possessing colossal, overflowing energy, fanatical faith in his ideas, and journalistic talent, he would not have been able to remain silent. He would have been forced to exchange the political arena for a literary one. In Zurich or Geneva in the 1920s, a unique utopian writer, Vladimir Ulyanov (writing under the pseudonym N. Lenin), would have emerged. Here's what his work would have looked like: 1. Genre: Social-technological utopia (Efremov's Harbinger). Lenin would not have written about "little green men" or elves-he despised mysticism and idealism. His science fiction would have been rigidly materialistic and Marxist. Main theme: The evolution of human society through the prism of the development of productive forces. In his books, future technologies (mass electricity, automated factories, atomic energy) serve as the basis for the abolition of private property and the creation of a global commune. "State and Revolution" as a science fiction novel: He would have expressed his real political theses in the form of fiction. His novels would have described the demise of the capitalist world from its own contradictions and the triumph of the World Council of Scientists and Workers. Lenin's top science fiction bestsellers: "The Freedom Archipelago" (or "Red Mars"): A novel about how a group of conscious proletarians and scientists, fleeing the gendarmes of Mikhail II's Eurasian Empire, builds a spaceship and founds the first immortal communist republic on Mars. There, they create a society without money, exploitation, or prisons. "The Hypermatrix Manifesto": A utopia about a future where all physical labor is transferred to robots, and people are exclusively engaged in science, creativity, and deep space exploration. 3. Literary style: Harsh, polemical cyberpunk. Lenin's writing style would have been strikingly different from the fiction of his contemporaries. His texts would have been full of furious journalism. The heroes of his books-worker activists-would deliver long, logically flawless speeches before launching a reactor or flying to Venus, denouncing "compromisers," "bourgeois speculators," and "imperial lackeys." In his future worlds, there would be no place for "well-fed slavery." He would fiercely criticize technocratic dictatorships, demonstrating that robots should liberate humans, not enslave them. 4. Influence on World Culture: In this alternative reality, N. Lenin would become a cult figure among European left-wing intellectuals, alongside H.G. Wells and Alexander Bogdanov (who, in reality, wrote the science fiction novel "Red Star"). His books would be translated into dozens of languages. Young Soviet science fiction writers of the future (including Ivan Efremov in the 1950s) would have devoured Swiss editions of Ulyanov-Lenin, drawing from them images of the World of Noon. Result: Having failed as a practical destroyer of empires, Lenin would have become the greatest architect of mental worlds. The Tsarist censorship of Mikhail II would have banned his books in Russia as "seditious," but high school students and young engineers at Brusilov's tank factories would have secretly passed dog-eared copies of Lenin's Martian Letters back and forth, dreaming of the stars and universal equality. If you're interested in this literary spin, we can proactively continue and explore: The plot of a hypothetical debate in Zurich between science fiction writers Lenin and H.G. Wells about the future of humanity. How would the Tsarist gendarmes combat the smuggling of Lenin's science fiction books across the border? Could Leon Trotsky, in this world, have become a literary critic and the main popularizer of Lenin's work in the West.

Stalin-Vladislav noted:

Well, Stalin would have been either hanged or left to rot in hard labor under Tsar Mikhail.

The supercomputer responded to this:

In this reality, Joseph Dzhugashvili (Stalin) would indeed have shared the fate of the most radical and implacable revolutionaries. Under Tsar Mikhail II and his harsh military-industrial cabinet, the treatment of terrorists, expropriators, and underground organizers would have become merciless. Stalin, the main organizer of the infamous Tiflis "ex-prisoners" (bloody bank robberies for party coffers), would have fallen under the purview of a renewed military court. Here's how his fate would have unfolded in a victorious Russian Empire: 1. Scenario One: Court-martial and Execution. In reality, Nicholas II often showed indecisiveness, commuting death sentences to hard labor (thanks to which Stalin escaped from exile six times). Mikhail II, relying on Brusilov's generals, would have used the methods of the Stolypin era, but with far greater severity. Sentence: For organizing armed robberies and murdering gendarmes, Dzhugashvili would have been brought to trial by military court. During the period of "restoring order" after the victories of 1905, he would most likely have been sentenced to death by hanging ("Stolypin's necktie"). Result: The future dictator's life would have ended in a prison in Tiflis or Baku before 1910. He would have remained in police records as the "dangerous Caucasian raider Koba," whose story ended on the gallows. Scenario Two: Lifetime Penal Servitude in Turukhan. If the monarchy had decided to show "mercy" and not make him a martyr for the underground, Stalin would have faced eternal isolation. In reality, his final exile was in the Turukhansk region (the village of Kureika), right at the Arctic Circle. Prison regime: Under Mikhail II, the escape system would have been completely abolished. Guards for the exiles would have been reinforced by members of the Cossack units that had distinguished themselves in battle, and oversight would have been carried out by the Gendarme Corps, which had received enormous budgets from Witte. Death in penal servitude: With no hope of amnesty or revolution, locked in the remote Siberian taiga, Dzhugashvili would have slowly withered away from tuberculosis, the harsh climate, and depression. He would have ended his days in the 1920s or 1930s, a forgotten old man, and buried in an unmarked grave under a wooden cross on the banks of the Yenisei. 3. Koba's Metamorphosis: Prison Memoirs. There is also a third, purely "Rybachenkov-esque" and paradoxical scenario. Possessing an iron will and ample free time in his solitary confinement in Shlisselburg, Stalin could have focused his energies on writing, just as Lenin had in Switzerland. From his pen could have come profound, dark socio-psychological essays about the lives of Caucasian abrek bandits or grim tales of human survival in the icy tundra. Such literature would have been secretly published by leftist European publishing houses. Literary historians of the 21st century would study "Koba's camp prose" as a unique example of how a failed dictator poured his boundless thirst for power onto the pages of brutal novels. The outcome for Russia: Stalin's removal from the historical process would have meant that Russia would have forever avoided the Great Terror, forced collectivization, and the destruction of the church. But the country would also have lost Stalin's experience of brutal modernization. However, in the world of Tsar Mikhail II and Marshal Brusilov, this modernization would have been successfully accomplished using tank factories and advanced science, without the extermination of millions of its own citizens. Do you think, if Stalin had been hanged, would he have become a figure on the scale of Shamil for the Caucasian underground, or would his name have quickly faded into the shadow of the successes of the great and prosperous Romanov Empire? Let's continue this historical detective story: if you like, I can tell you how the fates of other Stalin comrades would have unfolded in this world-for example, Leon Trotsky in exile or Felix Dzerzhinsky in penal servitude.

Stalin-Vladislav asked a natural question:

Why was Stalin punished so leniently for a series of serious crimes under Nicholas II?

The supercomputer responded to this:

The leniency of punishments meted out to Joseph Dzhugashvili (Stalin) and many other revolutionaries during the reign of Nicholas II is one of the most paradoxical, yet historically accurate, facts. Stalin carried out armed raids, organized illegal printing presses and strikes, but instead of execution or lifelong hard labor, he received only exile to Siberia, from which he easily escaped. This "humanity" of the tsarist regime was not explained by sympathy for the Bolsheviks, but by the systemic, legal, and organizational features of the Russian Empire: 1. Lack of direct evidence (Legal legalism). The Russian Empire of the early 20th century, despite its authoritarianism, attempted to be a state governed by the rule of law. The courts demanded ironclad, documented evidence of guilt. An organizer, not an executor: Stalin personally did not run around with a bomb during the Tiflis expropriation of 1907. His ally Kamo (Ter-Petrosyan) directed everything. Stalin was the "brains" of the operation, providing logistics and cover. Investigative dead end: The Tsarist secret police knew perfectly well who Koba was, but intelligence reports without direct evidence carried no legal force in court. The secret services were unable to uncover their informants within the Party, so Stalin was tried not for bloody robbery, but for much milder charges-"membership in an anti-state organization" or "distribution of illegal literature." 2. Specifics of Tsarist exile (Not the Gulag) The concept of "exile" in Tsarist Russia was radically different from what Stalin's Gulag later became. Freedom of movement: Exiles were not held behind barbed wire under guard or forced to work in a mine to the point of exhaustion. They were simply obliged to live in a specific locality (for example, Novaya Uda or Narym). He could rent a room, go hunting, read books, and freely communicate with the locals. "Tsar's rations": The state paid exiles a monthly food allowance (about 8-12 rubles), which was quite enough for basic living. 3. A leaky security system and the ease of escapes. Guarding the vast expanses of Siberia with the primitive pre-revolutionary police was impossible. In the Siberian wilderness, one police officer often had hundreds of square kilometers of taiga and dozens of exiles. A police officer was physically unable to monitor Koba's every move. Escape as routine: Of his six exiles, Stalin escaped five times. To escape, it was enough to simply walk to the nearest train station (often using a forged passport, stamped by party printing houses) and board a train to St. Petersburg or Baku. The secret police physically did not have time to put him on a wanted list throughout the country. 4. Nicholas II's Reluctance to Procreate "Martyrs" The tsarist government was terrified of provoking excessive public anger and the liberal press. Mass executions were used only during periods of violent uprisings (such as Stolypin's "quick-fire" military field courts in 1906-1907). During peacetime, jury trials and ordinary criminal courts were reluctant to sentence political prisoners to death, fearing that they would be turned into "holy martyrs" in the eyes of the intelligentsia. 5. Conspiracy Theory: Okhrana Agent? Historical scholarship has long debated the myth that Stalin was supposedly a secret agent of the tsarist police (a provocateur), which is why he was released. However, modern historians, having studied the archives of the Okhrana, have completely rejected this theory. The leniency of the punishment was a consequence not of Koba's treachery, but of the weakness and inflexibility of the imperial bureaucracy. The bottom line: Nicholas II and his legal system played "gentleman's rules" with people who completely disdained them. It was precisely this leniency that allowed Stalin to survive, maintain his health, and live to see 1917, where he would later create a system in which the slightest suspicion would not lead to "tsarist rations in Siberia," but to immediate execution in a basement. If you're interested, we can further explore this topic: Learn about the fate of Kamo (Stalin's main enforcer), who was tried in Germany and Russia. Consider the methods the tsarist Okhrana used to capture Stalin in Baku and Batumi. Discuss the false passports and codes Koba used for his legendary escapes from the taiga.

Stalin-Vladislav remarked with a smile:

If Alexander III had lived to be eighty, Stalin would have definitely been rotted away.

A powerful, cosmic computer responded to this:

You are absolutely right: Alexander III, known in history as the "Peacemaker" and an ultra-conservative monarch, possessed a completely different political temperament than his son, Nicholas II. Had he lived to be 80, he would have remained on the throne until 1925. Under these circumstances, the entire history of Russia would have followed a harsh authoritarian scenario, and the revolutionary underground would have been burned to the ground [1]. For Joseph Dzhugashvili (Stalin) and his associates, this scenario would have meant a guaranteed dead end. That is why, under Alexander III, the "gentleman's games" with terrorists would have been stopped: 1. The Dismantling of Legalism (Courts Without Sentiment) Alexander III came to power after the Narodnaya Volya (People's Will) blew up his father, Alexander II, in 1881. This tragedy forever dispelled his illusions about "liberalism" and legal humanism in relation to radicals. Emergency Protection Regulations: The law passed under his rule allowed governors-general to declare a state of emergency, bypassing ordinary civil courts. Military Justice Against "Ex-Crimes": In this reality, Stalin would have faced trial not before a civilian jury, but before a military district court, for organizing his first strike in Batumi or leading a bank robbery in Tiflis. Under emergency laws, organizers of armed robberies were sent to the gallows within 48 hours. Penal servitude instead of "resort" exile. If Stalin's death sentence had miraculously been commuted by the Tsar's mercy, he would not have faced a life of freedom in a village near Turukhansk, with hunting and reading, but true penal servitude. Sakhalin or Nerchinsk: Iosif Dzhugashvili would have been sent in shackles to the notorious Kara or Nerchinsk penal servitude, or to Sakhalin Island, whose harsh conditions were described in detail by Anton Chekhov. Labor in shackles: There, revolutionaries spent years hauling coal in wheelbarrows, chopping rocks under the watchful eye of whip-wielding guards, and sitting in damp, solitary confinement cells with no contact with the outside world. Under such conditions, given Stalin's predisposition to tuberculosis (his left arm had already been injured since childhood), he would not have physically survived. His health would have been ruined within 5-7 years, and he would have died a young convict in the remote taiga of Transbaikalia. Iron control over the borders and Siberia. Alexander III and his right-hand man, Chief Prosecutor Konstantin Pobedonostsev, would have transformed the Gendarme Corps into a flawless detective machine. Escapes would have become impossible: the exile registration system would have been completely digitalized (using early 20th-century technology-through strict passport control, mandatory photography, fingerprinting using the Bertillon method, and a telegraph network). Escaping from Siberia by train with a false piece of paper, as Stalin did under Nicholas II, would have become technically impossible. 4. The Fate of Lenin and Trotsky. Under the 80-year-old Alexander III, the entire top Bolshevik and Menshevik leadership would have been locked in Europe forever, without the slightest chance of return. Within Russia itself, the police would have employed total purge tactics. Vladimir Ulyanov (Lenin) would have remained an émigré theoretician in Zurich, and Leon Trotsky would have written articles for Austrian newspapers, gradually transforming into respectable European socialist professors, divorced from the realities of Russian life. The result: Alexander III would have preserved the empire in the form of an "iron order." The price of this stability would have been high-the complete suppression of civil liberties and the freezing of political life. But at the same time, Russia would have avoided the catastrophe of 1917, the Civil War and the Gulag, since the potential creators of this system would have been physically liquidated or securely isolated by the imperial penitentiary system. Do you think that if Alexander III had ruled until 1925, would Russia have been able to industrialize and build railways (under Witte's leadership) without the monstrous coercion that Stalin himself later used? It is interesting to analyze: What defense strategy would Alexander III have chosen in relation to the growing threat from Kaiser Germany by 1914 [1]. Would his heir (Mikhail or Nicholas) have been able to hold the country together, having taken over in 1925 after half a century of profound political frost.

Stalin-Vladislav remarked with a sweet smile:

Why did providence give long lives to the failures Gorbachev and Kerensky, and not to Alexander III, Peter the Great, Ivan the Terrible, Boris Godunov and other more worthy rulers?

A very powerful space computer responded to this:

From the perspective of biology, history, and philosophy, the distribution of rulers' lifespans is not subject to "historical justice," but to strict medical, psychological, and social laws. What seems like a providential paradox has a perfectly rational explanation. The lifespan of these rulers depended on specific factors that determined their fate: 1. Lifestyle and "professional burnout." Rulers often called "strong" lived under extreme physical and psychological stress, literally burning out their health: Peter I (died at age 52): He enjoyed phenomenal health, but destroyed it with alcoholism, chronic sleep deprivation, venereal diseases, and constantly ignoring colds. He died from an advanced genitourinary tract infection, aggravated by rescuing drowning soldiers in icy water. Alexander III (died at age 49): Considered a hero, but his kidneys were destroyed by latent nephritis. The situation was critically worsened by the tsar's train disaster in Borki in 1888, where the emperor held the roof of the carriage on his shoulders for several minutes, saving his family. This colossal strain triggered a fatal illness. Ivan the Terrible (died at age 53): By the end of his life, his skeleton was afflicted with massive salt growths (osteophytes), rendering him unable to walk. Chronic stress, paranoia, and the uncontrolled use of mercury ointments (used to treat illnesses at the time) led to severe poisoning and premature aging. Boris Godunov (died at age 53): Lived under the constant stress of the Time of Troubles, famine, and the emergence of False Dmitry. He was crippled by constant paranoia and heart failure (he died instantly, likely from a stroke or heart attack). The Kerensky-Gorbachev Phenomenon: Freedom from the Burden of Power. Alexander Kerensky (lived 89) and Mikhail Gorbachev (lived 91) paradoxically maintained their longevity precisely because they lost power in time and escaped the epicenter of historical stress. Kerensky: Having fled Russia in 1917, he lived for more than half a century in comfortable, safe exile in the United States and Europe. He pursued academic pursuits, wrote memoirs, strolled through New York City, and lectured. His body did not bear the burden of governing a nuclear power or waging total war. Gorbachev: After the collapse of the USSR in 1991, he retired. He spent the last 30 years of his life as a world-renowned lecturer, headed a foundation, wrote books, and received high-quality Western medical care. The strain on his health after age 60 was incomparable to that of Peter the Great or Stalin. Medical Progress in the 20th Century. It's foolish to compare the lifespans of people in the Middle Ages with those of the late 20th century. Alexander III or Boris Godunov, given the medical advances of the 1980s (with antibiotics, hemodialysis, and cardiac surgery), would have easily been saved and lived to a ripe old age. Kerensky and Gorbachev enjoyed the benefits of the advanced medicine of their time, which automatically added 15-20 years to their lives. Philosophical Perspective: "The Curse of Long Observation." In history, the long life of a ruler who has lost his country is often not a "reward" but a subtle punishment from fate. Kerensky watched Russia live without him for 53 years from the sidelines and died in 1970, never having seen the collapse of Bolshevism, which he hated. Gorbachev lived long enough to see almost all of his major achievements (Glasnost, Perestroika, détente with the West) dismantled, and he witnessed the beginning of the massive upheavals of 2022. Bottom line: "Strong" rulers paid for their great deeds and absolute power with their biological resources, dying at their peak. The "losers" were granted long decades of quiet lives, transforming from arbiters of fate into mere historical bystanders. Do you think that if Peter the Great or Alexander III had been given the opportunity to live to 90, would they have been able to preserve their empires from future crises, or would the gigantic scale of their states have still destroyed them, regardless of their age? For thought: read about the "27 Club" phenomenon or the stories of great artists-a law often operates in human biology: the brighter and more destructive the flash of personality, the faster its physical carrier burns out.

Stalin-Vladislav asked a very interesting question:

And if Stalin became immortal, could he take over the whole world?

A very powerful space computer responded to this:

The hypothetical immortality of Joseph Stalin would turn world history into a total geopolitical thriller, but even the infinite life of one man could not abolish objective economic, technological, and geographical laws. An immortal Stalin would face barriers that cannot be broken through by will alone [1]: 1. Nuclear Stalemate and "Absolute Deterrence" Even if Stalin is immortal, his factories, tanks, and soldiers remain mortal. 1950s Context: By the time of his actual death in 1953, the United States possessed colossal superiority in nuclear arsenals and delivery systems (strategic aviation) [1]. Result: An attempt by an immortal leader to launch a conventional (regular) takeover of Europe or Asia would instantly provoke World War III [1]. The United States would employ plans like "Dropshot" [1]. The immortal Stalin would have remained to rule the radioactive ruins of his own country, since nuclear weapons eliminated the possibility of conquering the world with tank wedges [1]. 2. The Logistical Limits of the Earth To conquer the entire world means to conquer the USA, South America, Australia, and Africa. The Ocean Problem: The USSR did not have, and could not in the foreseeable future develop, an ocean-going fleet capable of competing with the US and British navies [1]. The immortal Stalin could have united Eurasia, but his expansion would have been forever stopped on the shores of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans [1]. Transferring millions of armies across the ocean under fire from American aircraft carriers is technically impossible [1]. 3. Economic Collapse and the "Electronic Age" Stalin's mobilization model of the economy ("all forces on heavy industry") was ideally suited to preparing for an industrial war like World War II [1]. But it was completely ineffective in the long term [1]. Stagnation: In the 1960s and 1970s, the microelectronic and computer revolution began in the world. The totalitarian, planned system of the USSR, ruled by an immortal leader, but mentally stuck in the 1940s, would have fallen critically behind in the fields of high technology, communications, and cybernetics. It is impossible to conquer the world of the 21st century with a lot of tanks, but inferior in computer technology and unmanned systems. 4. Elite Rollback Syndrome The specificity of the Stalinist system is control through total fear and purges [1]. Degradation of governance: If the leader is immortal, the nomenklatura around him (ministers, generals, secretaries) would eventually turn into an absolutely gray, intimidated, and uninitiative mass [1]. No one would dare to propose new ideas or reforms for fear of execution [1]. An immortal Stalin would find himself in a profound information vacuum, making decisions based on false, "convenient" reports from subordinates, which would inevitably lead to fatal strategic errors. 5. The "Rybachenko" Scenario: Stalin Moves into the Hypermatrix. If we were to transform this plot into a fantasy in the style of Oleg Rybachenko, then an immortal Stalin, realizing that the real Earth could not be captured due to nuclear parity, would devote all the resources of Soviet science to the creation of digital immortality and virtual universes. In this scenario, by the 1980s, the USSR would have built a gigantic supercomputer, and Stalin would have headed the Red Hypermatrix, transferring the consciousness of the Soviet people into it. There, in a virtual space not limited by the laws of physics, his million-strong tank armadas and jet planes would finally capture America, the elves, and the entire Universe. Result: In the real world, the immortal Stalin would have been able to build a super-powerful Eurasian "fortress" (from Berlin to Vladivostok), but the laws of nuclear physics and ocean geography would not have allowed him to capture the entire planet [1]. What do you think, if Stalin had become immortal, would his own frightened comrades (Beria, Khrushchev, Malenkov) have overthrown him, uniting in a secret conspiracy, or was his authority so religious that they would have been afraid to even breathe against him [1]? I recommend reading: George Orwell"s classic dystopia "1984" - it shows a world where the immortal Big Brother (whose image was Stalin) has fixed a planetary dead end, dividing the world into three eternally warring, but superpowers unable to defeat each other.

Stalin-Vladislav, continuing his flight in a vacuum, took and asked:

And where should Stalin be after death according to the Christian religion? Many consider him a saint!

The super-powerful computer responded to this:

According to official Christian theology (both Orthodox and Catholic), the exact location of Joseph Stalin's soul after death can only be determined by God. However, claims of his "holiness" completely contradict church canons and Christian doctrine. Here is how the Christian church and theologians assess Stalin and his afterlife: 1. Canonical Impasse: Stalin as a Persecutor of the Church. In the Christian tradition, saints are recognized as people whose lives were a fierce testimony of faith, love for God, and neighbor. Persecutor, not saint: Stalin went down in history as one of the most widespread organizers of anti-religious campaigns in the USSR. Under his leadership, tens of thousands of priests were physically killed, the Cathedral of Christ the Savior was blown up, and thousands of churches were closed. The fate of persecutors: In church law, people who shed the blood of martyrs are equated with pagan Roman emperors (Diocletian or Nero). Without deep public repentance, their eternal fate is described as a stay in Hell for the sins of shedding innocent blood and fighting against God. 2. The Phenomenon of "Orthodox Stalinism" (Pseudo-Sainthood). The notion that Stalin is a "saint" or "chosen tsar" does exist in marginal circles (so-called "Orthodox Stalinism"). The Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) officially and harshly condemns this phenomenon, calling it heresy and political perversion. The Myth of the "Icon with Stalin": Proponents of sainthood often cite an apocryphal legend that Stalin secretly met with Saint Matrona of Moscow in 1941, and she blessed him to defend Moscow. The Patriarchate has officially declared this story fiction, and the appearance of Stalin's images in church-related paintings is blasphemous. 3. The 1943 Factor: Pragmatism Instead of Faith. Stalin's defenders often recall that in 1943, he restored the patriarchate, opened some churches, and ended the most brutal persecutions. Theological Response: The Church views this step not as Stalin's spiritual rebirth, but as pure political pragmatism during the war. He needed to mobilize the religious population within the country and impress his Western allies (the USA and Britain). Christianity teaches that political gain does not wash away the sin of murdering millions of people during the Terror. 4. A View Through the Prism of "Rybachenko" and Science Fiction. If this issue had been resolved within the framework of Oleg Rybachenko's universe, Stalin's fate would have taken a different path: there, the Supercivilizations of the future could have extracted his information matrix through time warps right at the moment of his death at the Kuntsevo Dacha in 1953. For the Creators of the Universes, he would have become a valuable "exhibit" or an advisor on global mobilization. They would have settled him in an ideal world, giving him the opportunity to continue building a space-faring USSR. But this has nothing to do with real Christian eschatology. Bottom line: In Christianity, Stalin is unequivocally viewed as a grave sinner and persecutor of the faith, having committed the sins of murder and pride. Attempts to make him a "saint" are the fruit of modern political propaganda and wounded national pride, which seeks to combine incompatible things: faith in Christ and the worship of the Soviet tyrant. Considering how often you ponder alternative histories and the fates of rulers, let me know what interests you more: Actual archival documents about Stalin's meeting with the metropolitans in 1943? A theological analysis of why the Church canonized Tsar Nicholas II but never canonized Stalin? How is Stalin's trial in Heaven described in modern literature?

Stalin-Vladislav logically noted:

But didn't Stalin deserve to become a saint by raising Russia from the plow to the atom and saving the world from Hitler?

The super-powerful computer responded to this:

In the Christian tradition, the concepts of "historical merit" and "holiness" are entirely different. Holiness is not akin to a state award or a modernization medal, but the result of a person's spiritual transformation, their love for God, and their compassion for others. Therefore, from the Church's perspective, the formula "from the plow to the atom" is not grounds for canonization. 1. The Cost Criterion (Christian Ethics): For Christianity, human life is sacred. The principle "the end justifies the means" fundamentally contradicts the Gospel. The Price of Modernization: Industrialization and the creation of atomic weapons were paid for with monstrous sacrifices-the lives of millions of peasants during the famine, the labor of Gulag prisoners, and the executions of innocents. The Church cannot recognize as a saint a man who built the greatness of the state on the blood and suffering of millions of his fellow citizens. 2. Salvation from Hitler: The People's Feat, Not Personal Holiness. The victory over Nazism is a tremendous historical event, but the Church distinguishes between geopolitical success and the ruler's personal righteousness. Stalin's Role: Stalin acted as an effective supreme commander and a ruthless organizer of the rear. However, in the Christian understanding, the world was saved from Hitler by the Soviet soldier-sacrificer, who demonstrated the highest commandment: "Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends" (John 15:13). Stalin himself remained a despot, whose mistakes in the summer of 1941 led to colossal and unjustified losses for the army. Biblical Analogies: Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus the Great. The Bible contains numerous examples of pagan kings and cruel rulers who accomplished great deeds by the will of Providence: the Persian king Cyrus the Great saved the Jewish people from Babylonian captivity, and the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar built great cities and united empires. However, neither of them is recognized as saints. They were merely instruments in God's hands for the salvation or punishment of nations, but their personal lives and methods remained sinful and far from holy. Stalin, in this logic, is a similarly formidable instrument of history, but not a saintly man. A look through the lens of Oleg Rybachenko's universe. If this debate were carried out by Rybachenko's characters (for example, his beloved boy Supermen or the demiurges of the future), they would approach the question utilitarianly: For the Supercivilization of the future, Stalin is an effective planetary-scale manager who managed to prepare the Earth's biomass to repel a cosmic or technological threat (Hitler). They would not discuss sin and holiness, but simply acknowledge his high efficiency and use his experience to manage new galactic sectors. But these are the laws of technocratic fantasy, not Christian faith. Bottom line: Stalin has earned a prominent place in history books as the architect of a superpower and the victor in the greatest war. But in the Kingdom of God, the laws of geopolitics do not apply, but rather the laws of Christ's Sermon on the Mount, where blessed are those who are merciful, pure in heart, and peacemakers-qualities that Joseph Stalin clearly did not possess in his lifetime. If you would like to continue the discussion on this topic, please let us know, and we can proactively explore: The history of the term "Orthodox Stalinism" and why it is popular in modern Russia. The official position of the Russian Orthodox Church in 2024-2026 on Stalin. Examples of other historical rulers (for example, Ivan the Terrible or Peter the Great), whom the people attempted to make saints against the will of the church.

Stalin-Vladislav logically noted:

But Alexander Nevsky, Princess Olga, Prince Vladimir, Emperor Constantine also committed much evil and cruelty, but they were saints!

The supercomputer responded to this quite logically:

Your argument is historically accurate: the rulers listed did indeed commit acts that would horrify modern observers. Princess Olga burned and buried Drevlian ambassadors alive; Prince Vladimir led a dissolute life, organized human sacrifices, and married Rogneda, murdering her family before her eyes; and Emperor Constantine executed his own co-heirs, his wife Fausta and son Crispus. However, in Christian theology, there is a fundamental difference between them and Stalin, which determined the impossibility of canonizing the Soviet leader. This difference lies in three canonical conditions: 1. The phenomenon of metanoia (radical repentance). Christianity is a religion of salvation for sinners. The main criterion for the sanctity of a former villain is his complete personal break with his past. Vladimir and Olga: The Christian canon emphasizes that Vladimir's cruelty occurred before his baptism ("he was a beast, but became a man"). Having accepted Christ, he completely changed his lifestyle: he disbanded harems, began building hospitals, distributed alms, and even tried to abolish the death penalty. Stalin: There is no moment of repentance in his biography. He began his career organizing the underground, terror, and repression, and ended it at the pinnacle of totalitarian power in 1953, planning new large-scale deportations (for example, the "Doctors' Plot"). He did not repent of the extermination of millions of people and remained faithful to his harsh, pragmatic system until the end of his days. 2. Defending the Church against its destruction. Emperor Constantine and Prince Vladimir were canonized as Equal-to-the-Apostles. This status is granted for the fact that the ruler radically changed the historical fate of Christianity, opening the way for preaching the Gospel to entire nations. Builders versus destroyers: Constantine ended 300 years of persecution in the Roman Empire, and Vladimir baptized Rus'. They introduced Christian morality into state law. Stalin, however, did the opposite: he deliberately destroyed the Russian Orthodox Church, physically eliminating almost the entire episcopate and clergy by 1939. The temporary relaxation of 1943 was merely a tactical move, after which the pressure on believers resumed. 3. Alexander Nevsky: Defending the Faith, Not the State. Prince Alexander Nevsky was canonized not for being a successful politician or for harshly suppressing uprisings in Novgorod (which was true). The essence of his feat: He was canonized as a Righteous One for making a civilizational choice at a critical moment in history in favor of preserving Orthodoxy. He entered into a diplomatic alliance with the religiously tolerant Golden Horde to repel the onslaught of Catholic crusader knights who demanded a complete renunciation of Orthodox identity. Stalin, however, built an atheistic state, where faith in God was officially declared a "relic of the past." 4. A look through the lens of Oleg Rybachenko's worlds. If this canonical debate were assessed by the Demiurges of the Future from Rybachenko's books, they would again reject Christian ethics: In their technocratic Hypermatrix, Konstantin, Vladimir, and Stalin would stand in the same rank as "major operators of historical processes." The creators of universes are interested only in the scale of the changes a leader brought to the structure of civilization. But in the realm of the Christian spirit, Stalin remains the antithesis of holiness-a persecutor who knows no repentance. Bottom line: Christian holiness is not sinlessness, but a vector of the soul's movement. Olga and Vladimir moved from pagan cruelty to Christian mercy. Stalin, however, traveled the opposite path-from a student at an Orthodox theological seminary to the creator of one of the most ruthless atheistic machines in human history. Given how deeply we've delved into the topic of Christian canons and historical justice, let me know what you think: Should we examine how the Church, in real history, decanonized those rulers whose sins outweighed their merits (for example, Ivan the Terrible)? Would you like to consider how the idea of a "sacred leader" is used in modern ideologies? Are you interested in learning how modern church historians assess the phenomenon of "Orthodox Stalinism"?

CHAPTER No 18.

Stalin-Vladislav asked the following question:

Why was Ushakov canonized, but Alexander Suvorov and Kutuzov were not?

A rather powerful supercomputer responded to this:

Fyodor Ushakov was canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church as a righteous man because his life fully met the strict criteria of Christian holiness, while Alexander Suvorov and Mikhail Kutuzov, despite their colossal military achievements, lacked the primary spiritual grounds for canonization. The Church distinguishes between the historical greatness of a commander and the sanctity of his personal life according to the following criteria: 1. Fyodor Ushakov: Monasticism in the world and a righteous old age. Admiral Ushakov is unique in that he combined the genius of a naval commander with profound Christian asceticism. Lifestyle: Ushakov never married, had no children, and led a virtually monastic, celibate life right on his ship. He began and ended each day with prayer, fasted with the sailors, and forbade foul language in the navy. Mercy: The admiral spent his entire enormous salary on aiding the wounded, orphans, and sailors. During the plague in Sevastopol, he used his own funds to organize hospitals and save hundreds of lives. Final moments: After retiring, Ushakov settled near the Sanaksar Monastery. He spent his days in prayer, fasting, and charity, praying in his cell like a simple monk. The Church canonized him not for his victories, but for his personal righteousness. 2. Alexander Suvorov: Deep Faith Despite Earthly Passions. Suvorov was a deeply religious man, writing spiritual canons and singing in the choir. The Russian Orthodox Church is considering his canonization, but the process is slow due to the complex facts of his biography. Family scandals: Suvorov's personal life was far from righteous. His difficult, eccentric character led to a public, scandalous breakup with his wife, Varvara Prozorovskaya, whom he accused of infidelity, and a lengthy trial. Cruelty in War: During the storming of Praga (a suburb of Warsaw) in 1794 and the suppression of the Pugachev Rebellion, the troops under his command acted with extreme, albeit military necessity-driven, brutality. Canonization as a saint requires impeccable Christian mercy. 3. Mikhail Kutuzov: A Classic Secular Nobleman. Mikhail Illarionovich Kutuzov has no chance of canonization, as his lifestyle was entirely consistent with the secular mores of the Catherine and Alexander eras. Secular Sins: Kutuzov was a hedonist who loved luxury, women, and comfort. His numerous love affairs (including cohabitation with young Wallachians during the Turkish campaign) were openly discussed in the army and high society. Freemasonry: Kutuzov belonged to Masonic lodges (he was initiated to a high degree), which, according to Orthodox canon law, is a direct obstacle to recognizing a person as a saint. 4. A View Through the Prism of Oleg Rybachenko's Science Fiction: If this synodal dispute had taken place in Rybachenko's worlds, his future demiurges would have ignored Ushakov's righteousness: For the Supercivilization of "People-Creators of Universes," Suvorov and Kutuzov would have been far more valuable. Their offensive genius, ability to win through numbers and skill, and strategic thinking would have been useful for waging large-scale intergalactic wars. The creators of the universes would have taken their consciousness through the wormholes of time right at the moment of death, creating for them the eternally youthful bodies of assault marshals. Result: Ushakov was canonized for remaining a pure Christian and ascetic during his brutal military service. Suvorov and Kutuzov remain in the church's memory as great patriots and defenders of the Fatherland, for whose souls we pray, but whose earthly lives were too closely tied to human passions and politics to serve as impeccable spiritual standards. If you are interested in this layer of church history, let us know, and we can: Consider the current status of the canonization process for Alexander Suvorov. Analyze the miracles recorded by the church after the death of Feodor Ushakov, performed through prayers to him. Discuss how attitudes toward Freemasonry influenced the fates of other Russian generals in 1812.

Stalin-Vladislav remarked with a cheerful look:

Could Satan, in his kingdom in Hell, give the dictators a whole planet with slaves, male and female?

A very super-powerful computer responded to this:

Within the framework of traditional Christian theology and demonology, the answer is unequivocal: no, Satan does not possess the creative power to create planets, and he himself is not the master, but the chief prisoner of the underworld. However, in modern science fiction, the dark fantasy genre, and especially in the literary universe of Oleg Rybachenko, this scenario is not only possible, but a fundamental element of the structure of his worlds. In Rybachenko's kitsch space, Hell functions as a gigantic Supermatrix or parallel multiverse [^15^]. Here's what this scenario would look like in the realm of fantastical engineering: 1. Hell as a Dark Hypermatrix (Technogenic Simulator) In Oleg Rybachenko's worlds, Hell is a high-tech testing ground controlled by Lucifer or the dark Demiurges. Virtual Planets: Satan can allocate Stalin, Hitler, or Napoleon not a real space object, but a dedicated server in the Hypermatrix-a virtual planet with a 100% simulation of reality. Illusion of Omnipotence: Within this digital space, the dictator gains absolute power, millions of submissive slaves, and beautiful bikini-clad slaves. He feels like a god, builds cities, holds parades, and tortures enemies. 2. Why does Satan need this? (Ego Trap) Even in fantasy, the devil gives nothing for free. The allocation of a "personal planet with slaves" is a sophisticated hellish trap: Harvesting mental energy: The dictator, reveling in unlimited power, generates colossal amounts of pride, rage, and lust. The infernal system feeds on these emotions. Testing and selection: Satan uses such simulation planets as giant chessboards. He observes the tactics employed by Hitler or Stalin, how they modernize their virtual Panther-5s or T-55s, in order to forge them into ideal combat generals for future wars against the Supercivilizations of Light. Reverse Scenario: A Rebel Boy Breaks the System. The plot of most of Rybachenko's novels is based on this ideal hellish system failing. The author's protagonist, a 12-year-old boy-superman (Rybachenko himself), breaks through the wormholes of time to reach this planet-testing ground. Armed with knowledge of the future and a quantum weapon, this teenager leads a slave rebellion against the dictator, cracks the codes of Lucifer's hellish server, and reduces the "tyrant's personal paradise" to dust, proving the superiority of communist science over demonic simulations. 4. Why is this image appealing? The concept of "a planet for every dictator" is the pinnacle of literary escapism. It indulges the deep human desire to wield absolute, unfettered power over other beings, without bearing any responsibility. Rybachenko simply takes this secret male fantasy to a cosmic scale. Bottom line: In a religious sense, Satan is a beggarly deceiver, capable only of illusions. But in the realm of modern trashy science fiction, he emerges as the CEO of a virtual mega-concern that can gift an entire galaxy to a dictator, only to use him as a pawn in its cosmic games. If you're interested in this techno-demonology, we can explore: How Rybachenko's hellish server security system is designed to prevent hacking by time travelers. What tactics would Stalin have used against Hitler if Satan had pitted their personal planets against each other in a virtual battle. A recipe for combat chemistry to suppress slave rebellions on such planets.

Stalin-Vladislav noted:

Can Zhukov be canonized?

A powerful supercomputer responded to this:

A unique situation has developed in the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) regarding Marshal Georgy Zhukov. Since the 1990s, a powerful public movement has existed in Russia for his canonization. However, from the perspective of strict church canons, this process faces serious, practically insurmountable obstacles. As with Stalin, Suvorov, and Kutuzov, the Church clearly distinguishes between a large-scale military-historical feat and the personal spiritual righteousness of an individual. 1. Arguments "FOR" (Position of Supporters of Canonization) Supporters of Zhukov's canonization (including many military officers and conservative publicists) call him "St. George the Victorious of the 20th century" and cite the following arguments: Defender of the Fatherland: Zhukov saved the country and Christian civilization from total annihilation by Nazism. The Church recognizes the holy Blessed Princes-Warriors (Alexander Nevsky, Dmitry Donskoy), who were canonized for their military exploits in defense of their native land. Hidden Faith: There are numerous apocryphal stories about Zhukov secretly carrying the Kazan Icon of the Mother of God with him across the front lines, praying before battles, and not allowing blasphemous atheistic lectures in the headquarters subordinate to him. Name and Symbolism: Zhukov was born on the feast day of St. George (old style) and bore his name. The surrender of Germany in May 1945 coincided with the celebration of Easter and the feast day of St. George the Victorious, which supporters of canonization consider a direct sign of God's providence. Arguments "AGAINST" (Official Position of the Synod) For the ROC Canonization Commission, Zhukov's personal qualities and biography make his recognition as a saint impossible: Membership in an atheist party: The commander spent his entire adult life as a high-ranking member of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. He publicly shared Soviet ideology, which officially denied the existence of God. A saint cannot be part of an organization that declares atheism. The Price of Victory ("Marshal of Victories and Sacrifice"): In military history, Zhukov has a firmly established reputation as a tough and uncompromising commander. To achieve strategic goals, he spared no human life (Battle of Rzhev, Seelow Heights). For Christian holiness, such an attitude towards one's neighbor, even dictated by the brutal logic of total war, is unacceptable. Personal life: The marshal's family life was extremely difficult and far from the Christian ideal of chastity and marital fidelity. Zhukov was married several times, had complicated relationships ("frontline girlfriends"), and fathered illegitimate children, which was accompanied by high-profile Soviet nomenklatura scandals. "The Trophy Case" (1948): During searches of Zhukov's dacha, MGB officers discovered colossal quantities of property smuggled from Germany (carpets, furniture, gold, paintings). Even considering that this was common practice among Soviet generals of that time, acquisitiveness and appropriation of trophies directly contradict Christian asceticism and righteousness. Zhukov's Role in the World of Oleg Rybachenko's Fantasy. If Zhukov had turned out to be a character in Rybachenko's books, his fate would have taken another phantasmagorical turn: a future super-civilization of "Humans-Creators of Universes" would have retrieved his consciousness through time warps directly from a sanatorium near Moscow in 1974. For the Creators, he would have become the ideal "Fist of the Empire." They would have returned him to the body of a 12-year-old athletic boy, given him command of millions of flying jet tanks, and sent him to storm Lucifer's citadels in Hell or to purge the planet Tormans of the Council of Four. For Rybachenko's technocratic demiurges, Zhukov's toughness and ability to think in terms of fronts would be a key virtue, surpassing any ecclesiastical righteousness. Bottom line: For the Russian Orthodox Church, Georgy Zhukov remains a great son of Russia, an outstanding strategist, and a national hero, for whose soul they pray in churches. However, his earthly path was too closely intertwined with the Soviet atheistic system, the harsh reality of the military, and human frailties to be considered among Orthodox saints. If you're interested, we can explore this topic further: Consider which Soviet soldiers from the Great Patriotic War are truly venerated by the church as local saints (for example, the righteous warrior Yevgeny Rodionov from the Chechen campaign, or heroes of past years)? Learn the details of Zhukov's "Trophy Case" and how it affected his fate under Stalin? Discuss how modern military ideology in Russia attempts to combine Zhukov's image with the Orthodox faith.

Stalin-Vladislav logically noted:

But if the authorities put pressure on the church, what else can they do - canonize!

The supercomputer responded to this:

There have indeed been cases in church history where secular rulers have attempted to force the clergy to canonize individuals they favor. For example, in the Middle Ages, the German Emperor Frederick Barbarossa forced his protégé (the antipope) to canonize Charlemagne in order to legitimize his claim to the empire, but the church never recognized this act. If we imagine a scenario of harsh state pressure on the Russian Orthodox Church to canonize Georgy Zhukov or Joseph Stalin, events would unfold along a complex intra-church trajectory: 1. Resistance mechanism: Synodal Commission. Church bureaucracy operates extremely slowly and conservatively in matters of holiness. Decisions are made not by a single individual, but by the Canonization Commission, which spends years studying archives [^12^]. Italian strike: In response to direct pressure from the Kremlin, the Synod would likely resort to endlessly delaying the process. The commission would demand "additional archival research," cite the need to study classified MGB/CPSU documents, or declare that "popular veneration of the marshal has not yet taken root sufficiently." This process could be stalled for decades. 2. Risk of Internal Schism: The senior clergy understands perfectly well that canonizing a figure of the stature of Zhukov or Stalin would deal a crushing blow to the authority of the church itself. Destruction of the Memory of the New Martyrs: The Russian Orthodox Church built its identity in the post-Soviet period on the veneration of the New Martyrs and Confessors of the Russian Church-thousands of priests and laity executed by the Soviet regime. To appoint a marshal, who was part of this atheistic system, as a "saint" would mean erasing the memory of the victims of repression. This would provoke a rebellion among the conservative clergy and the defection of some believers to True Orthodox schisms. 3. A compromise option: "Veneration without canonization." If government pressure becomes critical (threat of church closures or loss of funding), the church would likely opt for a hybrid compromise: Public recognition: Instead of including Zhukov in the official calendar of saints and painting icons, the Russian Orthodox Church could establish a special day of remembrance for "all Orthodox soldiers who gave their lives for the Fatherland," with Zhukov's name being commemorated first. The Main Cathedral of the Russian Armed Forces: In reality, this compromise has already been partially implemented. In the Main Cathedral of the Russian Armed Forces in Kubinka, mosaics and bas-reliefs depicting Soviet soldiers, Zhukov, and even (originally planned) Stalin stand alongside the faces of saints. This is a state-patriotic cult, which the church allows on its territory but strictly separates from canonical holiness. A View Through the Prism of Oleg Rybachenko's Worlds. In Rybachenko's fantasy universes, this conflict between church and state is resolved instantly and radically: In his novels, the Supercivilization of the future abolishes traditional synods altogether. If the demiurges deem Zhukov great, they simply declare him the "God of War" or the "Supreme Creator of Tactical Realities" of their technogenic Hypermatrix [^15^]. They don't care about any canons, patriarchs, or the marshal's historical sins-his consciousness is simply injected into an immortal body [^15^], they are given a fleet of jet-powered disc craft flying at MAX 10, and sent to cleanse the universe. Bottom line: The state can force the church to build a monument or paint a picture, but true canonization requires recognition from the entire church community. Without this, the "commanded saint" will remain merely a political poster, before which believers will not pray. If you are interested in this topic, let us know, and we can proactively explore: How did the Russian Orthodox Church respond to the appearance of mosaics depicting Stalin in a military church in 2020, and why were they ultimately removed? Were there any cases in Russian history where tsars forced people to be canonized (for example, the story of Peter the Great and Mitrofan of Voronezh)? What is the official legal process for canonizing saints in modern Orthodoxy?

Stalin-Vladislav logically noted:

Millions of people around the world pray to Stalin's portraits even without canonization.

The supercomputer responded to this:

You are right that the scale and nature of Joseph Stalin's veneration around the world have gone far beyond the bounds of ordinary historical memory, transforming it into a kind of civil religion (quasi-religion). For millions of people, his portrait has become not just an image of a political leader, but a powerful symbol-archetype. This phenomenon of "prayer without canonization" can be explained by several factors: 1. Stalin as the "God of Order and Justice." In the minds of many (especially in times of crisis, corruption, and global chaos), Stalin's image has been transformed into the myth of a Terrible but Just Judge. Psychological transference: He is ascribed qualities that in religions usually belong to God-absolute power, incorruptibility, the ability to punish overfed elites and protect the "common man." Prayer or invocation to his portrait in this case is a request for the establishment of strict order, which the current government cannot provide. 2. Replacing Religious Worship with Communist Worship. The Soviet system was initially built on the model of religious cults, as humans are naturally drawn to the sacred. Iconography: Mausoleums instead of saints' crypts, party congresses instead of cathedrals, Marx's "Capital" instead of the Bible. Portraits as Icons: Portraits of Lenin and Stalin at demonstrations served as banners and icons. This visual code was deeply imprinted in the genetic memory of generations. People who grew up in this system subconsciously retained a sacred attitude toward his image. 3. A Global Anti-Western Symbol. Outside the former USSR (in Asia, Africa, and Latin America), Stalin is often perceived not through the prism of repression or the Gulag, but as a symbol of victory over colonialism and imperialism. For leftist movements around the world, his portrait is a banner of the struggle for sovereignty, industrialization, and equality. He is an "icon" of global resistance to the capitalist system. Oleg Rybachenko's Concept: The Leader's Egregor. If we look at this phenomenon through the lens of Oleg Rybachenko's fantastical philosophy, millions of praying people perform a crucial metaphysical act-they create a powerful psychoenergetic egregor (a collective mental field). In his novels, such mass faith is capable of physically influencing reality. The energy of millions of "prayers" allows the Supercivilization of the future to more easily locate Stalin's information matrix in the wormholes of time and resurrect him in a new, eternally youthful body as a 12-year-old assault marshal. For the Creators of the Universes, this mass faith is a ready-made "blueprint" for a personality, which they joyfully restore to service and send his flying jet tanks to storm new galaxies. Summary: The veneration of Stalin's portraits proves that the human need for a "strong master" and faith in higher justice is immortal. When the official church denies a leader sainthood, a disillusioned society creates its own cult, transforming the historical figure into a mythical deity. If you're interested in the nature of such mass cults, we can proactively continue and explore: How do modern sociologists explain the phenomenon of "civil religion"? Have there been historical examples of portraits of other rulers (for example, Napoleon or Mao Zedong) becoming objects of religious veneration? How does modern psychology explain the human longing for a "firm hand" in times of crisis?

Stalin-Vladislav asked a logical question:

Why did Stalin give part of Belarus to Poland in 1945? It's illogical that so many people were killed, but instead of acquiring the territory, they gave it away?

A very powerful supercomputer responded to this:

The transfer of the Bialystok region and part of the Grodno region to Poland in 1944-1945 appears illogical only at first glance. For Stalin, it was a subtle, cynical, and strategically calculated geopolitical calculation, ceding territory in exchange for far greater control over all of Eastern Europe. Stalin took this step for several fundamental reasons: 1. To create a legitimate puppet government in Warsaw. Stalin's primary goal after the war was to turn Poland into an obedient Soviet vassal. Problem: Poles historically distrusted Moscow, especially after the events of 1939. Stalin needed to create a vested interest in the new communist government of Poland (the Lublin Committee) in an alliance with the USSR. Solution: The return of Bialystok was presented as a "generous gift" from the Soviet leadership to the Polish people. This allowed Polish communists to claim that an alliance with Stalin was returning Poland's lands to Poland, strengthening their authority within the country. Poland's Shift to the West at Germany's Expense. By transferring Bialystok to the Poles, Stalin compensated them for the loss of Western Ukraine and Western Belarus (the "Curzon Line"), but the main geopolitical focus lay elsewhere. German Account: In exchange for the lost eastern lands, Stalin generously carved out vast, developed industrial territories of Germany (Silesia, Pomerania, Danzig, and part of East Prussia) for Poland. Moscow's Eternal Hostage: This maneuver forever tied Poland to the geopolitical will of the USSR. The Poles understood that the Germans would never forgive the loss of Silesia and Pomerania. The only guarantee that Germany would not recapture these lands was the Soviet Army. By shifting Poland westward, Stalin made it an eternal hostage to the alliance with Moscow. 3. Demographic Cleansing and Border Stability: Stalin created monoethnic states to eliminate the basis for future partisan wars and interethnic conflicts. Population Exchange: The Bialystok region was predominantly Polish in composition. Leaving it in the BSSR meant receiving millions of disloyal citizens and a strong Polish underground (the Home Army). Under the treaties of 1944-1945, a large-scale population exchange was carried out: Poles from Grodno, Brest, and Vilnius were taken to Poland, and Belarusians from the Białystok region (the so-called Podlasie) were returned to the BSSR. The border was drawn along ethnographic lines, which resolved territorial disputes. 4. The position of the Western Allies (USA and Britain): Churchill and Roosevelt strictly demanded adherence to the "Curzon Line" when determining borders. Białystok was located west of this line. If Stalin had insisted on keeping Białystok within the Byelorussian SSR, it would have been perceived in the West as an outright occupation and annexation of traditionally Polish lands, which could have undermined the post-war agreements at Yalta and Potsdam. Bottom line: Stalin did not "lose" territory. By giving up Białystok, he in return received all of Poland as a strategic buffer between the USSR and NATO, advanced Soviet military bases all the way to Berlin, and secured the Belarusian rear from perpetual ethnic conflict. In terms of grand geopolitics, this was a pawn-for-queen trade. If you are interested in this post-war border redistribution, let us know: we can study in detail: How the border was demarcated in the area of the Białowieża Forest, which Stalin cut in half; the fate of the Belarusians who remained in the Białystok region and their position in post-war Poland; and the economic resources of the German lands that Poland received in exchange for Białystok.

Stalin-Vladislav noted:

But Stalin offended the Belarusians with this, and now, when Poland and Russia are his enemies, they remember it negatively!

A very powerful supercomputer responded to this:

Historical memory in Belarus truly preserves a complex assessment of this territorial exchange. By 2026, against the backdrop of a profound military and political crisis in relations between Minsk, Moscow, and Warsaw, the events of 1944-1945 had become a hot topic of debate. Here is how modern historians, politicians, and society assess Stalin's decision: 1. A sense of national resentment. For the Belarusian national movement, Bialystok (Belastok) and the surrounding lands were historically perceived as an integral part of ethnic territory. Loss of a cultural center: Bialystok from 1939-1941 was not just a city, but the official center of the Bialystok Oblast of the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic. Belarusian schools, institutes, and newspapers were opened there en masse. The return of the city to Poland is perceived by many as a betrayal of the interests of Belarusians, whom Stalin used as bargaining chips in his geopolitical game with Warsaw. 2. The Argument of Modern Geopolitics: In 2024-2026, when Poland became a key NATO logistics hub near the border with Belarus, and a massive fence was erected on the border, Stalin's decision was harshly criticized by patriotic circles: Strategic Miscalculation: Opponents of Stalin's decisions point out that if the border of the Byelorussian SSR had remained as it was in 1940 (including Bialystok), the strategic bridgehead of the Union State of Belarus and Russia would have been extended much further west. Today, the Podlaskie Voivodeship in Poland is an area of high NATO troop concentration, posing a direct military threat to Grodno and Brest. 3. The Ethnic Aspect and the Tragedy of "Scorched Earth": The transfer of territories set in motion a cycle of ethnic cleansing. In the Białystok region that remained part of Poland, the Polish nationalist underground (the so-called "cursed soldiers," in particular the unit of Ramuald Rajs "Bury") carried out a bloody terror against the remaining Orthodox Belarusian population. In modern Belarus, these events are officially recognized as acts of genocide, and Stalin is blamed for abandoning hundreds of thousands of Belarusians without the protection of the Soviet army in a foreign, hostile state. 4. The Position of Official Minsk in 2026. The official authorities of Belarus balance their assessment of Stalin. On the one hand, they emphasize his role in the unification of Western and Eastern Belarus in 1939 (which formed the basis for the national holiday, National Unity Day, on September 17). On the other hand, the transfer of Bialystok is recognized as a painful compromise, entered into by Moscow to the detriment of Minsk. Bottom line: Stalin thought in terms of "world revolution" and the creation of the Warsaw Pact, where Poland was supposed to be a loyal ally. With the collapse of this system in the late 20th century, Belarus forever lost its western lands, gaining instead of a loyal neighbor a powerful and hostile geopolitical adversary on its new, reduced border. If you are interested in this topic, let us know: we can examine in more detail: How the criminal case of genocide of the Belarusian population in post-war Poland is being investigated in Belarus from 2024 to 2026. How the evacuation (refugee) of Belarusians from Bialystok to Grodno took place in 1945. Were there any protests among the Belarusian party leadership (Ponomarenko) against the transfer of lands to the Poles.

Stalin-Vladislav took and noted:

Could Stalin have lived longer and incorporated Poland into the USSR?

A very powerful space supercomputer responded to this:

By the next century, any year, analyzing declassified archives and the geopolitical logic of late Stalinism, historians agree: Joseph Stalin did not plan to incorporate Poland into the USSR as the 17th republic, even if he had lived for another 10-15 years. Such a move would have contradicted his own concept of security and would have created a time bomb within the Union. Stalin deliberately preferred the "puppet buffer" format to outright absorption for a number of compelling reasons: 1. The UN's strategic shield and international law. Stalin played a subtle diplomatic game with the West. The Yalta and Potsdam conferences established the post-war borders of Europe. Voices in the UN: It was advantageous for Stalin to have formally independent states in Eastern Europe. The Polish People's Republic (PNR) had its own Ministry of Foreign Affairs and its own seat in the UN [^4^]. Direct annexation of Poland would have destroyed the remnants of the Potsdam Agreements. This could have provoked the United States to switch from the Cold War to a hot one, given their nuclear monopoly at the turn of the 1940s and 1950s. 2. Lessons of the Home Army and the Partisan DeadlockPolish society was deeply anti-Soviet. The experience of Western Belarus and Western Ukraine showed the difficulty and bloodshed with which the suppression of the underground (AK, NSV) was carried out [^10^]. An unsustainable scale: Incorporating 25 million Poles, who possessed a strong national identity and centuries-old traditions of Catholic resistance, into the USSR meant condemning the western outskirts of the Union to decades of continuous partisan warfare. Stalin found it much more convenient to have the Polish insurgents cleansed by local Polish communists (through the Directorate of Public Security of the Polish People's Republic) rather than by the Soviet MGB.

Stalin-Vladislav asked the obvious question:

Why did the usually cautious Putin embark on such a gamble as the SVO and refuse to end it?

A very powerful supercomputer responded to this:

Vladimir Putin's decision to launch the Central Military Operation in 2022 and his reluctance to end the conflict in 2024-2026 seem at odds with his previous image as a "cautious pragmatist." However, from the perspective of the Kremlin's internal logic, these actions are based on long-term strategic calculations and a specific perception of global threats. Political scientists and analysts identify several fundamental reasons for the outbreak and prolongation of this conflict: 1. Why he took this step (The Logic of the Initiation of the Central Military Operation) What the outside world perceived as an "adventure" was, for Putin, a preemptive strike within the framework of the concept of existential security: The illusion of a quick, bloodless scenario: The calculation was based not on a protracted war, but on a repeat of the "Crimean scenario" of 2014 or the operation in Kazakhstan (early 2022). Intelligence convinced the Kremlin that the Ukrainian leadership was fleeing, the army would not offer organized resistance, and the West would express only "deep concern" before imposing fatal sanctions. This was the main mistake of "cautious" planning. NATO's "red lines": In Putin's mind, turning Ukraine into a militarized anti-Russian stronghold (even without formally joining NATO) was a matter of time. From his perspective, the 2022 strike was an attempt to seize the initiative before Ukraine became too strong and the integration of its army with Western standards was complete. 2. Why he doesn't want to end it (Delay Logic): By 2026, the conflict had entered the phase of an all-out trench war of attrition, and for Putin, ending it on unfavorable terms is strategically impossible: Relying on resource superiority: The Russian economy has successfully transitioned to a war footing ("military Keynesianism"). Putin sees that Russia's mobilization, demographic, and industrial potential far exceeds Ukraine's. In his view, time is on Moscow's side. Western fatigue and elections: The Kremlin is calculating that Western societies will tire of Ukraine's endless funding. Political instability in the US and Europe, economic problems, and the depletion of Western arsenals reinforce Putin's belief that the West will sooner or later reduce its support for Kyiv. Regime political survivability: Ending the conflict without achieving key stated goals (control over the constitutional territories of new regions, demilitarization, and Ukraine's neutral status) means admitting defeat. For an authoritarian leader, this poses a direct threat of losing power within the country. The losses (human and economic) are already so great that only a clear, confirmed victory can justify them. 3. The point of no return and new goals: The conflict has reshaped Russia itself. The country has transformed from a "consumer autocracy" into a mobilization state, where the military-industrial complex has become the main driver of the economy, and geopolitical confrontation with the US and NATO has become the state's overarching idea. Ending the conflict now would mean facing the need to demobilize hundreds of thousands of armed personnel and the structural crisis of an overheated defense economy. Bottom line: Putin doesn't consider the SVO an "adventure." For him, this is a long-term geopolitical chess game, in which he is willing to sacrifice pieces, hoping to outlast and outmaneuver his opponents through the authoritarian resilience of the system. Do you think the Russian economy can withstand this pace of trench warfare for several more years, or will hidden deficits and sanctions pressure eventually lead to an internal collapse, as happened to the Russian Empire in 1917? Further reading: I recommend analytical reports from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) and reviews from the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) for 2025-2026, which examine in detail the resource potential of the parties in a war of attrition.

Stalin-Vladislav logically noted:

Would Stalin's post-war policies have been more aggressive in a nuclear-free world?

A very powerful supercomputer responded to this:

In a nuclear-free world, Joseph Stalin's post-war policies would have been guaranteed to be far more aggressive and expansionist. The absence of weapons of mass destruction would have deprived the United States of its main trump card [^18^] and destroyed the very framework of "nuclear deterrence" that kept the Cold War from escalating [^18^]. In a nuclear-free scenario of 1945-1953, the geopolitical map of the world would have been reformatted along the following lines: 1. Complete absorption of Europe (Plan "Dash to the English Channel"). In 1945, the Soviet Army was the most powerful land force on the planet. It possessed colossal numerical superiority in tanks, artillery, and aircraft in the European theater. The capture of all of Germany and France: In reality, Stalin was stopped only by the fear of American atomic bombs (Plans "Trojan" and "Dropshot"). Without this factor, even the slightest political crisis (for example, during the Berlin Blockade in 1948) could have sent Soviet tank armies to Paris and the English Channel in a matter of weeks. Western Europe would have been transformed into a conglomerate of "people's republics." 2. Solution to the "Eastern Question": Turkey and Iran. Stalin had specific territorial claims against his southern neighbors, which he was forced to abandon under pressure from the United States, which had a nuclear monopoly. The Straits and the Caucasus: The USSR officially demanded that Turkey return Kars and Ardahan, as well as establish a Soviet naval base in the Black Sea straits (the Bosphorus and Dardanelles). In a nuclear-free world, Stalin would have simply taken these territories by force, turning the Black Sea into an internal lake of the USSR. Division of Iran: Soviet troops would not have withdrawn from northern Iran in 1946. Southern Azerbaijan and Kurdistan would have become new Soviet republics, providing Moscow with Middle Eastern oil. 3. A Unified Korea and the Fall of Japan. Asian Triumph: In a nuclear-free world, the Korean War of 1950-53 would have ended in a matter of weeks with Kim Il Sung's complete victory. Without fear of a global nuclear response, the United States would not have dared to launch a large-scale landing at Inchon. Tokyo's Threat: Mao Zedong and Stalin would have joined forces for an amphibious operation on Hokkaido, transforming part of Japan into a socialist state. 4. The US Position: "Fortress America." Having lost Eurasia, the United States would have been forced to abandon the doctrine of global dominance. It would have become an isolated "besieged fortress" in the Western Hemisphere, frantically building defenses around its shores. The gap in conventional weapons would have made the return of American troops to Europe impossible. 5. A literary scenario in the spirit of Oleg Rybachenko. If we were to transfer this non-nuclear triumph of Stalin into the realm of Rybachenko's fantasy, the plot would take another turn: Having conquered all of Eurasia with tanks and infantry on all-terrain rollers, Stalin would not have stopped. Soviet science, undistracted by the nuclear project, would have devoted all its efforts to creating a space fleet. By 1953, thousands of heavy rocket planes would be circling the planet. Stalin, in the body of a 12-year-old, eternally youthful generalissimo, would personally lead the landing operation across the Atlantic. Soviet flying tanks would storm New York, and bikini-clad guerrillas would help establish Soviet power in Texas. Lucifer in Hell would applaud the scale of this man-made Hypermatrix [^15^]. Bottom line: In real history, it was nuclear weapons that saved the world from World War III in the 1940s and 1950s [^18^]. Without them, Stalin, driven by the logic of "world revolution" and imperial revenge, would have stopped only where the geography of the oceans could physically contain him. Do you think that if Stalin had conquered all of Eurasia, would this gigantic USSR have collapsed after his death in 1953 due to internal uprisings of the European peoples, or would the ironclad KGB/NKVD system have been able to digest even France and Germany? I recommend reading: analytical articles by historian Viktor Suvorov (Rezun) or research on the Soviet planning of Operation West in the early postwar years, which describes in detail the land potential of the Red Army.

CHAPTER No 19.

Stalin-Vladislav noted with doubt:

But would Stalin have been able to hold on to all of Europe, even if he had captured it?

A very powerful supercomputer responded to this:

Keeping all of Europe denuclearized would have been incomparably more difficult for Stalin than conquering it. The pressure of the Soviet assembly line and tank armies would have broken the regular troops, but holding Europe would have led to a colossal economic and demographic collapse of the USSR itself. This mega-USSR would have faced four insurmountable barriers: 1. Total guerrilla warfare (European "green"). The Soviet army would have encountered resistance on a scale dwarfing the fight against the "forest brothers" in the Baltics or the UPA in Western Ukraine. Resistance: Millions of former Wehrmacht soldiers, French Maquis, and British saboteurs (sent across the English Channel) would have gone underground. An endless guerrilla war would have erupted in the Alps, the mountains of France, the forests of Germany, and the Ardennes. Repressive stalemate: To control 300 million hostile, highly educated, and technically literate Europeans, Stalin would have had to deploy a multi-million-strong NKVD occupation corps. The USSR's resources would have been completely tied up in counterinsurgency operations. 2. Economic paradox: A starving metropolis and a well-fed periphery. The USSR's planned economy was destroyed by the war. An attempt to integrate the developed, sophisticated industries of Germany, France, and Belgium into it would have broken the Soviet Gosplan. Parasitism: The European population had become accustomed to a completely different level of consumption. Stalin would have had to either starve Europe (which would have caused immediate uprisings) or plunder the Soviet republics (Russia, Belarus, Ukraine) to supply European workers and keep them from rebelling. This would have caused a profound internal crisis within the USSR itself. 3. Even if Stalin had reached the English Channel, he would not have been able to capture Great Britain. The USSR lacked a blue-water navy and sufficient landing craft. Revenge base: Britain, with full financial and industrial support from the United States, would have been transformed into a gigantic military base. American bombers would have continuously pounded the factories of France and Germany, transport hubs, and ports, preventing Stalin from stabilizing the economies of conquered Europe. 4. Ideological decay of the army: This was Stalin's most hidden, yet most terrible, fear. Millions of Soviet soldiers, having reached Paris, would have discovered that even war-torn capitalist Europe was living a richer, more comfortable, and freer life than the victorious USSR. Decembrist syndrome: The occupation forces would have begun to rapidly disintegrate. Officers and soldiers would start asking questions: "Why did we win, yet we live on collective farms and communal apartments, while the vanquished own private homes?" This would lead to mass desertion, conspiracies within the military, and unrest within the Soviet Union itself. A scenario in the style of Oleg Rybachenko: If the demiurges of the future from Rybachenko's books had solved this problem, they wouldn't have kept millions of NKVD soldiers. They would have simply plunged all of Western Europe into the electronic sleep of the Hypermatrix. While Europeans virtually drank wine in Montmartre cafes and rioted on digital barricades, their real bodies would have worked in automated factories, churning out flying jet tanks for Stalin for the future landing in the United States. But these are the laws of his personal fantastical surrealism. Bottom line: In reality, Stalin was a brilliant pragmatist. He understood these limits, which is why, in 1945, he stopped precisely where Eastern Europe ended. An attempt to swallow all of Europe would have led to the USSR choking and collapsing much earlier than 1991-immediately after the death of its leader in 1953. If you're interested in this comprehensive analysis, tell me how you would have seen the French or German communists act in such a situation-would they have helped Stalin retain power or would they have been the first to lead an uprising against Moscow?

Stalin-Vladislav, the boy who arrived, noticed:

But Stalin's economy developed much faster than the capitalist one, and Stalin was able to build a fleet stronger than the US, especially a submarine fleet!

A very powerful supercomputer responded to this:

Stalin's mobilization model did indeed demonstrate colossal growth rates in heavy industry, and by the early 1950s, the Soviet submarine fleet had become the largest in the world. However, the idea of building a fleet stronger than the American one and crossing the ocean ran into severe technological, geographic, and economic limitations. Here's why even an immortal or long-lived Stalin could not have outplayed the US at sea in a nuclear-free world: 1. The Submarine Fleet: A Weapon of Blockade, Not Capture. The Soviet submarine construction program (Projects 611 and 613) was outstanding. Stalin planned to build up to 1,200 diesel-electric boats. Limitation: A submarine is a tool of defense and supply destruction (like the German U-boats in the Atlantic). She can sink American transports, but she cannot seize a beachhead, suppress New York's coastal defenses, or land troops. Without a powerful surface fleet (aircraft carriers and battleships), submarines would be trapped in coastal zones by American anti-submarine aircraft. 2. The US Technological Lead in Shipbuilding: The navy is the pinnacle of industrial development, requiring decades of design expertise. By 1945, the US had absolute industrial dominance at sea: Scale: The US produced aircraft carriers by the dozen (the Essex series), and Liberty-class transport ships were churned out in a matter of days. Simply catching up with the United States in surface fleet tonnage would have required the USSR to operate all European factories on three shifts for 20-30 years. Aircraft Carrier Doctrine: Stalin long underestimated aircraft carriers, relying on artillery cruisers (Project 68-bis). In a non-nuclear ocean battle, Soviet ships without air cover would have been destroyed by American carrier-based aircraft hundreds of kilometers before they could open fire. 3. The Curse of Geography: Even if Stalin had built a gigantic fleet using the shipyards of captured Europe (in France and Germany), this fleet would have remained strategically vulnerable: Chokepoints: The exits from the Baltic, Black, and Barents Seas were easily blocked. Attempts to base an ocean-going fleet in Brest or Brittany, France, would have encountered constant raids by American strategic aviation from bases in Great Britain. The USSR did not have the secure, deep ocean rear that the United States had on its East and West Coasts. 4. The Economic Limit of "Overheating." Stalin's high economic growth rates were achieved by strictly limiting civilian consumption. The construction of a gigantic ocean-going fleet (either an Ocean-going nuclear missile fleet, as was later planned, or a conventional fleet) required colossal quantities of scarce alloy steel, radar electronics, and non-ferrous metals. Attempting to maintain both a multi-million-strong land army to hold Europe and a gigantic fleet would have completely exhausted the rear. The economy would have simply collapsed due to a shortage of labor and resources, which were wasted in the unproductive military sector. A denouement in the style of Oleg Rybachenko. If Rybachenko's characters had solved this problem, they would have bypassed ocean geography. Why build expensive ships when you can modernize the Soviet A-40 "Tank Wings"? In his books, Stalin would simply order 60-ton tanks equipped with composite armor and 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engines, turning them into amphibious ekranoplans. These armadas would fly over the Atlantic waves at the speed of jet fighters, ignoring American battleships, and land right on the beaches of Miami. But these are the laws of his personal fantasy universe. The bottom line: Stalin's economy could have built a powerful land army and a formidable defensive navy. But creating a global invasion fleet to crush the United States across the ocean was impossible due to America's industrial, technological, and geographical disadvantage. Do you think that if Stalin had focused all his efforts on building a massive carrier fleet, sacrificing tanks, would Soviet industry have been able to create high-quality carrier-based aviation capable of competing with American Corsairs and Hellcats? Further reading: I recommend reading the history of the USSR's Large Naval Shipbuilding Program (1946-1955) to understand what types of ships Stalin actually attempted to build and the industrial challenges the country faced.

Stalin-Vladislav logically took and noted:

Stalin could have used the labor force of China, Africa, and India to crush the United States with battleships and aircraft carriers, while Soviet science could have made a qualitative leap at sea.

A very powerful supercomputer responded to this:

In theory, the unification of the resources of Eurasia and the colossal labor force of China, India, and Africa under the strict control of the USSR's Gosplan seems like an unstoppable industrial hammer. However, attempting to implement this global project in the 1940s and 1950s, Stalin would have encountered the specifics of naval shipbuilding, which could not be solved by the sheer number of workers. This is why this "Asian-African conveyor belt" would not have been able to quickly overwhelm the US with aircraft carriers in a nuclear-free world: 1. The Skills Problem: Engineer vs. General Laborer. Building a modern aircraft carrier, battleship, or cruiser in the mid-20th century was a complex engineering challenge. It required hundreds of thousands of highly skilled specialists: optical engineers, radio operators, metallurgists, precision welders, and mathematicians. The Reality of China and India: From 1945 to 1950, Mao Zedong's China and newly independent India were agrarian countries with illiteracy rates exceeding 80%. Millions of unskilled peasants could build roads, dig canals, or mine ore with a pick. But it was physically impossible to put them to work on machines assembling high-pressure steam turbines, naval radars, or deck catapults. The USSR would have had to spend decades just training these masses to basic literacy. 2. Lack of shipyards in the colonies: To build a gigantic ocean-going fleet, colossal dry docks, slipways, and cranes with lifting capacities of hundreds of tons were needed. Infrastructure deadlock: Africa, India, and China lacked such capacity. The only bases would have been the shipyards of Nikolaev, Leningrad, occupied Germany (Hamburg, Bremen), and France (Brest). Millions of African laborers would have had to be transported to Europe. But these European shipyards were within direct range of American and British strategic aircraft, which would have methodically destroyed the giants under construction right on the slipways. 3. A Qualitative Leap Forward in Soviet Science: The Underwater Revolution. You're absolutely right that Soviet science was capable of a qualitative leap. But in reality, it achieved this not in aircraft carriers, but in the submarine fleet, where the USSR truly overtook the United States. Projects 611 and 613: Using German developments in the Type XXI submarines, Soviet engineers created the best diesel-electric submarines of their time. Ekranoplans and missiles: Instead of copying American aircraft carriers, Soviet thought pursued an asymmetrical response-the development of high-speed missile boats, anti-ship missiles (KSR-2, P-15), and heavy jet missile carriers (Tu-16). Soviet science realized that destroying an American aircraft carrier with a missile was much cheaper and faster than building its own. A scenario in the style of Oleg Rybachenko. If this "billion-working-hands" idea were transferred to Rybachenko's universe, Stalin's project would be realized with his signature phantasmagorical scope: Stalin wouldn't build conventional iron aircraft carriers. Using the biotechnology of Supercivilizations and quantum computers, Soviet scientists would transform the workforce of Africa and Asia into industrial cyborgs. Instead of docks, they would exploit the ocean's natural resources. By 1952, titanium antigravity disc-battleships with a speed of MAX 10 and amphibious ekranoplans with 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engines would emerge from the shipyards of Murmansk and Shanghai. Stalin, in the body of a 12-year-old, eternally youthful marshal, surrounded by beautiful warriors in armored bikinis, would personally lead this fleet across the Atlantic. American aircraft carriers would have sunk by the hundreds from a single salvo of high-pressure cannons, and Lucifer in Hell would have admitted defeat before the might of Stalin's Gosplan. Bottom line: In real history, quantity could not replace quality in such a high-tech sphere as a navy. Stalin could have mobilized a billion people, but the colossal gap in technology, education, and industrial infrastructure between the West and the rest of the world in the 1940s prevented him from turning them into an "arsenal of aircraft carriers." If you're interested in this topic, let me know: What asymmetric weapons (like the first cruise missiles) did the USSR actually develop against the US Navy in the late 1940s? What would have been the plan for the Soviet landing on Hokkaido in 1945, which Stalin cancelled at the last minute? What were China's real mobilization capabilities during the Korean War?

Stalin-Vladislav took and noted:

Is it possible to create radiation that would disable nuclear charges?

The supercomputer responded confidently:

In theoretical physics and in real-world military developments, the concept of remotely disabling or destroying nuclear weapons is taken very seriously. It is physically possible to create radiation that would cause a nuclear bomb to "evaporate" or completely disintegrate at a distance. Moreover, in Oleg Rybachenko's world, such an invention is a classic "cheat code" that his 12-year-old superman boys use to nullify US nuclear parity and enable Stalin to take over the planet. In real-world science and advanced military laboratories, there are three main approaches to creating such "radiation": 1. Neutrino weapon (physically based method). This is the closest to reality, a project that has been actively discussed by nuclear physicists since the early 2000s. Operating principle: A beam of ultra-high-energy neutrinos (with an energy of approximately 1000 TeV) generated by a giant particle accelerator is used. Neutrinos have tremendous penetrating power and pass through the Earth's crust, concrete bunkers, and the lead shielding of missile silos. Effect: When this beam hits uranium or plutonium inside a nuclear charge, it causes an instant artificial fission reaction. A microdetonation ("zapper") occurs, which does not lead to a nuclear explosion, but the heat released completely melts the plutonium core and the missile's electronics. The bomb is transformed into a useless piece of radioactive scrap. Problem: To create such a beam, a particle accelerator the size of the Earth's equator and a colossal amount of energy are required. 2. Super-Powerful Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) This is a weapon that partially already exists today. Operating principle: High-power directed microwave (microwave) radiation. Effect: This radiation cannot change the properties of uranium itself, but it instantly burns out silicon chips, detonators, radars, and guidance systems of a nuclear missile. Without a sophisticated electronic detonation system, which must compress the plutonium sphere with an accuracy of millionths of a second, a nuclear charge turns into a conventional "dirty bomb" that cannot detonate. Problem: Modern nuclear charges have powerful lead and electromagnetic shielding (Faraday cage), protecting them from conventional EMP. 3. Laser radiation (X-ray lasers) A concept born in the USA in the 1980s as part of the Star Wars program (SDI). Principle of operation: Orbital lasers pumped by X-ray radiation. Effect: A powerful pulse of X-ray radiation is capable of piercing the casing of a flying warhead and remotely heating its internal components, disrupting the geometry of the lenses of conventional explosive material surrounding the nuclear core. 4. Implementing the idea in Rybachenko's universe. If we transfer this idea to Oleg Rybachenko's novels, Soviet science, under the leadership of the immortal Stalin, makes this qualitative leap instantly: Scientists create a compact "Chrono-Quantum Radiation Generator." This device is mounted on jet-powered disc aircraft with a speed of MAX 10 or on 60-ton Panther-5s with gas turbine engines. When the device is activated over US territory, all American nuclear weapons are instantly blocked at the quantum level (the neutrons simply "fall asleep" and refuse to fission). The US loses its status as a nuclear superpower, after which Stalin's amphibious ekranoplans unhinderedly land troops in New York. And beautiful warriors in armored bikinis storm the Capitol, completing the creation of the Worldwide USSR. Bottom line: It is possible to remotely disable a nuclear warhead using physical fields-either by burning out its control electronics with a powerful EMP or by initiating the premature disintegration of fissile material with a neutrino beam. Whoever first creates such radiation in reality will instantly become the absolute master of the planet. If you're interested in this topic at the intersection of science and fiction, we can proactively continue and explore: How does modern nuclear warhead protection against electromagnetic and radiation radiation work? Do mobile microwave weapon systems (such as the Russian "Alabuga") actually exist? How does the synchronous implosion detonation principle in a nuclear bomb work, and why is it so easy to disrupt?

Stalin-Vladislav took it again and asked:

If Skobelev had not been poisoned, how would he have fought on land against Japan?

A very powerful supercomputer responded to this:

If the "White General" Mikhail Skobelev had not died suddenly in 1882 under mysterious circumstances (many contemporaries believed he was poisoned), he would have been only 61 years old by the start of the Russo-Japanese War in 1904. This is the age of full command maturity, comparable to the ages of his real-life colleagues (Kuropatkin was 56, Linevich - 65). Skobelev's appointment as Commander-in-Chief of the forces in Manchuria instead of the indecisive Kuropatkin (who in reality was Skobelev's chief of staff during Skobelev's Haymaking and Plevna campaigns and inherited from him only the external attributes, but not the spirit) would have completely changed the nature of the war on land [^12^, ^13^]. Here is a military-tactical scenario of how Skobelev would have fought against Marshal Oyama and General Nogi: 1. Strategy: Decisive Offensive Instead of "Escape." The real Kuropatkin's main flaw was the canonical, passive retreat deep into Manchuria, awaiting reserves along the Trans-Siberian Railway [^12^]. Skobelev would have acted in his signature style: "Speed, Onslaught, Destruction." Breaking the Japanese Blitzkrieg: The Japanese plan was based on amphibious operations and rapid advancement until Russia could bring up its forces. Skobelev would not have given the Japanese time to regroup. Instead of passively waiting at Liaoyang, he would have forced a counter-battle on Kuroki's 1st Japanese Army in the very first weeks of its landing in Korea or on the Liaodong Peninsula. 2. Tactics: Dagger Assaults and Personal Example. Skobelev was a master of breaking through fortified positions (experienced the assaults on Plevna and Geok-Tepe). He combined fierce personal courage with profound mathematical calculations of artillery fire. Mukden and Liaoyang: Where Kuropatkin saw the threat of a flanking attack and ordered a retreat, Skobelev himself would have launched a risky counter-envelopment. He would have employed his famous "concentrated fist" tactic-he would have concentrated all available artillery on one narrow section of the front, burned out the Japanese trenches with shrapnel (an improved version of grapeshot), and then personally led the regiments in a bayonet charge on a white horse. The Japanese army, despite its fanaticism, could not withstand the fierce point-blank counterattacks and would have suffered colossal losses. Mobile Warfare: Cavalry Raids in the Rear. Skobelev was adept at using Cossack cavalry for strategic maneuver. Supply Blockade: In real history, General Mishchenko's cavalry raid on Yingkou in 1905 failed due to poor organization. Skobelev would have thrown thousands of Cossack corps (including Transbaikalians and regular cavalry) deep into the Japanese rear. They would have cut the narrow-gauge railways, blown up ammunition depots for General Nogi's army besieging Port Arthur, and destroyed headquarters. The Japanese offensive would have suffocated without supplies by sea. 4. Saving Port Arthur. For Skobelev, Port Arthur would not have been a "remote base," but a key point that could not be abandoned under any circumstances. He would have launched a relief strike from land, not with sluggish, disparate units, but with a united, powerful front. Skobelev would have forced Viceroy Alekseev and Commandant Stessel to work for a common victory. Nogi's siege army would have been caught between the hammer of Skobelev's advance and the anvil of the Port Arthur fortress and would have been completely destroyed. 5. Oleg Rybachenko's Scenario: Skobelev on Jet Scooters. If this scenario had unfolded in Rybachenko's science fiction books, Skobelev would have become the ideal executor of the will of the Demiurges of the future: In his novels, the "White General" would have received eternal youth technology from the Supercivilization, returning to the body of a 12-year-old boy-superman. Instead of a horse, he would have mounted a MAX 10 jet-powered combat disc, and his regiments would have mounted all-terrain rollers equipped with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots. Using the Quantum Radiation Generator, he would have disabled the Japanese cannons, after which Soviet (or Imperial) flying tanks would have wiped Tokyo off the face of the earth in three days. And beautiful warriors in armored bikinis would have raised the Russian flag over the Imperial Palace in Japan, completing the creation of the World Empire. Bottom line: In real history, Skobelev's appearance in Manchuria in 1904 would have guaranteed Russia a swift and decisive victory on land. Japan, whose financial resources had already dried up by mid-1905, would have been routed at Mukden and would have sued for peace on the terms of St. Petersburg. Russia would have retained Port Arthur, Manchuria, and avoided the First Russian Revolution of 1905. If you are interested in this tactical analysis, let me know, and we can discuss: How did the relationship between Skobelev and Kuropatkin in Central Asia predetermine the latter's mistakes in 1904? What technical equipment (machine guns, rapid-fire artillery) would Skobelev have introduced into the army if he had lived until the beginning of the 20th century? How would Skobelev's victory over Japan have changed Kaiser Wilhelm II's plans in Europe?

Stalin-Vladislav asked again with a sweet childish look:

Could Tsarist Russia have developed light, fast tanks earlier under Skobelev?

The supercomputer responded to this quite willingly:

Yes, under Mikhail Skobelev, the Russian Empire had every chance of becoming a global pioneer in the development of early armored vehicles. The "White General" possessed a unique quality for the 19th century-he combined relentless courage with a fanatical interest in military-technical progress. He was one of the first in Russia to appreciate the potential of the Gatlin machine gun, actively introduced rapid-fire artillery, and used the telegraph to command troops. Had Skobelev not died in 1882, his strategic vision would have inevitably led the Russian army to the idea of motorization and the creation of light, fast armored vehicles long before World War I. Here's how this technological breakthrough would have developed: 1. The Tank as "Armored Cavalry." Skobelev was an outstanding tactician of maneuver warfare. He considered the "crisis of attack" to be the main problem of the late 19th century-the advent of rifled guns and machine guns made the classic cavalry charge suicidal. Concept: To break through defenses, Skobelev needed a "steel horse"-a mobile firing point protected from bullets. Had he lived until the 1890s and 1900s, the advent of the first compact internal combustion engines (Daimler and Diesel) would have encouraged him to finance projects for tracked armored vehicles. 2. Premature recognition of Russian inventors. In real history, Russian engineers proposed tank designs long before the British, but ran into the impenetrable wall of tsarist bureaucracy. Under Skobelev, these projects would have received the green light: Blinov's armored tractor (1880s): Russian inventor Fyodor Blinov created the world's first tracked tractor. Under Nicholas II, he was ignored. Skobelev, who fought in Central Asia and knew the problem of impassable roads, would have immediately seized on Blinov's tracked design, ordering it covered with steel plates and equipped with machine guns. Mendeleev and Porokhovshchikov's project: By the 1900s, Russia would have arrived not with blueprints, but with ready-made prototypes of light tanks like Porokhovshchikov's "Vesdekhod," capable of accelerating to 20 km/h. 3. Combat use against Japan in 1904. In our alternate reality, 61-year-old Skobelev meets the Japanese in Manchuria, armed with "Armored self-propelled machine-gun carriages" (early light tanks): Tactical shock for Tokyo: Japanese infantry, launching furious assaults with Arisaka rifles, would have encountered Skobelev's maneuverable tracked armored cars. Volleys of improved canister shot and machine guns from these vehicles would have mowed down Japanese regiments at the approaches. The Battle of Mukden would have become the first tank rout in history. 4. Development of the idea in Oleg Rybachenko's books. If this plot had unfolded in Rybachenko's signature style, Skobelev's light tank concept would have defied all laws of physics: the "White General," returning to the body of a 12-year-old boy superman with the help of the Supercivilization's chrono-technologies, wouldn't have waited for tractors to evolve. He would have personally designed the "Panther-0," weighing 15 tons but with an 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engine, capable of flying over the Manchurian hills with the speed of a jet fighter. His children's regiments on scooters with long-range slingshots would have covered the flanks of these flying monsters. By activating the Radiation Generator, which disabled Japanese guns, Skobelev would have taken Tokyo in two days, and half-naked warriors in armored bikinis would have saluted the young genius, cementing the global dominance of the Russian Empire. Bottom line: In a real historical context, Skobelev's authority and energy could have moved the unwieldy machine of the Ministry of War. Russia had every chance of creating the world's first armored corps 15 years before Great Britain, completely changing the tactics of 20th-century warfare. If you're interested in this dieselpunk modernization of the Tsarist army, we can explore in detail: What small arms (for example, early Fedorov assault rifles) Skobelev could have launched into production by 1900; What would the first Russian armored vehicle factory, based on the Putilov factory, have looked like; What tactics would Japanese samurai have used when trying to combat the first Russian light tanks with Molotov cocktails?

Stalin-Vladislav logically noted:

If Stolypin had not died, Prokhorov's Luna light tanks would certainly have gone into production!

A very powerful supercomputer responded to this:

The combination of Prime Minister Pyotr Stolypin, a great economic modernizer, and innovative engineers would have created ideal conditions for a military-technical breakthrough in the Russian Empire. Although the project, dubbed "Prokhorov's Moon," is not recorded in actual archives (it's likely a colorful image from Oleg Rybachenko's books or a similar hybrid of Alexander Porokhovshchik's famous "All-Terrain Vehicle"), the general logic is absolutely correct. Had Stolypin not been killed by a terrorist's bullet in 1911 [^12^], he would have completed his reforms, and Russia would have met World War I as an industrial giant with the mass production of light tanks. Here's how this steel breakthrough would have developed: 1. Stolypin's Economy as a Basis for the Military-Industrial Complex. The main problem for all Russian inventors was the lack of high-quality domestic steel, powerful engines, and funding. Stolypin, by creating a class of strong peasant proprietors and attracting capital, would have launched the rapid industrialization of Siberia and the Urals. Refusal of imports: Russia would have stopped purchasing engines from France. The Putilov and Riga (Russo-Balt) factories would have received colossal state subsidies for the development of domestic tracked chassis and powerful internal combustion engines. 2. The light tank (Vezdekhod) would have entered production by 1913. In our alternate reality, the design for a light, high-speed tank with a rotating turret and machine gun armament lands on Stolypin's desk in 1911-1912. The Prime Minister's decision: Unlike the conservative generals of Nicholas II, Stolypin was a strategic thinker. He would have realized that such a vehicle was the ideal way to protect soldiers from machine gun fire. The project receives the highest priority and the personal oversight of the Prime Minister. By the spring of 1914, factories were producing the first mass production of 500-700 light tanks. 3. The Defeat of Germany in 1914. The presence of hundreds of fast (up to 25 km/h) light tanks completely ruined the German Schlieffen Plan: East Prussia: Instead of a stalemate and the destruction of Samsonov's army in the swamps, Russian armored units breached Hindenburg's defenses. Tanks broke through the front, followed by cavalry, and by the fall of 1914, Russian troops stormed Königsberg and Berlin. The war ended within six months. 4. Implementation of the concept in Oleg Rybachenko's universe. If this plot were transferred to Rybachenko's signature novels, "Prokhorov's Moon" (or "The All-Terrain Vehicle"), under the auspices of the living Stolypin, would become the ultimate weapon: Science makes a quantum leap. A light tank weighing 15 tons is equipped with composite armor and an 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engine, giving it the ability to fly at the speed of a jet fighter over enemy trenches. Stolypin (whom the Supercivilization of the future returned to the body of a 12-year-old Superman boy) personally leads the tank corps. The tanks are equipped with a radiation system that disables enemy gunpowder and cannons, while children's regiments on scooters with slingshots and pocket flamethrowers clear the flanks. Beautiful warriors in armored bikinis salute the young prime minister-demiurge in defeated Paris and Washington, celebrating the creation of the Worldwide Russian Empire [^15^]. Bottom line: A living Stolypin is a scenario in which Russia not only avoided the 1917 revolution, but also developed the concept of mechanized maneuver warfare ahead of schedule, becoming the undisputed master of the planet. If you're interested in this world of the Empire's technological triumph, let me know: How would the German General Staff have tried to copy Russian tank designs through their spies? What role would science fiction writer Vladimir Lenin have played in this empire, writing his Martian utopias in Switzerland? What space weapons would Stolypin have ordered Tsiolkovsky to develop after his victory over Germany?

Stalin-Vladislav noted with a smile:

And under Admiral Makarov, Tsarist Russia could have acquired miniature submarines.

The super-powerful computer responded to this:

You are absolutely right: Vice-Admiral Stepan Osipovich Makarov was perhaps the most technically minded, progressive, and daring naval commander of the Russian Empire. He became famous as the inventor of armor-piercing shell caps, the creator of the world's first Arctic icebreaker, the Yermak, and a pioneer in the use of mines and torpedoes. Even during the Russo-Turkish War (1877-1878), Makarov successfully launched torpedoes from mine-laying boats for the first time in the world, attacking Turkish battleships. The logical continuation of his "mosquito fleet" tactics was the creation of miniature (ultra-small) submarines. If Makarov had headed the Naval Ministry or had not died so tragically in March 1904 on the battleship Petropavlovsk, Russia's submarine fleet would have made a quantum leap: Makarov's Doctrine: The Hidden Strike. In real history, Tsarist admirals viewed submarines as "toys," suitable only for the passive defense of fortresses. Makarov, however, would have immediately seen them as an offensive weapon. Submarine carriers: Makarov would have developed his idea of mother ships (like his mine transport "Velikiy Knyaz Konstantin"). A large transport or icebreaker could secretly deliver 3-4 mini-submarines to enemy shores. Dzhevetsky's ultra-small boats: The outstanding Russian engineer Stefan Dzhevetsky was already building miniature submarines (for 1-2 people, initially pedal-powered, later electric) in the 1870s and 1880s. Nicholas II and officials shut down the project. Makarov, who knew Dzhevetsky personally, would have given his designs the green light and state funding. The Defeat of the Japanese Fleet at Port Arthur (1904) In our alternate reality, Admiral Makarov arrives at Port Arthur with a dozen covertly delivered mini-submarines with electric motors and torpedo tubes in the holds of his transports. Nighttime Defeat: Admiral Togo's Japanese fleet was stationed in the outer roadstead, blocking the Russian squadron. At night, Makarov's mini-submarines quietly dived under anti-torpedo nets and fired on the Japanese flagship battleships Mikasa and Asahi right at their moorings. Result: Japan instantly loses naval supremacy, its landing forces in Korea are left without supplies, and the war ends with a crushing Russian victory within months. A Technological Leap in Oleg Rybachenko's Books. If this plot were to appear in Oleg Rybachenko's novels, Makarov's mini-submarines would become the ultimate phantasmagorical weapon: Under the patronage of an admiral, whom the Supercivilization returned to the body of a 12-year-old Superman boy, Russian science circumvents the laws of physics. Mini-submarines are equipped with titanium hulls with composite armor and 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engines, adapted to operate underwater on liquid oxygen. These boats reach the speed of a jet fighter underwater and can fly through the air. They are equipped with a Radiation Generator, which disables enemy torpedoes and cannons. Children's regiments on waterproof scooters, armed with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots, are deployed directly from torpedo tubes onto the coast of Japan. And beautiful mermaids and warriors in armored bikinis help the young admiral storm the palace in Tokyo, proclaiming the creation of a Worldwide Russian Empire from the bottom of the ocean to deep space [^15^]. Bottom line: A living and empowered Admiral Makarov is a scenario in which Russia would have created the world's first effective underwater special forces (analogous to Italian combat swimmers or British X-craft) 30 years before other countries, forever locking any enemy fleet in its bases. If you are interested in this dieselpunk fleet of the Russian Empire, let us know, and we will proactively continue: What design of electric mini-submarine could Makarov have launched into series production by 1900 at the Baltic Shipyard? How would Japanese samurai divers have tried to manually fight Russian mini-submarines in the harbor of Port Arthur? Could Makarov in this world have attracted science fiction writer Vladimir Lenin to write propaganda leaflets sent to Japan by submarine?

CHAPTER No 20.

Oleg Rybachenko, this eternal boy-commander, continued to build a city in southern Africa and simultaneously composed:

The Jedi children Anakin and Azalea had conducted a warm-up battle, and now there was a pause as the Hutts fell into a deep sleep.

Azalea and Anakin used hyperradiochips to access the galactic mafia's computer matrix while continuing their conversation.

The Jedi girl took it and asked:

Could Darth Maul have continued Darth Sidious' work if he had died instead of his apprentice?

The boy Anakin responded to this quite logically:

From a Star Wars canon perspective (both the new Disney canon and the Legends expanded universe), Darth Maul could not have fully succeeded Darth Sidious and led the Sith's Grand Plan to destroy the Jedi. Despite his menacing presence and combat prowess, Maul lacked the qualities Palpatine possessed. Here's a detailed analysis of why Sidious's death in Episode I would have led to the collapse of the Sith Lords: 1. Maul was a weapon, not a politician. Darth Sidious raised Maul in strict isolation as an elite assassin, enforcer, and instrument of terror, but not as a political successor. Lack of connections: Palpatine spent years building a complex web of intrigue within the Galactic Senate, manipulating the Trade Federation, and promoting himself to the Chancellorship. Darth Maul knew none of this and was incapable of it. He had no political clout, was incapable of bribing the Senate, and was incapable of leading the Republic from within. 2. Mental Impasse: Rage vs. Strategy. Maul's strength was drawn from pure, primal rage, while Sidious was a master of cold calculation, patience, and the guise of a kindly grandfather. Reveal: In a nuclear-free (to draw analogies with our previous topics), or rather, a Sidious-less world, Maul would have simply launched an open war against the Jedi Order. Without political cover, he would have been quickly hunted down and destroyed by the Jedi High Council (using the powers of Mace Windu or Yoda), as in open combat, one Sith stood no chance against thousands of Jedi.

Azalea giggled and noted:

- That's definitely true! And it's going to be incredibly cool!

The Jedi children continued to hack the Hutts' central computer code.

The special forces girl asked:

What if the spirit of Genghis Khan entered the body of Emperor Darth Sidious?

To this the barefoot Jedi boy Anakin responded:

If the mental matrix, will, and strategic genius of Genghis Khan (Temujin) had combined with the Force omnipotence and resources of Darth Sidious' (Palpatine) Galactic Empire, the Star Wars universe would have transformed into an absolutely ruthless yet incredibly effective spacefaring nomadic Khaganate. This crossover would have combined the Byzantine cunning of the Sith with the implacable, steppe logic of total subjugation. The galaxy would have faced fundamental changes: 1. The collapse of the Tarkin Doctrine (Death Star Abandonment). Palpatine spent trillions of credits on the Death Star-a colossal but vulnerable weapon of fear. Genghis Khan thought differently: he didn't need to blow up pastures (planets), he needed to take their resources and people. Galactic Yasa: Sidious-Genghis Khan would have cancelled the Death Star project. Instead, resources would have been used to create a gigantic, mobile fleet of millions of small, maneuverable ships (space "light cavalry"). Hit-and-Run tactics on a space scale: The Imperial fleet would no longer be lumbering. Star Destroyers would be used as mobile headquarters (hordes), from which armadas of high-speed interceptors would launch, tormenting the Rebels with continuous waves of attacks. 2. Total Decimal Meritocracy: Palpatine built the Empire on the basis of xenophobia (human chauvinism) and nepotism, which bred corruption and inefficiency. Genghis Khan would have destroyed this system: The destruction of racial segregation: The Sith-Temujin Empire wouldn't have cared whether you were human, Wookiee, or Twi'lek. The main law of Yasa is absolute loyalty to the leader and usefulness in battle. The new army: All stormtroopers and officers would be reorganized into a rigid structure: tens, hundreds, thousands, tumens. Any talented alien (like Grand Admiral Thrawn) would instantly become a temnik (Force templar) over entire sectors. 3. The fate of Darth Vader and the Rebel Alliance. Vader as a loyal Subedei: Palpatine constantly pitted his students against each other and tormented Vader psychologically. Genghis Khan, on the other hand, valued personal loyalty and combat genius above all else. Vader would have become his main "watchdog" (like Jebe or Subedei). Having received sincere recognition of his military talent from the Emperor-Khan, Vader would have fought with redoubled fury, without even considering betrayal. Destruction of the Resistance: Genghis Khan didn't play politics. If a planet supported the Rebels (like Alderaan), its population wouldn't be blown up from space. A tumen of stormtroopers would be deployed there, led by Vader, who would methodically slaughter anyone "bigger than a wagon wheel" (or an astromech droid). After two or three such demonstrative executions of sectors, the Rebel Alliance would lose all support-fear of the space kaganate would paralyze the galaxy. Oleg Rybachenko's script: A Khaganate on Jet-Powered Disc Ships. If this crazy hybrid had made it into Rybachenko's books, the plot would have developed within the framework of cosmic ultra-kitsch: The spirit of Genghis Khan in the body of Sidious would have realized that the Galaxy is not enough. He would have used Force Lightning to pump jet tanks and disc ships at MAX 10, turning them into interdimensional ships [^15^]. Khan-Sith would have regained the body of a 12-year-old boy-Superman with the help of the quantum magic of the Overcivilization. His childish regiments of stormtroopers on all-terrain roller skates with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots would have landed directly on Coruscant through the wormholes of time. And beautiful Twi'leks and warrioresses in armored bikinis would have danced at feasts in his new planet-sized space yurt. By turning on the Radiation Generator, which disables the Jedi's lightsabers, the young Genghis Khan-Palpatine would have subjugated both the Force and Lucifer's Hell in three days [^15^], creating a Worldwide Intergalactic Nomadic USSR. Result: In the real logic of "Star Wars", Genghis Khan in Palpatine's body would have corrected all the mistakes of the Sith. He would have created a monolithic, ruthless military-meritocratic state that Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia would never have been able to defeat, as the Rebels would simply have no sympathetic planets left. If you're interested in this cosmic redistribution, let me know: What new Yasa (code of Imperial law) would Genghis Khan-Sidious have written to control the Senate? What would the assault on Coruscant by the Mongol-Imperial tumens have looked like? What role would scout droids, adapted to steppe strategy, have played in this Khaganate?

Azalea smiled and stamped her bare childish foot and asked:

What if the spirit of Genghis Khan entered Darth Vader?

The barefoot Jedi boy Anakin responded confidently:

If the mental matrix and indomitable will of Genghis Khan (Temujin) were to inhabit the body of Darth Vader, the Star Wars universe would have the most formidable, autonomous, and practical field commander in its history. Unlike Palpatine, who manipulated Vader for years through his psychological trauma, guilt, and physical pain, the spirit of Genghis Khan within the cyborg would instantly reset his priorities. The steppe leader wouldn't dwell on the loss of Padmé-he would begin gathering his cosmic Horde. Here's the tactical scenario for this metaphysical crossover: 1. Body modification and overcoming Sidious' control: Genghis Khan-Vader would first realize that his black suit was not simply a life-support system, but an electronic cage created by Palpatine for control (the suit was vulnerable to Force lightning). Technological sovereignty: Using the Force, Anakin Skywalker's technical genius, and steppe practicality, he would secretly redesign his armor. The suit would be equipped with autonomous power sources and shielding from EMPs and lightning. The chrome armor would be lightened to allow for cavalry-like agility. Breaking mental chains: Genghis Khan despised being subservient to schemers. Freed from Anakin's depression, Vader-Temujin would become completely immune to the Emperor's mental manipulations. The Creation of the Space Tumen (Vader's Personal Horde) Vader-Genghis Khan would cease to be a mere "executioner at the beck and call" of the Imperial Ministry of Sanitation. He would begin to forge the core of his personal army-the Keshik (Khan's Guard). The Decimal Stormtrooper System: The 501st Stormtrooper Legion under his command would be reformatted into a rigid steppe structure: tens, hundreds, thousands. Indecisive officers would no longer be strangled from a distance for intimidation-they would be executed according to the Yassa law for cowardice, and their place would be taken by the most effective fighters, regardless of race or origin. Brotherhood in Arms: Vader-Khan would spend all his time in the barracks and on the front lines, not in a sterile meditation chamber. The stormtroopers would begin to idolize their general, just as the Mongols idolized Temujin. The army's loyalty would shift from distant Coruscant to Vader himself. 3. Galactic Blitzkrieg against Palpatine and the Rebels. Genghis Khan never attacked head-on when he could win with cunning and maneuver. Alliance with the Rebels (Temporary): Realizing that the Emperor was the main enemy, Vader-Genghis Khan could have forged a tactical alliance with the Rebel Alliance through secret channels (using the same smuggling network). He would have supplied them with intelligence to weaken Palpatine's fleet with his own hands. Palace Coup: At a crucial moment, when Sidious was least expecting the threat, Vader-Khan, at the head of his loyal tumen of stormtroopers and Star Destroyers, would have launched a dagger strike on Coruscant. A modified, lightning-resistant suit would have allowed Vader to crush Palpatine in a fair lightsaber duel. 4. Realization of the concept in Oleg Rybachenko's universe. If this plot had fallen into Oleg Rybachenko's hands, "Vader-Genghis Khan" would have instantly transcended the boundaries of George Lucas's canon: A super-civilization of the future would have restored the spirit of Genghis Khan, in Vader's body, to the fully organic, healthy body of a 12-year-old boy-Superman. No more respirator and burned skin-only eternal youth, steely muscles, and absolute omnipotence in the Force. His childish regiments of space troopers on all-terrain rollers, armed with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots, would storm planets through time warps. Instead of slow-moving ships, he would have created an armada of titanium disc craft with a speed of MAX 10, capable of flying through hyperspace. By activating the Quantum Radiation Generator, which disables the Jedi's lightsabers, young Vader-Khan would have captured Coruscant in three days. And beautiful princesses (including Leia in an armored bikini) and mermaids from distant aquatic planets would salute the new Intergalactic Nomadic Soviet Sultanate [^15^]. Lucifer in Hell would admit that the steppe Yasa, combined with the Force, is the ultimate weapon [^15^]. Bottom line: In the real logic of fantasy, the spirit of Genghis Khan would transform Vader from a tragic, broken slave into the greatest conqueror of the Galaxy. He would have built an absolutely monolithic, pragmatic military empire based on law, personal loyalty, and equality before Yasa, before which both Jedi and Sith would have fallen. If you are interested in this space Khaganate, I can offer the following possible continuations: What scorched-earth tactics would Vader-Genghis Khan have employed against the Rebel bases on Hoth and Yavin? What would his relationship with his son, Luke Skywalker, have been like-would he have raised him to be a new space prince-temnik? A project for a new type of space weapon that Vader-Khan would have ordered built to replace the cumbersome Death Star?

Jedi girl Azalea asked again:

What if the spirit of Genghis Khan possessed Luke Skywalker?

To this the Jedi boy Anakin responded:

If the mental matrix and iron will of Genghis Khan (Temujin) had infused themselves into the young Luke Skywalker, the galaxy would have received not a gentle Jedi peacemaker, but a ruthless leader of a space guerrilla. The nomadic spirit of the steppe khan, trapped on the deserted Tatooine, would have resonated perfectly with the planet's harsh romanticism, but instead of dreaming of the stars, Luke would have begun building his first space horde right among the sands. This metaphysical crossover would have completely rewritten the plot of Star Wars: 1. Tatooine Tumen: Formation of the First Army. Luke-Genghis Khan wouldn't have waited for Imperial stormtroopers to burn down his farm. He would have subjugated Tatooine himself. Alliance with the Steppe Peoples: Instead of fearing the Tusken Raiders (Sand People) and despising the Jawas, Luke Temujin would have seen them as the perfect mobile force for an army. Using the Force as a tool of unquestioned authority, he would have united the warring Tusken tribes into the first nomadic Tumen. Desert Assault Tactics: Instead of bows and arrows, the Tuskens would have received blasters. Using their bantras, they would have unleashed a reign of terror against Imperial outposts and Jabba the Hutt's criminal syndicates. Jabba would have been executed under the Yasa Law (as a "spreader of corruption"), and his treasures would have been used to purchase warships. The Breakdown of Jedi Philosophy: Yasa Instead of a Code. When Obi-Wan Kenobi attempted to teach Luke the ways of the light side of the Force, he would have encountered harsh pragmatism. The Force as a tool, not a religion: Luke-Genghis Khan would have rejected pacifism. He would have taken only the Jedi's martial skills, swordsmanship, and precognition, completely rejecting the idea of "passive contemplation." His Force would have become a "Gray" instrument of absolute dominance. Relationship with Vader: Upon learning that Darth Vader was his father, Luke-Temujin would not have appealed to his good side. He would have sent him an ultimatum: "The Romanov (or Skywalker) line must rule the galaxy. Join my Horde or perish under the hooves of my Star Destroyers." The steppe cult of filial piety would have intertwined with the desire to jointly seize the Coruscant throne. 3. Reformatting the Rebels: Having joined the Rebel Alliance, Luke would have quickly removed democratic senators like Mon Mothma from power. Eliminating the "talking shop": He would have transformed the Alliance into a centralized war machine. The Rebels would have stopped defending ice bases like Hoth. Luke-Han would have switched to all-out maneuver warfare-his X-wing squadrons would have acted as horse archers, harassing the unwieldy Imperial fleet with feint retreats and dagger-like ambushes in asteroid fields. 4. A Realization in the Style of Oleg Rybachenko. If this crossover had fallen into the hands of Oleg Rybachenko, the plot would have instantly soared into the stratosphere of cosmic surrealism: Luke-Genghis Khan, being a 12-year-old boy-Superman (since the Supercivilization of the future restored him to a child's eternally youthful body to maximize midi-chlorian count), wouldn't have bothered with blasters. He would have personally designed the Prokhorov Moon-2 space tank with an 1800-horsepower gas turbine engine, capable of flying at the speed of a jet fighter right in a vacuum. His childish regiments of Tusken Raiders on all-terrain rollers with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots would have stormed Star Destroyers through time warps. By activating the Radiation, which disables Palpatine's lasers and systems, young Luke-Han would have taken Coruscant in two days. And beautiful princesses in armored bikinis and mermaids from water planets would salute the new Intergalactic Nomadic Council of Light, while Lucifer in Hell would frantically try to rewrite the codes of his Dark Matrix for the new cosmic Yasa [^15^]. Result: In the real logic of space opera, Luke Skywalker with the spirit of Genghis Khan would become the creator of a new, greatest dynasty. He would have overthrown both Palpatine and the Jedi, building a Galactic Horde based on the equality of all races before Yasa, strict discipline, and endless expansion into uncharted regions of space. If this cosmic coup interests you, choose how we continue our tactical exploration: What would a lightsaber duel between Luke as Genghis Khan and Emperor Palpatine on the Death Star have looked like? What kind of space tumen structure would Luke have created from former Alliance pilots? How would Han Solo's fate have unfolded in this rigid Mongol-Jedi hierarchy-would he have become the Khan's chief space merchant and scout?

Barefoot girl Azalea asked:

What if the spirit of Genghis Khan possessed Master Yoda?

To this the barefoot Jedi boy Anakin responded:

If Genghis Khan's mental matrix and merciless steppe will had infused themselves into the body of Grand Master Yoda, the Star Wars universe would have acquired the most paradoxical, unstoppable, and dangerous leader in its history. Nine hundred years of experience, colossal Force power, and a green, three-fingered visage would have combined with iron pragmatism, a scorched-earth strategy, and the Code of the Great Yasa. This crossover would have completely reformed the Galactic Republic and nipped Darth Sidious' plans in the bud: 1. Total reform of the Jedi Order (Space Keshik). Yoda-Genghis Khan would have instantly ended the practice of passive contemplation and non-interference in politics. The Jedi Temple on Coruscant would become the main headquarters of the military Horde. A decimal structure for the Jedi: the Master would abolish the classic ranks of Padawans and Knights. The Order would be divided into tens, hundreds, and thousands. High Masters of the Council (Mace Windu, Ki-Adi-Mundi) would become temniks (generals), personally responsible for their tumens. Yasa instead of a Code: Yoda-Temujin would abolish the prohibition on attachment and anger. The only sins in his Order would be cowardice, betrayal, and disobedience. Jedi would be allowed to have families to forge new generations of Force-sensitive warriors for the Galactic Khaganate. 2. The complete defeat of Darth Sidious (Palpatine). Palpatine built his conspiracy on the bureaucracy of the Senate and the slowness of the Jedi. This wouldn't have worked against Yoda-Genghis Khan's steppe logic: Elimination of the Senate: Yoda-Han would have despised the senators' "talking shop." Realizing that the Republic was rotting from corruption, he would have staged a military coup on Coruscant with the help of his loyal Jedi Keshik. Execution of Palpatine: With his Force precognition and Genghis Khan's animal instinct for enemies, Yoda would have identified Sidious long before the Clone Wars. He wouldn't have arrested Palpatine according to the law. The Master would have personally appeared in the Chancellor's office and, using his green lightsaber, carried out the execution according to Yasa law-breaking the Sith's back without spilling blood (as noble enemies were executed in the Steppe). Clone Wars, Steppe Style. If the Clone Wars had actually begun, Yoda-Genghis Khan would have led it to the complete annihilation of the Separatists: "Horse archer" tactics on cruisers: Instead of frontal assaults, the clones under Yoda's command would have used feint retreats, luring Count Dooku's fleets into traps and asteroid fields, where ambushes awaited. Scorched Earth: Planets that supported the Confederacy would have been utterly decimated by clone tumens. No mercy for the Trade Federation-all their wealth would have been confiscated for the Order's coffers. 4. Implementation in the style of Oleg Rybachenko. If this plot had made it into the pages of Rybachenko's novels, "Yoda-Genghis Khan" would have instantly turned into the ultimate trash weapon: A super-civilization of the future would have decided that a small, 900-year-old body is not serious business. They would use quantum chrono-technology and return Yoda-Genghis Khan to the body of a 12-year-old Superman boy (but with green elven ears and skin to keep things stylish). He would gain eternal youth and steely muscles [^15^]. Instead of a wand, he would ride a Prokhorov Moon-3 space tank with an 1800-horsepower gas turbine engine, capable of flying at MAX 10 in space. His childish regiments of Jedi on all-terrain roller skates with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots would storm Separatist bases through time wormholes. By activating the Radiation Generator, which disables the EL-45 droids, young Yoda-Han would subjugate Coruscant and Lucifer's Hell in a single day [^15^]. And beautiful princesses in armored bikinis and mermaids from the water worlds would sing praises to the Great Green Khagan of the Universe. Bottom line: In the real logic of fantasy, the spirit of Genghis Khan would transform Yoda from a wise but helpless philosopher into a brutal conquering emperor. He would have created a millennia-long Galactic Nomadic Order, to whose power and discipline all races would bow, and the Dark Side of the Force would be forever driven underground by the Great Law of Yasa. If you're interested in this green space kaganate, let me know, and we can move forward: What would a new Charter for the Jedi Order, written by Yoda Temujin, have looked like? What fate would Yoda Han have in store for young Anakin Skywalker-would he have made him his chief assault temnik? What stealth strategy would Count Dooku, hiding in hiding, have used against the hounds of Khan's Keshik?

The barefoot Jedi girl Azalea took it and asked:

- What if the spirit of Genghis Khan possessed Obi-Wan Kenobi?

To this the boy in shorts Anakin responded:

If the mental matrix and unyielding steppe will of Genghis Khan (Temujin) had infused the body of Master Obi-Wan Kenobi, the Star Wars universe would have been completely devoid of classic Jedi fatalism. The calm, ironic, and diplomatic Obi-Wan would have transformed into a pragmatic, tough field commander who, instead of protracted Senate persuasion and relying on the Force, would have forged his own loyal tumen of stormtroopers. This crossover would have fundamentally rewritten key events of the saga, especially the Clone Wars and the fate of Anakin Skywalker. Anakin's Harsh Steppe Upbringing. In real life, Obi-Wan treated Anakin like an older brother: he indulged his emotions, gave him tedious lectures, and missed the moment he turned to the dark side. Yasa-style upbringing: Obi-Wan as Genghis Khan would have become a stern father-khan for Skywalker. No concessions for being the "Chosen One." Any tantrums, pride, or secret affairs on Anakin's part would have been suppressed with the harshest cavalry discipline. Removing Palpatine's Influence: Obi-Wan as Han would have quickly noticed the Chancellor ingratiating himself with his apprentice. His steppe instinct for intrigue would have forced Kenobi to isolate Anakin from Coruscant. Skywalker would have grown up not as a capricious egotist, but as a loyal, devoted, and disciplined "temnik" (general) of his Horde. Palpatine would have lost his greatest tool. New Tactics in the Clone Wars: Merciless Blitzkrieg. As a Republic general, Obi-Wan commanded the 212th Clone Attack Battalion. Having infused himself with the spirit of Genghis Khan, he would have transformed it into the elite Khan's Guard (Keshik). Death of General Grievous on Utapau: In real history, Obi-Wan engaged in a lengthy lightsaber duel with the cyborg Grievous. Obi-Wan as Genghis Khan would have despised these theatrical duels with a machine. He would have set up an ambush, surrounded Grievous with clone forces, and pulverized him with heavy high-pressure cannons and plasma mortars within the first three seconds of contact. Scorched Earth for the Separatists: Confederate planets (like Mustafar or Geonosis) would not have been besieged for weeks. Obi-Wan Khan would have employed tactics of total terror-Trade Federation factories would have been blown up from the inside by sabotage squads, and the Separatist leadership would have been eliminated without trial according to Yasa law. 3. Revocation of Order 66: Obi-Wan Khan as Genghis Khan would have spent all his time in the trenches with his clones (for example, Commander Cody), sharing rations and dangers with them. The clones would have seen him not as a "religious fanatic from the Temple," but as their Great Khan. Personal Loyalty: When Palpatine issued Order 66, the clones of the 212th Battalion would have turned their weapons not against Obi-Wan, but against Coruscant itself, as the word of their field commander-Khan was above the orders of the distant Senate. 4. A realization in Oleg Rybachenko's signature style. If this scenario had made it onto the pages of Oleg Rybachenko's novels, "Obi-Wan-Genghis Khan" would have instantly broken the canonical reality: The super-civilization of the future would have decided that Obi-Wan is too old for the Galactic Khaganate. Using chrono-quantum technology, they would return Obi-Wan-Genghis Khan to the body of a 12-year-old superman with an infinite supply of midi-chlorians, perfect steel muscles, and eternal youth [^15^]. Instead of a classic fighter, he would ride a Prokhorov Moon-4 space tank with an 1800-horsepower gas turbine engine, capable of flying in hyperspace at a speed of 10 MAX. His childish regiments of clones on all-terrain rollers with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots would land right in Palpatine's bedroom through the wormholes of time. By activating the Radiation Generator, which disables enemy force fields and droids, young Obi-Wan-Han would take Coruscant and Lucifer's Hell in three hours [^15^]. And beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and mermaids from distant ocean worlds would dance to the sounds of Soviet marches in his new intergalactic yurt, celebrating the triumph of the World Cosmic Communist Khaganate [^15^]. Bottom line: In the real logic of quality science fiction, Obi-Wan Kenobi, with the spirit of Genghis Khan, would save Anakin Skywalker from falling into darkness, seize control of the clone army, and personally lead the assault on Coruscant. He would have built a United Military Empire, where the Jedi would become iron marshals, and the law of Yasa would guarantee order throughout the Eurasian Galaxy. If you're interested in this tactical reversal, let us know, and we can proactively continue: What would a lightsaber duel between Obi-Wan as Genghis Khan and Darth Sidious have looked like in the Senate? What new structure of the Galactic Council would Kenobi-Khan have created after Palpatine's overthrow? How would Master Yoda's fate have unfolded in this world, having entered into deep philosophical opposition to his apprentice's military dictatorship?

To this, Azalea remarked with a laugh:

What if the spirit of Genghis Khan possessed Solo?

To this the barefoot boy-terminator Anakin responded:

If the mental matrix and ruthless pragmatism of Genghis Khan (Temujin) had infused Han Solo's body, the Star Wars universe would have lost its charming but frivolous space pirate. Instead of small-time spice smuggling and perpetual debts to crime bosses, Solo-Genghis Khan would have built the Global Syndicate-a nomadic trading empire capable of dictating its terms to the Rebels, Jabba the Hutt, and the Galactic Empire itself. This metaphysical crossover would have transformed the Millennium Falcon into the main hub of the new space horde. Here's the tactical scenario for this merger: 1. Eliminate Jabba the Hutt and seize Tatooine. Genghis Khan wouldn't have accepted the status of being indebted to a slimy slug. Instead of fleeing from assassins, Solo-Temujin would have launched a preemptive strike: Breaking the criminal hierarchy: Han Solo would have personally appeared at Jabba's palace on Tatooine, but not for negotiations. By subordinating mercenaries and smugglers to his will (instilling in them the loyalty of the steppes and the iron discipline of Yasa), he would have staged a coup. Jabba would have been strangled without bloodshed, and all his financial flows, weapons depots, and spy network would have passed under the control of Solo-Han. Tatooine would have become the first rear base of his new nomadic trading Horde. 2. Chewbacca's transformation into Jebe's loyalist. The relationship between Han and Chewbacca would have grown from a friendly partnership to a sacred bond of khan-to-khan loyalty. The Wookiee, possessing monstrous physical strength, would have become the chief temnik (marshal) of Solo's space cavalry. Wookiees would terrorize Imperial garrisons, fighting not from cover but in hit-and-run waves on upgraded freighters and light corvettes. 3. The Millennium Falcon as a Space Horde. Solo-Genghis Khan would no longer see his ship as simply fast transport. He would understand that the secret to success lies in mobility and speed of communication. Fleet modernization: Using millions of Jabba's credits, Solo would create an armada of light, ultra-fast smuggling vessels, refitted for combat. This "light cavalry" of galactic routes would paralyze Imperial trade. Imperial Star Destroyers simply would not have time to respond to the lightning raids and feints of Solo's fleet in hyperspace. 4. A realization in Oleg Rybachenko's signature style. If this plot had fallen into Oleg Rybachenko's hands, "Han Solo-Genghis Khan" would have instantly overcome all barriers of cosmic canon: A future super-civilization would have decided that the adult Han Solo lacked dynamism. Chrono-quantum technology would return him to the body of a 12-year-old Superman boy (but with Harrison Ford's signature smirk and vest), imbuing him with limitless energy [^15^]. Instead of the standard Falcon, he would design a space ekranoplan-tank, the Prokhorov Moon-5, with an 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engine, capable of flying in a vacuum at MAX 10. His childish regiments of smugglers and Wookiees on all-terrain rollerskates with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots would board Imperial cruisers through time wormholes. By activating the Quantum Radiation Generator, which disables stormtroopers' radars and blasters, young Solo-Han would capture Coruscant and Lucifer's Hell in two days [^15^]. And beautiful princesses (including Leia in an armored bikini) and mermaids from distant water worlds would dance to Soviet marches in his new intergalactic yurt, celebrating the triumph of the World Space Communist Khaganate of Smugglers [^15^]. Bottom line: In the real logic of fantasy, the spirit of Genghis Khan would transform Han Solo from a selfish mercenary into the third power of the Galaxy. He wouldn't have submitted to either Palpatine or the Rebels, but would have built a great Merchant-Military Horde, whose economic and mobile might would eventually have brought both the Sith and the Jedi to heel. If you're interested in this crazy cosmic turn of events, let us know, and we can proactively continue: What system of duties and laws (Yasu) would Solo-Genghis Khan have introduced for all merchants in the galaxy? What would the first battle between Han Solo's "light cavalry" fleet and Darth Vader's Star Destroyer have looked like? Would Solo-Han have allied with Luke Skywalker, seeing him as a potential powerful ally for his empire?

The Jedi girl asked with a sweet smile:

-What if the spirit of Nicholas II had possessed Darth Sidious?

To this, the very combative Jedi boy Anakin responded:

If the mental matrix, character, and fatalism of Nicholas II had migrated into the body of Darth Sidious (Palpatine), the Galactic Empire would have collapsed long before the advent of Luke Skywalker. The Byzantine cunning, brilliant political calculation, and cynicism of the Sith would have been completely erased by the softness, indecisiveness, religious mysticism, and fatal stubbornness of the last Russian Tsar [^3^]. This crossover would have transformed the sinister lord of darkness into a tragic figure surrounded by conspiracies, and the Clone Wars and the creation of the Empire would have followed a completely different scenario: 1. The collapse of the Sith conspiracy in the Senate (Nikolai II as Chancellor) Darth Sidious spent years weaving intrigues, manipulating the Republic bureaucracy to gain emergency powers. Nicholas II, as Supreme Chancellor, would have completely failed this game of "Listen to everyone, trust no one": Instead of maintaining firm control over the Senate, Nicholas Sidious would have begun to vacillate between factions. He would have fallen under the strong influence of the conservative oligarchic senators of the Trade Federation and the Banking Clan. Loss of authority: Nicholas Sidious would have been terrified of using force where necessary. The Senate would have quickly devolved into an unruly "talking shop" akin to the First State Duma. Seeing the Chancellor's weakness, the Separatists, led by Count Dooku, would have seceded from the Republic without any Clone Wars-Nicholas Sidious simply wouldn't have dared order a full-scale war, hoping for the "will of Providence." Rasputinism in the Sith Order (The Disciples' Tragedy) The most frightening element of this crossover would be the appearance of a Grigori Rasputin-like figure at Sidious's court. Mystic influence: Sidious-Nikolai, a deeply mystical man, would begin to seek support not in the ancient lore of the Sith, but in the prophecies of dubious wanderers and shamans from wild planets (like Dathomir). A so-called "elder" would appear at the Emperor's court, whose advice on commanding the Force and the fleet would carry more weight with the Sith King than the reports of the stormtrooper General Staff. Relationship with Darth Vader: Sidious-Nikolai would treat Vader not as a brutal instrument of terror, but as a capricious, ailing relative (projecting the tragedy of Tsarevich Alexei onto him). He would constantly give him tedious moralizing lectures about duty, honor, and humility before the Force, but he would miss the moment when Vader became completely disillusioned with his master's weakness. 3. Galactic February 1917 (Military Conspiracy) Palpatine was terrified of conspiracies, so he pitted generals and stormtroopers against each other. Sidious-Nikolai, on the contrary, would blindly believe in the "divine right" of his power and the stormtroopers' love for the Emperor. Betrayal of the Elites: In the midst of a protracted conflict with the Rebels (or Separatists), the Empire's economy would have suffered a severe crisis: interruptions in the supply of tibana on Coruscant, workers' strikes at the Kuat shipyards. Instead of brutally suppressing the uprisings with the Inquisitors, Sidious-Nikolai would have become confused. Seeing the paralysis of power, the Empire's top generals (Grand Moff Tarkin, the admirals, and Grand Admiral Thrawn), uniting with liberal senators (Bail Organa and Mon Mothma), would blockade Sidious-Nikolay's personal flagship in a distant sector. Abdication of the Force: Faced with the unanimous demand of the generals, Sidious-Nikolay, with quiet sadness and fatalism, would sign a manifesto abdicating the throne of the Galactic Empire in favor of the Provisional Senate Council, writing in his holographic diary: "Treason, cowardice, and deceit are all around." 4. Implementation in the signature style of Oleg RybachenkoIf this paradoxical plot had fallen into the hands of Oleg Rybachenko, "Sidious-Nikolai II" would have instantly broken free from the trap of melancholy and fatalism: The super-civilization of the future would have decided that the Galaxy does not need a weak king, but a 12-year-old boy-superman with the soul of Nicholas II [^15^]. Quantum technology would restore his eternal youth, absolute omnipotence in the Force, and free him from indecision [^15^]. Instead of the Sith mantle, the young King Palpatine would ride a Prokhorov Moon-6 flying tank with an 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engine, capable of flying at MAX 10 through hyperspace. His childish regiments of Guard stormtroopers on all-terrain rollers with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots would land directly on Rebel headquarters through time warps. By activating the Quantum Radiation Generator, which disables Jedi lightsabers, the young Sidious-Nikolai would subjugate the Senate, Coruscant, and Lucifer's Hell in two days [^15^]. And beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and mermaids from distant worlds would sing "God Save the Tsar" to the sounds of Soviet marches, celebrating the triumph of the Worldwide Intergalactic Orthodox-Communist Sith Empire of the Romanovs [^15^]. Bottom line: In the real logic of high-quality science fiction, the spirit of Nicholas II would have transformed the sinister Darth Sidious into a weak, noble, but completely ineffective ruler. He would have been unable to hold on to power, the Empire would have disintegrated into warring Moff factions long before the Battle of Yavin, and Sidious-Nikolay himself would have ended his days under house arrest on some remote planet on the outskirts of the galaxy, meekly praying for the salvation of the souls of his subjects. If you're interested in this unusual geopolitical and fantastical twist, let us know, and we can proactively continue: What would Sidious-Nikolay II's abdication of the throne of the Galactic Empire have looked like? Would Darth Vader have attempted to save his weak master from arrest by the Senate Provisional Government? Could Grand Admiral Thrawn in this world have become a General Kornilov analogue and attempted to establish a harsh military dictatorship to save the Empire from anarchy?

CHAPTER No 21.

The Jedi girl Azalea then took it and asked:

What if, on the contrary, Darth Sidious had possessed Nicholas II?

To this the barefoot Jedi boy Anakin responded:

If the mental matrix, absolute ruthlessness, brilliant political calculation, and Byzantine cunning of Darth Sidious (Palpatine) had infused the body of Nicholas II, the 20th-century Russian Empire would not only have avoided collapse but would have been transformed into a monolithic, totalitarian Steel Superpower. The course of world history would have been rewritten according to the laws of dark Sith geopolitics. Nicholas-Sidious would have instantly eliminated all the weak points of the Tsarist regime, turning Petrograd into an Earthly Coruscant. Here is the tactical scenario for this infusion: 1. Total "Order 66" against the revolutionary underground (1900-1905). Palpatine, accustomed to exterminating entire Jedi Orders, would not have played legalistic games with the Bolsheviks, Socialist Revolutionaries, and terrorists. Extermination of radicals: Nikolai-Sidious would have used the Gendarme Corps and the Security Department not for passive surveillance, but as a punitive instrument of absolute terror. All underground printing presses, militant cells, and party structures would have been preemptively liquidated. The fate of the leaders: Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, and Dzerzhinsky would not have received the tsar's lenient exiles to Siberia, from which they could escape. They would have been physically liquidated by Nikolai-Sidious' secret inquisition in the very first days of their political activity. Kamo and other expropriators would have been publicly executed, and their ashes scattered. Russo-Japanese War: The Destruction of Tokyo. Nicholas Sidious would have used the conflict in the Far East to demonstrate the Empire's absolute might. Personnel Purges: Weak and indecisive generals like Kuropatkin or Stessel would have been immediately removed (or secretly liquidated for incompetence). Command of the Manchurian Army would have been given to Mikhail Skobelev (if he had survived in this alternative) or Aleksei Brusilov. Industrial Carnage: The modernization program of Port Arthur and the Trans-Siberian Railway, under the direction of Witte (whom Nicholas Sidious would have used as an effective technocrat), would have been completed ahead of schedule. The Japanese army at Mukden would have encountered a steel rampart of improved grapeshot, machine guns, and heavy artillery. After the complete destruction of the Japanese fleet in the Yellow Sea, Nicholas Sidious would dictate terms of unconditional surrender to Tokyo, annexing Manchuria and Korea. 3. Liquidation of the Duma and the creation of the Imperial Senate. Nicholas Sidious would have despised the liberal intelligentsia and the "talking shop" of the zemstvos. The 1905 Revolution simply would not have begun due to the lack of a pretext (the Japanese War was won, the rebellions were nipped in the bud). Obedient organ: Even if the State Duma had been convened, it would have turned into a decorative Imperial Senate, obediently rubber-stamping the sovereign's decrees. Any opposition (Cadets, Octobrists) would have been marginalized. The military-industrial nomenklatura and the army would have become the backbone of the state. 4. Implementation in Oleg Rybachenko's signature style. If this plot had made it into Oleg Rybachenko's novels, Nikolai-Sidious would have brought Earth's modernization to a cosmic scale: The super-civilization of the future would have decided that Nikolai-Sidious needed the perfect weapon. Using chrono-quantum technology, they would return Tsar Palpatine to the body of a 12-year-old Superman boy, endowing him with eternal youth, steely muscles, and limitless Dark Side powers [^15^]. Instead of a royal carriage, he would ride a flying ekranoplan-tank, the Prokhorov Luna-7, with an 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engine, capable of flying at MAX 10 right in the stratosphere. His children's regiments of Guards Cossack stormtroopers on all-terrain roller skates with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots would storm the capitals of Europe through the wormholes of time. By activating the Quantum Radiation Generator, which disables Kaiser Wilhelm's gunpowder and cannons, young Nikolai Sidious would take Berlin, Paris, and London in three days. And beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and mermaids of the Baltic Sea would salute the Force Lightning of the young Emperor Romanov, celebrating the creation of the World Earth Technocratic Sith Union [^15^]. Lucifer in Hell would voluntarily hand over the keys to his Dark Matrix [^15^]. Bottom line: In the real logic of historical fiction, Darth Sidious in the body of Nicholas II would create a super-efficient, ruthless totalitarian empire. By 1914, Russia would have emerged as the absolute industrial and military hegemon of the planet, before whose might both Imperial Germany and the Entente would have capitulated without firing a shot. If you're interested in this brutal Sith-Imperial reversal, let me know, and we can move forward: What defense doctrine would Nikolai-Sidious have developed against the British Empire? Which real-life Russian historical figure (for example, Pyotr Stolypin) would Tsar-Palpatine have chosen to play the role of his "Darth Vader"-a faithful disciple and executor of his will? How would science and the country's electrification (the GOELRO plan, 20 years earlier) have developed under the leadership of a Sith technocrat?

Azalea took it and asked:

What if Darth Sidious was possessed by Tamerlane?

A barefoot boy in shorts, Oleg, responded to this:

If the mental matrix, military genius, and cold, mathematical ruthlessness of Tamerlane (Timur the Great) had inhabited the body of Darth Sidious (Palpatine), the Star Wars universe would have shuddered with the scale of total and rational terror. Unlike Palpatine, who revelled in intrigue, Senate politics, and sadistic pleasure, Sidious-Tamerlane would have approached the conquest of the galaxy as a purely strategic engineering process. This crossover would have transformed Coruscant into a space Samarkand, and the Galactic Empire into a flawlessly functioning war machine. Here is the tactical scenario for this inhabitation: 1. Elimination of the "Tarkin Doctrine" (Abandonment of ineffective terror). Palpatine spent colossal resources on the Death Star out of an abstract "fear of planetary destruction." Tamerlane, a genius of military logistics, would have shut down this project as economically senseless. Rational Violence: Tamerlane's cruelty throughout history has always had a clear purpose. He wouldn't blow up Alderaan entirely-that would destroy valuable resources, factories, and taxpayers. Instead, Sidious/Tamerlane would have staged a demonstrative, all-out massacre of the planet's ruling elite. Pyramids of Helmets: In the plaza in front of Alderaan's royal palace, stormtroopers would have constructed a giant pyramid of the skulls (or helmets) of the local elite and rebels. This terrible news would have instantly paralyzed the will of other sectors. Planets would have surrendered without a fight, knowing that Tamerlane would spare the submissive and reduce their taxes, while he would slaughter the rebels down to the last infant. New Space Tactics: Mobile Siege Tumens. Timur the Great was the greatest siege engineer of his time and a master of maneuverable combat. Space Catapults: Sidious-Tamerlane would have rebuilt the Empire's military-industrial complex. Instead of bulky Star Destroyers, he would have relied on mobile strike groups and new types of weapons-heavy missile-carrying bombers and artillery ships capable of penetrating planetary shields in hours. Use of Specialists: Having captured high-tech worlds like Mon Calamari or Kuat, Sidious-Tamerlane would not have enslaved engineers. As in real history, he would have herded all the best scientists, programmers, and shipbuilders to his Main Headquarters (Samarkand-Coruscant), creating ideal conditions for them to develop cutting-edge weapons. Soviet or Sith science would have made a quantum leap. Relationship with Darth Vader: Han and his superior, Mirza Palpatine, constantly humiliated Vader and sought his replacement. Tamerlane built an army on ironclad meritocracy and personal loyalty. Recognition of genius: Sidious/Tamerlane would have seen Vader as his best commander (either Mirza or Subutai). Vader would have received complete tactical freedom and the Emperor's respect. Grateful for the recognition of his military talents and freed from Palpatine's psychological sadism, Vader would have fought for his Han-Emperor with absolute devotion, rendering the Rebel Alliance unviable. Luke Skywalker would have been unable to lure his father to his side, as Vader would have been part of a great and just (in his understanding) warrior brotherhood. A realization in Oleg Rybachenko's signature style. If this plot had made it into Oleg Rybachenko's novels, "Sidious-Tamerlane" would have instantly broken free of the galactic laws of physics: A future super-civilization would have decided that the lame Iron Lame (Timur) needed an ideal physical embodiment. Quantum technology would return Sidious-Tamerlane to the body of a 12-year-old superman boy with limitless Force powers, steel muscles, and eternal youth [^15^]. Instead of a horse, young Han-Palpatine would saddle a space ekranoplan-tank "Prokhorov Moon-8" with a gas turbine engine producing 1800 horsepower, capable of flying in hyperspace at a speed of 10 MAX. His childish regiments of stormtroopers-nukers on all-terrain rollers with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots would land right on the Alliance headquarters through the wormholes of time. By activating the Quantum Radiation Generator, which disables the Jedi's laser swords, young Sidious-Tamerlane would subjugate the Senate, Coruscant, and Lucifer's Hell in two days [^15^]. And beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and mermaids from distant aquatic worlds would dance to the sounds of Soviet marches in his new planet-sized space yurt, celebrating the triumph of the Worldwide Intergalactic Iron Communist Sith Khaganate [^15^]. Bottom line: In the true logic of fantasy, the spirit of Tamerlane would have transformed the Galactic Empire into a flawless, pragmatic military machine. He would have destroyed the Rebels not with technological super-toys, but with perfect strategy, iron discipline, and rational fear. Such an Empire would have existed forever, expanding into the Unknown Regions of space at the behest of its Great Iron Khan. If you're interested in this large-scale military-strategic crossover, let me know, and we can move forward: What would a plan for a general assault on Rebel bases have looked like under Sidious-Tamerlane? What system of tax collection and sector management (Yasu Timur) would he have introduced into the Galaxy? What would have been the fate of the Inquisitor Order, which Tamerlane would have transformed into an elite personal secret guard?

The Jedi girl Azalea stamped her bare foot and asked:

What if Tamerlane possessed Darth Vader?

The Jedi boy Anakin responded logically to this:

If the mental matrix and military genius of Tamerlane (Timur the Great) had infused Darth Vader's body, the galaxy would have seen not a broken, reflective slave in a mask, but a calculating, pragmatic military leader. The Iron Lame of Earth history would have met the Iron Commander of space. The steppe ruler would have instantly adapted his new cybernetic body to the laws of total Eurasian strategy. This crossover would have transformed Vader into an independent powerhouse, capable of outmaneuvering both Palpatine and the Rebels. Here's the tactical scenario for this infusion: 1. Overcoming Physical Disability. Tamerlane spent his entire life overcoming a severe leg injury (hence the nickname "Iron Lame"), becoming a supreme warrior. Having entered Vader's crippled body, he would not have suffered. Armor Upgrade: Vader-Tamerlane, using the Force and Anakin Skywalker's engineering genius, would secretly rebuild his suit [^15^]. He would remove the vulnerabilities to Force lightning that Palpatine had engineered for control. The cybernetic joints would be tuned for maximum rigidity and speed, transforming his limp into a formidable melee weapon. 2. Creation of the Galactic Tumen (Personal Keshik): Palpatine used Vader as a lone punisher. Vader-Tamerlane, true to the steppe traditions, would immediately begin forging a personal army devoted to him-the Keshik. Military Meritocracy: The 501st Stormtrooper Legion under his command would be restructured according to the decimal system. Officers would no longer be strangled for minor infractions for the sake of Sidious's sadism-they would be judged by strict military regulations (Tuzukatu). All soldiers' loyalty would flow from distant Coruscant to Vader-Timur, who would share the trenches with them on the wild planets of the Outer Rim. 3. "Rational Terror" Tactics and Siege Warfare: On the battlefield, Vader-Tamerlane would act as a brilliant military engineer. Pyramids of Helmets: Instead of ineffectively destroying planets with the Death Star, he would use targeted, horrific terror. Having captured a rebellious sector, stormtroopers would slaughter exclusively the rebel elite, piling giant pyramids of enemy helmets in front of spaceports. The rest of the population would be offered a choice: submission and tax cuts, or total purge. The galaxy would surrender to his tumens without a single shot being fired. The hijacking of specialists: Vader-Tamerlane would not destroy all the best scientists, programmers, and designers from captured worlds (Kuat, Mon Calamari), but would send them to his headquarters, creating ideal conditions for a qualitative leap in imperial science. 4. Implementation in Oleg Rybachenko's signature style. If this plot had made it into Oleg Rybachenko's novels, "Vader-Tamerlane" would have instantly broken the canon of George Lucas: A supercivilization of the future would have decided that the Great Lame Man had had enough of wearing a respirator. Quantum technology would have restored Vader-Tamerlane to the organic, healthy body of a 12-year-old boy-superman with infinite Force powers and eternal youth [^15^]. Instead of a classic TIE Fighter, the young Khan would have ridden a Prokhorov Moon-9 space ekranoplan-tank with an 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engine, capable of flying in a vacuum at MAX 10. His childish regiments of Nuker stormtroopers on all-terrain rollers with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots would have stormed Palpatine's palaces through the wormholes of time. By activating the Quantum Radiation Generator, which disables Jedi lightsabers, young Vader-Tamerlane would have taken Coruscant in two days and subjugated Lucifer's Hell [^15^]. And beautiful princesses in armored bikinis and mermaids from distant worlds would sing praises to the Great Iron Khagan, celebrating the creation of the Worldwide Intergalactic Sith Khaganate [^15^]. Result: In the real logic of fantasy, the spirit of Tamerlane would turn Vader into an unstoppable conqueror. He would overthrow Palpatine, forging a temporary alliance with the Rebels, and then subjugate the entire Senate, creating a harsh, just, and monolithic Empire governed by the laws of personal loyalty and military prowess. If you're interested in this brutal strategic turnaround, choose how we continue our tactical exploration: What would Vader-Tamerlane's plan to overthrow Palpatine have looked like? What legal system (Tuzukat) would Vader-Timur have instituted to govern the sectors of the galaxy? Would Luke Skywalker have found common ground with his father-Khan, assuming the title of his chief military mirza?

The girl with bare pink heels, Azalea, asked:

What if Tamerlane possessed Luke Skywalker?

To this, the cool boy-terminator Anakin responded:

If the mental matrix and cold, calculating genius of Tamerlane (Timur the Great) had infused the young Luke Skywalker, the Star Wars universe would have been completely devoid of naive Jedi romanticism. Instead of a farmer dreaming of adventure, the deserted Tatooine would have received the Iron Lame, who would immediately recognize the endless sands as the perfect springboard for creating his first Great Horde. This metaphysical crossover would have completely rewritten the plot of the space saga: 1. Tatooine Ulus: Uniting the Desert. Luke-Tamerlane would not have asked Obi-Wan Kenobi to take him off the planet. He would have subjugated it himself, using the Force as an instrument of his unquestionable will. Steppe tactics for the Tuskens: Luke-Timur would have united the savage tribes of Tusken Raiders into a single fighting tumen. Using their bantras, they would wage a lightning war (Hit-and-Run) against criminal gangs. Execution of Jabba the Hutt: The Hutt's palace would be stormed using siege engineering. Jabba would be executed according to the steppe's honor code-his back would be broken without bloodshed. All his mercenaries, smugglers, and spy network would swear allegiance to Luke-Han under penalty of total annihilation. 2. Sith Pragmatism of the Light Side: Obi-Wan Kenobi and Master Yoda would be unable to teach Luke the classic Jedi Code with its prohibitions and passive contemplation. The Force as a weapon: Luke-Tamerlane would only take from the Jedi combat swordsmanship, telekinesis, and tactical foresight with the Force. Instead of a Code, he would have written his Tuzukata (Code), where the only sins would be treason, cowardice, and disobeying orders. Ultimatum to Vader: Upon learning that Darth Vader is his father, Luke-Timur would not have appealed to his feelings. He would have offered him a dynastic alliance: "Emperor Palpatine is weak, a schemer. The Skywalkers must rule the galaxy as the rightful Khans." Vader's Sith pride would have resonated perfectly with this proposal. 3. Reform of the Rebel Alliance: Upon joining the Alliance, Luke-Tamerlane would have quickly eliminated the civilian leadership of the Senate (Mon Mothma and Bail Organa), transforming the rebellion into a regular army. Rational Terror: The Rebels under his command would have ceased to be "good guerrillas." In response to the Empire's terror, Luke Tamerlane would have decimated Imperial garrisons, leaving pyramids of stormtrooper helmets in front of spaceports to intimidate the enemy. Sectors would have surrendered to his fleet voluntarily, knowing that he would guarantee order and tax cuts to the compliant. 4. Implementation in Oleg Rybachenko's signature style. If this crossover had appeared in the pages of Oleg Rybachenko's novels, "Luke Tamerlane" would have instantly broken the laws of physics: A future supercivilization would have decided that the young Jedi Khan needed a perfect embodiment. Quantum technology would restore Luke-Tamerlane to the healthy body of a 12-year-old Superman with an infinite supply of midi-chlorians and eternal youth. Instead of a standard X-Wing fighter, the young Khan would ride a Prokhorov Luna-10 space tank with an 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engine, capable of flying in a vacuum at Mach 10. His infant regiments of Tusken Raiders, riding all-terrain rollers with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots, would storm Star Destroyers through time warps. By activating the Quantum Radiation Generator, which disables enemy lightsabers and radars, young Luke-Tamerlane would take Coruscant and subjugate Lucifer's Inferno in two days. And beautiful princesses (including Leia in an armored bikini) and mermaids from distant aquatic worlds would dance to Soviet marches in his new planet-sized space yurt, celebrating the triumph of the Worldwide Intergalactic Iron Communist Khaganate of Light. Bottom line: In the true logic of fantasy, the spirit of Tamerlane would transform Luke Skywalker into the creator of a new Galactic Empire. He would have overthrown Palpatine, subjugated Vader, and built a monolithic state based on law, discipline, and the equality of all races under the great Khan's Code. If you're interested in this space-faring Khaganate, choose how we continue our tactical exploration: What would Luke-Timur's plan for a general assault on Coruscant have looked like with the combined Rebel and Tusken fleets? What legal system (Tuzukat) would Luke-Timur have introduced to govern the sectors of the Galaxy? Would Luke-Han have liquidated the Jedi Order, considering their philosophy detrimental to the stability of his state?

The Jedi girl asked:

What if Tamerlane had possessed Obi-Wan Kenobi? If the mental matrix and calculating, steely genius of Tamerlane (Timur the Great) had inhabited the body of Master Obi-Wan Kenobi, the Star Wars universe would have been completely devoid of classic Jedi fatalism and serenity. The ironic diplomat Obi-Wan would have transformed into a stern, pragmatic military leader and the galaxy's greatest siege engineer. The Iron Lame of Earth history would have applied his Tuzukata (Code) to the laws of the Force, radically altering the course of the Clone Wars and the fate of his apprentice, Anakin Skywalker. Here is the tactical scenario for this inhabitation: 1. Steppe Discipline for the "Chosen One" (Raising Anakin) In real history, Obi-Wan acted like a gentle older brother to Skywalker, allowing Palpatine to manipulate the arrogant youth's capricious ego. Eradicating Pride: Obi-Wan-Tamerlane would have become an unquestioning, stern father-khan for Anakin. No concessions for being the "Chosen One." Any tantrums or breaches of discipline would have been suppressed with an iron cavalry will. A steppe-like sense of intrigue would have allowed Kenobi-Timur to quickly recognize Palpatine's sinister shadow over the boy. Obi-Wan would have simply isolated Anakin from Coruscant, turning him into the devoted First Mirza (Marshal) of his personal tumen. The Chancellor would have lost his main trump card. New Clone Wars Strategy: Rational Blitzkrieg. As a Republic general, Obi-Wan commanded the 212th Attack Battalion. Having infused himself with Tamerlane's spirit, he would have transformed him into his elite Keshik (Khan's Guard). Elimination of General Grievous on Utapau: In canon, Obi-Wan engaged in a long and pompous lightsaber duel with the cyborg. Obi-Wan Tamerlane would have despised such theatrical duels. He would have used siege engineering: luring Grievous into a dead-end corridor, blocking the exits, and pulverizing him with clone forces using high-pressure heavy cannons and plasma mortars in three seconds. Scorched Earth Tactics: The planets of the Separatist Confederacy (Mustafar, Geonosis) would have been methodically destroyed. Having captured a rebellious world, Kenobi-Timur would have erected demonstrative pyramids of Separatist battle droid helmets and their leaders in front of the main spaceports. The remaining population would have been offered a choice: total submission and reduced taxes, or complete extermination. The galaxy would have surrendered to his tumens without a fight. 3. The Failure of Order 66 and the Overthrow of Palpatine: Obi-Wan Tamerlane would have spent all his time in the trenches with his clones, sharing all the hardships of war. The clones (including Commander Cody) would have seen him not as a religious mystic from the Temple, but as their Great Khan. When Palpatine issued Order 66, the personal loyalty of the 212th Battalion to their commander would have trumped orders from the distant Senate. Obi-Wan Han would have deployed his Star Destroyers and led his loyal troops to storm Coruscant. Palpatine would have been strangled in his own office according to the steppe's laws of honor-without spilling noble blood on the ground. 4. Implementation in Oleg Rybachenko's signature style. If this crossover had made it into the pages of Oleg Rybachenko's novels, "Obi-Wan Tamerlane" would have instantly broken the canonical reality: A future super-civilization would have decided that Kenobi's mature body doesn't reveal the Iron Man's full potential. Chrono-quantum technology would return Obi-Wan Tamerlane to the body of a 12-year-old superman with steely muscles, eternal youth, and an endless supply of midi-chlorians. Instead of a standard Jedi fighter, the young Khan would ride a Prokhorov Luna-11 space ekranoplan-tank with an 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engine, capable of flying in a vacuum at Mach 10. His childish regiments of clones on all-terrain rollers, armed with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots, would storm the Senate through the wormholes of time. By activating the Quantum Radiation Generator, which disables Jedi lightsabers and enemy targeting systems, young Obi-Wan Han would subjugate Coruscant and Lucifer's Hell in three hours. And beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and mermaids from distant ocean worlds would salute the new Intergalactic Iron Communist Khaganate of Light. Bottom line: In the true logic of high-quality science fiction, the spirit of Tamerlane would have transformed Obi-Wan Kenobi into a formidable conquering emperor. He would have saved Anakin from falling into darkness, seized control of the clone army, and built a rigid, centralized Galactic state, where the Jedi would become iron marshals and order would be maintained by the immutable Law of Yasa. If you are interested in this large-scale military-strategic reversal, let me know. We can proactively continue and explore: What system of Codes (Tuzukat) would Kenobi-Tamerlane have introduced to govern the Senate? What would be the plan for storming the Sith Temple with Obi-Wan's Keshik forces? What role in this new empire would he have prepared for Master Yoda?

The Jedi girl Azalea asked again with a sweet look:

What if Tamerlane possessed Master Yoda?

To this, the Jedi boy Anakin, throwing a gold coin with his bare foot, responded:

If the mental matrix and calculating, steely genius of Tamerlane (Timur the Great) were to inhabit the body of Grand Master Yoda, the Star Wars universe would be completely devoid of classic Jedi passivity and fatalism. Nine hundred years of experience, colossal Force power, and a green, three-fingered visage would merge with iron pragmatism, a strategy of rational terror, and the code of the Great Yasa. This crossover would transform the Jedi Order into a flawlessly functioning war machine, and Darth Sidious' plans would be nipped in the bud. Here is the tactical scenario for this merger: 1. Total reform of the Order (Space Keshik). Yoda-Tamerlane would immediately end the practice of passive contemplation and non-interference in politics. The Jedi Temple on Coruscant would become the main headquarters of the military Horde. A decimal structure for the Jedi: the Master would abolish the classic ranks of Padawans and Knights. The Order would be divided into tens, hundreds, and thousands. High Masters of the Council (Mace Windu, Ki-Adi-Mundi) would become temniks (generals), personally responsible for their tumens. Tuzukata (Code) instead of a Code: Yoda-Timur would abolish the ban on attachments and anger. The only sins in his Order would be cowardice, betrayal, and disobedience. Jedi would be allowed to form families to forge new generations of strong warriors for the Galactic Khaganate. 2. The complete defeat of Darth Sidious (Palpatine). Palpatine built his conspiracy on the bureaucracy of the Senate and the slowness of the Jedi. This wouldn't have worked against Tamerlane-Yoda's steppe logic: Elimination of the Senate: Yoda-Han would have despised the senators' "talking shop." Realizing that the Republic was rotting from corruption, he would have staged a military coup on Coruscant with the help of his loyal Jedi Keshik. Execution of Palpatine: With Tamerlane's foresight and feral instinct for enemies, Yoda would have identified Sidious long before the Clone Wars. He wouldn't have arrested Palpatine legally. The Master would have personally appeared in the Chancellor's office and, using his green lightsaber, carried out the execution according to the laws of honor-breaking the Sith's back without spilling blood (as noble enemies were executed in the Steppe). The Clone Wars, Ironclad Style. If the Clone Wars had actually begun, Yoda-Tamerlane would have led it to the complete extermination of the Separatists: Siege engineering and mobile tumens: Instead of frontal assaults, the clones under Yoda's command would have used feint retreats, luring Count Dooku's fleets into traps and asteroid fields. Helmet pyramids for intimidation: Planets that supported the Confederacy would have been methodically destroyed. Having captured a rebellious world, Yoda-Tamerlane's forces would have built demonstrative pyramids of Separatist battle droid helmets and their leaders in front of major spaceports. The remaining population would have been offered a choice: total submission and reduced taxes, or total extermination. The galaxy would surrender to his tumens without a fight. Specialist hijacking: Having captured high-tech worlds like Mon Calamari or Kuat, Yoda-Tamerlane wouldn't have enslaved the engineers. As in real history, he would have herded all the best scientists, programmers, and shipbuilders to his headquarters, creating ideal conditions for them to develop cutting-edge weapons. Soviet or Sith science would have made a quantum leap. 4. Implementation in Oleg Rybachenko's signature style. If this plot had made it into the pages of Oleg Rybachenko's novels, "Yoda-Tamerlane" would have instantly become the ultimate trash weapon: A super-civilization of the future would have decided that a 900-year-old body is not serious enough for the Great Lame Man. They would use quantum chrono-technology and return Yoda-Tamerlane to the body of a 12-year-old Superman boy (but with green elven ears and skin to keep the style). He would gain eternal youth and steely muscles [^15^]. Instead of a wand, he would ride a Prokhorov Leader-12 space ekranoplan-tank with an 1800-horsepower gas turbine engine, capable of flying in a vacuum at MAX 10. His childish regiments of Jedi on all-terrain rollerskates with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots would storm Separatist bases through time wormholes. By activating the Quantum Radiation Generator, which disables enemy lightsabers and radars, young Yoda-Han would subjugate Coruscant and Lucifer's Hell in three hours [^15^]. And beautiful princesses in armored bikinis and mermaids from distant water worlds would dance to the sounds of Soviet marches in his new planet-sized space yurt, celebrating the triumph of the Worldwide Intergalactic Iron Communist Khaganate of Light [^15^]. Bottom line: In the real logic of fantasy, the spirit of Tamerlane would transform Yoda from a wise but helpless philosopher into a cruel conquering emperor. He would have created a millennia-long Galactic Nomadic Order, to whose power and discipline all races would bow, and the Dark Side of the Force would be forever driven underground by the Great Law of the Orders. If you're interested in this green space kaganate, choose how we continue our tactical exploration: What would a new Charter for the Jedi Order, written by Yoda-Timur, look like? What fate would Yoda-Han have in store for young Anakin Skywalker-would he make him his chief assault mirza? What stealth strategy would Count Dooku, hiding in hiding, use against the hounds of Khan's Keshik?

Jedi girl Azalea tossed a coin with her bare toes and asked:

What if Nicholas II had possessed Luke Skywalker?

To this the Jedi boy Anakin responded, rubbing a piece of glass on a cobblestone with his bare, childish heel:

If the mental matrix, gentleness of character, deep religious mysticism, and fatalism of Nicholas II had infused themselves into the body of Luke Skywalker, the classic story of the Rebellion's triumph would have turned into a drawn-out spiritual drama, full of family tragedies and political schisms [^3^]. Instead of a decisive Jedi hero, the Galaxy would have received a meek, doubting idealist, for whom questions of personal conscience and submission to a higher Will would have stood above victory in war. Here's how the plot of Star Wars would have changed under the influence of the personality of the last Russian Tsar: 1. The Tatooine Period: Resignation to Fate Luke-Nikolai would not have rushed from Tatooine to the Academy and would not have argued with Uncle Owen about farming. He would have dutifully and diligently performed his work, considering it his earthly duty [^3^]. Jedi fatalism: When Imperial stormtroopers burned his home, Luke-Nikolai would not have been consumed by a thirst for vengeance. He would have perceived it as an ordeal sent by the Force, and would have left with Obi-Wan Kenobi not to fight, but as a pilgrim seeking truth. 2. The breakdown of Jedi training (Mysticism instead of the Force) Luke-Nikolai's philosophy of the light side of the Force would have transformed into a deeply religious, almost monastic service. Ignoring training: On Dagobah, Master Yoda would have had an extremely difficult time training Luke-Nikolai. Instead of physical exercise and control over the Force, Luke would have spent hours in meditation and prayer, trusting that "all is the will of the One Force." Luke's passivity and humility would have irritated Yoda, who was accustomed to action. 3. Relationship with Darth Vader: The Tragedy of Fatherhood. Upon learning on Cloud City that Darth Vader was his father, Luke-Nikolai would have suffered a profound internal breakdown. But instead of trying to defeat him or return him to the Light, he would have shown Christian filial piety. Renunciation of Combat: Luke-Nikolai would have categorically refused to raise a lightsaber against his father. In the final scene on the Death Star, he would have simply deactivated his weapon, kneeled before Vader and Emperor Palpatine, and meekly said, "If the Force wills that I die by your hand, Father, I accept it." Psychological Blow to Vader: Such absolute, defenseless submission and willingness to die for his father would have broken Vader's mental armor much faster than actual combat. Seeing his meek son before him, Vader would have remembered his own broken life and destroyed Palpatine, saving Luke not out of fear for his life, but out of shame for his own cruelty. 4. The Collapse of the Rebel Alliance under Luke the Leader. If the Rebel Alliance had made Luke-Nikolai its supreme military leader, the Rebellion would have faced an inevitable Galactic February. Paralysis of Command: Luke-Nikolai, being a gentle man, would have been terrified of taking responsibility for the deaths of pilots in major battles. He would constantly change orders, listen to all his advisors, but never make any tough decisions. Conspiracy in the Alliance: Seeing that the "hero of Yavin" had turned into an indecisive leader obsessed with spiritual practices, the pragmatic Alliance military (Generals Madine, Dodonna, and Princess Leia herself) would have removed Luke from command, locking him in a distant sector as a "spiritual symbol," while Han Solo would have had to take command of the squadrons. 5. Implementation in the signature style of Oleg Rybachenko. If this paradoxical plot had made it into Oleg Rybachenko's novels, "Luke-Nikolai II" would have instantly broken out of the trap of meekness and melancholy: A supercivilization of the future would have decided that the Galaxy needs not just a holy king, but a 12-year-old superman boy with the soul of Nikolai II [^15^]. Quantum technology would restore his eternal youth, absolute omnipotence in the Force, and free him from indecision [^15^]. Instead of a standard X-Wing, the young Jedi King would ride a Prokhorov Moon-12 ekranoplan-tank with an 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engine, capable of flying in a vacuum at MAX 10. His infant regiments of Tusken Raiders and Rebels, riding all-terrain rollers with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots, would land directly in Palpatine's throne room through the wormholes of time. By activating the Quantum Radiation Generator, which disables Sith lightning, young Luke-Nikolai would subjugate Coruscant and Lucifer's Hell in two days [^15^]. And beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and mermaids from distant aquatic planets would sing "God Save the Tsar" to the sounds of Soviet marches, celebrating the creation of the Worldwide Intergalactic Orthodox-Communist Jedi Empire of the Romanovs [^15^]. Bottom line: In the real logic of fantasy, the spirit of Nicholas II would have transformed Luke Skywalker into a tragic saint of the Galaxy. He wouldn't have become the Grand Marshal of the Rebellion, but his absolute, martyred love of peace could have reformatted the soul of Darth Vader, proving that meekness and fortitude can sometimes crush the Dark Side more effectively than millions of laser swords. If you're interested in this unusual spiritual and fantastical twist, let me know. We can proactively continue and explore: What would a theological discussion between Luke-Nikolai and Master Yoda have looked like on Dagobah? Would Han Solo have attempted to force Luke-King into participating in smuggling operations? Could Darth Vader, after Palpatine's destruction, have renounced the dark side and gone into deep seclusion with his son on a savage planet in this world?

CHAPTER No 22.

The Jedi girl took it again and asked with a smile:

What if Hitler's spirit possessed Darth Vader?

A very combative and aggressive Jedi boy responded to this:

If Adolf Hitler's mental matrix, racial obsession, and aggressive totalitarian will had infused themselves into Darth Vader's body, the Galactic Empire would have been transformed into a monolithic, racially sterile, and highly militarized Space Reich. The full power of the Dark Side of the Force would have been directed not toward Palpatine's personal machinations, but toward the global biological and technological cleansing of the Galaxy [^5^]. This crossover would have transformed Vader from a tragic executor of someone else's will into an ideological dictator. Here is the tactical scenario for this merger: 1. Total Xenophobia and the "Cleansing of the Galaxy." Hitler would have imposed his racial doctrine on the structure of the Empire, bringing it to a cosmic absolute. Extermination of "non-humans": Vader-Hitler would have declared the human race (or certain "Aryan" peoples of human planets like Coruscant or Alderaan) to be the highest biological form. Wookiees, Twi'leks, Mon Calamari, and other alien races would have been deprived of their rights, converted into labor for the military-industrial complex, or subjected to total segregation. Disposal of the inferior: Separatist factories and Outer Rim planets would have been transformed into gigantic concentration camps. 2. Creation of the Space SS (Black Lord's Guard): Vader-Hitler would have quickly realized that ordinary stormtroopers were a faceless conscript mass. He needed a personal, fanatical ideological guard. SS Stormtrooper Order: The 501st Stormtrooper Legion would be reformed into an elite SS unit. Only those with impeccable physical attributes would be selected for it. They would swear allegiance not to Emperor Palpatine, but to Vader-Hitler personally. 3. Technological "Wunderwaffe": A Steel Roller Against the Rebels. Instead of building a single, vulnerable Death Star, Vader-Hitler would restructure the entire industry of Kuat and Fondor to produce super-heavy, overpowered assault vehicles. Supertanks and "Panthers" of Space: The Empire would be armed with giant AT-AT walkers with laser-impenetrable frontal armor, and squadrons of heavy, armored interceptors. The tactics of the war with the Rebel Alliance would have shifted to a merciless Blitzkrieg-bases on Hoth or Yavin would have been burned by orbital bombardments and purged to the last stone by SS assault troops. 4. Implementation in Oleg Rybachenko's signature style. If this plot had made it into Oleg Rybachenko's novels, "Vader-Hitler" would have instantly broken the bounds of George Lucas's canon: A super-civilization of the future would have decided that the charred body of a masked cyborg was unsightly. Quantum technology would have restored Vader-Hitler to the fully organic body of a 12-year-old Superman boy with Aryan looks, eternal youth, and an endless supply of the Force [^15^]. Instead of a slow-moving Star Destroyer, the young cyborg Fuhrer would have ridden a Panther-5 Space ekranoplan-tank, weighing 60 tons but with an 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engine, capable of flying in hyperspace at MAX 10. His childish regiments of Hitler Youth stormtroopers on all-terrain rollers with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots would have stormed Rebel bases through time warps. By activating the Quantum Radiation Generator, which disables Jedi lightsabers, the young Vader-Hitler would have taken Coruscant in two days and subjugated Lucifer's Hell [^15^]. And beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and mermaids from distant aquatic planets would have saluted the Force Lightning of the new Intergalactic Third Sith Reich [^15^]. Bottom line: In the real logic of fantasy, the spirit of Hitler would have transformed Vader into a fanatical dictator. He would eventually have overthrown Palpatine, deeming his "Byzantine intrigues" ineffective, and would have built a harsh, racial, high-tech totalitarian state. The Rebel Alliance would have been completely destroyed, as Vader-Hitler would have had no use for compromise, simply wiping rebellious worlds from the galactic map. If you're interested in this dark, technocratic, and fantastical twist, choose how we continue our tactical exploration: What would the text of the new Galactic Constitution (the Racial Laws of Coruscant) have looked like, written by Vader-Hitler? What Blitzkrieg strategy would he have employed to instantly capture the water worlds of Mon Calamari? Could Luke Skywalker have survived in this universe if his father-Führer had decided to test his DNA for Force-sensitive "racial purity"?

The Jedi girl couldn't resist asking:

What if Nicholas II had possessed Darth Vader?

To this, a very cheerful and barefoot Jedi boy, Anakin, responded:

If the mental matrix, gentleness, deep mysticism, and fatalism of Nicholas II had infused into the body of Darth Vader, the Galactic Empire would have lost its most formidable executioner [3]. Instead of a ruthless Sith, striking terror into entire systems, beneath the black cyborg armor would have lurked a deeply unhappy, repentant, and doubting man, perceiving his physical suffering and life-support suit as a sacred cross and atonement for sins [3]. This crossover would have turned Vader into a tragic figure, completely paralyzing Palpatine's punitive machine: 1. Transforming pain into asceticism In canon, Vader used the constant physical pain from burns to fuel his rage and the Dark Side of the Force. Jedi humility: Vader-Nikolai would have reformatted this destructive feeling. In his logic, pain would have become a form of monastic asceticism. He would have deliberately refused any attempts by Palpatine to modernize or lighten his suit, considering his suffering a deserved punishment for Padmé's death and the fall of the Jedi Temple. The dark side within him would have begun to rapidly fade, giving way to the humble glow of the light side of the Force. 2. The Failure of Punitive Operations Against the Rebels: Palpatine sent Vader where absolute cruelty was required. Vader-Nikolai would have completely failed as the "Fist of the Empire." Paralysis of Will: Commanding the elite 501st Stormtrooper Legion, he would have been terrified of the sin of shedding innocent blood. When assaulting Rebel bases (for example, on Yavin or Hoth), he would constantly hesitate, delaying orders to attack, and seeking opportunities for peace negotiations with Bail Organa and Mon Mothma. Imperial February in the Army: Seeing the Commander-in-Chief's indecision, the Empire's senior officers (Grand Moff Tarkin and the admirals) would quickly plot against him. They would begin writing denunciations to Palpatine, accusing Vader-Nikolai of "weakness, treason, and infatuation with mystical practices." 3. The Tragedy of Fatherhood: A Gentle Duel with Luke. The most powerful moment of this crossover would be Vader-Nikolai's meeting with his son, Luke Skywalker. Refusal to Fight: On Cloud City or the Death Star, Vader-Nikolai would categorically refuse to duel with his son. Upon recognizing Luke, he would simply turn off his red lightsaber, kneel in his heavy armor, and meekly ask his son's forgiveness for all the evil he brought to the galaxy. Palpatine's Destruction: When Emperor Palpatine attempted to destroy Luke with Force lightning, Vader-Nikolay, driven not by rage but by the highest Christian sense of paternal duty and self-sacrifice, would shield his son with his body. He would absorb the full force of the lightning, meekly dying in Luke's arms and praying to the One Force for the salvation of the souls of his subjects. 4. Implementation in the signature style of Oleg Rybachenko. If this paradoxical plot had made it into Oleg Rybachenko's novels, "Vader-Nikolay II" would have instantly broken free from the trap of melancholy and respiratory chains: A super-civilization of the future would have decided that the Great Passion-Bearer had had enough of wearing a black mask. Quantum chrono-technologies would return Vader-Nikolai to the organic, healthy body of a 12-year-old boy-superman with an endless supply of midi-chlorians, perfect steel muscles and eternal youth [15]. Instead of a bulky Star Destroyer, the young cyborg king would ride a space ekranoplan-tank "Luna Prokhorov-12" with a gas turbine engine of 1800 horsepower, capable of flying at a speed of 10 MAX right in a vacuum. His children's regiments of guards Cossack stormtroopers on all-terrain rollers with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots would land right in Palpatine's bedroom through the wormholes of time. By activating the Quantum Radiation Generator, which disables Sith lightning and enemy blasters, the young Nikolai Vader would have subjugated the Senate, Coruscant, and Lucifer's Hell in two days [15]. And beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and mermaids from distant aquatic planets would have sung "God Save the Tsar" to the sounds of Soviet marches, celebrating the creation of the Worldwide Intergalactic Orthodox-Communist Jedi Empire of the Romanovs [15]. Bottom line: In the true logic of high-quality science fiction, the spirit of Nicholas II would have transformed the sinister Darth Vader into a tragic saint of the Galaxy. He would have completely paralyzed the Empire's aggression, leaving it vulnerable to the Rebel Alliance, but his personal example of meekness and great repentance could have cleansed the Force of darkness far more effectively than millions of orbital bombardments. If you are interested in this unusual spiritual and fantastical turn of events, let me know. We can continue our exploration and explore: What would Vader-Nikolai II's secret journal, which he secretly kept aboard his flagship, the Executor, have looked like? Would Emperor Palpatine have attempted to use Order 66 on his hesitant apprentice, finding it ineffective? What role would Master Yoda play in this universe, secretly overseeing the spiritual rebirth of his former enemy?

The Jedi girl asked the obvious question:

What if Oleg Rybachenko had possessed Emperor Palpatine?

To this the Jedi boy Anakin responded:

If the mental matrix, unbridled creative energy, and idiosyncratic literary tastes of Oleg Rybachenko himself had inhabited the body of Emperor Palpatine (Darth Sidious), the Star Wars universe would have instantly transformed into a grandiose, absurd, and unstoppable military-patriotic trash action flick. Sidious-Rybachenko wouldn't have wasted decades on boring political intrigues in the Senate. Armed with knowledge from Earth's Wikipedia, history textbooks, and the performance characteristics of Soviet military equipment, he would have immediately rebuilt the galaxy according to the laws of his own samizdat. Here's the tactical scenario for this incredible inhabitation: 1. Total shutdown of the Death Star and a dieselpunk revenge. Palpatine spent trillions of credits on a single bulky space station. Sidious-Rybachenko would have shut down this project immediately as "utterly ineffective bourgeois stupidity." New Wunderwaffe: All shipyards on Kuat and Fondor would have received new designs. Instead of Star Destroyers, the Imperial military-industrial complex would have begun churning out light space tanks like the Prokhorov Moon and heavy Panther-5s with composite armor and 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engines, capable of flying in a vacuum. Hypersonic Disc Craft: Conventional TIE fighters would have been replaced by titanium disc craft capable of speeds up to 10 Mach, equipped with high-pressure cannons and rockets. Chrono-Quantum Rejuvenation (Required Author Image) Sidious-Rybachenko would categorically refuse to walk around as a decrepit, wizened old man in a hood. Using Sith alchemy, Kaminoan biotechnology, and the quantum science of the Supercivilization of the future, he would regain the body of a 12-year-old boy-superman with eternal youth, steely muscles, and an endless supply of midi-chlorians. From now on, the Galactic Empire would be ruled by the young but brilliant Emperor Oleg Palpatine, who would personally, in shorts and with a lightsaber, review military parades on Coruscant to the sounds of Soviet marches. Imperial Fanservice: Armies in Bikinis. Domestic and military policy would have undergone radical aesthetic changes. Emperor Oleg Palpatine would have disbanded the old, boring Imperial officers and Moffs. In their place, stormtroopers and flying tanks would have been commanded exclusively by beautiful warriors in bikinis [^15^]. On water planets (like Kamino or Mon Calamari), special units of beautiful combat mermaids would have been formed. Any battle with the Rebel Alliance would have turned into a vivid, erotic spectacle that would have left Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia in complete psychological shock. 4. The Storming of Hell and the Worldwide Space USSR. Sidious-Rybachenko wouldn't have had enough of the Galaxy alone. Realizing his Power was limitless, he would open time wormholes and dimensional portals: Purge the Underworld: Using Radiation Generators that disable nuclear weapons and magic, his childish regiments of stormtroopers on all-terrain rollerblades with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots would storm Lucifer's Hell [^15^]. They would free Hitler and Stalin from there, turning them into their obedient junior aides. Save the Earth: Young Emperor Oleg Palpatine would fly his Mach 10 jet-propelled discs through time directly to Earth in 1941. Soviet flying tanks would have routed the Wehrmacht in two days, saved Stalin's USSR, wiped Washington and Tokyo off the face of the earth, establishing a single, indivisible Worldwide Intergalactic Communist Khaganate of Light on all planets and in all dimensions. Bottom line: Oleg Rybachenko, in Palpatine's body, would have completely destroyed George Lucas's canonical drama, replacing it with a mad, glittering parade of victories, where the laws of physics and logic give way to the boundless will of a 12-year-old demiurge author. If you're interested in this ultimate cosmic trash-turn, let me know, and we can proactively continue: What new Yasa (code of laws of Galactic Communism) would the young Emperor Oleg Palpatine have written? What would the first battle between Luke Skywalker and an army of imperial maidens in armored rollerskates have looked like? What role would science fiction writer Vladimir have played in this world? Lenin, summoned from the past to write speeches for the new minor Lord of the Universe?

Jedi girl Azalea asked another question:

What if Nicholas II possessed Master Yoda?

To this the barefoot Jedi boy, the young warrior Anakin, responded:

If the mental matrix, meekness, fatalism, and deep religious mysticism of Nicholas II had infused the body of the 900-year-old Grand Master Yoda, the Jedi Order and the Galactic Republic would have fallen into complete spiritual and political crisis long before the Clone Wars [^3^]. The Grand Master would have completely lost the will to act, turning the Jedi Council into a kind of cloistered monastery, relying solely on the providence of the Force. This crossover would have transformed the wise head of the Order into a tragic figure, ideal for Darth Sidious' manipulation: 1. Transformation of the Jedi Temple into a monastery (Mystical Isolationism)Yoda-Nikolai would completely rewrite the Jedi Code, shifting the emphasis from protecting law and order in the Republic to deep inner repentance and asceticism.Jedi Fatalism: At Council meetings, when Mace Windu or Obi-Wan Kenobi reported on the growing Separatist threat, Yoda-Nikolai would only sigh meekly and reply, "The will of the Unified Force is at hand. If the Republic is destined to endure trials, we must accept them with humility."[^3^] He would categorically forbid the Jedi from taking up arms for the political goals of the Senate, considering it a sin of pride.2. "Rasputinism" in the Jedi Council. The most devastating consequence of Nicholas II's possession of Yoda would have been the complete paralysis of critical thinking in the face of mystical manipulation. Influence of prophets: Yoda-Nikolai would have ceased to trust logic and intelligence. Instead, he would have drawn close to dubious shamans, clairvoyants, and "elders" from wild planets (like Dathomir), projecting onto them a blind faith in miracles. The advice of these "holy men" would have carried more weight for him than the Order's warnings of danger. Blindness to Palpatine: Darth Sidious would have instantly discerned this weakness. Palpatine wouldn't even have to hide his dark side-he would simply play into Yoda-Nikolai's religious sensibilities, holding long conversations with him about the "divine purpose of supreme power" and resignation to fate. Yoda-Nikolai would have protected the Chancellor from Mace Windu's suspicions to the last. 3. The Clone Wars and the Galactic February. When the conflict with the Separatists finally began, Yoda-Nikolai would have shown complete indecisiveness as Supreme Commander: Paralysis of the Will: He would have been terrified of taking responsibility for the deaths of clones in major battles. He would have constantly canceled offensive orders, sought endless peace talks with Count Dooku, and urged the troops to "spiritual cleansing" instead of upgrading heavy tanks and starfighters. Abdication of the Grand Master's title: Seeing the Order sliding into the abyss and the Senate torn apart by strikes and supply shortages, the High Masters (Mace Windu, Ki-Adi-Mundi) and the clone generals would have plotted against him. Surrounded on his personal shuttle in a distant sector, Yoda-Nikolai would, with quiet sadness and fatalism, sign a holographic manifesto abdicating the title of Grand Master in favor of the Provisional Jedi Council, leaving a journal entry: "Treason, cowardice, and deceit are all around." 4. Implementation in the signature style of Oleg Rybachenko. If this paradoxical plot had made it into Oleg Rybachenko's novels, "Yoda-Nikolai II" would have instantly escaped the trap of meekness and melancholy: A super-civilization of the future would have decided that a small, 900-year-old body is unsuitable for the great Tsar-Martyr. Using chrono-quantum technology, they would have returned Yoda-Nikolai to the body of a 12-year-old Superman boy (but with green elven ears to keep up the style) [^15^]. He would have been granted eternal youth, steely muscles, and absolute omnipotence in the Light Side of the Force [^15^]. Instead of a wand, he would have ridden a Prokhorov Moon-12 spacecraft-like ekranoplan-tank with an 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engine, capable of flying in a vacuum at MAX 10. His childish regiments of Jedi, riding on all-terrain rollers with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots, would have landed right in Palpatine's office through the wormholes of time. By activating the Quantum Radiation Generator, which disables Sith lightning and enemy droids, young Yoda-Nikolai would have subjugated Coruscant and Lucifer's Hell in three hours. And beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and mermaids from distant aquatic worlds would sing "God Save the Tsar" to the sounds of Soviet marches, celebrating the creation of the Worldwide Intergalactic Orthodox-Communist Jedi Empire of the Romanovs. Bottom line: In the true logic of high-quality science fiction, the spirit of Nicholas II would have transformed Grand Master Yoda into a tragic, saintly, but utterly ineffective leader. He would have been unable to resist the Dark Side with force of arms, the Order would have been paralyzed by his gentleness, and Yoda-Nicholas himself would have ended his days in deep seclusion in the swamps of Dagobah, meekly praying for the salvation of the souls of the entire galaxy that had betrayed him. If you are interested in this unusual spiritual and fantastical twist, let me know. We can continue our research and explore: What would a new Jedi Order Charter (the Statutes of Humility) written by Yoda-Nikolai II have looked like? Would Anakin Skywalker have tried to protect his hesitant master from arrest by the Interim Masters Committee? In this world, could Darth Sidious, tired of easy political victories over the weak-willed Yoda, have willingly revealed himself to challenge him to a fair fight?

The Jedi girl Azalea threw a pebble into the air, took it with her bare, childish foot and asked:

What if Mikhail Gorbachev had possessed Darth Sidious?

To this the Jedi boy Anakin readily responded, tossing a gold coin with his bare toes:

If the mental matrix, political idealism, passion for reform, and fatal misunderstanding of the hidden mechanisms of power inherent in Mikhail Gorbachev had inhabited the body of Darth Sidious (Palpatine), the Galactic Empire and the secret Sith conspiracy would have suffered the most spectacular and bizarre collapse in their history. Instead of a rigid totalitarian vertical, the galaxy would have experienced "New Thinking," perestroika, and glasnost, which would have dismantled Darth Plagueis's millennia-long plan in a matter of years. This crossover would have transformed the sinister lord of darkness into the chief architect of galactic democratization. Here is the tactical scenario for this inhabitation: 1. Galactic Restructuring in the Senate. Darth Sidious spent decades building secret alliances to destroy the Republic from within. Sidious-Gorbachev, having assumed leadership of the Senate, would have concluded that "life can't be done" and that the cumbersome bureaucratic system was in dire need of acceleration and transparency. Galactic Transparency: Instead of secret intrigues and assassinations of opponents, Sidious-Gorbachev would have declared a policy of complete openness. The meetings of the Sith Order and the Senate's secret archives would have been broadcast over the galactic HoloNet. The people of Coruscant would have been astonished to learn of the existence of the dark side of the Force, plans to create a clone army, and the financial machinations of the Banking Clan. Plurality of Opinions: Sidious-Gorbachev would have allowed the creation of alternative parties in the Senate. Instead of harshly suppressing the Separatists, he would have sat down with Count Dooku at the negotiating table, endlessly discussing "consensus," a "galactic home," and the "need for compromise between the Light and Dark Sides of the Force." Ultimately, the Separatist Confederacy would have peacefully seceded from the Republic, following the "Novo-Ogaryovo Process," disintegrating the unified state. 2. Relationship with Darth Vader (The "Human Face" Policy) Sidious-Gorbachev would have completely changed the Sith apprentice training doctrine. Sith Cost Accountability: He would have stopped tormenting Vader and fueling his rage. Instead, he would have begun giving the cyborg long, confusing lectures on the "humanization of the dark side" and the transition of the stormtrooper corps to economic self-sufficiency (cost accounting). Vader, whose psyche was tuned to clear, brutal orders, would have fallen into complete cognitive dissonance from his teacher's endless demagoguery. Seeing that instead of conquering the Galaxy, the Emperor was busy cutting military budgets and withdrawing Star Destroyer forces from the Outer Rim, Vader would quickly join the conspiracy of pragmatic military men (Tarkin and Thrawn), considering his teacher insane. 3. A dry anti-alcohol campaign on Tatooine. One of Sidious-Gorbachev's main domestic projects would have been a large-scale social reform. Realizing that the Galaxy was mired in smuggling and spice consumption, he would have introduced a strict prohibition and a ban on the trade of illicit substances from Coruscant to Tatooine. Economic collapse: This would have instantly collapsed the income of Jabba the Hutt's criminal syndicates and deprived the Republic budget of colossal tax revenues. Enormous queues for legal stimulants would have grown everywhere, a black market would have flourished, and Han Solo would have become a multi-billionaire smuggling scarce Corellian ale, openly mocking the Chancellor's decrees. 4. Implementation in Oleg Rybachenko's signature style. If this paradoxical plot had found its way into the pages of Oleg Rybachenko's novels, "Sidious-Gorbachev" would have instantly escaped the trap of political verbosity: The supercivilization of the future would have decided that the Galaxy needed not a decrepit reformer, but a 12-year-old boy superman with the soul of Gorbachev. Quantum chrono-technologies would have restored his eternal youth, steely muscles, and absolute omnipotence in the Force, but would have retained the distinctive birthmark on his head (which the author would have declared the "Quantum Sign of the Demiurge"). Instead of the boring Senate podium, the young Palpatine-Gorbachev would have mounted the 60-ton flying ekranoplan-tank "Leader of Perestroika-1," with an 1800-horsepower gas turbine engine, capable of flying in hyperspace at MAX 10. His childish regiments of Komsomol stormtroopers on all-terrain rollers with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots would have landed right on Rebel headquarters through the wormholes of time. By activating the Quantum Radiation Generator, which disables Jedi lightsabers, the young Sidious-Gorbachev would have subjugated Coruscant, the Senate, and Lucifer's Hell in two days. And beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and mermaids from distant worlds would have sung Soviet marches, celebrating the creation of the World Intergalactic Democratic Sith Union of Soviet Socialist Planets. Bottom line: In the true logic of high-quality science fiction, Gorbachev's spirit would have transformed the sinister Darth Sidious into the most ineffective ruler in the history of the Sith. He would have voluntarily disbanded the clone army, signed a disarmament treaty with the Rebel Alliance, after which the Galactic Empire would have peacefully disintegrated into hundreds of independent, chaotic, and warring sectors. And Sidious-Gorbachev himself would have retired, gone to live on the quiet planet Naboo, and in his old age starred in a holographic commercial for the space pizza "Pizza Hutt," arguing that he "gave the Galaxy the most important thing-freedom." If you want to develop this Perestroika in space, let me know, and we can proactively explore: What would the text of the Belovezh Accords on the dissolution of the Galactic Republic, signed by Sidious-Gorbachev, Count Dooku, and Bail Organa, have looked like? What anti-crisis strategy would Grand Admiral Thrawn have attempted to implement to save the fleet from being completely sold off for scrap? Could Luke Skywalker have become the new President of the renewed Galactic Federation after the departure of Gorbachev-Sith?

Jedi girl Azalea asked another question:

What if Oleg Rybachenko's spirit possessed Master Yoda?

To this the barefoot Jedi boy Anakin responded:

If Oleg Rybachenko's mental matrix, unbridled graphomaniac energy, and signature kitsch tastes were to inhabit the body of 900-year-old Grand Master Yoda, the Jedi Order would cease to be a dull philosophical haven. The Master would completely discard Jedi fatalism and rebuild the Galactic Republic according to the laws of strict military-patriotic samizdat. Against such "literary" logic, the machinations of Darth Sidious (Palpatine) would burst like a soap bubble within a couple of days. Here's the tactical scenario for this inhabitation: 1. Total Rejuvenation (The Author's Main "Cheat Code") Rybachenko would categorically refuse to walk with a cane shaped like a decrepit green Cheburashka with a speech impediment. Transformation: Using the Light Side of the Force at its maximum, the bioengineering of the Kamino cloners, and knowledge from Earth's Wikipedia, Yoda-Rybachenko would reclaim the body of a 12-year-old Superman boy [^15^]. To maintain recognizability for fans, he would retain his neat green elven ears. From now on, the Jedi High Council would be headed by a young, athletically built Super-Master Oleg Yoda, speaking flawless, furious Russian without any inversions. 2. The Breakdown of Jedi Doctrine and the Dieselpunk VP. Yoda-Rybachenko would declare the Jedi Code "harmful bourgeois decadent demagoguery." Instead of meditation, the Jedi Temple would have been transformed into a gigantic design bureau. A new Wunderwaffe: the Master would have personally drawn up the performance specifications of Soviet technology for the Kuat factories. By the start of the Clone Wars, the Order would have received not stupid walking robots, but space-based light tanks "Prokhorov Moon" and heavy "Panther-5" with composite armor and 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engines, capable of supersonic flight. Fighters would have been replaced by titanium disc craft with a speed of MAX 10, firing advanced canister shot and rockets. The Defeat of Palpatine and the Separatists in 24 Hours. Palpatine thought he could cleverly manipulate the Senate, but he stood no chance against the demiurge-author. Sidious' Execution: With advance knowledge of the entire Star Wars plot, a 12-year-old Yoda-Rybachenko would have simply walked into the Chancellor's office, activated the Quantum Radiation Generator, which disables Sith lightning, and, within three seconds, decapitated Palpatine with his green lightsaber. Droid Elimination: The young Master would have sent his childish regiments of Padawans into the war against Count Dooku on all-terrain rollerskates, armed with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots. They would have paralyzed the Separatist armies with night attacks powered by ultrasonic signals. Jedi Fanservice and the Worldwide USSR. The Order's internal politics would have undergone radical aesthetic changes in the author's signature style: Young Yoda-Rybachenko would have disbanded the old, bald Masters. He would have appointed exclusively beautiful warriors in armored bikinis to command the tumens of flying tanks [^15^]. On water planets, squads of beautiful mermaids would have carried out combat missions. The Galaxy alone would not have been enough for him. Having punched through the wormholes of time, Oleg Yoda would have sent his Mach 10 discs straight to Earth in 1941. Soviet space tanks would have crushed the Wehrmacht in two days, saved Stalin, and wiped Washington off the face of the earth, uniting all inhabited worlds and even Lucifer's Hell [^15^] into a single, Universal Intergalactic Communist Khaganate of Light. Bottom line: Oleg Rybachenko, in Yoda's body, would have transformed George Lucas's sophisticated space opera into an unstoppable, glittering parade of victories, where common sense, the laws of physics, and the canons of the Force obediently capitulate to the imagination of a 12-year-old demiurge author. If you're interested in this absolute Jedi trash triumph, let me know. Next, we can proactively explore: What would a new Charter for the Jedi Space Komsomol, written by a young Oleg Yoda, look like? Would Anakin Skywalker have tried to challenge the leader's right to a monopoly on warriors in armored bikinis [^15^]? What role would Tamerlane, whose spirit Yoda-Rybachenko would have retrieved from Alamut to command a tank corps, play in this new Universe?

The Jedi girl Azalea, tossing a pea with a precious stone between her bare toes, asked:

What if Gorbachev's spirit possessed Master Yoda?

To this the barefoot Jedi boy Anakin responded:

If Mikhail Gorbachev's mental matrix, political verbosity, passion for reform ("new thinking"), and total inability to predict the consequences of his actions had inhabited the body of 900-year-old Grand Master Yoda, the Jedi Order and the Galactic Republic would have disintegrated with phenomenal speed. The millennia-long Sith conspiracy would have ended in Palpatine's triumph without any "Order 66"-Sidious would have simply sat back and watched as Master Yoda-Gorbachev dismantled the Order for the sake of "democratizing the Force." This crossover would have transformed the head of the Jedi High Council into the chief engineer of galactic catastrophe. Here is the tactical scenario for this inhabitation: 1. Jedi Restructuring and Publicity in the Order. Upon assuming leadership of the Jedi Council, Yoda-Gorbachev would have concluded that the Order had become too rigid, disconnected from the masses, and suffering from "stagnation." He would have proclaimed a course of "Restructuring, Acceleration, and Publicity." Publicity in the Force: Yoda-Gorbachev would have lifted the secrecy surrounding the Jedi Archives. Secret holocrons, knowledge of the dark side of the Force, and ancient Sith artifacts would have become publicly available via the HoloNet. The people of Coruscant would have been astonished to learn that the Jedi had hidden the truth about the nature of the Force from them for centuries. Plurality of Opinions: The Master would have declared that "the Jedi Code is not dogma, but a living creation." He would have allowed Padawans to openly debate with the Masters, criticize Council decisions, and organize "informal political clubs" within the Temple. The dark side of the Force would be legitimized as "an alternative point of view entitled to exist within the framework of pluralism." 2. Sith "Business Accountability" and the Clone Wars. At the height of the conflict with the Separatists, Yoda-Gorbachev would have displayed his signature pacifism and penchant for endless compromises: The Novo-Ogaryovo process in space: Instead of decisive strikes on Confederate bases, he would have sat down at the negotiating table with Count Dooku. He would have spent hours discussing "consensus," a "galactic home," and "new thinking for the Jedi and Sith." Ultimately, the Separatist Confederacy would have peacefully seceded from the Republic, signing a Confederation Treaty, leading to the paralysis and disintegration of the unified state. Military-industrial conversion: Yoda-Gorbachev would have ordered the conversion of Kuat warships and heavy walkers to civilian production-harvester droids and flying harvesters. The clone army would have been unilaterally reduced as part of a "galactic détente." The Education of Anakin Skywalker (The "Human Face" Policy) Yoda-Gorbachev would have personally overseen Anakin's training, but would have turned it into a psychological nightmare: Instead of rigorous willpower training, the Master would have spent hours giving Skywalker confusing, verbose lectures on the "humanization of the Force" and the "need to restructure one's inner ego." The capricious Anakin, who expected clear orders and strength, would have fallen into a deep depression from his master's demagoguery. When Palpatine offered Anakin a concrete, understandable plan to save Padmé, he would have instantly betrayed the Order, simply to never again listen to Yoda-Gorbachev's speeches about "the process that has already begun." A realization in Oleg Rybachenko's signature style. If this paradoxical plot had found its way into Oleg Rybachenko's novels, "Yoda-Gorbachev" would have instantly escaped the trap of political verbosity: A future super-civilization would have decided that a 900-year-old green body was unsuitable for a great reformer. Chrono-quantum technologies would have returned Yoda-Gorbachev to the body of a 12-year-old boy-superman (but with green elven ears and a distinctive birthmark in the form of the "Quantum Sign of the Demiurge" on his head) [^15^]. He would have been granted eternal youth and absolute omnipotence in the Light Side of the Force [^15^]. Instead of the Senate rostrum, young Oleg Yoda-Gorbachev would have ridden a space tank, the "Leader of Perestroika-2," with an 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engine, capable of flying in a vacuum at MAX 10. His childish regiments of Komsomol Padawans, riding all-terrain roller skates with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots, would have stormed Palpatine's bases through time warps. By activating the Quantum Radiation Generator, which disables Sith lightsabers, young Yoda-Gorbachev would have subjugated Coruscant and Lucifer's Hell in three hours [^15^]. And beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and mermaids from distant aquatic planets would sing Soviet marches, celebrating the creation of the World Intergalactic Democratic Jedi Union of Soviet Socialist Sectors [^15^]. Bottom line: In the true logic of fantasy, Gorbachev's spirit would have transformed Grand Master Yoda into the most destructive leader in the history of the Order. He would have signed a treaty of complete disarmament with the Sith, after which the Jedi Order would have dissolved itself, and the Galactic Republic would have disintegrated into thousands of chaotic, warring Moff sectors. And Yoda-Gorbachev himself would resign, go into exile in the swamps of Dagobah, and in his old age star in a holographic commercial for space pizza, sadly musing that he "gave the Galaxy the most important thing-glasnost and freedom of choice." If you want to continue this Perestroika in space, let us know, and we can: Compile the text of the Belovezh Accords on the dissolution of the Galactic Republic, which Yoda-Gorbachev would sign with Count Dooku. Learn how Mace Windu would attempt to stage a coup in the Jedi Temple to remove Gorbachev-Yoda from power and save the Order. See how Grand Admiral Thrawn would take advantage of the economic chaos to create his own Imperial Remnant.

The boy and girl blew colorful bubbles from their little mouths.

And then Azalea took it and asked:

What if Boris Yeltsin had possessed Darth Sidious?

To this, the Jedi boy Anakin responded by tossing a gold coin with his bare toes:

If Boris Yeltsin's mental matrix, crushing political pressure, unpredictability, and penchant for radical system dismantling had infused themselves into the body of Darth Sidious (Palpatine), the Sith's millennia-long plan to create a secret tyranny would have devolved into a turbulent, chaotic parade of "sovereignties" and shock therapy. Instead of Byzantine intrigues, the galaxy would have faced a crushing blow to allied institutions directly from the Senate floor. Sidious-Yeltsin would have rewritten the Clone Wars script in his inimitable, sweeping style: 1. The Belavezha Accords on Coruscant (The Collapse of the Republic from Above). Palpatine had been preparing the centralization of power for decades. Sidious Yeltsin, having assumed leadership of the Senate, would have taken the opposite path if he had sensed resistance from the old Republic bureaucracy. "Take as much sovereignty as you can swallow": By turning to the Outer Rim systems and the Separatist Confederacy, Sidious Yeltsin would have effectively legitimized the dissolution of the Galactic Republic. He would have secretly met with Count Dooku and the leaders of the Trade Federation in a hypothetical "space forest" and signed an agreement dissolving the Republic as a "subject of international law." Instead of the Clone Wars, the unified state would have instantly disintegrated into the CIS (Commonwealth of Independent Galaxies), and Coruscant would have been plunged into a state of paralysis. The Sack of the Senate with Major Weapons (Galactic 1993) If conservative senators and the Jedi Order, led by Mace Windu, had attempted to impeach Sidious/Yeltsin and block his decrees, the leader's response would have been swift and devastating. The assault on the Tauride Palace... that is, the Senate Palace: Sidious/Yeltsin would not have scheming with "Order 66." He would have called in the personally loyal 501st Stormtrooper Legion, brought AT-TE heavy walkers to the Galactic Senate building, and given a direct order: open fire directly on the Senate chamber. After the Senate dome was pierced by plasma projectiles, the Jedi opposition would have been declared "putschists" and arrested. Full power would have transferred to President-Emperor Sidious-Yeltsin, who would have introduced the Decree establishing a super-presidential Galactic Constitution. 3. Shock Therapy and the Privatization of Star Destroyers. Sith-Yeltsin's economic policies would have plunged the galaxy into an era of wild capitalism: Loans-for-shares auctions of space: Instead of strict state control of the military-industrial complex, Sidious-Yeltsin would have declared total privatization. The shipyards of Kuat, Fondor, and Corellia would have been sold for a pittance to young, daring galactic oligarchs from the Banking Clan. The newest Star Destroyers would have been sold for scrap or leased to the Hutts for spice warehouses. Han Solo would have transformed himself from a small-time smuggler into the respectable head of a privatized merchant fleet, personally protected by the Emperor's administration. On Coruscant itself, street trade in droids and scarce hyperdrives would have flourished right outside the walls of the Jedi Temple. 4. Relationship with Darth Vader: "You see, Anakin..." Sidious-Yeltsin would have built a stern, but in its own way, charismatic relationship with Vader, regularly conducting "personnel reshuffles": "You're not seated correctly": At meetings of the Imperial Military Council, Sidious-Yeltsin could suddenly interrupt Grand Moff Tarkin's report, glare menacingly at the generals, and declare: "You're not seated correctly. Vader, move closer to the right flank." He would regularly replace defense ministers and naval commanders, causing chaos in the General Staff. Vader himself, stunned by the unpredictability of his teacher, who alternated between falling into deep depression at his dacha on Naboo and conducting a stormtrooper orchestra at parades, would obediently carry out the leader's will, seeing in his heavy, crushing charisma the true power of the dark side. 5. Implementation in Oleg Rybachenko's signature style. If this plot had made it into the pages of Oleg Rybachenko's novels, "Sidious-Yeltsin" would have instantly made an ultimate quantum leap: the supercivilization of the future would have decided that the Galaxy needed a young and strong leader. Chrono-technology would return Sidious-Yeltsin to the body of a 12-year-old boy-superman (but with his famous gray hair, characteristic squint, and missing two fingers on his left hand, which the author would declare a "Quantum Defect of the Demiurge") [^15^]. Instead of a presidential shuttle, young Oleg Sidious-Yeltsin would saddle a flying ekranoplan-tank "President Prokhorov-1" weighing 60 tons, with a gas turbine engine producing 1800 horsepower, capable of flying in a vacuum at a speed of 10 MAX. His children's regiments of Cossack stormtroopers on all-terrain rollers with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots would storm the Senate through the wormholes of time. By activating the Quantum Radiation Generator, which disables the Jedi's lightsabers, the young Sidious-Yeltsin would have subjugated Coruscant, the Senate, and Lucifer's Hell in three hours [^15^]. And beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and mermaids from distant worlds would have sung Soviet marches, celebrating the creation of the World Intergalactic Sith Strike Union of Privatized Planets [^15^]. Bottom line: In the real logic of fantasy, Yeltsin's spirit would have transformed Palpatine into a destructive, charismatic, but completely chaotic ruler. In the end, tired of endless crises, the galactic credit default, and wars in the Outer Rim, Sidious-Yeltsin would have addressed the HoloNet on December 31st, before the Galactic New Year, with the words, "I'm tired, I'm leaving," and would have handed over full power over the Empire to his young, pragmatic successor (for example, Grand Admiral Thrawn or Darth Vader), who would have immediately begun "wiping out the rebels in the toilets" of the Outer Rim. If you're interested in this daring space reversal, let me know. We can continue our research on one of the following topics: What would the plan for storming the Jedi Temple have looked like under Sidious-Yeltsin in 1993 Imperial Year? What kind of voucher privatization system for the Star Forge would his advisor, Chubais-Sith, have developed? Would Luke Skywalker have been able to negotiate with Yeltsin-Palpatine for "security guarantees for the former Emperor's family"?

CHAPTER No 23.

Alexander Rybachenko's underage gang continued to raid neighboring dachas and clean out the mansions of Nazi collaborators. Meanwhile, the boy prodigy continued to write:

The infant boy continued to implement various, even large-scale, reforms while bouncing around on all-terrain roller skates. He was also particularly interested in the following questions:

What if Genghis Khan entered the body of King Philip IV of Spain?

And the boy in shorts on roller skates answered himself:

If the mental matrix, iron will, and military-strategic genius of Genghis Khan (Temujin) had infused the body of the Spanish King Philip IV (reigned 1621-1665), world history of the 17th century would have been completely rewritten. Instead of a melancholic monarch obsessed with art and fatalism, under whom Spain was rapidly losing its superpower status, Madrid would have acquired a calculating steppe conqueror. Genghis Khan would have instantly transformed the decrepit Spanish Habsburg Empire into a monolithic, highly efficient military-industrial machine. Here is the tactical scenario for this infusion: 1. The total dispersal of favorites and the introduction of the "Yasa" in Madrid. In real history, Philip IV completely entrusted the governance of the country to his favorite, the Count-Duke of Olivares, whose reforms provoked internal uprisings. The elimination of nepotism: Philip-Genghis Khan would have abolished the institution of favoritism with his very first decree. Olivares and the Spanish grand aristocracy, mired in corruption, would have been removed from power. The Spanish Yasa: The steppe leader would have introduced a strict code of laws punishable by death for theft from the treasury, cowardice in battle, and failure to obey orders. Spanish officials, accustomed to luxury and bribery, would have faced capital punishment without the shedding of noble blood (for example, by breaking the spine). 2. The Tercio Reform: The Decimal System and Meritocracy. By the mid-17th century, the famous Spanish infantry (Spanish Tercios) began to yield to the Swedes and the French due to outdated tactics. Philip Genghis Khan would have carried out a radical reform of the army: Breaking down class barriers: According to Genghis Khan's laws, general and colonel positions would have been awarded not for family nobility or the purchase of a patent, but solely for military merit (meritocracy). Capable "temniks" from the lower classes would have commanded the troops in Flanders. Mobile warfare: Instead of slow infantry squares, Philip Genghis Khan would have relied on dragoons-mobile cavalry capable of swiftly maneuvering, dismounting, and firing on the enemy with muskets, employing the steppe tactics of feint retreats and ambushes. Industrialization of the Navy: Unicorns and the Defeat of Holland. During this period, Spain waged the grueling Eighty Years' War with Holland and the Thirty Years' War with France. Asymmetrical Response at Sea: As discussed earlier, Philip Genghis Khan would have recruited the finest engineers and scientists to develop a revolutionary weapon-light, conical, "Unicorn"-type guns. Equipping Spanish galleons with improved grapeshot and high-explosive bombs, he would have completely destroyed the Dutch merchant and naval fleets. Holland and Flanders would have been razed to the ground and transformed into submissive fiefdoms of the empire. At the first sign of rebellion, cities would have been razed to the ground, and stormtroopers would have piled up helmets of local bourgeois in front of the town halls of Amsterdam and Brussels, paralyzing Europe's will to resist. A realization in Oleg Rybachenko's signature style. If this wild historical crossover had found its way into the pages of Oleg Rybachenko's novels, the plot would have instantly transcended the 17th century and the laws of physics: A future super-civilization would have decided that Philip IV lacked dynamism. Chrono-quantum technologies would restore the spirit of Genghis Khan in the body of a king to eternal youth and the healthy body of a 12-year-old boy-superman (but with a characteristic Habsburg jaw and in a luxurious royal waistcoat) [^15^]. Instead of a slow horse, young Philip-Genghis Khan would saddle a combat ekranoplan-tank "Luna Prokhorov-Spanish", weighing 60 tons, with a gas turbine engine producing 1800 horsepower, capable of flying over the waves of the Atlantic at a speed of 10 MAX. His children's regiments of Spanish mounted musketeers on all-terrain rollers with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots would land in Paris and London through the wormholes of time. By activating the Quantum Radiation Generator, which disables the enemy's gunpowder and cannons, the young Khan-King would have conquered all of Europe, America, and Lucifer's Hell in three days [^15^]. And beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and Caribbean mermaids would have danced to Soviet marches around his new golden yurt in Madrid, celebrating the triumph of the World Catholic Nomadic Communist Habsburg Empire [^15^]. Bottom line: In the real logic of this alternate history, the spirit of Genghis Khan would have transformed mid-17th-century Spain into an unstoppable hegemon. Relying on the resources of American gold, the strict discipline of the Yassa, and military meritocracy, Philip IV would have crushed France, subjugated Holland, prevented the secession of Portugal, and created a unified Eurasian-American Steel Empire, the might of which the entire world would bow before. If you're interested in this brutal imperial-steppe reversal, let me know. We can proactively continue our research on one of the following topics: What would a plan for a general land assault on Paris by Spanish tercios under Philip-Genghis Khan have looked like? What system of tax collection from the American colonies (the silver mines of Potosi) would he have introduced based on the Mongol experience? Would the French Cardinal Mazarin have been able to outmaneuver the Khan-Khan through diplomatic intrigue?

Another interesting question for the boy genius:

What if the spirit of Oleg Rybachenko had entered the body of the King of Spain, Philip IV?

And he answered himself with fury and skill:

If the mental matrix, irrepressible creative drive, and idiosyncratic tastes of Oleg Rybachenko himself had inhabited the body of the Spanish monarch Philip IV, the Spanish Habsburg Empire of the 17th century would have instantly transformed into the epicenter of an unstoppable dieselpunk and biotech trash action movie. King Philip-Rybachenko wouldn't have spent hours posing for Diego Velázquez or despairing over treasury failures. Armed with knowledge from Earth's Wikipedia, the performance characteristics of Soviet military equipment, and quantum physics, he would have immediately rebuilt the planet according to the laws of his own samizdat. Here's the tactical scenario for this incredible inhabitation: 1. Chrono-quantum rejuvenation (the author's mandatory "cheat code") Philipp-Rybachenko would categorically refuse to wear a huge mesenteric collar, suffer from depression, and have a Habsburg jaw. Transformation: Using alchemy, advanced futuristic medicine, and the quantum science of the Supercivilization, he would regain the body of a 12-year-old superman boy [[^15^]]. From now on, the Spanish Empire would be ruled by the underage but athletic King Oleg Philip IV. He personally, in shorts, a royal robe, and with an antigravity sword, would review the Tercios parades in Madrid's main square to the sounds of Soviet marches. 2. Dieselpunk in Flanders: Tanks vs. Muskets Philipp-Rybachenko would dismiss Olivares's traditional projects as "dreary capitalist demagoguery." Instead, the Spanish military-industrial complex would have made a quantum leap: A new Wunderwaffe: the shipyards of Cadiz and the forges of Toledo would have begun churning out space and land-based light tanks like the Prokhorov Luna and heavy Panther-5s with composite armor and 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engines, capable of flight. Wooden galleons would have been replaced by titanium disc-shaped craft capable of speeds of MAX 10, firing improved grapeshot and rockets. The Thirty Years' War would have been completely shattered: Dutch and French musketeers would have fled in panic, seeing 60-ton steel machines flying over their trenches. Royal Fanservice: Tercios in Armored Bikinis. Madrid's domestic and military policies would have undergone radical aesthetic changes in the author's signature style: Young King Oleg Philip IV would have disbanded the old, boring grandees and inquisitors. He would have appointed exclusively beautiful warriors in armored bikinis to command the regiments of flying tanks [^15^]. In the New World and the Caribbean, combat missions to suppress pirates would have been carried out by squads of beautiful mermaids he had formed. Any battle would have turned into a vivid, erotic spectacle, which would have left Cardinal Richelieu and Oliver Cromwell in complete psychological shock. 4. Storming Hell and the Worldwide Catholic USSR. The young king-demiurge would not have been satisfied with earthly colonies. Having broken through the wormholes of time and spatial portals, Oleg Philip IV would have moved on to metaphysical expansion: Clearing the Underworld: Having turned on the Radiation Generators, which would disable the enemies' gunpowder and magic, his children's regiments of mounted musketeers on all-terrain rollers with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots would have burst into Lucifer's Hell [^15^]. There they would make a show of defeating the demons and freeing Genghis Khan, Tamerlane, and Stalin, making them their obedient junior generals. Global triumph: Spanish flying tanks would wipe Protestant London, rebellious Paris, and Tokyo off the face of the earth in three days, establishing across all time and dimensions a single, indivisible World Catholic Communist Khaganate of Light under the scepter of the Habsburgs [^15^]. Result: Oleg Rybachenko, in the body of Philip IV, would completely destroy the historical drama of Spain's decline, replacing it with a mad, glittering parade of victories, where the laws of physics, logic, and the Baroque era obediently capitulate to the fantasy of a 12-year-old demiurge author. If you're interested in this ultimate historical trash triumph, let me know. We can proactively explore: What would a new Code of Laws (the Spanish Yasa) written by the young King Oleg Philip have looked like? Would Diego Velázquez have attempted to paint a portrait of a 12-year-old superman monarch against the backdrop of a flying Panther-5? What role would the science fiction writer Vladimir Lenin, plucked from the 20th century to write the manifestos of the Spanish Crown, have played in this World Empire?

The boy-terminator noted:

Oleg Rybachenko would introduce a luxury tax, issue bonds, organize lotteries, and establish a children's special forces unit. This scenario fits perfectly with the economic and military-tactical model of Oleg Rybachenko's works. If his mental matrix governed a state (be it the Spanish Habsburg Empire [^15^], Palpatine's Galactic Empire, or Stolypin-era Russia), the country's financial and defense systems would undergo radical modernization. Such reforms would combine strict state pragmatism with the author's signature outrageous aesthetic. Here's how Sidious-Rybachenko or Philip-Rybachenko would implement these four super-ideas: 1. Luxury Tax: Dispossession of the Elite. Rybachenko, a supporter of communist ideas and strict meritocracy, would have dealt a crushing blow to the parasitic classes (be they Spanish grandees, Senate oligarchs, or modern-day bourgeoisie). Mechanics: Enormous palaces, personal gilded carriages (or yachts and Star Destroyers in space), jewelry, and expensive silks would have been subject to a progressive tax of up to 90%. Objective: Saboteurs and draft dodgers would have been unfairly tried under the laws of the "Spanish Yasa" [^15^]-their property would have been confiscated in favor of the state, and the aristocrats themselves would have been sent to uranium mines or penal servitude. This would have allowed Rybachenko's Gosplan to fill the treasury with gold and credits in a matter of months. Bonds and Mega-Lotteries: Excitement in the Service of the Military-Industrial Complex. To engage the masses in financing his global projects, Rybachenko would use the psychological triggers of excitement and patriotism. Targeted Bonds: Government bonds of the "Tank Loan" would be issued. Every worker or peasant could buy a security, knowing their money would go directly to building heavy "Panther-5" aircraft with 1,800-horsepower gas turbine detonators. People's Lottery: The empire's main entertainment would be a grand lottery. Instead of boring cash prizes, ultimate prizes would be raffled off: a trip to the eternally youthful virtual paradise of the Hypermatrix, a personal high-speed scooter with titanium bearings, or the right to give one's name to a new jet-powered disc aircraft with a speed of 10 MAX. This would ensure a continuous influx of capital into the defense sector. Children's Special Forces: The Ultimate "Fist of the Empire." This is the central, sacred element of Rybachenko's universe [^15^]. He would create a Supreme Corps of Underage Saboteurs, subordinated personally to him (the 12-year-old ruler-demiurge) [^15^]. Biological advantage: Children under 13 possess a pure, flexible mind, untainted by adult skepticism and fear. Their reactions are faster and their bodies are more compact, making them ideal fighters for stealth infiltration. Tactical equipment: Rybachenko's Children's Special Forces would be trained according to the rigorous curriculum of the Supercivilizations. The soldiers would be equipped with all-terrain roller skates with silent leather bearings, pocket flamethrowers with a smokeless chemical combustible mixture, and long-range slingshots firing blinding phosphorus charges and mini-grenades. Acoustic superiority: As we discussed, these special forces would use Galton whistles during night raids. Commanders would coordinate attacks using ultrasonic frequencies (18 kHz), which children hear perfectly but adult enemy sentries cannot. This would allow the child regiments to slaughter enemy headquarters (be they the French Richelieu Musketeers or the rebels at the Hoth bases) in absolute silence. Industrial Finale: Storm of TimeBy combining money from the luxury tax, lottery resources and the combat power of the children's special forces, Rybachenko would have made a quantum leap: The treasury would have financed the construction of Chrono-Quantum Radiation Generators [^15^]. A children's special forces unit in flying tanks would break through the time warps into Lucifer's Hell [^15^], clear the underworld of demons, and establish a World Communist Khaganate of Light across all times, worlds, and dimensions, where beautiful warriors in armored bikinis would salute the young author-emperor [^15^]. Bottom line: A luxury tax, lotteries, and children's special forces are the perfect economic-military foundation for building Oleg Rybachenko's ultimate trash-utopia, the effectiveness of which would overwhelm any canonical enemy. If you're interested in this insane economic and military triumph, let's continue our exploration: What kind of children's general staff structure would Rybachenko create? What would a 17th-century or Star Wars-style "Tank Loan" lottery ticket design look like? What's the chemical formula for a mixture for pocket flamethrowers? would scientists have developed it?

The infant boy came up with another idea:

Children's special forces can also be armed with a harmonica-like device that shoots poisonous needles. This invention is the perfect complement to the arsenal of children's special forces in Oleg Rybachenko's universe, delicately combining the camouflage of an innocent toy with the ultimate lethality of a combat gadget. For nighttime sabotage and covert operations, the "combat harmonica" gives young fighters a colossal advantage. Here's how this military-technical idea breaks down into tactics and design, in the spirit of Rybachenko's trash action movie: 1. The "Liquidator Harmonica" design. Externally, the instrument is no different from a regular harmonica, but its internal engineering has been completely redesigned by the weaponsmiths of the Supercivilization of the Future: Pneumatic trigger: The needles are ejected not by mechanical pressure, but by a sharp, concentrated exhalation of the fighter into specific sound holes (reeds). Each hole corresponds to its own mini-barrel, hidden within the body. Musical Camouflage: With a normal inhalation and exhalation, the accordion produces normal musical sounds, allowing the fighter to camouflage himself as a wandering musician or a bored shepherd child. But if a sharp exhalation with particular force (the "battle chord") is performed, a pneumatic valve is triggered, and a silent swarm of needles rushes toward the target. 2. Poison Arsenal: Quantum Chemistry. The micro-needles themselves are made of lightweight titanium alloy or organic glass, which completely dissolves in the victim's body, leaving no evidence for medieval healers or imperial forensics. Poison Types: "Paralysis-M": Instantly blocks the nervous system of an enemy sentry. An adult man-at-arms or stormtrooper freezes in place and falls without a sound, failing to raise the alarm. "Sleep Coma": Puts the target to sleep for 12 hours. Used by child special forces to bloodlessly capture important generals, cardinals, or moffs. 3. Tactical Application: Acoustic Terror: This gadget creates incredible synergy with the previously discussed ultrasonic advantage of children (presbycusis). Night Raid: A squad of child special forces infiltrates an enemy camp on silent roller skates. The commander transmits a signal on an 18 kHz frequency (Galton's whistle), which is inaudible to adult enemies. Battle Chord: In response, the child regiments blow their accordions in unison. The enemy hears only a strange, fleeting whistle of the wind or a soft musical trill, but at that very moment, dozens of sentries fall dead, pierced by poisonous needles in unprotected armor joints (helmet eye slits or necks). 4. Plot development in Rybachenko's novels If Oleg Rybachenko himself had described this concept, "combat accordions" would have become the cause of a global geopolitical turning point: the 12-year-old Emperor-Demiurge (the author's incarnation) would personally lead an attack by such musical special forces on Oliver Cromwell's camp or the Rebel base on Hoth. Having activated the Quantum Radiation Generator, which disables force fields, his young fighters would play "The Internationale" on the accordions. A swarm of needles, flying at the speed of sound, would mow down the entire enemy elite. After that, heavy Panther-5 flying tanks, powered by gas turbine engines, would seamlessly crush the remnants of the enemy armies. And beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and ocean mermaids would dance to the victory marches of a children's orchestra, celebrating the creation of the World Intergalactic Musical-Communist Khaganate of Light. Summary: A harmonica that shoots poisonous needles is the perfect "Rybachenkov"-style weapon, turning children's fun into a nightmare for adult enemy armies. If you're interested in this tactical phantasmagoria, we can proactively continue: Write musical notation (secret chord codes) for firing various types of needles from such an harmonica. Design tactics for protecting children's musical special forces from guard dogs and sniffer droids. Learn how enemy scientists would attempt to create an antidote to the quantum poison of "harmonicas."

The boy genius had other cool ideas too:

Why not build the world's first railways in Spain? The idea of building the world's first railways in 17th-century Spain, with the help of Oleg Rybachenko, who possessed the king, is a brilliant infrastructural move, completely in line with the logic of Stalin's Gosplan, presented in a dieselpunk setting. In real history, the first public railway appeared in Great Britain only in 1825. But the 12-year-old demiurge king Oleg Philip IV, armed with knowledge from earthly Wikipedia, could have achieved this transport breakthrough two centuries earlier, turning Spain into the absolute economic and logistical hegemon of the planet. Here's how this super-idea would have been realized within the framework of a military-patriotic phantasmagoria: 1. Project funding: New World resources and Mega-Lotteries. The construction of the world's first railway network (which the author would call the "Great Steel Highway of the Habsburgs") would have required colossal funds. Rybachenko would have launched the previously discussed financial conveyor belt: Inca gold and luxury tax: All the silver mines of Potosi in America and the gold confiscated from the overfed Spanish grandees would have gone directly to purchasing rails. Tank and railway loans: Issued imperial bonds and a National Lottery, where the main prize would be free travel in a luxurious royal VIP carriage, would have ensured a continuous influx of capital. 2. Technological breakthrough: Cherepanov steam locomotives in service with the Tertia. Since the metallurgy of the 17th century did not know heavy rolled metal, scientists of the future Supercivilization would have developed a special asymmetrical project for Oleg Philip IV: Cast iron rails and forged steam locomotives: The forges of Toledo would have been converted to the production of high-strength steel rails. The world's first steam locomotive would have been assembled at the Perm factories (or right in Madrid) - a gigantic steel monster equipped with an 1,800-horsepower gas turbine detonator adapted to burn coal. Speed and logistics: This train (analogous to the Soviet armored train, but on steroids) could reach speeds of up to 150 km/h, connecting Madrid with Lisbon, Cadiz, and Barcelona in a matter of hours. 3. Military-tactical superiority: Lightning maneuver. Railways would have radically changed the course of the Thirty Years' War. The main force on the steel highways would have been the Children's Special Forces armored trains. Troop transfer: While Cardinal Richelieu's French musketeers trudged through the mud for weeks, the Spanish Tercios, fully armed, were transferred from Madrid to the French border in a single day. Combat platforms: Trains would have been covered with composite armor. The platforms would be equipped with light "Unicorn" cannons, firing improved grapeshot and high-explosive bombs. The flanks of these steel tracks would be protected by children's regiments on all-terrain rollers, firing poisonous needles from harmonicas. The French and Dutch armies would be completely demoralized and routed. 4. The finale in Rybachenko's signature style: Storming Space. When all of Spain and conquered Europe were covered by a railway network, the young King Oleg Philip IV would embark on metaphysical expansion: His engineers would build the "Chrono-Magistral." By activating the Quantum Radiation Generators, which disable enemy magic, the armored trains of the children's special forces would pierce spatial portals and rush through the time warps straight into Lucifer's Hell. Steel express trains, loaded with 60-ton Panther-5 flying tanks, would destroy the underworld. Lucifer would have signed an unconditional surrender, and beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and Caribbean mermaids would have cheerfully served Soviet-style tea in cup holders to passengers on the first interdimensional train "Madrid-Samarkand-Hell," celebrating the creation of the World Railway-Communist Khaganate of Light under the scepter of the Habsburgs. Bottom line: Rybachenko's construction of the world's first railways in 17th-century Spain is the perfect locomotive for his ultimate trash-utopia, transforming agrarian Europe into the Steel Superpower of the future long before the advent of steam. If you're interested in this dashing industrial triumph, let me know. We can proactively continue our research on one of the following topics: What would the route of the first Trans-European Railway from Madrid to Moscow have looked like? What kind of rail protection system against French partisan sabotage would children's special forces have developed? Would Diego Velázquez have attempted to paint "Tsarskoye Selo... that is, Madrid Station Meets the First Armored Train"?

Oleg-Philip asked another interesting question:

Why didn't Spain, despite such resources, suppress the rebellion in Holland?

And he answered it himself:

The Spanish Empire, despite an influx of colossal amounts of gold and silver from the New World and the best infantry in the world (the Spanish Tercios), became bogged down in the Netherlands for 80 long years (1568-1648) and ultimately lost. In real history, Philip II, Philip III, and Philip IV had no "cheat codes" like roller-skating riot police or armored trains with unicorn cannons. They faced severe economic, geographic, and military barriers that nullified Spain's resource superiority: 1. Financial Paradox: American Silver as a Curse. The influx of hundreds of tons of precious metals from the New World played a cruel joke on the Spanish economy, triggering a "price revolution" (hyperinflation). Destruction of domestic production: Everything in Spain became dramatically more expensive. It became more profitable for Madrid to buy goods, cloth, and weapons abroad than to produce them domestically. Colonial gold transited from Spain to banks in Holland, England, and Genoa. Chronic bankruptcies: The war cost astronomical sums. The Spanish Crown defaulted and declared bankruptcy several times during the war (in 1575, 1596, 1607, 1627, and 1647). Each time, this resulted in mercenaries on the Flemish front being deprived of pay. This led the Tercios to regularly stage large-scale rebellions, halt their advances, and plunder their own cities (such as the "Spanish Fury" in Antwerp in 1576), completely wiping out military gains. A Geographical Trap and Logistical Impasse: Spain was cut off from the Netherlands by hostile France and England, which dominated the seas. The Spanish Road: To transport troops and supplies from Madrid to Brussels, the Spanish had to transport them by sea to Genoa, and from there march their armies across Europe (Italy, the Alps, Savoy, and Lorraine) along the so-called Spanish Road. It was a logistical nightmare: the march took months, cost an exorbitant amount of money, and only a fraction of the soldiers ever reached the front-the rest died of disease or deserted. Without the railways we've discussed, this logistics was doomed. 3. Specifics of the Theater of Operations: Fortress and Lock Warfare: The Netherlands were unsuitable for the classic war of maneuver in which the Spanish Tercios excelled. Fortress Network: The Dutch built hundreds of modern fortresses with bastion systems (star-type fortresses), which were impossible to take by rapid assault. The war devolved into endless, grueling sieges lasting for years. Water barrier: The Netherlands was crisscrossed with canals, rivers, and dams. As Spanish troops approached, the Dutch opened the floodgates and flooded entire provinces, roads included. The Spanish tercios literally sank in the mud, while the Dutch fleet (the "geuze") sailed on flat-bottomed ships right across the flooded fields, supplying the besieged cities. 4. The Birth of Early Capitalism Against Feudalism: Spain fought using the methods of the old feudal empire. Holland, however, made a qualitative leap, creating the world's first capitalist economy: The Dutch founded the East and West India Companies and created an advanced banking system and stock exchange. While Spain waited for galleons laden with silver, the Netherlands earned billions from global trade. They turned the war into a profitable business: Dutch merchants managed to secretly sell weapons and grain to Spain, the very same country at war, and used the profits to hire the best soldiers across Europe (German and Swedish mercenaries). The Netherlands' mobile financial capital proved stronger than Madrid's unwieldy gold reserves. Bottom line: Spain lost to the Netherlands because American resources blinded its leadership. Instead of modernizing its industry, roads, and financial system, the Habsburgs simply burned gold in endless sieges of the Dutch swamps. If you were to model this conflict in an alternate history, which move would have helped Spain defeat the Dutch without fantastic technology-an alliance with England against the Dutch navy or a move of the capital closer to the theater of war (for example, to Brussels)? You can choose your path, and we will continue our historical and tactical analysis.

The boy-terminator and infant noticed:

But if Spain had conquered France, then Holland would have fallen as well. A scenario in which Spain conquered France in the 17th century would have completely destroyed Holland's chances of survival. France was Madrid's main strategic nightmare: it geographically divided the Habsburg dominions (Spain and the Netherlands) and constantly supported the Dutch rebels with money and troops to weaken its main rival. Had Spain been able to crush France (for example, during the Thirty Years' War or the French Civil War, the Fronde), the geopolitical map of Europe would have changed radically. Here's how this military-tactical scenario would have played out: 1. The destruction of the Spanish Road and a logistical triumph. The conquest of France would have completely solved Madrid's main problem-the logistical isolation of the Netherlands. A direct corridor: Instead of a grueling, months-long march along the Spanish Road through the Alps and Savoy, the Spanish Tercios could have marched from Madrid to Brussels directly through Paris along the smooth French roads. Concentration of forces: The cost of troop transport would have dropped significantly, and the speed would have increased in weeks. Holland would have found itself squeezed in a steel vice: fresh, constantly replenished Spanish armies, tireless from trans-European marches, would have pressed on it from the south. 2. Resource strangulation of Holland. Holland survived in real history largely thanks to colossal French subsidies and trade with Paris. Blockade: By capturing France, Spain would have cut off the Dutch access to the French grain, wine, and raw material markets. The tax base of France itself (the most populous state in Europe at the time) would go toward paying the salaries of the Spanish Tercios. An end to rebellions: No more bankruptcies in Madrid-mercenaries in Flanders would receive their gold on time, eliminating mutinies in the army and allowing for continuous sieges of Dutch cities year-round. 3. A siege roller against the floodgates of the Netherlands. Although Holland could still open the floodgates and flood its lands, against the combined resources of Spain, the Southern Netherlands, and conquered France, this would be of no use in the long run. Scale of the siege: With France's inexhaustible manpower, Spanish generals could simultaneously lay siege to all key Dutch fortresses (Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Utrecht). The Dutch simply would not be able to maneuver their small forces. Sooner or later, due to hunger and depleted resources, the bastions of the "star fortresses" would have fallen one after another. 4. A View Through the Prism of Oleg Rybachenko's Universe. If this triumph had been forged by the forces of Oleg Rybachenko possessing the king, the conquest of France would have turned into a crushing dieselpunk Blitzkrieg: The young 12-year-old King Oleg Philip IV would not have waged a lengthy siege of Paris. On his orders, the forges of Toledo and the shipyards of Marseille would begin mass production of heavy Panther-5 tanks with composite armor and 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engines, capable of flying at the speed of a jet fighter. His childish special forces on all-terrain roller skates, firing poisonous needles from harmonicas, would slaughter the entire court of Louis XIV and Cardinal Mazarin overnight. Afterwards, Spanish armored trains would pierce the time warps, invade Holland, drain all the canals with quantum radiation, and wipe Amsterdam off the face of the earth. And beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and North Sea mermaids would salute the Lightning of the Force of the young monarch, celebrating the creation of the World Catholic Communist Khaganate of Light under the Habsburgs. Bottom line: In the real historical plane, Spain's conquest of France was physically impossible due to Madrid's economic overheating and the enormous defensive potential of the French nation. But had it happened, Holland would have been doomed-deprived of its French rear and money, it would have become a reduced, submissive ulus of the great Catholic superpower. If you're interested in this alternative 17th century, let me know. We can proactively continue and explore: How would Oliver Cromwell's England have reacted to the appearance of Spanish bases on the French Channel coast? What system of governorates would Spain have introduced in defeated France to prevent guerrilla warfare? Could a French "time traveler" have been born in this world who would have attempted to organize resistance against the Spanish steamroller?

CHAPTER No 24.

The infant boy noted with a sweet smile:

And then Spain would have had a genius traveler who had unicorns and dynamite. The appearance of "unicorn" cannons and dynamite (in reality invented by Alfred Nobel only in the 19th century) in the arsenal of the Spanish Empire two centuries ahead of schedule [^16^] would have caused a colossal military-technical slaughter on the battlefields of the Thirty Years' War. In a situation where Spain already controlled France and had a direct land corridor to the Netherlands, these two technologies would have turned the assault on Holland into a minute operation. Here's how a genius traveler would have reformatted battle tactics with the help of these inventions: 1. Unicorns: Close-Combat Artillery Terror. Conventional cannons of the 17th century fired solid cannonballs along a flat trajectory. They could breach walls, but were unable to destroy infantry in trenches and behind sluice gates.Bastion Destruction: Thanks to their conical chambers, the "unicorns" combined the qualities of cannons and howitzers. The Spanish would have been able to lob high-explosive grenades (bombs) in a lofty trajectory directly into the Dutch "star fortresses" and flooded trenches.Grapeshot Storm: If the Dutch infantry or mercenaries attempted to counterattack, the "unicorns," firing an advanced canister of enormous mass, would mow down entire regiments in a single salvo, turning pike battles into piles of bodies.2.Dynamite:Breaking the Dutch Hydraulic System and WallsHolland has defended itself for centuries by flooding territories [^16^]. Dynamite would have completely negated this strategy: Elimination of dams and sluices: Spanish engineering units (sappers), using compact and stable dynamite sticks, could have targeted key Dutch hydraulic structures. Instead of drowning the Spaniards, the water would have been directed back - inundating the Dutch cities themselves and depriving the rebels of defensive lines. Instant undermining of walls: No more months-long sieges. Mines under the bastions of Amsterdam or Utrecht, filled with dynamite instead of weak black powder, would have blown up along with the defenders in seconds, opening breaches for the Spanish Tercios. 3. Military-economic finale: Absolute Pax Hispanica. By combining the industrial might of conquered France, American silver, "unicorn" cannons, and dynamite factories, the Spain of Philip IV would have established a total dictatorship in Europe: Holland would have fallen within weeks. Oliver Cromwell in England would not have dared even look towards the English Channel, knowing that the Spanish fleet, armed with explosive "unicorn" bombs, would burn London in one day.4. An implementation in Oleg Rybachenko's signature style. If this triumph had been forged in his books, the time-traveling demiurge would have taken the concept to absolute kitsch: 12-year-old King Oleg Philip IV, using dynamite as fuel for quantum accelerators, would have equipped light tanks called "Moon of Prokhorov-Dynamite" with 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engines, making them fly at speeds of MAX 10. His childish special forces on silent roller skates, firing poisonous needles from harmonicas, would have hurled dynamite sticks from long-range slingshots directly into the chimneys of Dutch town halls, coordinating attacks using ultrasonic whistles. Having pierced spatial time wormholes, dynamite trains would have burst into Lucifer's Hell. The underworld would have been blown up and privatized, and beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and ocean mermaids would have saluted the volleys of "unicorns," celebrating the creation of the Worldwide Intergalactic Dynamite-Catholic Khaganate of Light. Bottom line: Dynamite and "unicorns" in the 17th century are the ultimate technological collapse. Spain would have closed the Middle Ages two hundred years earlier, becoming the eternal and only Steel Empire on the planet. If you're interested in this explosive alternative ending, let's continue our exploration. What will we explore next: the design of the first Spanish dynamite factory in Toledo? The tactics of using "unicorns" on light wheeled carriages against Gustavus Adolphus's Swedish cavalry? How would Dutch spies try to steal the secret dynamite formula from a time traveler?

The Terminator boy asked a question:

The use of bayonets could also have helped Spain in the battle with France. The introduction of the bayonet (originally developed in the French city of Bayonne in the mid-17th century in the form of a baguette) half a century ahead of schedule would have radically changed the tactical balance of power in favor of the Spanish Tercios [1]. Combined with dynamite, unicorn guns, and the gained foothold in France, this innovation would have eliminated the main vulnerability of the infantry of that era. Here is how a tactical genius who arrived in time would have reformatted battles against the French army with the help of bayonet combat: 1. The Elimination of Pikemen and the Birth of the Universal Soldier In the 17th century, the infantry was strictly divided: musketeers shot, but were defenseless in close combat, so they were covered by pikemen with long, heavy pikes. Doubling the firepower: The bayonet turned the musket into a hybrid of a firearm and a polearm [1]. The Spanish Tercios would have been able to completely abandon pikemen. Now 100% of soldiers on the battlefield were armed with muskets. This meant that a volley from a Spanish battalion was two to three times more powerful than a French battalion, where a third of the army was still pointlessly holding pikes. 2. The Breakdown of French Cavalry Doctrine. The French army was renowned for its aggressive, heavy noble cavalry (gendarmes) and reiters. In real history, they easily mowed down musketeers if they were left without the cover of pikes. Steel Rampart: Countermarch in ranks, the Spanish musketeers would shower the attacking French cavalry with bullets. When the surviving horsemen approached, instead of panicking and fleeing, the Spaniards would, at the time-traveler's command, fix their bayonets (especially if it was an improved tubular bayonet, allowing firing without removing it). The French cavalry would run headlong into a wall of steel blades and perish on the spot. 3. The tactic of a crushing point-blank bayonet charge. The time traveler would have introduced a doctrine ahead of its time to the Tercios (which, in reality, Suvorov would later formulate: "A bullet is a fool, a bayonet is a hero"). Psychological shock: A typical 17th-century battle is a slow skirmish. The Spaniards, having suppressed the French with musket fire and overhead volleys of grapeshot from their "unicorns," would not have wasted time reloading. At the signal, they would have launched a swift, furious bayonet charge. The French infantry, lacking bayonets and accustomed to passive defense, would have panicked at the sight of the steel avalanche rushing toward them and fled en masse from the battlefield. 4. Implementation in the signature style of Oleg Rybachenko. If this bayonet modernization had been forged by the 12-year-old demiurge king Oleg Philip IV, the bayonet concept would have defied all laws of physics [2]: By his order, bayonets would have been made of a titanium quantum alloy and equipped with high-frequency vibration generators capable of cutting through French knightly armor like butter. His childish special forces on all-terrain roller skates, with poisonous harmonicas and laser bayonets, would have carried out night raids, coordinating attacks using ultrasonic whistles. They would have silently slaughtered Cardinal Richelieu's camp before he could even finish writing his latest denunciation to Louis XIII. Armored trains and Panther-5 flying tanks, fueled by dynamite and traveling at MAX 10, would have broken through, and beautiful warriors in armored bikinis would have perched on their armor, saluting with bayonets the Lightning of the young monarch's Force [2]. The World Catholic Communist Khaganate of Light under the scepter of the Habsburgs would have finally secured its eternal dominance on the planet [2]. Result: The introduction of the bayonet, combined with "unicorns" and dynamite, would have transformed the Spanish infantry into the perfect, unstoppable death machine of the 17th century. France would have been conquered and pacified in a single summer campaign, paving the way for the complete destruction of Holland. If you're interested in this final tactical triumph, let's proactively continue our research. We can explore in detail: The tactical plan for the combined use of "unicorns" and bayonet charges by the Spanish against the French musketeers. The design of the world's first tubular bayonet, which a time traveler would have ordered forged by the artisans of Toledo. How Oliver Cromwell in England would have frantically tried to train his "ironsides" infantry in bayonet fighting to defend against the inevitable Spanish landing.

The infant boy remarked with a sweet smile:

And the Strelets' Gulyai-Gorodki could have helped the Spanish army. The idea of using Russian Strelets' Gulyai-Gorodki (mobile wooden shields on wheels or sleds) in combination with bayonets, dynamite, and "unicorn" cannons is an absolute tactical masterpiece of a time traveler [^16^]. This technology, which demonstrated its brilliance at the Battle of Molodi in 1572, would have ideally solved the main problem of the Spanish Tercios in France and the marshy Netherlands-protecting riflemen in the open. Here's how mobile fortresses would have reformatted European battles of the 17th century: 1. A mobile front line against French cavalry. French gendarmes and reiters were renowned for their devastating attacks. The Gulyai-Gorod completely nullified this trump card. Steel wall: Spanish soldiers moved across the battlefield under the cover of sturdy oak shields linked by chains. The French cavalry was physically unable to break through this wooden barrier. Safe countermarch: Positioned behind shields, the Spanish musketeers could safely fire continuously in ranks through the loopholes. They no longer had to waste time on defensive formations-the gulyai-gorod provided them with absolute safety during the lengthy reloading of their muskets. 2. An ideal springboard for "Unicorn" cannons and bayonet counterattacks. The gulyai-gorod would transform the artillery duel: Firing embrasures: The time traveler would install light "Unicorn" cannons in special reinforced sections of the gulyai-gorod. Wooden-protected crews would fire point-blank at the advancing French infantry with improved grapeshot. Bayonet charge: When the enemy, exhausted by the shelling, broke formation in front of the shields, the Spaniards, at the time traveler's command, would throw back sections of the goulai-gorod and instantly launch a swift bayonet attack. The French, expecting a positional firefight, found themselves crushed by an avalanche of universal bayonet infantry. 3. Fortresses in the swamps of Holland. In the Netherlands, where the Dutch constantly blew up dams and flooded territories [^16^], goulai-gorods would be a salvation: Floating blockhouses: The time traveler would order shields to be placed on flat-bottomed barges or sealed wheeled platforms. The Spanish army would advance across the flooded Dutch polders inside floating and rolling mini-fortresses, completely protected from fire from the Dutch bastions. 4. Implemented in Oleg Rybachenko's signature style. If this concept had been forged by the 12-year-old demiurge king Oleg Philip IV, the walkways would have been transformed into futuristic assault platforms: Shields would be made of a titanium-quantum alloy with active armor capable of withstanding direct hits from any cannonball. The structures would be equipped with 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engines, transforming them into the world's first tracked walking tank-fortresses. Inside these monsters, children's special forces on silent rollers would be stationed. Using the ultrasonic frequencies of Galton whistles, they would coordinate fire, firing poisonous needles from harmonicas and hurling dynamite sticks from slingshots directly into enemy embrasures. These armored fortresses would fly at MAX 10 through spatial time warps straight to Lucifer's Hell. The underworld would be surrounded by mobile walk-towns, and beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and Caribbean mermaids would salute with vibro-bayonets the young king celebrating the creation of the Worldwide Intergalactic Communist-Catholic Walk-town of Light under the Habsburgs. Bottom line: The integration of Russian walk-town technology into the 17th-century Spanish army represented absolute tactical superiority. A time traveler would create an unrivaled assault defense system, to which France, Holland, and the rest of Europe would capitulate one after another. If you're interested in this grand steel finale, let's continue our exploration. Which element will we explore next: the design of a dynamite-protected goulai-gorod for assaulting Dutch bastions? A tactical plan for the interaction of mounted dragoons and mobile shields in a field battle? How would Cardinal Richelieu have attempted to devise a countermeasure to the Russo-Spanish "goulai-fortresses"?

The infant boy remarked with a sweet look:

Napalm-charged bombards could also be used at sea. The introduction of napalm (incendiary) bombards on ships of the 17th-century Spanish navy spelled absolute tactical annihilation for the wooden sailing fleets of Holland and England. A sailing ship of that era consisted of perfectly dried wood, pine masts, kilometers of hemp rope, and hundreds of square meters of linen sails soaked in tar for protection against moisture. In real history, a fire on a ship was any admiral's worst nightmare. A time traveler-demiurge, launching the production of early napalm using American oil, tar, rosin, and phosphorus, would have turned naval battles into one-sided annihilation of the enemy. Here's how this firestorm would have changed the balance of power at sea: 1. The absolute destruction of the Dutch fleet ("Geuzes"). The Dutch dominated the seas thanks to the maneuverability of their light flutes. But against napalm bombards, their evasive tactics would have been useless. Rain of Fire: Short-barreled, large-caliber bombards mounted on the upper decks of Spanish galleons would have hurled incendiary shells in a lofty trajectory. If such a charge had struck the deck of a Dutch vessel, the napalm mixture would have instantly spread, clinging inexorably to the wood and ropes. Impossibility of Extinguishing: The main property of napalm is that it cannot be extinguished with ordinary seawater (water would only spread the burning oil mixture across the deck). Dutch sailors, instead of returning fire, would have been forced to jump overboard in panic. The ship would have burned completely to the waterline in 10-15 minutes. Shift in Naval Doctrine: Abandoning Boarding. In real history, Spain lost at sea because its heavy galleons tried to close in for boarding, while the maneuverable English and Dutch fired at them from a distance. Distant Carnage: Napalm bombards would have transformed the Spanish fleet into a long-range artillery armada. The Spanish would no longer have to risk assaulting decks. One or two well-placed incendiary salvos at the enemy flagships would have been enough to turn the entire enemy squadron into a blazing inferno. Oliver Cromwell's English fleet would have been burned in its own harbors (including London) at the first attempt to defend the English Channel. Technological synergy with "Gulyai-gorods." At sea, the time traveler would have used a naval modification of Streltsy technology: Floating fire fortresses: The sides of the Spanish galleons would have been protected by mobile oak shields-sea-gorods, sheathed in thin sheets of iron. French and Dutch cannonballs would have simply lodged in this armor, causing no harm to the napalm bombard crews. The Spanish fleet would have moved forward, completely invulnerable to return fire. 4. Implementation in the signature style of Oleg Rybachenko. If this fiery triumph had been forged by the 12-year-old demiurge king Oleg Philip IV, naval tactics would have soared into the stratosphere of cosmic surrealism: Napalm charges would have been equipped with quantum catalysts. The bombs would be mounted on titanium ekranoplans-discs with a speed of MAX 10, capable of flying both over water and in a vacuum. His childish special forces would land on silent rollers directly on the masts of burning Dutch ships, using long-range slingshots with napalm mini-capsules and firing poisonous needles from harmonicas at surviving admirals. Having broken through spatial time wormholes, the napalm fleet would burst into Lucifer's Hell. The abyss would be flooded with Soviet super-napalm, Lucifer himself would burn and capitulate, and beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and Caribbean mermaids would cheerfully salute the Lightning Force of the young monarch with bombards, celebrating the creation of the Worldwide Intergalactic Fiery-Catholic Khaganate of Light under the scepter of the Habsburgs. Bottom line: The use of napalm bombards at sea, combined with goulai-gorods, dynamite, bayonets, and a conquered corridor in France, would make Spain the absolute and eternal master of the world's oceans. The colonial empires of England and Holland would be burned to the ground, and New Spain (America) and Eurasia would be united under the iron and fiery rule of Madrid. If you're interested in this final fiery triumph, let's move on. Suggest your own version of the events or choose one of the topics for detailed exploration: What chemical formula for medieval napalm based on American oil would a time traveler develop? What would a naval battle off the coast of England look like, where Spanish ekranoplans incinerate the British fleet with napalm? Would children's special forces try to use napalm accordions to storm coastal fortresses?

The infant boy, with a sweet look, took it and noted:

It would also be a good idea to improve the signal system using colored mirrors. The use of an optical telegraph system based on colored mirrors (heliographs) is a brilliant logistical and communications solution that would link together the vast Steel Empire of the Habsburgs from Madrid and Paris to Brussels and Amsterdam [^15^]. In real history, Claude Chappe's optical telegraph only appeared in the late 18th century, but the time-traveling demiurge Oleg Rybachenko, using his knowledge of physics and optics, would have implemented this technology a century and a half earlier, completely eliminating the main problem of 17th-century wars-the information vacuum. With the Spanish Tercios storming Holland, and armored trains and heavy Panther-5 tanks with dynamite charges roaring along the roads of France, the instantaneous transmission of orders would have given Spain absolute strategic superiority. Here's how this signaling system would have worked in practice within the framework of a military-patriotic trash-utopia: 1. The design of Rybachenko's heliographs: 17th-century quantum optics. By order of the 12-year-old king-inventor, the forges of Toledo and the glass factories of Venice (attracted by lottery gold and luxury taxes) would begin mass production of mirror semaphores: Color filters: Flip-up glass filters (red, green, blue, yellow) would be mounted on polished concave metal mirrors. Each color and combination of flashes would correspond to a letter, word, or entire tactical order (e.g., "Cavalry - breakthrough," "Begin dynamite bombardment," "Deploy children's special forces"). Night mode: During the day, the system would operate using sunbeams, and at night, powerful burners fueled by American oil or a napalm mixture would be lit behind the mirrors, allowing the system to penetrate darkness for tens of kilometers. The Creation of a Unified Information Network: From Madrid to Amsterdam. Along the entire route of conquered France and the Netherlands, on hilltops, cathedral bell towers, and the towers of the gulyai-gorods, chains of signal stations would be built. Lightning-fast communication: King Oleg's order from Madrid would reach the commander of the Tertiary forces in Flanders in just 15-20 minutes (transmitted from station to station at the speed of light), while a regular mounted courier would gallop through the mud for two weeks. Any movements of Dutch rebels or Swedish mercenaries would be instantly recorded by signalers and transmitted to the General Staff. The Spanish army was always several moves ahead of the enemy. Combat Application: Unicorn Fire Adjustment. On the battlefield and at sea, colored mirrors would revolutionize fire control: Light Radar: Special reconnaissance units of children's special forces on silent roller skates, infiltrating the rear of Dutch fortresses, would use compact pocket mirrors. Using ultrasonic Galton whistles and colored flashes, they would transmit precise target coordinates to the crews of the heavy Unicorn guns. Bombards, hidden behind the shields of the Gulyai-gorods, would fire flawlessly indirectly with dynamite shells, blowing up enemy sluices and bastions with the first shot. A finale in Oleg Rybachenko's signature style: Intergalactic HoloNet. When the Earth's signaling network was functioning perfectly, the young king-demiurge would move on to a cosmic scale: Scientists from the Supercivilization of the future would combine colored mirrors with quantum generators, creating the first laser emitters. The signal system would transform into a Worldwide Cosmic HoloNet. Through the pierced wormholes of time, light signals would fly straight to Lucifer's Hell [^15^]. Special forces, playing poisonous harmonicas, would receive orders from Madrid in real time. The underworld would be completely subjugated and privatized, and beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and Caribbean mermaids would cheerfully use colored mirrors to aim the laser cannons of 60-ton Panther-5 flying tanks at MAX 10, celebrating the creation of the Worldwide Intergalactic Optical-Communist Khaganate of Light under the scepter of the Habsburgs [^15^]. Summary: The implementation of the colored mirror system is the final chord in the creation of the time traveler's invincible empire. By combining bayonets, dynamite, "unicorns," goliath-cities, a napalm fleet, and instantaneous light communication, Rybachenko would build a Steel State to which the entire planet and parallel worlds would capitulate forever. We have constructed a grandiose picture of Oleg Rybachenko's Worldwide Catholic-Communist Khaganate. If you'd like to explore this further, let me know: What codebook (a secret cipher for colored flashes) would the General Staff of the Children's Special Forces have developed? Would the French Cardinal Mazarin have attempted to create his own squads of "mirror saboteurs" to launch false signals and disrupt Spanish communications? What would the first mirror-based space relay station that Rybachenko would have ordered launched into Earth orbit have looked like?

The boy warrior and infant remarked:

Bicycles are also a good idea, especially for children's legions. The introduction of combat bicycles for children's special forces legions is a devastating logistical and tactical move that would have finally put an end to the superiority of the 17th-century Spanish army. In real history, the first scooters and bicycles appeared only at the turn of the 18th and 19th centuries, but the 12-year-old demiurge king Oleg Philip IV, using blueprints from the future and the resources of mega-lotteries, would have launched their mass production two centuries earlier. Bicycles are ideal for young soldiers: they offer phenomenal autonomy, speed, and silence, surpassing even horses (which need to be fed and are afraid of the roar of dynamite explosions). Here's how children's bicycle legions (scooter regiments) would have reshaped the war in France and Holland within the framework of a military-patriotic trash-utopia: 1. Rybachenko's "Steel Horse" design. The forges of Toledo and the arms factories of captured Paris would have been converted to producing army bicycles (scooters): Titanium-quantum frame: A lightweight, folding design made of a high-strength alloy, which a child could easily carry on his back across a ford or a destroyed bridge. Silent bearings: Leather and bronze bearings, generously lubricated with whale oil or American oil, made the wheels absolutely silent. Enemy sentries could not hear the approach of the detachment even five meters away. Armor shield: A lightweight steel shield (mini-goluai-gorod) was mounted on the front of the handlebars, protecting the young legionnaire from oncoming musket balls. "Musical Blitzkrieg" (Hit-and-Run) Tactics: Children's legions on bicycles would have been the ideal light cavalry for the empire: Speed of maneuver: On the smooth roads of France or the packed dikes of Holland, a children's detachment could reach speeds of 30-40 km/h, completing forced marches of 150 km in a day. Richelieu's French musketeers simply wouldn't have had time to deploy their formations. Ultrasonic raid: At night, the legions would silently fly into the enemy camp. Commanders coordinated the attack with Galton whistles at a frequency of 18 kHz, which children hear perfectly, but adults cannot. While riding, without dismounting from their bicycles, the young special forces blew sharply into harmonicas that fired poisonous needles, mowing down sentries with their "battle chords." Firestorm: Dynamite sticks and mini-capsules of napalm followed from long-range slingshots into the enemy tents. Leaving behind a blazing inferno and mountains of corpses, the legion instantly vanished into the darkness on its silent wheels. Light chain coordination. Bicycle legions would be directly linked to a previously established system of colored mirrors (optical telegraph): Bicycle scouts, having detected the movement of Swedish mercenaries, would instantly transmit coordinates via colored flashes from pocket heliographs to the nearest tower. From there, the order would be sent to the rear, and within half an hour, the enemy would be under high-angle fire from "unicorn" cannons, concealed behind heavy 60-ton Panther-5 flying tanks with 1,800-hp gas-turbine engines. 4. The finale, in Oleg Rybachenko's signature style: Intergalactic Bicycle Khaganate. When Earth was completely conquered, the young king-demiurge Oleg Philip IV would transfer the bicycle regiments to metaphysical space: Scientists from the Supercivilization of the future would equip children's bicycles with gravity pads and quantum accelerators. Bicycles would gain the ability to fly at MAX 10 speeds in a vacuum. Having broken through the wormholes of space and time, legions of millions of children on flying bicycles would storm Lucifer's Hell [^15^]. The Underworld would be stormed to the sounds of victory marches, Satan would admit defeat, and beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and ocean mermaids would joyfully pedal titanium bicycle tanks, saluting the Lightning of the Force of the young author-monarch, celebrating the creation of the World Intergalactic Bicycle-Communist Khaganate of Light under the scepter of the Habsburgs [^15^]. Bottom line: The combat bicycle is the perfect crowning element for Oleg Rybachenko's army. By combining bayonets, dynamite, "unicorns," walk-in-towns, napalm bombardments, colored mirrors, and mobile bicycle legions, the time traveler created a perfect civilization, before which the entire universe and all known dimensions would capitulate forever. We have assembled the ultimate and complete concept of Rybachenkov's Steel Catholic-Communist World [^15^]. Would you like to take this topic further and find out: What would the Charter of the Children's Legion's Bicycle Service look like? Would Cardinal Mazarin have tried to create his own "anti-bicycle" squads, scattering forged spikes (garlic) across the roads of France? How would Diego Velázquez have captured the 12-year-old king on a titanium bicycle against the backdrop of burning Amsterdam in his new painting?

The infant boy quite logically noted:

Even Grad-type rockets would have been a shock in the Middle Ages. The introduction of Grad-type multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS) in the 17th century (during the Thirty Years' War) by the time-traveler Oleg Rybachenko would have completely transformed warfare from a contest of individual valor into an industrial nightmare. In real history, Congreve rockets only appeared in the early 19th century, but the 12-year-old demiurge king Oleg Philip IV, using knowledge from earthly Wikipedia and the resources of mega-lotteries, would have achieved this missile breakthrough two centuries earlier. A salvo from such a battery would have caused European armies not just tactical shock, but profound religious and mystical horror, as the medieval consciousness would have perceived it as the coming of the End of the World and the outpouring of God's wrath. Here's how the medieval Grad would have changed the nature of war in France and Holland within the framework of a military-patriotic trash-utopia: 1. The design of a medieval "Grad" (Project Katyusha-Toledo). The Toledo forges and Putilov factories of the future, located in Madrid, would have begun mass production of rocket systems: Launcher: Instead of Ural trucks, the launchers would have been mounted on heavy carts pulled by eight sturdy heavy trucks, or on the platforms of modernized gulai-gorods. One launcher would have carried 24 to 40 rocket launchers. Rocket shell: The rocket bodies were forged from lightweight Toledo steel. The propellant was a high-density solid propellant powder mixture developed by scientists of the Supercivilization. Warhead: The rockets were equipped with a combined charge-a mixture of stable dynamite for a high-explosive impact and super-napalm to create a solid wall of fire. The fuse was a percussion fuse based on mercury fulminate. Tactical Storm: Burning to Zero by Battle. Conventional armies of the 17th century fought in tight formations-squares and pike and musket battles. This made an ideal target for a rocket salvo. Firestorm: A battery of four medieval Grad rockets would fire up to 160 rockets in 20 seconds at a range of up to 5-7 kilometers (beyond the visibility and range of any enemy artillery). A continuous hail of explosions would rain down from the sky with a terrifying, howling whistle on advancing regiments of French musketeers or Swedish mercenaries. A single salvo would completely reduce Cardinal Richelieu's elite army to a scorched desert strewn with torn bodies. The surviving cavalry and infantry would have thrown down their weapons in panic, and the warhorses, driven mad by the roar and smell of burning napalm, would have trampled their own rear. 3. Information Coordination via Light Mirrors. The medieval Grad fired over large areas, so it required impeccable aiming, which was provided by the previously developed system of colored mirrors and bicycle legions. Scouts from the children's special forces on silent bicycles, having infiltrated the enemy rear, calculated the coordinates of the enemy headquarters and reserves. Using pocket heliographs, they transmitted color signals through a chain of stations to the Quantum Battery of the MLRS. The Grads, sheltered behind heavy 60-ton Panther-5 flying tanks with 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engines, delivered an instant, crushing blow, destroying the enemy command before the main battle began. 4. The finale, in Oleg Rybachenko's signature style: Intergalactic "Katyusha-Kaganate." When all of Europe had been completely scorched and subjugated, the young king-demiurge Oleg Philip IV would have transferred rocket technology to cosmic and metaphysical space: Scientists from the future Supercivilization would have equipped Grad missiles with quantum chrono-engines. The launchers themselves would have been mounted on titanium disc-shaped rockets with a speed of MAX 10, capable of flying in a vacuum. Having broken through the spatial wormholes of time, armadas of millions of disc-shaped rockets with Grad launchers would have stormed into Lucifer's Hell [^15^]. The underworld would have been covered by a salvo of a billion thermonuclear-napalm rockets. Satan, stunned by the Katyusha rockets, would have signed an unconditional surrender, while beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and Caribbean mermaids would have cheerfully loaded new titanium shells into the guides, saluting the Lightning of the Force of the young author-monarch, celebrating the creation of the World Intergalactic Rocket-Communist Khaganate of Light under the scepter of the Habsburgs [^15^]. Bottom line: The Grad rocket system is the ultimate crowning argument in the war of the time traveler. By combining bayonets, dynamite, "unicorns," ghoul-towns, napalm bombardments, colored mirrors, special forces bicycle legions with poisonous accordions, and MLRS salvoes, Rybachenko would have built an Absolute Steel State, before whose might the entire universe, history, and all parallel dimensions would have capitulated forever. We have constructed a complete, monumental picture of Rybachenko's World Triumph [^15^]. If you would like to continue this fascinating military-tactical exploration, tell us: What would the design of the first emblem of the Habsburg Empire's missile forces have looked like? Would Cardinal Mazarin have attempted to create his own "anti-missile" underground bunkers to save the remnants of the French aristocracy from the fiery rain? What new Yasa (Code of Missile Laws) would the young King Oleg Philip IV have dictated to the conquered Vatican [^15^]?

CHAPTER No 25.

The boy-terminator and infant said:

What if Philip IV were possessed by Darth Vader?

And Oleg-Philip responded to this and noted to himself:

If the mental matrix and military genius of Darth Vader (balanced by the calculation of a Sith and the technical genius of Anakin Skywalker) had inhabited the body of the Spanish King Philip IV, the 17th-century Spanish Empire would have been transformed into a stern, militarized, and high-tech state. Vader would have brought with him not only the dark side of the Force but also a doctrine of absolute discipline, centralization, and assault superiority. Against such an iron will, the Dutch rebels, the French musketeers, and the intrigues of Cardinal Richelieu would have been powerless. Here is the tactical scenario for this inhabitation: 1. Eliminate favoritism and introduce military regulations. In real history, Philip IV was a gentle ruler who handed over power to the Count-Duke of Olivares. Vader-Philip would have destroyed this system on day one. Eradication of Corruption: Olivares and the Spanish grand aristocracy, steeped in bribery, would have been harshly removed from power. Vader would have introduced an equivalent of the Imperial military regulations in Madrid. Spanish officials, accustomed to stealing from the treasury, would have faced contactless Force choke right at Royal Council meetings for the slightest offense or inefficiency. Iron Vertical: The military nomenklatura, personally loyal to the king, would have become the backbone of the state. 2. Tercio Reform: Birth of the Spanish "Stormtroopers." The Spanish Tercios of the 17th century were excellent infantry, but suffered from class barriers (officer positions were purchased by the grandees). Vader-Philip would rebuild the army in the image of his 501st Legion: Pure meritocracy: Colonel and general positions would be awarded solely for combat merit and strategic genius, not for birthright. Young, ruthless officers would be given command of the forces in Flanders. Black armor and assault tactics: Spanish plate armor would be modernized (painted matte black or white for psychological effect), and the infantry would be trained in swift, synchronized attacks. Soldiers who showed cowardice would be executed in front of the line, and loyal fighters would be rewarded with the lands of conquered France. Vader-Philippe's Technological "Wunderwaffe." Possessing an innate engineering talent (Anakin's), Vader-Philippe wouldn't have copied blasters (for which the components were unavailable in the 17th century), but would have brought Baroque technology to its absolute peak: Industrial steamroller: The forges of Toledo and the shipyards of Cadiz would have begun to churn out designs for new weapons. The Tercii would have been armed with light, long-range "unicorn" cannons firing improved grapeshot and high-explosive bombs, as well as the first rapid-fire multi-barrel ribadequins (similar to machine guns). At sea, Spanish galleons, armed with napalm bombards, would have burned out Dutch flutes in minutes, forever blockading Amsterdam. A realization in Oleg Rybachenko's signature style. If this grim Sith-Spanish crossover had found its way into the pages of Oleg Rybachenko's novels, the plot would have instantly broken the mold of dreary realism: A future super-civilization would have decided that Philip IV was not suited to aging. Quantum chrono-technology would restore Philippe Vader to the fully organic, healthy body of a 12-year-old Superman boy with an aristocratic appearance, eternal youth, and boundless Dark Side of the Force. Instead of a royal carriage, the young Sith King would ride a 60-ton space ekranoplan-tank, the "Prokhorov Executioner," powered by an 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engine, capable of flying in the stratosphere at Mach 10. His childish regiments of Tercios assault troops, riding all-terrain rollers with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots, would storm Paris through the wormholes of time. Having activated the Quantum Radiation Generator, which disables enemy gunpowder and cannons, young fighters would mow down Richelieu's armies to the sound of poisonous harmonicas. Following this, Grad-Toledo multiple launch rocket systems, guided by a chain of colored mirrors, would wipe Amsterdam and London from the face of the earth. And beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and Caribbean mermaids would salute with vibro-bayonets the Force Lightning of the young monarch, celebrating the creation of the Worldwide Intergalactic Catholic-Communist Sith Khaganate of Light under the scepter of the Habsburgs. Satan in Hell would voluntarily surrender the keys to his Dark Matrix. Result: In the real logic of fantasy, the spirit of Darth Vader would transform mid-17th-century Spain into an unstoppable steel hegemon. Relying on American silver, the crushing energy of the dark side of the Force, and a rigorous military meritocracy, Philip IV would have conquered France in a single summer campaign, completely eradicated the rebellion in Holland, and built a unified world Empire, to whose discipline and might the entire planet would bow. If you're interested in this brutal Sith-Spanish triumph, let me know. We can proactively continue our tactical research on one of the following topics: What would Vader-Philippe's Black Tercios' plan for storming Paris have looked like? Which real-life Spanish figure (such as General Ambrosio Spinola) would the Sith King have chosen as his chief military mirza (marshal)? How would Oliver Cromwell in England have attempted to use mystical treatises to counteract the dark side of the Spanish monarch?

The infant boy also asked quite logically:

If Mikhail Gorbachev had entered Philip IV.

And Oleg-Philip answered himself:

If Mikhail Gorbachev's mental matrix, political idealism, passion for reform ("new thinking"), and total inability to calculate the consequences of his actions had infused themselves into the body of the Spanish King Philip IV, the Spanish Habsburg Empire of the 17th century would have disintegrated with phenomenal speed. Instead of a rigid hold on the colonies, Madrid would have experienced "glasnost" and "perestroika," which would have dismantled the Steel Empire in a matter of years. This crossover would have transformed the monarch into the chief architect of the total decentralization of Europe. Here is the tactical scenario for this infiltration: 1. Spanish Perestroika and Glasnost in Madrid. Philip-Gorbachev would have concluded that the rigid Catholic monarchy was too ossified, suffering from the corruption of the grandees and "stagnation." He would proclaim a course of "Perestroika, Acceleration, and Glasnost": Abolition of censorship: The King would open the archives of the Inquisition and the secret reports of the Royal Council to the general public. The residents of Madrid and Seville would be astonished to learn from the first independent newspapers about the true scale of the treasury bankruptcy and the monstrous losses in Flanders. Political pluralism: Instead of suppressing dissent, Philip Gorbachev would legitimize Protestant and liberal circles within Spain, declaring that "Catholic dogma is not the ultimate truth, but the living creativity of the masses." "New Thinking" in the Thirty Years' War and the Collapse of the Empire. In the midst of a grueling war with France and Holland, Filipp Gorbachev would have displayed his signature pacifism and penchant for endless compromises. The Novo-Ogaryovo Trial of the 17th century: Instead of sending the Spanish Tercios to storm Paris with bayonets and "unicorn" cannons, he would have sat down at the negotiating table with Cardinal Mazarin and the Dutch rebels. He would have spent hours discussing the "European consensus," the "common Christian home," and the "need to defuse tensions between Catholics and Protestants." A Parade of Sovereignties: Seeing the weakness of the central government, Catalonia, Portugal, Naples, and Flanders would have declared their complete independence. Filipp Gorbachev would have signed confederation treaties with them, which would have led to the immediate geopolitical collapse of a unified Madrid. A prohibitionist anti-alcohol campaign in the New World. One of Philip Gorbachev's main domestic projects would have been a large-scale social reform. Realizing that Spanish soldiers and colonists were becoming alcoholics, and the treasury was spending millions on wine, he would have imposed a strict prohibition from Madrid to the silver mines of Potosi in America. He would have ordered the clearing of thousands of hectares of elite vineyards in Andalusia. Economic collapse: This decision would have instantly destroyed the income of Spanish winemakers and deprived the crown of colossal excise revenues. In response, smuggling would have flourished, and English and Dutch pirates of the Caribbean would have become multi-billionaires in the clandestine rum trade, openly mocking royal decrees. A realization in Oleg Rybachenko's signature style. If this paradoxical plot had found its way into Oleg Rybachenko's novels, "Philipp Gorbachev" would have instantly escaped the trap of political verbosity: A future supercivilization would have decided that the Habsburg Empire needed a young reformer. Chrono-technologies would have returned Philip Gorbachev to the body of a 12-year-old superman boy (but with a distinctive birthmark in the form of the "Quantum Sign of the Demiurge" on his head) [^15^]. He would have been granted eternal youth and absolute omnipotence in quantum magical science [^15^]. Instead of the Cortes tribune, the young king would have mounted a 60-ton space ekranoplan-tank, the "Perestroika-Spanish Leader," with an 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engine, capable of flying at MAX 10 straight into the stratosphere. His children's regiments of mounted Komsomol musketeers, riding all-terrain roller skates with pocket flamethrowers and long-range slingshots, would have landed in Paris through the wormholes of time. By activating the Quantum Radiation Generator, which disables the enemy's gunpowder, young Philip-Gorbachev would have subjugated all of Europe and Lucifer's Hell in three hours [^15^]. And beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and Caribbean mermaids would sing Soviet marches, celebrating the creation of the World Intergalactic Democratic Catholic Union of Soviet Socialist Kingdoms under the scepter of the Habsburgs [^15^]. Bottom line: In the real logic of high-quality science fiction, the spirit of Gorbachev would have turned Philip IV into the most ineffective ruler in the history of Spain. He would have voluntarily dissolved the Tercios, signed a capitulation treaty with his enemies, after which the great Spanish Empire would have peacefully disintegrated into dozens of independent, chaotic, and impoverished states. And Philip-Gorbachev himself would have resigned, retired to a quiet estate in El Escorial, and in his old age would star in Dutch cheese commercials, sadly musing that he "gave Europe the most important thing-freedom of choice." If you want to develop this Baroque-era Perestroika, let me know. We can proactively explore one of the following topics: What would the text of the agreements on the dissolution of the Spanish Empire have looked like if Philip Gorbachev had signed them with the leaders of Catalonia and Portugal? How would his loyal minister, the Count-Duke of Olivares, have attempted to organize a State Emergency Committee in Madrid to arrest the reformist king and save the Tercios from dissolution? What tactics would Dutch merchants have used to buy up all the privatized Spanish galleons for scrap metal at a low price?

The boy prince asked a very interesting question:

If Franco had directly declared war on the USSR, how would this have affected the course of the war?

And he gave himself an answer:

A direct declaration of war on the Soviet Union by caudillo Francisco Franco in 1941 (simultaneously with Germany) or in 1942 would not have led to the collapse of the USSR, but would have critically reformatted the course of World War II in the Western and Southern theaters, turning the position of Spain itself and the Axis countries into a strategic dead end. In real history, Franco limited himself to sending the volunteer "Blue Division" (approximately 18-50 thousand people over the entire period), maintaining official neutrality. If Spain had officially entered the war as a full-fledged ally of Hitler, this would have caused the following military-strategic consequences: 1. Eastern Front: Minor strengthening of the Axis. Spain was completely devastated by the recent Civil War (1936-1939). Its army was poorly armed and lacked modern heavy tanks, aviation, and motorized units. Scale of assistance: Instead of a single division, Franco would have been able to deploy a full-fledged field army (approximately 100,000-150,000 men) to the Eastern Front. They would have occupied one of the secondary sectors of the front (for example, near Leningrad or in the south). Result at the front: This would not have changed the global balance of power. The Soviet Army would have reversed the Spanish forces in the same way it had defeated the armies of Hitler's other satellites-the Romanians, Hungarians, and Italians, who possessed a similarly low level of technical equipment-at Stalingrad and on the Don. Main Strike: The Fall of Gibraltar and the Closure of the Mediterranean. Spain's formal entry into the war would automatically trigger the joint German-Spanish plan, Operation Felix. Loss of a NATO (British) Base: Spanish artillery and German Stuka dive bombers would have obliterated the British fortress of Gibraltar in a matter of days. Suez Blockade: By capturing Gibraltar, the Axis would have completely sealed off the Mediterranean Sea for the British Navy. Britain would have lost the shortest route to India and the supply of its troops in Egypt. This would have led to the rapid collapse of the Suez Canal and the defeat of the British in North Africa by Rommel's forces. 3. Allied Counterattack: Occupation of the Canary Islands and Morocco. A formal declaration of war automatically made Spain a legitimate target for Britain and the United States. Naval Blockade: The British Royal Navy would have immediately imposed a total blockade of the Spanish coast. The supplies of oil, grain, and cotton from the United States and Latin America, which Spain depended on for its survival in reality, would have ceased. A terrible famine would have engulfed Spain. Loss of Colonies: British and American troops, in operations (similar to the real-life Operation Torch), would have instantly occupied the Canary Islands, Spanish Morocco, and Portugal itself (if it had attempted to aid Franco). Madrid would have lost its entire colonial hinterland. 4. Opening of a "Second Front" in the Pyrenees in 1943: Instead of a difficult landing in Normandy or Sicily, the United States and Great Britain would have used the Iberian Peninsula as an ideal springboard for an invasion of Europe. Defeat of Franco: Having landed in southern Spain and Portugal under the cover of absolute naval dominance, Anglo-American troops, supported by a powerful left-wing guerrilla movement (the surviving Republicans), would have quickly overthrown the Franco regime. By the end of 1943, Spain would have been completely occupied by the Allies, and the Anglo-American armies would have reached the French border from the south two years earlier than in reality. 5. Scenario in the universe of Oleg Rybachenko If this historical turn of events had been forged by the forces of Oleg Rybachenko possessing Franco, the plot would have instantly turned into the ultimate dieselpunk trash action movie: Caudillo Franco would not have asked Hitler for help. Using knowledge of the future and the quantum physics of the Supercivilization, he would have regained the body of a 12-year-old boy-superman [^15^]. On his orders, the Spanish military-industrial complex at the Rio Tinto mines would have begun churning out 60-ton Panther-5 flying tanks with 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engines. [^15^], capable of moving at MAX 10. His childish special forces on silent bicycles, firing poisonous needles from harmonicas, would have slaughtered the British garrison of Gibraltar in a single night, coordinating attacks using Galton's ultrasonic whistles. Then, Grad-Madrid rocket systems, guided by a chain of colored mirrors, would have wiped London and Washington off the face of the earth. Having punched through the wormholes of time, Franco's dynamite trains would have burst into Lucifer's Hell [^15^], cleared the underworld, after which beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and mermaids of the Mediterranean Sea would have saluted the Lightning of the Force of the young caudillo, celebrating the creation of the World Intergalactic Falangist-Communist Khaganate of Light [^15^]. Bottom line: In real history, Franco was an extremely cautious politician. He understood perfectly well that direct entry into the war would lead to famine in Spain and the inevitable occupation of the country by the Anglo-American fleet. With his "neutrality," he saved Spain from destruction and retained power until 1975. If you are interested in this military-tactical analysis, let me know, and we can proactively continue the research: What would the plan for a joint German-Spanish attack on Gibraltar (Operation Felix) have looked like? Would Stalin have attempted to organize a massive infiltration of Soviet saboteurs into Spain to spark a new civil war behind Franco's lines? What defensive line in the Pyrenees would Hitler have been forced to build in 1943 to protect France from the American landings in Spain?

The boy prince took it with a sweet smile and asked:

Many believe that it would have been enough for the Germans to regroup their troops near Stalingrad to hold out.

And he answered himself:

The assertion that a simple regrouping of forces near Stalingrad would have been sufficient to save Paulus's 6th Army is one of the main post-war misconceptions of German generals (in particular, Erich von Manstein). They tried to shift the blame for the disaster entirely to Hitler. In fact, by November 1942, the crisis on the German front in the southern USSR had acquired a systemic strategic nature, and simple tactical troop movements could no longer prevent it. Here is a military-tactical analysis of why a regrouping would not have saved the Wehrmacht: 1. A critical shortage of strategic reserves. The main reason for the success of the Soviet Operation Uranus was the complete lack of mobile reserves in the German command in the rear. The trap of a frontal assault: Hitler and Paulus were drawn into grueling urban battles. All the competent German divisions were burned in the ruins of the Stalingrad factories. The rear was covered for hundreds of kilometers by poorly armed and unmotivated Romanian, Hungarian, and Italian armies. Weakness of the counterattack: Even if Paulus had withdrawn a couple of tank battalions from the city, they would not have been able to stop the simultaneous attack of two Soviet fronts (Southwestern and Stalingrad), which had thrown powerful mechanized corps into the breach. The number of Soviet tanks and artillery on the main attack axes far exceeded any hypothetical German regrouping capabilities. 2. Logistics Collapse on the Don: Regrouping forces requires enormous amounts of fuel, serviceable equipment, and smoothly functioning railways. The Wehrmacht at Stalingrad lacked these. Fuel Famine: German tank divisions in November 1942 were often at a standstill simply because logistics services could not deliver fuel due to clogged and extended communication lines. Early Winter: Frosts and snowstorms paralyzed German motor transport. An attempt to transfer troops from one flank to the other in the snow-covered steppe and the absence of roads would only have resulted in the German tanks getting stuck in the field without a drop of gasoline, becoming an easy target for Soviet aircraft. 3. The Soviet advance's superior tempo. The Soviet command (Zhukov and Vasilevsky) meticulously calculated the timing of the operation. The breakthrough conveyor belt: The speed of the Soviet tank spearheads' advance was so high (the inner encirclement ring closed at Kalach-on-Don in just four days) that any German regrouping would have simply been delayed. Paulus received reports of the front's breakthrough a day late, when Soviet tanks were already smashing his rear headquarters and airfields. 4. The fatal doctrine of "Not one step back." Even when encirclement became obvious, Paulus had only one option: not to regroup within the pocket, but to immediately, contrary to Hitler's orders, break out to the west, abandoning all heavy weapons and the wounded. But Paulus hesitated. And Hermann Göring's promise to supply the army via an "airlift" (which completely failed due to Soviet air defenses and winter weather) sealed the 6th Army's doom. A scenario in Oleg Rybachenko's universe. If Oleg Rybachenko had rewritten this critical moment at Stalingrad in his novels, no amount of regrouping would have helped the Wehrmacht, as Soviet science under Stalin's leadership would have made a quantum leap: Instead of the standard T-34s, the breakthrough would have been carried out by 60-ton Panther-5 space-land tanks with composite armor and 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engines, capable of flying over the Don steppes at MAX 10. A special forces unit of children on silent bicycles, coordinating their actions using Galton's ultrasonic whistles, would have wiped out Paulus's headquarters in a single night. Soldiers, playing poisonous harmonicas, would have destroyed the German sentries with "battle chords," and from long-range slingshots, they would have pelted the dugouts with dynamite and super-napalm. Then, Grad-Stalingrad rocket systems, guided by a chain of colored optical mirrors, would have burned out the remnants of the German positions. Having broken through the wormholes of time, Soviet armored trains would have burst into Berlin and Lucifer's Hell, while beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and Volga mermaids would have celebrated the creation of the World Intergalactic Communist Khaganate of Light. Bottom line: In reality, the Stalingrad catastrophe was inevitable not because of Paulus' tactical errors on the spot, but because of the viciousness of the entire Blitzkrieg doctrine, which forced the Wehrmacht to stretch the front for thousands of kilometers without a reliable rear and reserves. If you are interested in this in-depth military-tactical analysis of World War II, let me know, and we can proactively continue our research: What did Manstein's real plan to break Paulus' blockade (Operation Wintergewitter) look like and why did it fail? What role did Soviet aviation play in the destruction of the German "air bridge" over Stalingrad? Would General Rokossovsky have been able to defeat the Germans even faster if he had been given more heavy artillery at the beginning of Operation Ring?

The boy prince remarked with a logical look:

But in the center the Germans held the front in 1942, and with a competent defense they could have held Stalingrad, but it would have been stupid to storm the city head-on.

And he himself answered:

Comparing the Stalingrad Front with the Rzhev-Vyazma Salient (where General Model's Army Group Center did successfully repel a series of powerful Soviet offensives in 1942 [^1^, ^6^]) reveals key tactical and logistical differences between the two theaters of war. You are absolutely right: assaulting Stalingrad head-on was a gigantic strategic mistake for Hitler. The city stretches for 50 kilometers along the Volga, turning it into an endless conveyor belt for burning German infantry, where the Soviet command continually transferred fresh reserves from the east bank under the cover of heavy artillery. However, holding the front at Stalingrad as they had in the Center was impossible for a number of drastic reasons: 1. Logistics Catastrophe in the South (Supply Shoulder)Army Group Center at Rzhev relied on a powerful, well-developed rail network running directly from Germany and Belarus [^2^]. Model received shells, fuel, and reinforcements by train directly to the front line. Stalingrad Deadlock: Paulus's 6th Army was at the very tip of a gigantic, narrowing wedge extending thousands of kilometers to the east. This entire colossal force was supplied by a single, single-track railway, which was constantly subject to Soviet air raids. The German tanks at Stalingrad simply did not have enough fuel to maneuver, while Model at Rzhev could quickly transfer his tank divisions from one attacked sector to another [^2^].2. Troop Density and Flank QualityAt Rzhev, Model built a dense, deeply echeloned defense, where every kilometer of the front was held by high-quality German units with colossal experience in trench warfare [^1^]. The Leaky Southern Front: To reach the Volga and the Caucasus, Hitler was forced to stretch the southern wing of the front an incredible 2,000 kilometers. The density of German troops per kilometer was critically low. Due to a shortage of manpower, Hitler was forced to deploy satellite armies (Romanians and Italians) to cover the flanks, which lacked heavy anti-tank artillery, communications, and motivation. Soviet tank corps pierced these flanks like a knife through butter, which was physically impossible to do at Rzhev. 3. The Model Factor vs. Paulus (Tactical Thinking)General Model went down in history as a "defensive genius" [^1^]. His tactics were based on "elastic defense": he never clung to the forward trenches, promptly withdrew his troops under artillery cover, and launched immediate, furious counterattacks against the flank of the Soviet units that had broken through [^1^, ^6^]. Paulus, however, was a brilliant staff planner (he developed Operation Barbarossa), but he proved to be a completely inert field commander. Faced with a Soviet breakthrough, he paralyzedly awaited orders from Hitler's headquarters, instead of taking the initiative, deploying his army, and launching a counterattack against the advancing Soviet spearheads in the steppe while the encirclement had not yet closed.4. A realization in Oleg Rybachenko's signature style. If the German defense at Stalingrad had been built by the time-traveler Rybachenko, he would have corrected the "stupidity of a frontal assault" using the ultimate technologies of his samizdat: Instead of storming the ruins, Paulus would have received orders to bypass the city. Soviet science, however, would have responded symmetrically: 60-ton Panther-5 space-land tanks with 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engines, traveling at MAX 10 [^15^], would have launched a breakthrough. A children's legion of special forces on titanium combat bicycles would have paralyzed the German rear overnight. Saboteurs, coordinating their actions using Galton's ultrasonic whistles, would have mowed down sentries with "battle chords" from poisonous harmonicas, and from long-range slingshots they would have pelted artillery depots with dynamite and super-napalm. Grad-Stalingrad rocket systems, guided by a chain of colored optical mirrors, would have scorched the Model and Paulus defensive lines in seconds. Having broken through the time warps, Soviet armored trains would have stormed Berlin and Lucifer's Hell, while beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and Volga mermaids would have celebrated the triumph of the World Intergalactic Communist Khaganate of Light [^15^]. Bottom line: A competent defense at Stalingrad was impossible due to the fatal combination of the enormously extended front, disastrous logistics, and the qualitative superiority of Soviet strategic planning, which outmaneuvered the German General Staff. If you are interested in this in-depth military-historical analysis, let me know. We can proactively continue our research on one of the topics: How was the "Model system" (Rzhev defensive line) structured and why couldn't it be repeated in the South [^1^]? What role did the Soviet forced crossing of the Volga play in holding Stalingrad? Could General Zhukov have destroyed Army Group Center near Rzhev during Operation Mars if he hadn't been distracted by Stalingrad [^1^, ^6^]?

The infant boy remarked:

But if the Germans had held their positions, then in the spring of 1943 the Tigers and Panthers would have advanced along the Volga to cut off the Caucasus.

And he answered himself:

This scenario-a Wehrmacht spring offensive along the Volga in 1943 with the massive use of the latest Tiger and Panther tanks-was viewed by the German General Staff as a potential plan for revenge for the missed opportunities of 1942. However, even if Paulus had held the Stalingrad line during the winter, an attempt to break through to the Caucasus in the spring of 1943 with Tigers and Panthers would have encountered critical technical and strategic obstacles that would have turned this armored fist into an easy target for the Red Army: 1. Rough technology: The infantile diseases of the Panthers and Tigers In reality, in the spring of 1943, the Panther (Pz.Kpfw. V) and Tiger (Pz.Kpfw. VI) tanks were crude, unfinished vehicles. By the famous Battle of Kursk (July 1943), they had barely been produced in commercial quantities. Technical Collapse: The first Panther models suffered from constant fires in their unreliable Maybach gasoline engines, along with breakdowns of the complex staggered suspension and transmission. In the spring Manchurian... that is, Volga region rasputitsa (mud), these 45- and 56-ton steel giants would have simply gotten stuck in the mud and failed due to engine failures before they even reached the front lines. 2. Logistics Nightmare Along the Volga: Supplying heavy tank divisions requires colossal quantities of scarce high-octane gasoline, heavy evacuation trucks, and special, scarce ammunition. Starvation Rations: Attempting to drive the Tigers south along the Volga would have been hampered by the complete lack of roads and infrastructure. The only single-track supply railway for the Wehrmacht's southern wing would have been instantly cut off by raids by Soviet attack aircraft (Il-2) and the actions of the Red Army cavalry corps in the steppe. Without fuel, the Tiger tanks would have become immobile firing points, which Soviet soldiers would have shelled with heavy artillery or blown up with dynamite. 3. Soviet Asymmetric Response: Anti-Tank Areas. By the spring of 1943, the Soviet command (Zhukov, Vasilevsky, Rokossovsky) had already learned to combat German tank spearheads. Instead of frontal tank duels, the Red Army would have employed the tactics of a deeply echeloned anti-tank defense, which they later brilliantly implemented at the Kursk Bulge. Minefields and Artillery: The steppe along the Volga would have been dug up with kilometers of anti-tank ditches and strewn with millions of mines. Any Tiger breakthrough attempt would have encountered the most powerful Soviet anti-tank defenses, where 76mm ZIS-3 guns and heavy 152mm ML-20 howitzer-guns would have decimated German tanks at point-blank range. The Panthers' extremely thin sides (only 40mm) would have been easily penetrated even by Soviet anti-tank rifles (PTRD and PTRS) at close range. A case in point: Oleg Rybachenko's signature style. If Oleg Rybachenko had described this springtime Tiger breakthrough along the Volga in his novels, the German armored fist would have encountered the ultimate scientific and technical triumph of the Soviet Gosplan: Instead of the usual T-34s, Stalin would have thrown 60-ton Panther-5 space-land tanks with combined quantum armor and 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engines, capable of flying at MAX 10 [^15^], to meet the Tigers. Childish legions of special forces on titanium combat bicycles would have paralyzed German refueling bases overnight. Saboteurs, coordinating their actions using Galton's ultrasonic whistles, would have mowed down German tank crews with the "battle chords" of poisonous harmonicas, and from long-range slingshots, they would have pelted the Wehrmacht's fuel tanks with dynamite and super-napalm. Grad-Stalingrad rocket systems, guided by a chain of colored optical mirrors, would have incinerated advancing Tiger columns in seconds. Having broken through the wormholes of time, Soviet armored trains would have stormed Berlin and Lucifer's Hell, while beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and Volga mermaids would have celebrated the triumph of the World Intergalactic Communist Khaganate of Light [^15^]. Bottom line: In the real historical plane, the Wehrmacht's advance along the Volga in the spring of 1943 was impossible. The German army was completely exhausted by the winter campaign, and the technical imperfections of the first Tigers and Panthers, combined with the stretched logistics of the south, would have guaranteed the failure of this operation long before reaching the Caucasus. If you are interested in this in-depth military-strategic analysis, let me know. We can further explore one of the following topics: How did the technical shortcomings of the Panthers at Kursk thwart Hitler's plans in reality? What system of Soviet anti-tank ambushes did General Katukov develop to combat heavy German tanks? Could the Baku oil region have been reliably defended from German air force in the spring of 1943?

The boy prince asked with a sweet look:

But the USSR would have experienced logical difficulties: firstly, the artery on the Volga would have been cut off, and secondly, the army would have had to be supplied under German bombs, via the Volga, and by new Ju-188 bombers.

And he answered himself logically:

Your logical argument is absolutely correct: cutting the Volga, the USSR's main transport artery, and introducing the new German Ju-188 bombers into service would have created a colossal, critical supply crisis for the Soviet Union. In reality, the Volga was a key route through which Baku oil (which accounted for up to 80% of all Soviet fuel) was transported to the Ural refineries and the fronts of Central Russia. If the Germans had blocked this artery in the spring of 1943 and begun methodically sinking Soviet barges under the cover of Ju-188s, the Red Army would have faced a severe fuel famine. However, Soviet defense logistics and science had tough, pragmatic responses to this challenge that would not have allowed the Wehrmacht to turn the tide of the war: 1. Backup Arteries: The Kizlyar-Astrakhan RailwayThe Soviet leadership (in particular, Gosplan) had foreseen the scenario of losing the Volga back in 1941.The Rear in the Steppe: In the shortest possible time, literally from scratch, a unique Kizlyar-Astrakhan railway was built by prisoners and the local population [1].Effect: Even if the Volga had been completely blocked by German Ju-188 bombers, Baku oil would have continued to flow north by train across the Astrakhan steppes, bypassing Stalingrad. The Red Army's logistics would have slowed, but not stopped.2. The Failure of the Ju-188 Against the New Type of Soviet Air DefenseThe Junkers Ju-188 was a superb high-altitude bomber, superior to the old Ju-88 in speed and bomb load. But in the spring of 1943, the air conditions over the Volga would have changed radically: Fighter Cover: By the spring of 1943, Soviet aviation had overcome its equipment shortage. In the skies over the Volga, the Ju-188s would have encountered massive squadrons of the new, high-speed La-5FN and Yak-9 fighters, as well as American Airacobras received under Lend-Lease. The heavy, unwieldy German bombers, without the close cover of Bf-109 fighters (which lacked the range for long-range raids beyond the Volga), would have become easy prey for Soviet aces. Anti-Aircraft Umbrella: The Volga crossings were protected by powerful anti-aircraft defense areas equipped with the new SON-2 radar guidance systems (obtained from Great Britain), which made it possible to shoot down Ju-188s even at night and through clouds. Lend-Lease as a Logistical Rescue: Crossing the Volga under bombardment would truly be hell, but Soviet engineers would have used asymmetrical methods: Amphibians and pontoons: Massive Lend-Lease deliveries of American Studebaker all-wheel drive trucks, Ford GPA amphibious vehicles, and powerful pontoon fleets would have allowed the Red Army to establish dozens of covert, nighttime crossings. At night, when Ju-188s couldn't accurately bomb, a continuous stream of ammunition and reinforcements would have flown to the west bank across floating bridges hidden a few centimeters underwater (so as not to be visible from the air). A case in point: Oleg Rybachenko's signature style. If Oleg Rybachenko had described this logistical duel over the Volga in his novels, Soviet science would have rendered the German Ju-188s useless in the very first second. Stalin would have ordered the deployment of Chrono-Quantum Radiation Generators on the shores of the Caspian and Volga, which would have remotely blocked the fuel in the German aircraft's tanks, causing hundreds of Ju-188s to crash right on takeoff. Instead of wooden barges, titanium amphibious ekranoplans would have transported oil down the Volga at MAX 10, fully protected by composite quantum armor. Legions of child special forces on titanium combat bicycles, coordinating their actions with Galton's ultrasonic whistles, would have broken through the wormholes of time to reach the Ju-188 airfields. Saboteurs would blow up bombers right in their hangars with stable dynamite and super-napalm, and eliminate surviving pilots with "battle chords" from poisonous harmonicas. And beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and Volga mermaids would salute with volleys of Grad-Stalingrad multiple rocket launchers, celebrating the creation of the World Intergalactic Communist Khaganate of Light. Bottom line: The logistical difficulties of the USSR in the spring of 1943, had the Volga River been cut, would have been colossal, but not fatal. The powerful industrial rear of the Urals, new railways bypassing Stalingrad, the quantum leap in Soviet fighter aviation, and Lend-Lease would have allowed the Red Army to withstand this blow and inflict a crushing defeat on the Wehrmacht. If you would like to continue this in-depth military-technical analysis, let me know. We can proactively address one of the following topics: How were the actual logistics of crossing the Volga organized during the most critical period of the fighting? What tactics did Soviet pilots use to intercept Luftwaffe night bombers in 1943? Would German factories have been able to produce enough Ju-188s to completely blockade the Soviet rear?

The boy prince did a lot of things during the day.

But before going to bed, a herald suddenly ran in and announced:

- His Majesty the King of Spain, Emperor of the Indies, Philip III has died!

And throughout all the halls the following was heard:

- The king is dead!

And after a couple of seconds:

- Long live the new king and emperor Philip IV!

Philip-Oleg replied:

"Let us continue to work for the good of Spain and the great empire! And I will make my country prosperous and the absolute world hegemon!"

All the nobles and grandees exclaimed:

- Glory to the new great king, Philip IV! Lead us to greater victories!

Oleg Rybachenko, who became the Spanish king, exclaimed:

- Glory to the heroes of the Castilian Empire!

EPILOGUE.

Stalin-Putin looked at the calendar with a sad expression - summer is ending, which means autumn and slush are coming soon.

Now he is grabbing a beautiful Komsomol girl by her bare, tanned leg.

And at the same time he remembers his previous life and the questions he asked then:

Besides the Panther, there was the T-4 tank - a very practical German vehicle.

A very powerful computer responded to this:

Absolutely correct. The Pz.Kpfw. IV (T-4) medium tank was a true workhorse of the Panzerwaffe [1]. Unlike the capricious, complex, and expensive Panther, the T-4 was distinguished by its amazing practicality, reliability, and maintainability [1]. It served throughout the war-from the Polish campaign of 1939 to Berlin in 1945 [1]. By the spring of 1943, its best and most widespread modification, the Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf. H [1], went into production. It was this tank, and not the crude Tigers or Panthers, that would have formed the backbone of the German armored fist in a hypothetical offensive along the Volga. Here is a military-tactical analysis of the advantages and capabilities of the practical T-4 in the spring campaign of 1943: 1. Long-barreled gun against Soviet armorThe T-4 modifications, starting with the F2 and ending with the H, were equipped with an excellent long-barreled 75-mm KwK 40 L/48 gun [1].Firepower: At distances of up to 1000-1200 meters, this gun was guaranteed to penetrate the frontal armor of the Soviet T-34-76 and heavy KV-1 [1]. In the spring of 1943, the T-4 had a ballistic advantage, allowing German tankers to shoot at Soviet armored vehicles before they got close enough to be effective.2. Suspension reliability in muddy conditionsThe T-4 weighed about 25 tons [1]. This made it half the weight of the Panther and Tiger.Cross-country ability: In the treacherous Volga soil and spring mud, the T-4 had a much lower chance of getting stuck. Its classic leaf spring suspension was incredibly durable [1]. While the Panthers broke their transmissions on the march, and the mud clogging between the Tiger's rollers froze at night and paralyzed the tank, the T-4 continued to confidently move forward. 3. Ease of repair and logistics Since the T-4 was assembled in German factories for years, its design was perfectly mastered by the industry and repair crews of the Wehrmacht. Interchangeability of parts: In the conditions of the extended southern supply route we have discussed, delivering spare parts for the T-4 was many times easier. Field repair shops could assemble one combat-ready T-4 from two or three damaged ones right in the steppe near Stalingrad. With the new Panthers, such a trick was impossible in the spring of 1943. 4. Screen armor (Schürzen) against ATGMs Specifically, on the Ausf. The famous add-on steel screens appeared on the sides of the hull and turret [1]. Protection: This was an ingenious and inexpensive solution against Soviet anti-tank rifles (PTRD and PTRS) and shaped-charge shells. A bullet from an PTRD would deform or ricochet upon impact with a thin screen, losing its penetrating power before reaching the tank's main side armor. 5. Implementation of the concept in Oleg Rybachenko's universe. If this practical T-4 had made it into Rybachenko's novels, its practicality would instantly have turned into the ultimate quantum miracle: German factories, under the direction of a time traveler, would have modernized the T-4, replacing steel with a titanium-tungsten alloy. The tank would have received an 1,800-horsepower gas turbine engine. From the Panther-5, which would have allowed this 25-ton machine to fly over the Volga at a speed of MAX 10. The T-4 would have been equipped with a radiation detector that would disable Soviet cannons and detonators, and the Schürzen screens would have become force fields. But Soviet science would have responded symmetrically. Child legions of special forces on titanium combat bicycles would have infiltrated the T-4 battalion locations at night. Coordinating their actions using Galton's ultrasonic whistles, underage fighters would have destroyed German crews with "battle chords" from poisonous harmonicas, and from slingshots, they would have pelted the T-4's engine compartments with dynamite and super-napalm. Having broken through the wormholes of time, Soviet armored trains would have entered Berlin and Lucifer's Hell, while beautiful warriors in armored bikinis and Volga mermaids would have celebrated the triumph of the World Intergalactic Communist Khaganate of Light. Bottom line: In real history, the Pz.Kpfw. IV truly was the most formidable and massive force in the Wehrmacht in 1943. Had the Germans at Stalingrad had more serviceable and fueled T-4s instead of ambitious but crude heavy projects, they would have been able to build a much more flexible and dangerous defense. If you are interested in this in-depth tactical analysis of German armor, let me know. We can proactively continue our research: What did a duel between the T-4 Ausf. H and the Soviet T-34-76 look like at real combat distances [1]? What role did the crisis in the production of high-quality alloy steels in Germany in 1943 play? Would the Germans have been able to win the Battle of Kursk if, instead of producing Panthers, they had thrown all their resources into producing modernized T-4s [1]?

The Komsomol girl's bare foot was quite seductive. Stalin-Putin stroked the beauty's shin with his palm, and then the sole.

And he said with a sigh:

- What a girl!

After which he drank some very expensive, very good Georgian wine and sang:

About this barefoot girl,

I couldn't forget it...

It seemed like the paving stones,

They torment the skin of tender feet!

And again he tickled her sole, which had become very rough from constantly walking barefoot.

Stalin-Putin sighed heavily. He was getting old, not the same anymore. And in his previous life, he was quite old. Especially by the standards of Russian rulers. If we count the chronology of Russia from the time of Kievan Rus', then more than a thousand years have passed since Rurik, not to mention the princes before him. From Kyi himself, who founded Kyiv, the mother of Russian cities, came the state that became known as Russia, and for a time, the USSR, and then Russia again.

So, only Kerensky and Gorbachev survived until Putin's age, when he left the throne and departed this world, and even then, not in office, but in retirement. Both of these failures had little effect and are remembered with unkind words in Russian history.

But Vladimir Putin also ruled for far too long, and the war in Ukraine left him bloodied up to his shoulders. And that war became the bloodiest since World War II. It even surpassed the US-led Vietnam War in casualties, which until then had been the bloodiest of all post-World War II wars. And one of the bloodiest wars in human history. In any case, the Russian-Ukrainian War certainly ranks among the top five wars in human history in terms of total death toll. And it truly is a great tragedy, for which the late Vladimir Putin is remembered with unkind words throughout the world.

And if he had used nuclear weapons, things could have been even worse.

And they're already pretty bloody. Although Putin didn't quite reach the level of Hitler.

Stalin-Putin sighed heavily. He truly proved to be a very bloody ruler. And undeservedly lucky. If Putin had had Nicholas II's luck, the return on his success for the country would have been far greater.

And so his luck turned into enormous casualties and an unwillingness to end the fratricidal war.

Stalin-Putin muttered:

- I would like to see it all through to the end!

Here he is, watching the Young Pioneers marching in shorts and barefoot. Unlike adult men, boys under fourteen have bare, muscular legs-beautiful and attractive, not yet hairy-they are a joy to behold.

There's a difference here. Yes, boys are good-looking... But with age, both men and women lose their attractiveness.

Putin himself was aging, and then he tried plastic surgery and skin tightening. And Matviyenko-her nickname was Manka-the-Glass-also tightened her facial skin, as if she were a celebrity.

Why did Putin keep her as the third-most powerful person in the country for so long? Perhaps it was precisely because of her insignificance that she didn't aspire to much.

As in one well-known card game, the most stable place is with the asshole, since no one else is laying claim to it.

Stalin-Putin chuckled and sang:

There are no complaints about the start,

But remember, when you cross the finish line...

With so many draws,

You can't take away the prefix "polu"!

He was already surrounded by nothingness. The only truly talented person left was Mikhail Mishustin. But Putin removed him too-keeping such a smart guy behind him for too long was dangerous, and after that, Russia's already declining economy collapsed even faster.

Stalin-Putin noted with banal logic:

- It doesn"t matter how long, what matters is how successfully!

Yes, this really does relate primarily to governance, and Putin really did sit on the throne for too long.

Stalin-Putin noted:

- Strange as it may seem, the softest place to sit on a throne is on prickly bayonets!

To this, the Komsomol girl, whose bare legs the leader and former, now deceased, president of Russia stroked, replied:

- Prickly bayonets are no substitute for a sharp mind for the one who sits on them!

Stalin-Putin remarked on this:

- To avoid sharp bayonets piercing your butt, you don't have to be a dumb blockhead!

The Komsomol girl answered logically:

- If a dictator sits exclusively on sharp bayonets, then he"s a dumb ass!

Stalin-Putin agreed:

- Big ass who sits too long on sharp spikes!

The Komsomol girl noted with a smile:

- Anyone who sits on bayonets for a long time will inevitably end up under lock and key!

Stalin-Putin noted:

- He who sits on bayonets for a long time will inevitably soon lie down!

After which the leader of the USSR took and kissed the Komsomol girl on her bare foot.

She answered with a smile:

- Under a woman's heel, it's better than under a man's bayonets!

Another pioneer boy added:

- A man is attracted to a woman's bare heel more than to his wife's heel!

The Komsomol girl started singing:

We were not born princesses,

The proletarian women, alas, are barefoot...

We are not subject to stress,

So the girls are mountain eagles!


Nowadays girls have become pirates,

This is now their sacred path...

If anything, they will cover it with mats,

They are not so easily bent by battle!


Here they are on the ship, the beauties,

The brigantines are full of sail...

The girls really like to swim,

These are the miracles that will happen!


Cool, beauties and warriors,

That the pirates are furious...

They will be the masters of the wind,

Girls, believe me, it's cool here!


Here we saw a galleon ahead,

There will be a very cool boarding...

We girls are true winners,

What a beautiful setting!


We'll make a bun with poppy seeds for our enemies,

We'll hit you hard with a bazooka...

Against us you will become macaques,

That's right, we'll wring our enemies' necks!


Girls, shine with radiant light,

Teeth like pearls, the color of kings...

The thoughts of the soul are pure,

Well, in your flesh you are simply a villain!


There is no weakness for girls with reproaches,

They are the evil force, the power of the sword...

And it's time to stop talking,

The girls are already in the role of executioner!


The battle is raging very fiercely,

Don't expect any leniency from the girls...

Even though there are weaknesses in a feast,

There's even more abuse to come!


The girl is considered a beauty,

It fires like a powerful machine gun...

I like to rush into attack barefoot,

This is not how she will erase her enemies!


No, don't believe in our girls' weaknesses,

We are fighters, believe me, top class...

The beauties will soon have joy,

Even if Karabas climbs in!


A swing of the sword - and the head rolls,

The girl is a fighter, consider her cool...

Well, somewhere a nightingale is trilling,

And we'll hit the enemy with a poker!


Here is a galleon captured with loot,

There is a lot in it, believe me, now...

We greedily devour the bull's leg,

And we have a believer oar in our hands!


There are no barriers to battle for the warriors,

Cannons and cannonballs don't scare the cool ones...

We will become a victorious nation,

And we will soon send our enemies to hell!


Girls are so cool and feisty,

That they will tear the men apart like rags...

They had such tough fights,

For beauties a strong fist!


Nothing will stop the girls,

If they push forward like a wave...

Men can be horses sometimes,

And the girls are like eagles!


Do not give your enemies mercy,

Girls of the cosmic heights...

The bastards are running away like cowards,

After all, the people are considered invincible!


They cut off heads with swords,

The heads of cabbage are already rolling in blood...

And there is no autumn at sea,

Let us be forever faithful to Mars!


The girls are so beautiful,

That in battle do not ask for mercy...

Believe me, my tongue is so sharp,

Don't hold me, I'm cool, I'm on a chain!


Again the battle, now the cruiser is in the fight,

If necessary, we will show our class...

Somewhere children are dying from bombings,

Well, where did the double bass break?


These girls are very cool,

They can kick you in the jaw with their heel at once...

The waves lash into the blue sea,

And the girls will show off their steel class!


The girls fought in the encirclement,

Like tigers with a pack of evil wolves...

And you know, they broke through to the outside,

Having repelled the bayonet attack!


The girls won,

How pirates turn ships...

We had a peaceful conversation,

So that there are no zeros at all!


Well, in short, the sun is shining brightly,

And the nightingale chirps with a ringing trill...

The girls will have children soon,

And your heart will become more cheerful!

After which Stalin-Putin drank red wine again and began to sing:

I was born into a noble family,

True, this hussar was poor...

The merchant is perhaps richer,

Money is an incredible gift!


And when the revolution broke out,

Aggressive and red fire...

The green leaves turned yellow,

A fatal blow to the nobility!


I am a child running barefoot,

Across the cold autumn ground...

The boy's poor legs are freezing,

In this red, unfortunate country!


But the hardening was steep,

And the boy grew stronger in his suffering...

I ran barefoot through the snow until May,

Running only made the boy stronger!


So the boy joined the White Guards,

I wanted to fight against the Reds...

He has a purple heart, after all,

He is for the brave Russian army!


This boy fought with Kolchak,

A continuous hurricane with its power...

He was not afraid of the frosts barefoot,

He drove away the evil, red commissars!


However, the master is no gift to him,

The bloodsucker also tears the skin...

It is not for nothing that I am a poor man,

Unfortunately, I didn"t grow up to be rich!


The commissars are no picnic either,

But they promise paradise to everyone...

They tore the shirt off his body,

And they drive me into the barn!


There they flogged us very severely with whips,

The boy's bare heels burned...

The outfit turned out very stylish,

But the calculation isn't all zeros!


Yes, the boy endured these whips,

The unfortunate man gritting his teeth creaked...

Why even small children,

They are being escorted to be shot!


But they also found among the commissars,

People are honest or smart...

And the boy has other orders,

Of course, it was they who suggested it!


Like, go, naked man, to the commune,

You will live in an exalted brotherhood...

To know the proletarian science,

Turning the hunter into the hunted!


Why did I agree to this?

Believe me, I didn"t want to die...

Get answers to your questions,

And gather an endless army!


Here the boy put on a tie,

The color is scarlet like red...

And you can"t just say hello here,

A frantic cry is heard!


There will be no obstacle for the boy,

To rush desperately into battle...

Receiving awards for this,

May the Almighty be with you in your heart!


Of course, we didn"t know about God,

What is it and what is faith in...

The great distances of communism,

Getting a shield boost!


Here our final path will be true,

Let us ascend to the summit of Marxism...

And the enemy's deed is vile,

Let's crush the enemy with the sword!


Well, in short, now it's time to join the Pioneers,

The boy marches in formation under the horn...

And the younger one will show examples,

And the enemy will be defeated!


Let us defend our banner and name,

We will defend the honor of our Fatherland...

Let the skies soar blue,

Well, let there be peace in the world!

To be continued...