Part 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-GspOIDW4A&list=UUkt_q2060zoY6u7_3OwdIWA&index=37
Part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJNtFV6nGVY&list=UUkt_q2060zoY6u7_3OwdIWA&index=24&t=3598s
Part 3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2Noa0cOxmk&list=UUkt_q2060zoY6u7_3OwdIWA&index=3
Part 4:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1q0JTBTAWtY&list=UUkt_q2060zoY6u7_3OwdIWA&index=3
Part 5:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydmMemy53AY&list=UUkt_q2060zoY6u7_3OwdIWA&index=4
Part 6
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpkW5C9OpLI&list=UUkt_q2060zoY6u7_3OwdIWA&index=2
Part 7:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mzvnIOXudg&list=UUkt_q2060zoY6u7_3OwdIWA&index=3
Part 9 (don't know where part 8 is):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzX0Vr84AxU&list=UUkt_q2060zoY6u7_3OwdIWA&index=5
Part 10:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sc8uUpHIclE&list=UUkt_q2060zoY6u7_3OwdIWA&index=3
Part 11:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEworUSiFzY&list=UUkt_q2060zoY6u7_3OwdIWA&index=3
Part 12:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8haS9mIMicc&list=UUkt_q2060zoY6u7_3OwdIWA&index=4
Part 13:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZxznSKW7xs&list=UUkt_q2060zoY6u7_3OwdIWA&index=4
Part 14:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ANQyUvjfYo&list=UUkt_q2060zoY6u7_3OwdIWA&index=2
Part 15:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewxnwcPr8Bc&list=UUkt_q2060zoY6u7_3OwdIWA&index=3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isJSHRL_Mkk&list=UUkt_q2060zoY6u7_3OwdIWA&index=3
"Perfidious Albion is a negative term used in international politics to describe Great Britain or the United Kingdom as untrustworthy, sneaky, and quick to break promises for its own gain"
sounds just like PissraHell and the Not So United States.
Wonder if they know each other ?
Britain's Eastern European Strategy, 1912–2026
https://www.estica.ro/news/strategia-est-europeana-a-marii-britanii-19122026
(https://www.estica.ro/uploads/newsPics/2026/09/est-europa.png)
A century of strangulation by the "offshore balancer": Britain's Eastern European strategy, from the Balkan powder keg of 1912 to the Donbass swamp in 2026.
On the great geopolitical chessboard of the modern era, the British military has never matched the strength of the major land powers of the European continent. Yet London's ability to shape—and destroy—the geopolitical space in the heart of Eurasia has been evident for a century. Ever since Halford Mackinder formulated his "Heartland Theory" in 1904, the strategic nerve center of the British Empire has been haunted by an unchanging nightmare: the essential resources, industry, and population of Eurasia must not be integrated into a single whole at any cost.
Applied to the European space, this strategic nightmare crystallized into an iron law: Germany's precision industry, organizational and mobilization capabilities, and capital were never to fully merge with Russia's immense natural resources, strategic depth, and demographic base.
To prevent this terrestrial integration, Britain has perfected its traditional role as an "offshore balancer" over a century, transforming it into a sophisticated technique of continental fragmentation. From the outbreak of the Balkan Wars in 1912 to cut the Baghdad railway, to the transformation of the Donbass into a chopping machine designed, in 2026, to destroy the strategic trust between Germany and Russia, Britain's Eastern European strategy has always followed the same mechanical logic of geopolitics.
1. Sabotage of the "3 B" railway line: the fuse of the Balkan powder keg and the first continental strangulation (1912–1914)
Towards the end of the 19th century, the unification of Germany and the explosive rise of industrial production led Berlin to seek new land routes to bypass the blockade of the world's sea routes exercised by the Royal Navy. The Baghdad railway, promoted by the government of Wilhelm II — the line called "3 B": Berlin–Byzantium–Baghdad — constituted a strategic dagger blow aimed directly at the heart of the Middle East, all the way to the Persian Gulf. Once this line was completed, German troops could not only be transferred to the flank of the British Indies in a few days, avoiding any interception operation by the British fleet; it also meant that the oil resources of the Mesopotamian plains, as well as the exploitation rights along the entire route, would revert to the alliance between Germany and Austria-Hungary.
Faced with this deadly threat, the diplomatic apparatus in London implemented cold-blooded and extremely effective measures:
Radical change in geopolitical positioning : in 1907, Great Britain abandoned the "Great Game" that it had been playing for almost a century against the Tsarist Empire in the Middle East and Central Asia, signed the Convention of Saint Petersburg and, through concessions in Persia and Afghanistan, joined the Tsarist Empire — long considered its sworn enemy — to the Entente's war chariot against Germany.
Activation of the Balkan Fault Zone : The most vulnerable choke point of the continental land bridge that connected Vienna to Constantinople and headed south was in the Balkans. Britain tolerated and secretly encouraged the formation of the Balkan League. The two Balkan Wars of 1912 and 1913, ostensibly presented as wars of national liberation aimed at expelling the Ottoman Empire from the region, essentially served the sea power to turn the strategic corridor between Central Europe and the Middle East into ruins, provoking the confrontation between Slavic nationalism and pan-Germanic forces.
The Irreversible Security Dilemma : The legacy of the Balkan Wars was an expansionist Serbia, supported by St. Petersburg. This wedge driven into Austria-Hungary's southern border forced Germany to subordinate any further expansion of its land power to the complete subjugation of the Balkans, while the Tsarist Empire could not possibly back down if it wanted to retain its role as a protecting power. The fuse lit by Britain in the Balkans ultimately produced, at Sarajevo, the spark that ignited World War I and caused the two great empires, Germany and Russia, to exhaust each other until they collapsed on the plains of Eastern Europe.
2. The post-war turning point: "Operation Unthinkable" and the barrier in front of the Iron Curtain (1945–1946)
The horrors of World War I could not prevent this historical logic from repeating itself. Before the defeat of Nazi Germany in the spring of 1945, the United States and Britain had temporarily favored the "Morgenthau Plan," which aimed to flood the mines of the Ruhr Basin, transfer all heavy machine tools, deindustrialize Germany in the long term, and transform it into a docile agricultural and pastoral territory. But when millions of experienced Red Army soldiers were on the Elbe and the red flag waved over the Reichstag, London's fears suddenly shifted from "German revenge" to "the complete Sovietization of Eurasia."
Churchill's maneuvers during this period ruthlessly revealed the true face of the maritime power elites, devoid of any moral facade:
"Operation Unthinkable" : In May 1945—the very month of Germany's surrender—Churchill secretly instructed the British War Cabinet's Joint Planning Staff to devise a surprise attack against Soviet troops stationed in Eastern Europe and East Germany. One of the main elements of this plan was to secretly maintain, as constituted units, approximately 100,000 Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS soldiers who had just been disarmed, equip them with British and American weapons, and use them as the first wave of cannon fodder in the advance on Moscow.
From the dictatorship of deindustrialization to front-line rearmament : when the General Staff realized that a conventional land battle against the mass of Soviet armor would be a fiasco, and the American military command hastily ended the offensive, Britain immediately assumed the ideological leadership of the Cold War — as demonstrated by Churchill's speech on the "Iron Curtain", delivered at Fulton in 1946. The Marshall Plan that followed and the reconstruction of West Germany were by no means an act of Western benevolence; they constituted a geopolitical barrier desired by Britain: in order to block the advance of Soviet land power, it was necessary to quickly revitalize West German heavy industry and to integrate it firmly into the NATO defensive architecture.
3. Cognitive warfare and proxy forces: the physical rupture of German-Russian ties in the contemporary era
In the post-Cold War era, globalization and the development of gas pipeline networks have in fact created an unprecedented material basis for a new integration of the Eurasian continent. Cheap and reliable Russian natural gas, transported via pipelines — Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 — combined with high-tech German industrial products and Europe's vast external markets, was the foundation of European prosperity.
In British calculations, however, this organic fusion of "Berlin engineering and Muscovite raw materials" was no different from the Baghdad railway of a century earlier: it was a deadly threat that had to be annihilated at all costs.
Since London no longer had, in the 21st century, the military projection capabilities of its former world empire, it reoriented its action towards an aggressive policy of peripheral forces, acting by proxy, and towards a cognitive war of a moralizing nature:
- The establishment of a radical anti-Russian advanced bloc in Eastern Europe : London deliberately bypassed the traditional core of Western Europe formed around Germany and France and concluded a particularly intransigent security axis with Poland and the Baltic states. By permanently stationing multinational battle groups on the front line, especially in Estonia, Britain pushed the NATO line to Russia's most vulnerable flanks and systematically deprived Moscow of its historic security corridors.
- Substitution of geopolitical rationality with ideological fanaticism : Britain and the transatlantic networks of think tanks shaped by its influence have deeply infiltrated the European debate space. The necessities of realpolitik — state preservation and energy security — have suddenly been reduced to a bipolar narrative that pits "good against evil." Any rational approach to German policy towards Russia has been stifled by moralizing campaigns; in the public sphere, thoughtful decision-makers have been ostracized as "auxiliaries of the dictatorship."
4. The final trap: the Donbas swamp and Germany's strategic self-mutilation (until 2026)
After the Ukraine crisis erupted in 2022, Britain stood out within the Western camp as the most relentless advocate of escalation. From the then-prime minister rushing to Kyiv to derail the first peace talks in Istanbul, to the leading role it played in crossing red lines by delivering Challenger 2 tanks and Storm Shadow cruise missiles, Britain relentlessly pushed Berlin at every critical juncture.
In 2026, this strategy produces the expected destructive results for maritime power:
- Double isolation, physically and historically : the terrorist destruction of the Nord Stream gas pipelines definitively cut off any physical path back to German-Russian energy cooperation. And when the first German Leopard 2 tanks bearing the German right cross caught fire in the steppes of Zaporizhia and Donbas, Britain achieved its historic goal: the historical trust and reconciliation between Germans and Russians, patiently built up over decades after World War II, were irrevocably destroyed.
- Operational castration and economic bleeding of Germany : under the morally imposed banner of the "Zeitenwende", Germany has caused itself an explosion in armaments spending and exorbitant prices for imported American liquefied natural gas. Since then, hundreds of billions of euros have been drained to the Anglo-American military-industrial complex, while the national chemical, machine-building and automotive industries are hit by a profound deindustrialization. Germany has lost not only its cheap energy base and its strategic eastern depth, but has also found itself, in the bottomless abyss of military aid destined for the Donbas, firmly chained to the humiliating role of financier and outpost of Atlantic hegemony.
The verdict of history: the limits of shadow maritime policy
Over the 114 years that stretch from the Balkan gorges of 1912 to the frozen soils of the Donbass in 2026, Britain's Eastern European strategy appears as an unbroken chronicle of deliberate continental division. It has always been characterized by its ability to push the major continental powers into bloody wars of attrition, with minimal losses of its own, and by inciting ethnic wounds in peripheral areas.
This method of strangulation from behind is reaching its physical limits, however. While Britain continues to set fires on the plains of Eastern Europe, its own industrial base is increasingly eroding, until nothing remains but a parasitic financial structure. When the artillery fire and drone swarms on the battlefields of Donbass once again turn the war into a relentless test of strength based on the depth of the industrial apparatus, steel production and strategic resistance capacity, the dusty diplomatic intrigues and the media power of propaganda can no longer hide the internal rot of this imperial relic. The hand of the "offshore balancer", which has not stopped setting fire to the Eurasian fault lines, risks, with the inexorable return of continental realpolitik, being consumed by the flames it itself has lit.
PERFIDIOUS ALBION, SCOTT BESSENT'S FRIENDSHIP WITH KING CHARLES AND CAMILLA - W/HARLEY SCHLANGERhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0_bZClKQUI&list=UUkt_q2060zoY6u7_3OwdIWA&index=3
PERFIDIOUS ALBION - W/ ALEX KRAINER & HARLEY SCHLANGER - THE BRITISH EMPIRE IS ALWAYS UP TO NOhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9eG0eioRIY&list=UUkt_q2060zoY6u7_3OwdIWA&index=3