Military Review

Do Norwegians know the Russian proverb "a cat scratches on its ridge"?

73
We talk a lot about the deployment of the American missile defense system in European countries. First of all, in those who recently joined the alliance. Remember, some seven or eight years ago, no one considered these countries (Poland, Baltic states, Romania and others) as their primary goals in the event of a military conflict. Who in their right mind perceives the Baltic countries as an enemy? Even Poland, with its ambitions, was perceived only as a territory through which it would be necessary to pass in order to reach the main enemy forces.


Do Norwegians know the Russian proverb "a cat scratches on its ridge"?


But in favor of the overseas host, the political leadership of these countries went to the deployment of missile defense elements on their territory. What automatically made these countries the goals of Russia's strategic nuclear forces. Today, for all who are in their right mind, it is clear that these countries will be simply destroyed. Not politically, it would not be so scary, but physically. The people of these countries will be destroyed.

Those who have long been involved in the discussion of the problems of Russia's defense policy, remember how many copies were broken about introducing words into the Russian military doctrine about the possibility of a preemptive nuclear strike ... Preemptive strike!

I'm always scared when I listen to or read Western military experts. Burdened with academic titles, positions in various universities, past achievements in the military field. How convincingly they say that NATO came to their countries in order to protect the peoples from aggressive Russia. And people believe this nonsense ...

But the point of the military doctrine I mentioned above is a forced measure. Alas, but the time of retaliatory strikes was irretrievably gone. Today we cannot afford to wait for an attack. We are forced to warn the attack. How long does it take rockets from Poland or, if events develop according to the current scenario, to fly to Kaliningrad, St. Petersburg, Moscow and many of our cities in the west of the country? And from the area of ​​the Norwegian Sea? .. Put at risk our people? Sacrifice?

But, besides the new goals, sorry for the directness, but this is a fact, there are traditional ones, which experts have known for decades. And that today, again, alas, also moved into the category of goals for our strategic forces. On one of these new "old" goals today and talk.

Many probably remember the "straight line" of Vladimir Putin. Answering one of the questions, the president said the following:

“I don’t want to force anything here, but experts know that, say, American nuclear submarines are on duty in northern Norway. The missile flight time is 15 minutes to Moscow. And we need to understand what is happening there, see what is happening there.”

Some of those familiar with these words made a “surprised face”. What boats? What is America? Norway is a small country and will not participate in the confrontation between NATO and Russia. Just because the Norwegians understand their fate in the event of an exchange of blows ...

I imagine now the smiles of sailor readers who have been in the northern waters. And not only today, but also in the "Soviet time". On any marine map of the time, the locations of the tracking stations for our boats and even the possible positions of the submarines of the likely enemy were indicated. Out in the ocean from our northern bases has always been under the control of the Americans. And among the submarine commanders it was considered to be a special chic to come out so that the Americans would "wipe" ...

Intelligence for fleet has always been and is the most important factor ensuring victory in a naval battle. If the commander knows all the forces and means of the enemy that he can use in a specific area of ​​the ocean, then you can always take measures to neutralize these threats. And with the advent of nuclear submarines with nuclear weapons on board, the need arose to constantly monitor their position in the ocean. It was then that the "norms" were established for the submarine being in combat positions both at our bases and at American bases.

But I did not start the article with submarines. Yes, and this topic is sufficiently disclosed by experts in the field of the Navy. We will consider missile defense systems. Namely, missile defense in Norway.

In the arctic zone of Norway there is an island called Vardø. Back in Soviet times, the island attracted attention by the fact that it was part of the tracking system for our submarines. There was built radar "Globus-2". A beautiful structure in the shape of a ball, which provided "inspection" of the waters of not only the Norwegian Sea, but also the territorial waters of the USSR. The Russian Kola Peninsula with Vardo is clearly visible. 40 miles to the border ...

The population, slightly more than 4000 people, was engaged in traditional Norwegian fishing. There was a fish processing plant. Its own power station. And so ... The local energy company began to constantly declare an increase in demand for electricity ... Why would it? Especially considering that the fish factory was closed, and for the local population such conditions are created under which it simply leaves the island. Today, the population in the "dry residue" 2100 people.

So, "back to our sheep". Why was suddenly needed electricity? Why did the power company go to a huge cost and laid a rather serious cable from the mainland to supply electricity? The questions are simple ... Understandable to anyone with a brain. This means that a consumer has appeared that requires a lot of energy. And those that can not be provided with small power plants.

And if you add to these considerations more facts. For example, the delivery to the island of a sufficiently large number of earth-moving machines ... Or the fact that the island for some reason attracted the attention of "ecologists", "marine biologists" and other scientific fraternities ... And the fact that the Kola Peninsula is literally "stuck with red" flags of Russian restricted areas ...

To intrigue further is silly. Everyone already understood that construction was underway in Vardø. And not simple. Some readers remember my material on the new Russian radar. Among other things, there is also data on the energy consumption of such stations. Here is the explanation of the cable laid ...

So, on the island will be located, according to American data, a new station. "Globe-3". And it will be intended for ... tracking space debris. Americans and Europeans are very afraid of this very garbage. Norwegians are especially scared.

The version is of course funny. And not only for us, but also for the Americans themselves. Here is the expert opinion on the radar from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Theodore Postol.

Placing such a powerful radar as the Globus-3 on Vardø Island "does not make sense if its main goal is to track space debris." The radar is designed to track Russian missiles. "If you have a neighbor who walks along the fence with a gun in his hand, he can say that he doesn’t have a gun; however, you still have a lot of questions about his intentions. It seems that the US is doing everything possible to gather intelligence about new Russian missiles and develop measures to combat them. "

I think that about the new radar is enough. After all, Norway is not only of the islands. There is also a mainland. And there, too, noticeable "swarming." So far not particularly advertised, but quite noticeable, if you track data from open sources in NATO and the United States. We will reveal a couple of "military secrets" of NATO.

Not many people know that Norway since the times of the USSR was one of the most loyal allies of the Americans. Excellent location of the country, the experience of the past world war. The desire of the political elite to please the "mighty of this world." What else is needed in order to intensify their actions to militarize the country? To create a "headache" among Soviet commanders?

So, even in Soviet times, more precisely during the Cold War, as they say today, the American Marine Corps received six caves in the Trondheim area for use from the Government of Norway. Realizing that delivering military equipment and ammunition from the United States would be problematic, the Americans staged warehouses in the caves. Three caves are occupied by military equipment and armament. And the remaining three are munitions. For the quick delivery of all this "good" Americans are also provided with two airfields in the central part of the country.

Some readers have always wondered where the Americans brought the equipment to from. After all, as shown by a recent delivery scam tanks to Poland and the Baltic states, European roads are not at all designed for such a quick delivery. Here is the "first military secret." Equipment was exported for training precisely from warehouses in Norway. And this is done not only in order to expedite delivery, but also in order to ensure constant updating of the park. You understand the storage conditions yourself ... Moreover, the "Norwegian tanks" are also seen in Afghanistan and other Middle Eastern countries. Rotation ...

If we analyze the quantitative composition of equipment and weapons "in the caves", then we can conclude about the approximate number of US Marines. Approximately 4500-4800 people. Some experts say a more accurate figure. 4600 people. It all depends on the degree of awareness.

In May of this year, US military exercises called Stratmobex (Strategic Mobility Exercise) took place. From the caves, up to 500 units of heavy equipment, including tanks, were made. Agree, this is not the Polish or Baltic "silenki" ...

And according to the latest data, the US Marine Corps is considering an increase in the "range of goods" in warehouses. Now we are talking about the full deployment of the Marines brigade in Norway. And this is from 8 to 16 thousands of people ... Moreover, the nomenclature itself will be changed. Emphasis will be placed on the latest systems. On a rapid deployment system. On mobile systems.

In addition, the marines today are actively working with the Norwegian army. While on the territory of the country are about 300 marines. They are engaged not only in servicing and maintaining equipment in combat readiness, but also in training Norwegians. This amount is clearly not enough. Therefore, today we are talking about an increase in the number of the American contingent at least twice.

It seems to me that all the plans of Americans in this country will be implemented by the end of this year. Too much love from the Norwegian government and NATO.

I would not like readers to get the impression that the Americans are to blame for everything. Yes, the United States really did a lot to ensure that Norway was a “doll” in their hands. But the Norwegians themselves, it seems, do not really understand the situation. Impunity and "invisibility" of their efforts since the days of the USSR has generated a strange confidence that everything will get away with it. Confidence that another war will pass for Norway, just like the previous ones ...

Do they think that the Russians do not know about the modernization of the Norwegian missile defense system at the military bases of the Norwegian army in Örlann and Evenes? Or that the X-NUMX of the F-52 will be sent there? Or about the fact that missiles of increased radius of action will be delivered to the Norwegian missile defense system? Even about the deployment on the base of Evenes five new naval anti-submarine patrol aircraft P-35 Poseidon to track our submarines know ... And the cat, as you know, is scraping its ridge ...

Russian President Vladimir Putin once said a beautiful phrase. True, it does not apply to Norway, but to the owners of Norway, but it fully deserves to be reminded.

"If someone thinks that he can manage to drag chestnuts with someone else's hands from the flames of World War, he is mistaken, and it will not be possible to sit behind a big puddle."

It is very difficult to understand a neighbor who is “not friendly” with formal logic. Perhaps this is simply impossible. Maybe you readers will understand. Two weeks ago, the Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg said in an interview with the German television channel Deutsche Welle:

"Norway is not afraid of Russia. Our air defense system will be aimed at protecting our military bases. Norway is the northern flank of NATO and must take the necessary precautions. Russia surpasses us in military capabilities, therefore our military bases must be protected. However, we do not think that Russia has the intention to attack us. "

Australian aborigines have beautiful weapon. Boomerang. The peculiarity of this weapon is that it returns. Moreover, if the hunter does not have a perfect boomerang, there are cases of "use on his own person." Simply speaking, you will receive the same boomerang on your own blunt head. Maybe some of our neighbors should learn the experience of Australian Aborigines?
Author:
73 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Teberii
    Teberii 27 June 2017 05: 19 New
    +1
    Nerves play pranks, and so we can’t forbid them to answer yes.
    1. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 27 June 2017 06: 18 New
      +4
      Do Norwegians know the Russian proverb "a cat scratches on its ridge"?
      equally, this applies to any anti-Russian-minded country, everyone is "scratching" .. both the Balts and the Poles, you can not talk about the rest.
    2. Maksus
      Maksus 27 June 2017 10: 19 New
      0
      Change the picture - why did you attach a British soldier to an article about Norway?
      1. Orionvit
        Orionvit 27 June 2017 19: 55 New
        +2
        This is not quite a British soldier, it is primarily a NATO soldier. So no difference.
  2. ImPerts
    ImPerts 27 June 2017 05: 56 New
    +3
    How not to remember our first democrat? Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov and his project T-15! Or status in a new way)))
    1. lukewarm
      lukewarm 28 June 2017 12: 04 New
      +3
      Quote: ImPerts
      How not to remember our first democrat? Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov and his project T-15!

      )))) A very humane project ... Like all "democrats", no matter what kind of "wave. They are, you know, democrats ...
  3. Monster_Fat
    Monster_Fat 27 June 2017 06: 23 New
    +2
    Norway is the only country in the world that can hide its entire population in underground shelters in the event of a global war.
    1. Sars
      Sars 27 June 2017 06: 47 New
      +8
      There is another very interesting country in which, apparently, the "global leadership" lives - Switzerland. There, in fact, everything is ready for the apocalypse - the tunnels are all adapted for bomb shelters, plus profile bunkers.
      1. andj61
        andj61 27 June 2017 08: 05 New
        22
        Quote: Monster_Fat
        Norway is the only country in the world that can hide its entire population in underground shelters in the event of a global war.

        Quote: SarS
        There is another very interesting country in which, apparently, the "global leadership" lives - Switzerland. There, in fact, everything is ready for the apocalypse - the tunnels are all adapted for bomb shelters, plus profile bunkers.

        You still need to get to these shelters!
        Suppose we got there for two or three days, and then what? If the blows are delivered, then who will dig them out of these shelters? If delivered far away, you still have to get out of there - an autonomous long-term existence in these shelters is not even provided for.
        I remember my teacher on civil defense at MVTU in the late 70s - early 80s. When asked whether in the event of a nuclear war it’s worth running to the institute’s shelter (and there are long corridors, there will be many people trampling BEFORE the shelters), he answered: it’s better I go outside and smoke for the last time. When striking large cities, especially with dense and high-rise buildings, hopes that they can dig out of shelters are illusory. hi
        1. armourer
          armourer 28 June 2017 01: 58 New
          +2
          Quote: andj61
          If strikes were made, then who will dig them out of these shelters?

          To melt them with high-temperature rockets, and to hell with nyma, Nehay to shout lol
    2. inkass_98
      inkass_98 27 June 2017 06: 47 New
      +7
      She can hide, there will be no one to get hidden. Yes, and no one, to be honest. Equipping completely isolated shelters costs such money that even a toad strangles Norway.
    3. domokl
      27 June 2017 07: 02 New
      10
      Quote: Monster_Fat
      a country in the world that can hide its entire population in underground shelters,

      I would interpret this action in a slightly different way ... A country that can bury its population alive. After the attacks of nuclear weapons it is doubtful that the population will be able to return to the surface ... The stone also melts.
    4. Locksmith
      Locksmith 27 June 2017 07: 05 New
      +7
      Quote: Monster_Fat
      Norway is the only country in the world that can hide its entire population in underground shelters in the event of a global war.

      Well, yes, you don’t have to bury anyone.
    5. Sirocco
      Sirocco 27 June 2017 08: 21 New
      14
      It’s possible to hide, but what about surviving a nuclear strike, what will life be like in the BACKGROUND? I think that the adversaries make the main blow or bet on the 5th column, in case of failure of these expectations, military events will follow, we will wait for the elections of 18, I think everything will be determined in 18-20, and how the business elite of the Russian Federation will behave, she is the same as in Norway, sitting on the bucks.
    6. electrooleg
      electrooleg 27 June 2017 09: 17 New
      +1
      Quote: Monster_Fat
      Norway is the only country in the world that can hide its entire population in underground shelters


      He can hide it, but then go out then how? In 170 years only if. And if the gates of shelters are sealed by temperature, then they won’t come out at all. The national crypt will turn out laughing Archaeologists of the future will be greatly surprised later.
    7. Fei_Wong
      Fei_Wong 27 June 2017 10: 49 New
      +2
      Albania is forgotten. There are still SEA bunkers left. And how much earlier it was - literally in every yard at least in pieces. Really, no fools. It was not a country, but some kind of huge bunker.
  4. Olgovich
    Olgovich 27 June 2017 06: 37 New
    12
    But the point of the military doctrine, which I mentioned above, is a necessary measure. Alas, the time for retaliatory strikes was irrevocably gone. Today we cannot afford to wait for the attack.

    That's right!
    Limits for June 22, August 1, etc. - for Russia exhausted: stop getting the hardest blows and then just answer.
    History has given Russia the full right to decide for itself!
    1. domokl
      27 June 2017 07: 04 New
      +8
      History certainly gave us such a right. But even more right was given to us by the actions of the recent past of European countries, including Norway, after which the number of people in our cities and villages sharply decreased ... I agree, the limits are fully exhausted ..
  5. Uncle lee
    Uncle lee 27 June 2017 07: 04 New
    +8
    retaliation time is gone forever
    - the main thing is not to miss the lead time!
    1. lukewarm
      lukewarm 28 June 2017 12: 08 New
      +2
      This time. And two - when this moment comes and it will be clear that this is it - it is necessary that there is enough steel in the genitals of decision-makers))). And then our "snail" is grown up on "universal values" and fed up by bucks.
      1. Uncle lee
        Uncle lee 28 June 2017 13: 50 New
        +3
        Exactly ! Right now, on TV, Stankevich squeals that the Americans will not be our brothers and attack us!
  6. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 27 June 2017 07: 13 New
    +4
    for all who are in their right mind, it is clear that these countries will simply be destroyed

    So it is clear to those who are in their right mind. And those who talk about the “Russian threat” and believe that NATO will surely protect against everything, even an alien invasion, do not differ in common sense.
  7. rudolff
    rudolff 27 June 2017 08: 16 New
    +3
    Staver: "Those who have long been involved in the discussion of the problems of Russia's defense policy remember how many copies were broken regarding the introduction into the Russian military doctrine of words about the possibility of delivering a preventive nuclear strike ... A preemptive strike!"
    Staver: "But the point of the military doctrine that I mentioned above is a forced measure. Alas, the time for retaliatory strikes has gone irrevocably. Today we cannot afford to wait for the attack. We are forced to prevent the attack."

    Staver, do you basically never read the original sources or intentionally lie? According to the doctrine: "The Russian Federation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and (or) its allies, as well as in the case of aggression against the Russian Federation using conventional weapons, when the very existence is jeopardized state "There is no talk of any preemptive or preventive strike, only in response to aggression and only in two cases.
    1. domokl
      27 June 2017 09: 31 New
      +2
      Read this interview of Patrushev, published today on the tape ru. And then your comment. To whom does he belong ... Who lies or does not read the source ...

      https://lenta.ru/news/2009/10/14/prevent/
      1. rudolff
        rudolff 27 June 2017 10: 25 New
        +3
        Staver, it’s not in my rules to be rude to people without need, but you force it yourself, because your lies do much more harm.
        You refer to the interview of Patrushev, which he gave to Izvestia on October 14, 2009 and which put the whole world community on the ears. Meanwhile, the interview was not about the current doctrine, but about the possible inclusion of a point on preemptive (preventive) strike in the new edition of the doctrine, which at that time was only discussed. This doctrine was adopted in 2010 and the preemptive nuclear strike clause was not included in it. Patrushev gave out wishful thinking as a fact. That is, just like you, lying! There is no this point in the current doctrine of 2014. By the way, and during its discussion, Patrushev distinguished himself with exactly the same statement.
        The source is not the chatter of a high-ranking official, but the doctrine itself. And it provides only two cases of the use of nuclear weapons: "The Russian Federation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and (or) its allies, as well as in the case of aggression against the Russian Federation using conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is threatened. "
        The question is settled or will you continue to argue? If I were you, I would apologize. Not in front of me, but in front of those reading the article.
        1. Tusv
          Tusv 27 June 2017 19: 33 New
          +1
          Quote: rudolff
          The Russian Federation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and (or) its allies, as well as in the case of aggression against the Russian Federation using conventional weapons, when the very existence of the state is threatened

          The box sounded more menacing.
          Or the existence of the Russian Federation and allies will be threatened

          Here you must clearly choose between When and Or. Is there a threat of existence and deployment of a Pro in Poland, Romania and Norway? There is. Threatens the Russian Federation with physical destruction? Yes sir. Get Satan and do not curse yourself; others will put a cross for you.
          Farther. The Americans tried to arrange a color revolution in Armenia. Yes. Our CSTO ally is undeniable. Whether the existence of Armenia threatened the existence of yavol again. Do we have the right to attack America. Yes easily
          1. rudolff
            rudolff 27 June 2017 19: 59 New
            0
            Tusv, do you propose vigorous missiles in Romania, Poland and Norway to shandarahnut so as not to think of intercepting our missiles? Then it is necessary in Azerbaijan, they are trying to recapture their Karabakh from Armenia.
            But seriously, not one of your examples is the basis for the use of nuclear weapons.
            1. Tusv
              Tusv 27 June 2017 20: 09 New
              0
              Quote: rudolff
              Then it is necessary in Azerbaijan, they are trying to recapture their Karabakh from Armenia.

              These two pereulkaf are pounding for Karabakh, while the Soviet Union was still alive. As a result, the s-300 supply plan for air defense was disrupted. Americans rejoiced.
              Is Isaer our enemy? No. They somehow need to be tried on, Yes. Difficult - archi, but it is necessary
        2. dmitry.kashkaryow
          dmitry.kashkaryow 27 June 2017 19: 44 New
          +1
          "the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is threatened." Who will decide that there is a threat to the existence of the state? AND? That's it .... This is a preventive nuclear strike, only a veiled one!
          1. rudolff
            rudolff 27 June 2017 20: 04 New
            0
            dmitry.kashkaryow. The President has the right to use nuclear weapons, and it is up to him to decide. But only for this, Russia must first be attacked.
        3. andrewTSO
          andrewTSO 28 June 2017 08: 49 New
          0
          So is a nuclear strike preventive if there is aggression against Russia using conventional weapons. Those. aggression is ordinary, and a strike is nuclear. In my opinion, this is a Preventive nuclear strike. Or no?
          1. Senior manager
            Senior manager 16 February 2018 11: 16 New
            0
            As soon as the import rocket crosses the Russian border, the RIGHT to use nuclear weapons arises, and, by a combination of factors, the Supreme decides whether or not to use them. The contingent at the remotes of Amer’s missile defense systems smokes weed. And the general situation at the theater is known, I think, down to what products are in the containers of the "partners". BUT! The case of M. Rust is fresh in memory. Hopefully, not just me.
  8. Brigadier
    Brigadier 27 June 2017 08: 36 New
    +6
    Our government is much more than just talking about cooperation with "overseas partners" who, in Hitler's style, have come close to our borders and are ready to strike.
    When again we are “suddenly” attacked, then those who survive will again explain this to the fact that Putin believed the agreements concluded with our “partners” ...
    Yes, and the 5th column in our country also does not sleep and does its job ... And successfully does, by the way! One Borkin center in Yekaterinburg is worth it!
    Well, the history of our rulers does not teach anything!
    Nothing ...
    1. lukewarm
      lukewarm 28 June 2017 12: 21 New
      +1
      Quote: Brigadier
      Well, nothing teaches the story of our rulers

      You are mistaken! ))) Hang boards Mannerheim and drape the Mausoleum on May 9th. And you say Nothing))) We still do not have an ideology, some basic disagreements with the “partners”, oddly enough, too. We all want them to respect our sovereignty and wait. We are waiting for the trump to be chosen (he is his own, not a globalist), we are waiting for the sanctions to be lifted. We continue the liberalistic defeat of the economy. The people are poor. Well, what to list, you see and name everything yourself. A sudden blow in 20XX (insert the right one) will be more sudden than in 1941.
      1. Senior manager
        Senior manager 16 February 2018 11: 18 New
        0
        There will be no sudden blow. The answer would not be delayed.
  9. Kenxnumx
    Kenxnumx 27 June 2017 09: 37 New
    0
    The author would have to at least a little understanding of the topic on which he writes. Missiles from Poland and Romania will not fly to Russia. These are elements of missile defense. They are for another.
    1. domokl
      27 June 2017 15: 39 New
      +5
      laughing Have you tried to clarify about these very elements of missile defense? I'm about the launchers. So, it would be nice to really understand the topic before writing nonsense ...
      1. Kenxnumx
        Kenxnumx 27 June 2017 16: 17 New
        0
        Yes, I heard this story about the use of strategists. So you can let them go from anywhere.
    2. andrewTSO
      andrewTSO 28 June 2017 08: 53 New
      +1
      Heh, here you are really “funny” (if it weren’t so sad) - today it’s ABM, and tomorrow it’s ABSOLUTELY ABM ...
      Well, to hell with you, believe anything, but why should we make fools of us ?!
  10. 72jora72
    72jora72 27 June 2017 10: 12 New
    +9
    Quote: Ken71
    The author would have to at least a little understanding of the topic on which he writes. Missiles from Poland and Romania will not fly to Russia. These are elements of missile defense. They are for another.

    Most likely you are a layman in this topic, missile defense systems MK-41 are capable of launching various types of missiles, including not only Standard Missile 3, but also Tomahawks.
    1. Kenxnumx
      Kenxnumx 27 June 2017 11: 33 New
      0
      And so what they are capable of. You can use mobile systems. I wrote about what is and not about fantasy.
      1. andrew42
        andrew42 27 June 2017 12: 31 New
        +8
        The Manhattan project also looked like a fantasy. But Hiroshima and Nagasaki got acquainted with his first results with FANTASTIC speed.
        1. Kenxnumx
          Kenxnumx 27 June 2017 22: 43 New
          0
          No need to write nonsense.
  11. esaul1950
    esaul1950 27 June 2017 12: 51 New
    +1
    Quote: Monster_Fat
    Norway is the only country in the world that can hide its entire population in underground shelters in the event of a global war.

    Well, they’ll hide it, and who will dig them out later?
  12. seacap
    seacap 27 June 2017 13: 58 New
    +7
    Yes, it’s not how to enter and how to leave the shelters, how much to sit there. The modern population of Europe, accustomed to eating sweet and sleeping softly, enjoy all the benefits of civilization, moreover, the generation that knows about war only from Hollywood, where good guys always win therefore it is so easy to relate to it as to a computer game, in the conditions of destruction of state administration, infrastructure, and life support it turns into a herd of savages and is not viable. This is confirmed by numerous cataclysms, such as Katrina. The question is not even that, damn them, what they themselves wanted we got it, the question is the most important. Is our so-called ready? the elite (leaders), formed by our partners and therefore so dependent on them, shy and with slurred politics, who lost and sold all allies, will no longer make a decision to deliver an outstripping strike in response to time and effort. And yet, like ours, which For a long time not ours, oligarchs and foreign investors, owners of their (our) money will be able to mobilize our industry, or at least not paralyze? And can our worn-out science, with an elderly and bloodless engineering corps, instantly respond to the challenges and requirements of the situation? And still, perhaps the most important thing is how our population, with such a fifth column, with such a secondary education according to Sorov’s textbooks, will defend their homeland and whether, if they treat it scornfully and are called a rashka, trying to get to the west at the earliest opportunity behind manna.
  13. pshek
    pshek 27 June 2017 14: 10 New
    +1
    “Remember, just some seven to eight years ago, no one considered these countries (Poland, the Baltic states, Romania and others) as primary goals in the event of a military conflict.”

    Ah ha ha ha. What nonsense, what a lie.
  14. Aitvaras
    Aitvaras 27 June 2017 14: 27 New
    +1
    The author apparently does not listen to his President Putin, he clearly said that no one will survive in the event of a thermonuclear war. Is the author naive and hopes that there will not be a nasty blow to Russia? Perhaps, due to the large size of Russia, who will survive, but I think that they will envy the dead.
  15. Earnest
    Earnest 27 June 2017 15: 30 New
    +2
    Quote: rudolff

    The source is not the chatter of a high-ranking official, but the doctrine itself. And it provides only two cases of the use of nuclear weapons: "The Russian Federation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and (or) its allies, as well as in the case of aggression against the Russian Federation using conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is threatened. "
    The question is settled or will you continue to argue? If I were you, I would apologize. Not in front of me, but in front of those reading the article.

    The point in your dispute can only be put to people who are well aware of the current Combat Regulations of the Strategic Nuclear Forces. On the basis of the military doctrine, they introduce all the concepts of the types and methods of using nuclear weapons, only there you can read a clear and unambiguous interpretation of such terms as a preemptive, retaliatory, retaliatory strike and so on. And then you both take terms from different areas of military science and arrange a dialogue between the blind and the deaf, both of which are “off topic”.
    1. rudolff
      rudolff 27 June 2017 16: 06 New
      0
      Earnest, we are not talking about the hypothetical possibility of a preemptive nuclear strike by Russia, but about a specific regulatory act. The Military Doctrine does not provide for such an opportunity. The list of cases of the use of nuclear weapons is exhaustive. One can argue only about the interpretation of individual chapters or points of the doctrine. For example, what does it mean when the very existence of a state is threatened, where are the limits of such a threat? This is first.
      Secondly, there is a hierarchy of legal acts, in this case, the military. No Combat Charter, order or instruction may contradict or supplement the Military Doctrine, just the opposite. It is the same as a by-law to repeal the law or the law of the Constitution.
      I fully admit that during the threatened period, the new version of the Doctrine will be quickly adopted or its action will be suspended altogether with the delegation of special rights to the President or the authorized body. Maybe. But now it’s exactly as it is.
      1. bk316
        bk316 27 June 2017 20: 00 New
        +3
        You can only argue about the interpretation of individual chapters or points of the doctrine

        That's it.
        If the leadership of the Russian Federation receives information from reliable sources that in 8 hours a massive missile strike (non-nuclear) will be launched across the Russian Federation and then aviation will be connected, and the ground forces of NATO countries from Norway to Romania will invade our territory THIS WILL BE A THREAT TO THE EXISTENCE OF THE STATE?
        I think the answer is obvious, here is a preemptive strike.
        1. rudolff
          rudolff 27 June 2017 20: 53 New
          0
          No. Read carefully:
          "... as well as in the case of aggression against the Russian Federation using conventional weapons, when the very existence of the state is threatened."
          That is, at first there should be aggression with the use of conventional weapons, and then the answer. It is aggression, not its threat.
    2. Bastinda
      Bastinda 27 June 2017 16: 54 New
      +1
      Do Russia have allies now?
      1. rudolff
        rudolff 27 June 2017 18: 10 New
        0
        Formally, the military allies are members of the CSTO. But this, if formally. And so ...
  16. urman
    urman 27 June 2017 15: 45 New
    0
    It is very difficult to understand a neighbor who is not “friendly” with formal logic. \\\\\\\\
    The author directly went in cycles in watered correctness.
    I have not yet read the last two words of the phrase,
    put aside in the mind, not friends with the head!
    Well, okay, this is his copyright.
    Well, I would call a spade a spade.
    That's why I do not write articles laughing
  17. urman
    urman 27 June 2017 15: 57 New
    +2
    When they attack us "suddenly" again, then those who survive will again explain this to the fact that Putin believed the agreements concluded with our "partners" ... \\\\\\
    I do not think that GDP believes these (partners)
    It’s just that my generation, at the genetic level, absorbed the ability to read between the lines.
    And when about five years ago, long before this shnyaga with sanctions.
    GDP said that the situation of the 41st year cannot be allowed,
    told his acquaintances, there will be a butch.
    They laughed at me.
    Well, the second track to the port of Kavkaz began to be pulled past us, long before the Crimean spring.
    Port TAMAN, NOT a FACT, would be interrupted.
    All the same, I believe that our analysts are sitting, not suckers, they know their business.
  18. k_ply
    k_ply 27 June 2017 16: 05 New
    +2
    And according to the latest data, the US Marine Corps is considering increasing the "product range" in warehouses. Now we are talking about the full deployment of the marines in Norway. And this is from 8 to 16 thousand people ...

    Not now, but "long since" (since 1981). And for the 4th expeditionary brigade of the Marine Corps with a staff number of 16,5 thousand people. (now 2nd ebrmp ATP, 14,5 thousand people.). Warehousing was completed by the beginning of the 90s.
    Clippings from the journal Foreign Military Review No. 6/1989 and No. 4/1991 ...


    In addition to the Amer MP, the British (in the photo) and the Dutch MP are still practicing with the exercises the landing and deployment in North Norway.
  19. Savignon
    Savignon 27 June 2017 18: 24 New
    0
    Maybe some of our neighbors should study the experience of Aboriginal Australia?

    wassat In terms of development, Norwegian Papuans are one step lower than the Australian aborigines, and therefore are not able to learn anything. The maximum ability is to breed homosexual in Norwegian kindergartens:
    1. Michael_59
      Michael_59 29 June 2017 20: 48 New
      0
      Quote: Savignon
      in terms of development are

      I wonder at what level of development are those who allegedly spreading this infection under the sauce of disagreement with sexual perversions? Here is the title of the video shown in rainbow colors. Satanists unobtrusively crush the divine, natural symbol - the rainbow - under their interests contrary to the human race. As if mocking, at first the blue - the color of the heavens - was "assigned" to his shame, now a rainbow. Wake up, dumb, soon all the colors will grab 8)))
  20. RED PARTISAN
    RED PARTISAN 27 June 2017 19: 26 New
    +3
    In no case should repeat June 22! If intelligence can establish the exact time of the attack on Russia, then it is necessary to hit the enemy a couple of hours before it. Our strike should completely demolish the US military infrastructure along with the states that deployed it on its territory. The population of Europe does not care ...
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. RED PARTISAN
        RED PARTISAN 27 June 2017 20: 37 New
        +6
        For the purposes in Eastern Europe, our TNW is quite enough, and for the overseas "friends" Russia has a more powerful argument - the strategic nuclear forces. If you think that the United States is going to fight with us over European whores, then you will be very disappointed. Your role in this performance is cannon fodder, which will draw a portion of our forces onto itself, but your future fate does not bother Uncle Sam at all. Your territory is the US bridgehead for a missile attack on Russia, after which East European "meat" will be thrown as suicide bombers into my homeland. Remove foreign troops from your land and live in peace with Russia, otherwise - start the population census right now. Russia is not looking for a conflict, but your masters are systematically moving towards the Caribbean Crisis 2.0, so we are forced to respond.
      2. Redfox3k
        Redfox3k 27 June 2017 20: 38 New
        +2
        Any explicit preparation for an attack on the Russian Federation is an occasion for an instant preemptive strike from all directions. Everyone will die. And the Czechs. If Europe, led by the United States, wants this, then they must be treated forcibly. And then very much like Hitler.
        1. andrewTSO
          andrewTSO 28 June 2017 09: 23 New
          0
          Instant preemptive strike from all directions? Gee-gee, you're a storyteller :)
          No, of course, dreaming is not bad, but ...
          And so you are right, of course, everyone will die and "even the Czechs" :)
          So far, NO one has managed to avoid this, except for the Highlander MacLeod
      3. freddyk
        freddyk 27 June 2017 22: 04 New
        +3
        Quote: Vz.58
        Any non-announced launch of a Russian missile is an occasion for an instant response from all directions. Everyone will die. And the red partisans with their families


        No, all the same, Europe is in the clouds. The concept of a preemptive strike does not seem clear to you. Europe will have nothing to answer, from which from all directions? And will the states respond? Then I absolutely agree with RED PARTISAN. CONVERSATION???
        And from Partizan
        Remove foreign troops from your land and live in peace with Russia,
  21. Simon
    Simon 27 June 2017 20: 54 New
    +1
    Quote: Teberii
    Nerves play pranks, and so we can’t forbid them to answer yes.

    Yes! The time will come - we will answer, it will not seem a little! am
  22. Simon
    Simon 27 June 2017 21: 00 New
    +1
    Quote: RED PARTISAN
    In no case should repeat June 22! If intelligence can establish the exact time of the attack on Russia, then it is necessary to hit the enemy a couple of hours before it. Our strike should completely demolish the US military infrastructure along with the states that deployed it on its territory. The population of Europe does not care ...

    The accuracy of our missiles is proven in Syria! So that only dust will remain from their bases! It doesn't matter where they stand. yes
    1. RED PARTISAN
      RED PARTISAN 27 June 2017 21: 38 New
      +2
      When using missiles with nuclear warheads, the accuracy of the hit is not so important. An additional “bonus” of a military atom is the EMP in a high-altitude nuclear explosion of powerful ammunition, which will blind the missile defense radar for some time and create problems for radio communications.
  23. Guest171-Again
    Guest171-Again 27 June 2017 23: 49 New
    0
    Now, I remember once, the Warsaw Pact countries were considered “buffer”, and now, it turns out, the NATO countries? Well, well, life is full of surprises
    1. andj61
      andj61 28 June 2017 08: 16 New
      +2
      Quote: Guest171-Again
      Now, I remember once, the Warsaw Pact countries were considered “buffer”, and now, it turns out, the NATO countries? Well, well, life is full of surprises

      In fact, nothing has changed: as ALL European countries were buffer - a buffer between the USSR and the USA, they remained. The only difference is that part was (at least in words) for the USSR, part for the USA, and now - all for USA. But they did not stop being a buffer from this. bully hi
  24. savage1976
    savage1976 28 June 2017 00: 38 New
    +3
    It turns out that in a million years there will be huge new oil fields ..... In the caves of Norway and Switzerland.
  25. Clueless
    Clueless 28 June 2017 07: 38 New
    0
    Quote: andj61
    When striking large cities, especially with dense and high-rise buildings, hopes that they can dig out of shelters are illusory.

    That's just the big cities are very effective against nuclear weapons, by the way. Dense development in the city greatly reduces the effectiveness of nuclear weapons destruction.
  26. mp-133
    mp-133 28 June 2017 08: 33 New
    +1
    Such a dense development that houses and skyscrapers will have nowhere to fall? recourse
  27. yrakuz
    yrakuz 28 June 2017 09: 12 New
    +1
    It’s clear to a fool that being a 3rd World War is a matter of when. The ball is small, as it turned out. Resources are already scarce, and in a hundred years this shortage will become fatal. Damn, I’m even sorry that I won’t live - so prepared ....
  28. Brushing
    Brushing 28 June 2017 12: 48 New
    +2
    I've never been a Norwegian, but I hear such a saying for the first time .... laughing
  29. Earnest
    Earnest 28 June 2017 22: 05 New
    0
    Quote: rudolff
    Earnest, we are not talking about the hypothetical possibility of a preemptive nuclear strike by Russia, but about a specific regulatory act. The Military Doctrine does not provide for such an opportunity ...

    You do not understand the terms with which you operate, you do not know where they are disclosed, you have not read these documents, but continue to talk about them. In the Military Doctrine there are no such terms as retaliation or retaliatory strike, and many, many other concepts contained in the documents under the heading "Sov. Secret" or "special importance", so it makes no sense to discuss them here. Here is a quote from Art. 27 Doctrines: "27. The Russian Federation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and (or) its allies, as well as in the case of aggression against the Russian Federation using conventional weapons, when the very existence of the state is threatened. " Where are the words about "apply first", "do not apply first"? Not! So do not conceive them there.
  30. Earnest
    Earnest 28 June 2017 22: 19 New
    0
    The doctrine implies that the Russian Federation would deliver nuclear strikes as the first, then call this situation at least a "preemptive" strike, at least a "preemptive one", and after it is delivered by the enemy. Point.
    For erudition: classification of nuclear missile strikes
    http://encyclopedia.mil.ru/encyclopedia/dictionar
    y / details.htm? id = 14460% 40morfDictionary
  31. The comment was deleted.