Military Review

A few thoughts about readers' questions about Russia's withdrawal from the memorandum. Afterword

Regular readers of our publication know that I very rarely write a continuation of my articles. Not because the topic becomes uninteresting. Just every reader after reading my material can make a conclusion on their own. Depending on your own thoughts, your own worldview, if you like. From my own life experience. True, these are just facts that have passed through the prism of the experience and knowledge of a particular person. That is why the truth is always different. More precisely, the truth is that everyone has his own.

But today is the time to continue the topic is necessary. Alas, it is necessary to ascertain that the previous material did not solve the tasks set by me at the beginning of the article. Common thoughts in the comments were gradually "trampled" by active "amateurs." This is purely my definition. And "amateurs" are quoted because they are actually fairly well-prepared opponents. And their task is simple, as the multiplication table: to divert the discussion aside. Remember the old joke about the student in the exam who learned only one question? Therefore, answering any other one, he skillfully led to this particular topic and started talking about what he knows more or less.

And further. Very unpleasant topic. Many of the commentators use the forbidden technique. It seems: "Are you ready to change the sofa to the trench?" I can not boast that I know all the old-timers of the site. But due to the subject of my articles, many are familiar to me. Who correspondence, and who personally. And these are not just “sofa hamsters”, but really people who know the army and the war. Really knowledgeable military production people. And not from the machine, but from fairly large cabinets. Some, like, for example, Astarta, a distinguished military general, who passed, in particular, Egypt (we discussed this article in absentia in absentia) we have already lost. Not everyone likes to argue with an aggressive "amateur". Therefore, dear readers, let us without meanness and "torn vests" on a skinny chest ...

But back to the topic that makes our brain "boil" for several days. To the subject of Russia’s withdrawal from the memorandum.

To begin with, let’s see if the Syrian Su-22 had chances against the American F / A-18 Super Hornet. Was it "self-defense", according to the Americans? I will break my own "rules" and immediately answer this question. Bullshit, designed for complete idiots or people who have never seen combat aircraft, even on video. Americans really wanted to show their strength. Wolf and Lamb ...

Let's start with the "terrible" Syrian fighter-bomber Su-22. This is actually an export modification of the old (mid-70-ies) Soviet Su-17 aircraft. The beautiful word "fighter" this aircraft received for the opportunity to use air-to-air missiles. Again, "scary" for a modern American aircraft. The firing range of these missiles is approximately 20-22 kilometers. Yes, and eyes "drying" blind. Suffering from senile "myopia". Airborne systems provide target acquisition at approximately 80 km range.

Hence, the Syrian aircraft was not used as a fighter, but as a bomber. After all, 4 tons of combat load is essential. Specialists, by the way, have very big doubts about the presence of air-to-air missiles in this flight. The last plane shot down in aerial combat on the account of the Americans was in 1999 (Serbian MiG-29 over Bosnia).

And to whom did the Su-22 "attack"? What kind of "harmless samoletik" from the Americans? The F / A-18E / F Super Hornet is a multipurpose carrier-based fighter (mid-90-s). This is a deep upgrade of the F / A-18 Hornet. The aircraft is primarily intended for air combat. Although it carries a combat load twice as large as the Su-22. The “eyes” are seen at approximately 150 km. And the air-to-air missiles fly 70 km ...

Conclusions about the chances of aircraft in open battle do it yourself. The Syrian was just a target ... And we will analyze another important, but controversial moment. The Americans claim that they did exactly as prescribed in the memorandum. They contacted the Russian command and warned about the possible use of force against the aircraft of Syria. Moreover, it is alleged that they tried to contact the Syrian pilot ...

Both of these statements are nothing more than a proposal to the Russian side to "hush up" the matter. Again, exactly what I wrote in the last article. "Well, it happens ... The young guy is hot. He did not take the order like that ... Do not judge the hero ..." Russia, as conceived by the American command, must acknowledge the receipt of the warning and transfer it to the Syrian pilot. And that ... should die at the hands of terrorists.

Not a ride. Moscow clearly answered. Not contacted! And the Syrian pilot (may Allah be good for him) "let down" the Americans. Not just survived, but also safely evacuated from the occupied territory. But the most disgusting for the Pentagon, he did not bite his tongue and can speak quite clearly. And what he will say is clear to everyone.

A fairly large group of readers yesterday put forward the thesis of the beginning of a full-scale war between the United States and Russia, if we are fulfilling our words. There were many arguments and figures. They compared almost the wear resistance of the shoes of our armies. If we put everything together, we will see a simple approach in the style of "maydanuty" guys. The United States surpasses us in everything, and we will lose in this war unequivocally (forgive me Vladimir Volfovich for the free use of the old words attributed to him).

Do you really believe that in Syria, Russia and the United States are eager to start a war between themselves? Why, after the downed bomber, we did not start a war with Turkey? Why the Americans did not start a war with the DPRK?

There are many fools in world politics. But even fools understand that in a big war there will be no restrictions. And all agreements on the non-use of something there immediately can be thrown into the trash. This will be the last war. Not for the warring countries, but for the planet. Now I can’t say for sure how many times our planet can be split with existing nuclear weapons, but I’m sure what is possible is many times over. Does it need someone?

Another part of the opponents of the Russian decision speaks of the deliberate loss of our VKS in a local conflict on Syrian territory. Russia is against the whole world ... What the "whole world" is worth, the Australians showed yesterday. Quickly turned their part in the fighting in Syria and today send their forces of self-defense back. Defend your Australia. From someone ... Probably rebelled kangaroos and platypuses. Who is there from "the whole world"? Balts, Poles and other Luxembourgers with the Netherlands?

The conflict in Syria is really possible. Local. Something similar to Vietnamese or Egyptian ... Some oppositionist "Ahmed McCain" against the Syrian "Mustafa Ivanov." But...

Oh, this is "but." Constantly puts a stick in the wheels of all reasoning. Remember what is said in the statement of the Russian MO? All aircraft will be considered as targets ... Then what? After the installation of our air defense systems in Syria, was there at least one case when American planes "accidentally flew" into the area of ​​responsibility of these systems? At least one? The Americans and their allies very carefully choose the routes of their flights, so that, God forbid, do not "get under the distribution."

Before the events in Syria, US pilots were confident in their cars. Almost officially they called themselves the lords of the sky. And they were very surprised when Russian aerobatic teams worked out at all kinds of air shows. US intelligence reassured the pilots of the "flying and high-value" flight planes. However, in Syria, overseas "lords" saw that the planes were not piecemeal ... Serial, and there are quite a lot of them.

Can Americans Act aviation within the territories to which our warning does not apply? The question is interesting. Therefore, I refer to the opinion of one of the experts. Syria is too small for modern military aviation. Therefore, both Russian and American planes will not be able to work without entering the "alien" sky. These are the realities of modern aviation.

And here fighters take the first place. Not stationary air defense systems, namely fighters. Alas, but from the fact that today there is a presence in Syria, the coalition cannot oppose anything to our “landmarks” and MiGs. According to experts from both the United States and Russia, these planes will demolish Americans from the sky very quickly. And it is without heroism and dedication. Purely pragmatic approach. The study of aircraft performance characteristics and weapons.

Now someone will remember the F-22 ... "Predator", of course, is good. Just how many of these "little animals" are involved in the war in Syria? But those who can fight with them are involved ... I mean Su-35. Who will be from the opposite side? All the same F15 / 16 ... And how many of these Fs should be against one 35?

Do not suffer a question. According to American experts, 1 to 10 with a probability of winning 60% ... According to our estimates, more is needed. Oh, those ends of the wings of the aircraft ... "Khibiny", their mother ...

Well, the answer to the following skeptics. Why do we need it and why did it happen at all? Maybe the truth is not worth "inflate"?

Dear commentators, answer yourself a simple question. Why do we even get involved in this war? Why are the Russian guys there now? What would happen if we did not help Assad? Questions unpretentious. Repeatedly "gnawed" in various media and forums. Therefore, the answer is obvious to most. Not only in Russia, but in the world. We (all, Russia, the United States, the coalition, Iran, NATO and all that is there today) are fighting international terrorism!

Only we are fighting from "different sides." Russia is on the side of the legitimate government of Syria, and the United States and others like them are on the side of the opposition. This is where the “pothole on the road” of the war is located. For us, any militant is automatically a terrorist, and for Americans selectively. I already wrote about the "bad / good" action movie in the American version in the last article.

It so happened that behind the "celestial" affairs we forgot about the sinful earth. And the answer to my last question, alas, lies precisely on the ground. More precisely, it lies in the area of ​​Resafe. This is a key road junction south of Raqqah, which Assad aimed. Control of this outcome allows the Syrian army to launch an attack on Raqqa from the south. Such an operation on almost 100% will be successful. And everyone understands this.

The Americans have already tried to seize the initiative with the help of Kurdish controlled units. But the government forces were able to drive the troops from their positions. Resap today in the hands of Assad.

"The Americans are forced to" save "their controlled" good "militants. And, sadly, today everything depends on completely impossible demands. On the one hand, and on the other. If Assad continues, then provocations, and, quite possibly, and the outbreak of direct hostilities by the Americans is very likely. If Assad does not dare launch an offensive, he will lose all the advantages of his position today and will have to move away from Raqqi ...

In general, we can already talk about the prospects of Syria in the future. Either the Vietnamese scenario and the continuation of the war to the last Syrian, or disintegration into several parts. The territory of the "caliphate", which actually died, become a bargaining chip. In the period of a kind of "anarchy" in these territories, it is easy to create not only the Kurdish state, but several independent Syrian ones. The benefit of the principles of separation is a lot. From religious differences to political orientation.

And on leaving the memorandum, it is already possible to conclude that this is “not the way it was last time.” This is quite a conscious decision of the Russian military and political circles. And it is dictated not only by the events in Syria. It is dictated by the general situation on the Russian borders. And above all, the increased activity of NATO in the border areas. We are again trying to "show the fist." Draw into the next "cold" conflict. Syria, Ukraine, the western frontier ... Again the "old song" about the arms race ...

The air smells like a thunderstorm ... Nothing. Not all thunderstorms end in heavy rain. Rumbles more often, flashes with lightning, that's all. But the air is filled with ozone. And cleared of all dirt. You go out into the woods or the field and see the cleanliness ... And you yourself become cleaner ...

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Moore
    Moore 26 June 2017 05: 23
    I believe that the mere exit from the memorandum does not mean much.
    IMHO, the striped "partners" will not fight with us with their own hands. For this, there are mongrels of lower rank. Of those that take selfie at the owner’s fence.
    1. Finches
      Finches 26 June 2017 05: 37
      I am inclined to think that the situation will not last long, since the United States is extremely undesirable in the first place, since they hang out on bird rights in Syria, and they give an account that our air-defense systems located there are not for advertising ... I believe that the Americans have already turned on the return line and are looking for approaches ... Their trick with the plane may also be a political game against Trump on the eve of the 20th, those who in the military environment support Congress hawks ... But still I think that even they don’t they want to bring the boiling point to the limit in this region, although they will spoil everything - after all, this is their second trick of this kind!
      1. Fei_Wong
        Fei_Wong 26 June 2017 09: 08
        and they are reporting that our anti-aircraft systems located there are not for the sake of advertising ...

        Just “advertising”, if some of our air defense calculation commanders have the courage and, what to say, recklessness (for the consequences are difficult to calculate) to bring down at least one Murrian plane ... and so, the air defense advertisement will be off-scale, this doesn’t go to a fortuneteller . All potential buyers are EXTREMELY interested in this of our technology, as it passed the baptism of fire on the modern battlefield. ^ _ ^
        1. EvilLion
          EvilLion 26 June 2017 10: 06
          The calculations of the air defense system had clear instructions, they had taken for escort before, the enemy arrived, provoked, they made it clear to her what to do, the enemy flew away. In the Khmeinima area, all affected areas are declared, and it will be difficult to make claims for your own rudeness, but finding out who the camel is and who is not can be difficult over the rest of the territory, as well as the actions of the pilot, who are actually more at risk than the air defense system, with one side, and much less free, including due to greater risk on the other. A missile can be launched even just in case. On the principle that the tribunal would better judge me then than they would bring it in zinc.
          1. Fei_Wong
            Fei_Wong 26 June 2017 11: 58
            as well as the actions of the pilot, who is actually more at risk than the SAM systems

            Here you can argue - if we talk about the general case (and not about the particular, like the S-400 / Super Hornet pair - then everything is clear). For SAM air defense systems are different, like airplanes airplanes. Some Syrian Cube with its operators, for example, risks a hundred times stronger than the same Super Hornet.
            1. EvilLion
              EvilLion 26 June 2017 12: 52
              SAM operators do not sit in launchers, and will not necessarily be located near radars that are actually affected. If they are defeated, they are likely to lose radar, and if the pilot is successfully ejected, they will have to run through the territory inhabited by enemies. On the “Shell”, there is also a calculation inside the car, but they are already the internal perimeter of the defense and they will not be the first to shoot.
        2. hydrox
          hydrox 26 June 2017 14: 01
          Quote: Fei_Wong
          ... our air defense systems ...

          ... the commander of the calculation of air defense there is the courage of a Murrian plane ... buyers SHARPLY ... ^ _ ^

          Okay, balabol!
          What air defense, when it’s not about Tartus and Hmeimim !. We are talking about Raqqa with DeZom and Damascus, which are located 500-700 km from our S-400.
          In those places from the air defense only Shilka yes Zushka.
          1. Fei_Wong
            Fei_Wong 26 June 2017 18: 34
            In fact, I emphasize, I talked about the GENERAL case, without any geographical bindings. About the fact of the incident.
    2. siberalt
      siberalt 26 June 2017 06: 15
      All of these memoranda and disarmament treaties are more beneficial to the United States.
    3. To be or not to be
      To be or not to be 26 June 2017 09: 40
      The issue is not a memorandum, or even Syria itself. Syria = Spain before the 2nd World War. where the world will go further. rather, where the not-so-secret rulers of this world lead it.
      A meeting of the Bilbert Club on July 1-4 in the USA. Even the composition of the participants says a lot. There were no “redheads” from the Russian Federation. But the question of Russia was raised by representatives of TRUMP on the election results.
      Then in France SUDDENLY defeated MOCRON. And the other day he announced his friendship with Russia. and put an eye on Iranian gas
      Then there was the visit of TRUMP to Saudi Arabia and in passing flying to Israel.
      And there QATAR offended. Pa out of the blue, friends turned their backs. And in Qatar, again, there is a lot of gas
      But. and the Russian Federation did not sit. VVP opened the construction of the Turkish stream. and successfully together with Germany holds a blow to the Nord Stream -2. which the USA as always does not want.
      Where not ... look .. everywhere ... Rothschilds! laughing
  2. Uncle lee
    Uncle lee 26 June 2017 05: 30
    it sparkles with lightning, and that’s it.
    God forbid that it would be so .....
  3. ochakow703
    ochakow703 26 June 2017 05: 49
    One thing can be said - impunity breeds impudence and lawlessness, and something needs to be done with this. Otherwise, they will cease to reckon with us, and the meaning of our attempts (and victims, unfortunately) will be lost.
  4. Best
    Best 26 June 2017 06: 10
    IMHO, and the memorandum is valid? In the context of yesterday's posts on this site, we again fly freely, and the Australians returned their aircraft. The author does not consider the problem comprehensively, for there is Iran fighting for its interests, there is Qatar, there is Israel, there are Kurds and much more. But an important component is the role of 1. Assad at present; 2. his army. Unfortunately, often the material on the site is often very outdated, but situations, events, including in Syria, change almost every hour, and the material is presented in two to four days of "old age", which no longer reflects the present. The memorandum, its action or the way out of it plays a significant role in the context of the events taking place in the US Congress, the changing positions of Trump, the events in the EU, the positions of Russia, more often slurred, etc. Words about the decisiveness of Russia and Putin are often disavowed by their actions. And this is a manifestation of weakness, which opponents will certainly use. Began to "embarrass" leaving in the shadow of Lavrov, his silence ...
    1. domokl
      26 June 2017 06: 35
      Alas, this is the organization of the media. In addition to the author, many more people should “subtract” the article. And the decision to publish is made by the chief editor. Therefore, analytical articles on relevant topics are indeed a little "belated." But it cannot be otherwise if you are responsible for your written thoughts and words.
      Analytics is not news. This is more of an author’s view of a problem. But the problem, regardless of the news remains. Only the external surroundings and some non-systemic factors are changing.
      1. okko077
        okko077 26 June 2017 13: 18
        The analytical abilities of the author of the article deserve some attention, but the technical side is very lame. It’s not worth discussing the capabilities of technology and aviation, which the author has never known and does not know in the first place. Everything written about SU-22, to put it mildly, does not correspond to reality. ..
        As for the exit from the memorandum, I do not believe it. If, within the specified boundaries, the pilot of the western coalition found escort of an alien system, then no one would have gone there. There are no heroes!
        1. domokl
          26 June 2017 16: 16
          Quote: okko077
          Everything written about SU -22, to put it mildly, does not correspond to reality ...

          lol This is a rebuke to the commander of the VKS ... He really is one of the attack aircraft. But I think I met other planes at airfields what
          1. okko077
            okko077 26 June 2017 22: 49
            Can you clarify if you yourself do not know? .. Or the correct judgment depends on the one who speaks?
  5. ImPerts
    ImPerts 26 June 2017 06: 19
    In all this noise accompanying our actions in Syria, one rational action can be singled out. While everyone is arguing and breaking spears, Assad needs to make the most of the opportunity and not stop. I hope that there are enough resources.
    1. Kenxnumx
      Kenxnumx 26 June 2017 07: 33
      Assad needs to stop. Cut off what was captured and seceded from other Syria.
      1. hydrox
        hydrox 26 June 2017 14: 05
        Stratech sofa, do not disgrace :: liberal criteria do not work in a war! ;-))
        1. Walanin
          Walanin 29 June 2017 16: 00
          Holguin manuals too
  6. Kenxnumx
    Kenxnumx 26 June 2017 07: 31
    The author is task
    set. He brought up the audience. Failed the first time here is sadness. By the way, so what did we forget there. I didn’t even say it the second time.
    1. domokl
      26 June 2017 10: 48
      The author made me think and not stupidly repeat the feeling of thought ... Those to whom it was addressed understood this perfectly ...
      And you yourself write just like that, from the fact that you know how to put letters into words? Or set yourself the task of saying something? If the author simply writes, out of position, then he is a repeater of someone else’s opinion. no more...
      1. Kenxnumx
        Kenxnumx 26 June 2017 12: 36
        I want someone to tell me what we are doing in Syria besides protecting the interests of Iran and the throne of the local prince. I consider the version about the Qatar gas pipeline insufficiently substantiated
      2. hydrox
        hydrox 26 June 2017 14: 08
        He doesn’t know how to write, he just doesn’t want to read :: the habit of chewing gum annihilates everything human, leaving only ruminant reflexes! ;-))
  7. Cataphract
    Cataphract 26 June 2017 08: 40
    active "amateur".

    as the author is self-critical however. Well, pathos is not to occupy, in the sphere of someone else to "treat" the thread. Slogans are already of little interest to anyone, and the amateurish look is the same.
    1. domokl
      26 June 2017 10: 59
      Comment in style: "it is written that I don’t even want to comment" lol And if there is a need for quotation, it is worth not tearing out Soviet words from the text, but quoting in full (in Soviet it is: Learn, study and study! V. And Lenin)
  8. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 26 June 2017 08: 49
    The article is good, so critics are shaking the air in vain.
    The US is superior to us in everything, and we will definitely lose in this war
    This is left to the conscience of admirers of the United States and its aviation. Let them pray on American planes if they enjoy it - their right. But it would be better to refrain from constantly criticizing our VKS. And you should not compare a really heroic Russian soldier with a cinema American.
    1. okko077
      okko077 26 June 2017 23: 30
      And until the age of 41, such ... with analogues of such drovers were told that on foreign territory and quickly .... We do not have BATTLE INFORMATION SYSTEMS and we are not ready for a modern war ....
  9. andj61
    andj61 26 June 2017 09: 36
    And here fighters take the first place. Not stationary air defense systems, namely fighters. Alas, but from the fact that today there is a presence in Syria, the coalition cannot oppose anything to our “landmarks” and MiGs. According to experts from both the United States and Russia, these planes will demolish Americans from the sky very quickly. And it is without heroism and dedication. Purely pragmatic approach. The study of aircraft performance characteristics and weapons.

    The author, of course, respect for optimism! drinks
    Just let's calculate how many planes will be on one side and the other. With us, these data are regularly published and do not represent a secret, although they are constantly changing. But, in general - a dozen Su-30s, four Su-35s, and as many Su-34s. And this is still optimistic. “Clean” bombers and attack aircraft should not be considered - they are of little use in air battles. What from the Americans. This is at least one aircraft carrier in the Mediterranean Sea (the second went here in early June) and in the Gulf region. We consider at a minimum - 60 aircraft (thirty each - in reality, more). Somewhere else, 50-60 aircraft are at the disposal of the Amer coalition. And what happens? Six-seven superiority in them? HOW do our "demolish Americans from heaven", and "very quickly"? And this arithmetic is still without taking into account modern aircraft in the countries of the region, which will definitely become the banner of the United States in the event of a conflict. And two, a maximum of three of our air defense systems in Syria, will not give any decisive advantage to the NKMs, since in terms of their performance characteristics they can protect only basing places - and this is a lot! - but do not close the sky over Syria.
    I completely agree with the authors that the United States does not need a conflict with Russia, and they will try not to bring it to a real confrontation. I also agree that for the United States, the loss of several aircraft is an unacceptable damage, the mere awareness of the possibility of obtaining which will restrain them. But to rely solely on this deterrence and on the fact that the Americans are clearly “linking” is impossible.
    1. hydrox
      hydrox 26 June 2017 14: 25
      Liberal counted!
      Only arithmetic doesn’t work in war, but military art :: no raids will pass from SM, ships and coastal air defense will not pass (unless through Israel (which it will not allow, so as not to lose relations with Russia)). We don’t talk about axes, it’s not interesting.
      If you remembered the beginnings of geometry, you would be able to understand that in the Latakia-Rakka-DeZ-Damascus zone, Americans cannot stick their nose when there is a fighter on duty link, and for the simple reason - we are there by invitation (i.e. visiting the owner), and the Americans - stealthily sneakily stealing - and all this understand that Russia is there in its international rights, and the Yankees went for a walk.
      RQ-4 drone for $ 200 million. We failed - and what about the Americans? Yes, they are silent, like partisans!
      This will continue to be so.
  10. EvilLion
    EvilLion 26 June 2017 09: 59
    I have no doubt that Su-35 excels in LTX EVERYTHING that it can face in the Syrian sky, it is larger, it is meaner and most importantly, it is much younger. But why so sure that this is such a construction battalion from a joke, that they even don’t give weapons to this beast? 10: 1, well, just like with American presentations, just the opposite. No, if they approach head to head one at a time, then maybe there will be such a WinStreak if the pilot does not make a mistake. But the battle with a large group, even for a superhero, will be unbearable, while the total number of fighters, judging by the latest pictures of 8-12 pieces. In the Khmeinim’s aspen nest of “shells” and long-range air defense systems, which, incidentally, were loaded with rockets only 60 km away, by agreement, but they could now deliver large batons, we can expect that a couple dozen F-16 raids can be repelled, especially if you don’t fly to missions, but keep the fighters in constant readiness on the DB, but somehow I don’t know what to do when trying to attack attack aircraft covered by single vehicles simply because the fighters are much smaller than the fighters. 1-3 You can buy boors on F-16 or even F / A-18F, well, or you can let the bomber leave while the boor runs away from the P-77 flying to the snout, and then fly off under the umbrella from the air defense system itself, but no more.
    1. domokl
      26 June 2017 10: 52
      laughing Everything is logical. But, it’s worth looking into what category the exterminators that today really exist in Syria on both sides belong .. And about the amount of data from the American site Veteran ... There are a lot of things to be found bully
    2. okko077
      okko077 26 June 2017 23: 20
      In vain do not doubt. SU-35 has superiority only in close combat. At medium and long distances there is no such superiority. And given that the Americans usually use AWACS and other systems and launch missiles without entering the detection zone, or rather, before they are detected, our planes are still losing here. And the Americans have been practicing and perfecting this technique for a long time ....
  11. xtur
    xtur 26 June 2017 10: 12
    topwar is more likely a site for non-professionals interested in military topics. So the role of professionals here is explanatory, teaching. Which is and has always been a very thankless job.

    Just don't be surprised at this
    1. Kenxnumx
      Kenxnumx 26 June 2017 10: 18
      The ark was built by an amateur. Professionals created the Titanic :)
      1. domokl
        26 June 2017 10: 54
        And how many arks walks across oceans today? And the descendants of the Titanic tens of thousands crying
        1. Kenxnumx
          Kenxnumx 26 June 2017 12: 33
          I would say that all the descendants of the ark as the first cargo and passenger ship of large displacement.
          1. EvilLion
            EvilLion 26 June 2017 12: 56
            When the ark sailed, there were definitely no icebergs on the surface. X) For so much water should be taken not only from the atmosphere to pour out, but it is a weak rain, but also to melt the ice shells of Antarctica with Greenland.
          2. domokl
            26 June 2017 16: 20
            Quote: Ken71
            all descendants of the ark as the first cargo and passenger ship of large displacement.

            wassat So the Titanic then is a direct descendant of the ark! ... Here is Noah ... I had to learn crying
            1. xtur
              xtur 12 July 2017 10: 26
              > So then the Titanic is a direct descendant of the ark!

              it’s all demagogy, if it’s not politically correct to call a spade a spade.
              the main difference between the Titanic and the Ark in the number of passengers saved and in the number of drowned. Titanic led effective manager, and the Ark is an effective and responsible leader.

              here everyone identifies himself whose descendant he is - the entire crew and most of the passengers who drowned for insurance, or who saved all 100% of the crew and passengers

  12. silver_roman
    silver_roman 26 June 2017 16: 09
    It is very pleasant to read, I only doubtfully doubt the proportion of 1 to 10 or more (drying versus F-15/16/18). Nevertheless, this is not a junk of the 90s, but repeatedly modernized cars. And again, by the number of cars: The Raptors WAS in the UAR, there were a couple of them, but our 35th there were about 5 there. I would be glad to make a mistake.
    In any case, we lose in quantity. Pleased with the presence of air defense. On the other hand, on the approach of Amers, how many squadrons are there from all sorts of Cathars, Turkey, etc.?
  13. nikvic46
    nikvic46 28 June 2017 09: 29
    I am also an amateur. I don’t know much in the real defense of our country. I understand that it should be so. They explain to us that
    there are no fools in the world to start a full-scale war. But history has repeatedly shown that wars began with small
    clashes. I, as an amateur, see a danger to my own in hacker attacks, and this is nothing compared to the state
    cyberattack. If the "home-made" virus could infect many institutions in our country, then what about what large
    specialists from hostile countries. I propose creating computer inputs for objects, institutions, created on an analog system, which is not threatened by any decoder. I beg you not to be offended by my stupid advice. Just me
    I read that the Americans are developing electronic airships to defend their cities. And people say that the most
    the old may be useful, and in some cases better than the new.
  14. The comment was deleted.
  15. Radikal
    Radikal 29 June 2017 01: 26
    In general, we can already talk about the prospects of Syria in the future. Either the Vietnamese scenario and the continuation of the war to the last Syrian, or disintegration into several parts. The territory of the "caliphate", which actually died, become a bargaining chip. In the period of a kind of "anarchy" in these territories, it is easy to create not only the Kurdish state, but several independent Syrian ones. The benefit of the principles of separation is a lot. From religious differences to political orientation.
    You would also regret that Russia still has not concluded the Lavrov-Tillerson Pact (in the image and likeness of the pact known to adults). “Soothing” articles are best read to loved ones for a future dream - undoubted benefit! The history of our country has shown and proved that if you indulge the aggressor, turn a blind eye to his provocative actions, pretend that nothing is happening - in the end it still ended in war!
  16. Walanin
    Walanin 29 June 2017 15: 57
    Do not suffer a question. According to American experts, 1 to 10 with a probability of winning 60% ... According to our estimates, more is needed. Oh, those ends of the wings of the aircraft ... "Khibiny", their mother ...

    Did the author just jump from the hat factory? wassat
  17. Stalnov I.P.
    Stalnov I.P. 6 July 2017 11: 11
    It’s a good article if the Americans knew that they’d get away with everything, they would behave differently, brazenly and shamelessly, but now they are limited in their actions and all the scribbles of the West sang that the S-300, S-400 do not see something just a bluff of a mare, they see everything, and with REB they hear everything. We don’t know a lot of things and probably will never know, but what is already visible itself says that the RF Armed Forces are working correctly and well and I HONOR these soldiers and officers!