Military Review

Leonid Ivashov: We do not have a mobilization resource

77
Leonid Ivashov: We do not have a mobilization resource



On Thursday, October 19, Russian President Vladimir Putin took part in the final plenary session of the Valdai International Discussion Club on the theme “The World of the Future: Through Clash to Harmony”.

To the question: “Does increasing the presence of NATO at the borders pose a threat to Russia? What could be the answer to this? ", - Vladimir Putin answered very lapidously:" Every step we know, is clear. It does not bother us. Let them train. Everything's under control". The president probably answered, as he was supposed to answer. There is nothing panic. When he claims that we know every step, he says that we are predicting a situation. That is, prognostic analysis in the activities of politicians and the military is present. And, of course, there is no point in talking about threats to our security at a public forum. He will set tasks for the security forces, primarily the Ministry of Defense, at closed, non-public meetings.

As for the situation on our western borders, we see what is happening there and what is the main reason. Of course, this is not the Crimea and the Donbass. When we carefully examine where the military efforts are concentrated and military activity is manifested, we will immediately see that it is precisely in the areas in which hydrocarbons move to Europe. It is there that military jams are created, tensions are being injected so that our gas and oil do not go to Europe. Why is this done? And because Americans are actively building terminals in Europe to receive their liquefied gas, and later, perhaps, oil. Today they are taking Europeans by the throat so that they buy exactly American gas, which will be more expensive than Russian gas at least one and a half times. The background is in it.

So when Putin says that “everything is under control,” he probably knows the mood of Europeans. Probably, there are certain plans and mechanisms of action, and they are already being manifested in order to withstand American aggression together with the Europeans. That is, the reason lies precisely in the American economic interests, the survival of the American economy. And Russia here acts not as the main military opponent of the USA, but as a competitor in hydrocarbon raw materials.

However, dissonance arises in the perception of society. On the one hand, Putin directly said, "It does not bother us." On the other hand, the Ministry of Defense recently expressed extremely serious concerns about the fact that the Pentagon began to create a strategic system of instant global strike. What kind of system is this and how should we respond to it: Putin-style (“not worried”) or ministry of defense (with apprehensions)?

We were the first to start talking about changing the US military strategy - public figures from the Academy of Geopolitical Problems. The Ministry of Defense did not pay attention to us at all - there was such a period. And it all started like this. In 2000, the Americans conducted a serious nuclear analysis, they call it the “nuclear review”, where scientists, military and nuclear weapons practitioners are involved. Then, in 2001, there was a stormy, closed discussion: what to do with the nuclear weaponsWhat is its role, what is the cost of its content? And analysts came to the conclusion that nuclear weapons should be kept, but they should not be developed, it does not work on the battlefield and does not bring profits to the Americans. Further, the US military strategy is changing dramatically. They freeze the development of strategic nuclear forces, launch a missile defense program. The main element of the US military strategy is the concept of a fast global strike. And January 18, 2003, Bush signs a directive on the concept of a fast global strike. We were knocking at the Russian Defense Ministry, trying to convey the idea that cardinal changes were taking place, that the main threat today is not even US strategic nuclear weapons, but a quick global strike that is supposed to be delivered within thousands of high-precision winged minutes during 40-60, above all missiles on missile systems of Russia. By mines, mobile ground complexes, by submarines, which are near the pier or on the surface, and so on. And in essence, behead Russia in terms of strategic nuclear weapons. To prevent Russia from snapping back and responding with its intercontinental ballistic missiles, the United States is deploying its missile defense system. That was the logic behind the new US military strategy. All this is implemented with 2003 year. And we see that the Americans are moving us. 2003 year - a joint declaration of the presidents of the United States and Russia on the reduction of nuclear weapons. 12 December of the same year, Americans are notified that they are withdrawing from the anti-ballistic missile treaty, launching their global missile defense system and announcing the concept of a quick global strike.

Today, nothing is changing, except that cyber-weapons are added to the elements of a fast global strike, and plus the US is now actively developing drones tactics of drones. That is, tens of thousands of drones are involved, which can also paralyze both civilian and military targets. The quick global strike program involves the creation of 32 thousands of high-precision cruise missiles. Moreover, the strategic range of at least 6 thousands of kilometers, high accuracy and speed to 5 moves. These are the means against which no one, including Russia, has reliable protection today.

Of course, this should bother us. It was under the influence of the US adoption of the concept of a quick global strike in the latest version of Russia's military doctrine that the wording on guarantees of our security was finally changed. If everywhere in previous military doctrines it was spelled out that strategic nuclear weapons are a guarantee of our security, then everything else can be destroyed, which Serdyukov did. But the latest military doctrine speaks of a non-nuclear deterrence factor. And the fact that our "Caliber" fly, the fact that our ships are already entering the distant seas, that drew attention to the support of the military aviation - This is precisely the non-nuclear deterrence factor.

But problems are only in the initial stage of resolution. Our army is now well prepared to repel and even prevent a first strike, especially a fast global strike. Army - yes, but the country is not preparing for this. We do not have a mobilization resource. If tomorrow the first echelon of the army, the one that is in the ranks today, enters the battle, it must restrain the blows of the enemy and give an opportunity to mobilize both the economy and the reserve, the second echelon. I must give time for the reorientation of civilian enterprises and for the existing defense industry enterprises to switch to the accelerated production of modern military equipment. But this mobilization resource, mobilization plans are practically absent. Yes, and the legislation in this regard is very, very lame. Therefore, the army will reflect the first blow, and if the war will be protracted? I am not sure that our government will be able to increase something. With import substitution we stumbled into the wall and can not do anything. There are no personnel, no technological equipment, no resource reserves to strengthen production. And a lot of things we do not have to withstand a long blow of the enemy.

Regarding the HEU-LEU agreement. Putin decided to talk about this agreement at the Valdai Club, and he said, I must say, very emotionally: “The United States got access to all the top-secret objects of the Russian Federation.” The president also said that in the offices of Americans at the most secret Russian plants were American flags. Our president spoke with indignation about all this. But the question is that under Yeltsin, this agreement operated from 1993 of the year to the end of the Yeltsin term, while under Putin, it worked for 13-14 for years and ended only in 2013 of the year. Why did Putin decide to tell people and people that in 1993-2013 we actually lost our sovereignty in the nuclear field, including under several presidential terms of Putin himself?

It was under Putin that we — social activists, scientists plus State Duma deputies — developed tremendous activity to encourage withdrawal from this agreement. Why Vladimir Vladimirovich tolerated - this is a question for him. But this deal really cost Russia dearly, and not only militarily. In 1993, Yeltsin had a deal with Clinton on the issue of dispersal and execution of parliament, the Supreme Council. After all, Yeltsin then called Clinton and asked: “Bill, will you support me - I want to dissolve the parliament? He replied: "No, the Congress will not support, it is not democratic." And then - Clinton's return call: "I talked with influential members of Congress, and if you take a step towards our relationship, we will support you." And this drunkard: “What step do you want?” - “Now, if you had enriched uranium, which you have today, which stands on warheads, at least half or a third of it was transferred (naturally for a fee) to the US - I could push you support. The alcoholic replied: "Take it all!"

As a result, we agreed to sell 500 tons of enriched uranium for a meager amount to the Americans. And not just to sell highly enriched uranium. They cannot bring it to the level of low-enriched for work at their nuclear power plants. So we also agreed that Russia would process it to a state of low enrichment, to nuclear fuel in essence, and transfer it to the States. Yeltsin acted on the principle: “To hell with state interests, and you, Bill, only support me in terms of a coup d’état.” Here is the core of this nuclear deal.

Because of it, today we have lost a huge stock of weapons-grade uranium for our warheads and in the quality of fuel for our nuclear power plants. Plus, today Russia is powerfully entering the nuclear fuel market and is building nuclear power plants. But we cannot supply nuclear fuel to them today. That is, despite the fact that the agreement ceased to operate in the 2013 year, traces of it will long be felt in our economy and in defense capability. And the Americans, when we completed the whole cycle of the shameful deal, began to behave more arrogantly, and we feel it.

Is it possible to say that awareness of the truth of circumstances finally came to the heads of the rulers and Russia would turn the vector on nuclear matters to 180 degrees? Something is happening on this field, but in this way we cannot live. For decades, an obvious problem - a criminal deal, an act of betrayal - we do not notice, cover it, contribute to the implementation. And when the worst has already been implemented, we begin to see it in hindsight. We see this not only in this transaction - and in other areas of the Russian and political and economic leadership. Can not be so. It is necessary to carry out a powerful analysis, listen to the public, especially the scientific one. After all, in the HEU-LEU transaction which went along with Yeltsin, and already during Putin’s presidency, powerful movements, appeals to the presidents, articles in the press, television programs! Our nuclear industry minister, Mikhailov, resigned. Experts excited the authorities and the public: “You can’t do that, you need to leave uranium for yourself, you can’t support and arm the enemy”. No one noticed anything. Today, all of a sudden, when everything is over, these are harsh statements by the president. Is this all a pre-election character?
Author:
Originator:
https://izborsk-club.ru/14198
77 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Same lech
    Same lech 26 October 2017 04: 56
    +5
    and they are already showing up in order to counter American aggression together with the Europeans.


    What about smile why did recently Steinmeier come to PUTIN? ...
    allegedly complaining about the Germans pain at the fifth point ... not at all.
    The Germans are practical people and will not engage in nonsense ... in general, all the most interesting is yet to come.
    1. 210ox
      210ox 26 October 2017 05: 53
      17
      Yes, and let them all line up there .... Transit must be promoted. But as for the resource, Ivashov is right as always. Neither economic nor human. And most importantly. With this socio-political system, it is not possible to fundamentally resolve this issue.
      Quote: The same Lech
      and they are already showing up in order to counter American aggression together with the Europeans.


      What about smile why did recently Steinmeier come to PUTIN? ...
      allegedly complaining about the Germans pain at the fifth point ... not at all.
      The Germans are practical people and will not engage in nonsense ... in general, all the most interesting is yet to come.
    2. Finches
      Finches 26 October 2017 06: 10
      19
      Yes! The general is right - we seem to have a mobilization resource, but more on paper, but in fact ... The old system of "mobic" manning was completely destroyed, it seems that they started to create a new one ... but so far there, on paper. And this is a very serious problem!
      1. vladimirZ
        vladimirZ 26 October 2017 09: 30
        14
        The Pentagon has begun to create a strategic system for an instant global strike. What kind of system is this and how should we respond to it: in Putin's way (“does not bother”) or in Minoboron's style (with fears)? - from article

        How to resist the modern American "blitzkrieg" - a lightning-fast global blow to Russia, with a corrupt comprador oligarchic class in power of our state? This is the main question of preserving Russia, and even more - the Russian World. Everything else is secondary.
        Will Putin, who covered treacherous deals in favor of the United States until 2013, be able to take patriotic positions and really fight for Russia's interests, and not just for the treacherous comprador oligarchic interests of the class of the modern Russian bourgeoisie?
        "Is all this an election character?" Putin and his supporters, only to continue to hold onto power, asks the military analyst General Ivashev. And it’s hard to disagree with him, the rating of confidence among the people, the power of the oligarchs and their representative Putin V.V., is losing more and more.
        1. SMP
          SMP 26 October 2017 10: 00
          14
          How to resist the modern American "blitzkrieg" - a lightning-fast global blow to Russia, with a corrupt comprador oligarchic class in power of our state? This is the main question of preserving Russia, and even more - the Russian World. Everything else is secondary.
          Will Putin, who covered treacherous deals in favor of the United States until 2013, be able to take patriotic positions and really fight for Russia's interests, and not just for the treacherous comprador oligarchic interests of the class of the modern Russian bourgeoisie?
          "Is all this an election character?" Putin and his supporters, only to continue to hold on to power - the military analyst General Ivashev asks a question. And it’s hard to disagree with him, the rating of confidence among the people, the power of the oligarchs and their representative Putin V.V., is losing more and more.


          1. There is only one way out Zyuganov becomes president and transfers the rails to the socialist economy, taking into account the mistakes not only of the USSR but also of China, from which they also accumulated.

          But problems are only in the initial stage of resolution. Our army is now well prepared to repel and even prevent the first strike, especially a quick global strike. The army - yes, but the country is not preparing for this. We do not have a mobilization resource. If tomorrow the first echelon of the army, the one in service today, enters the battle, it must restrain the enemy’s attacks and give the opportunity to mobilize both the economy and the reserve, the second echelon. It should give time for the reorientation of civilian enterprises and for the current defense industry enterprises to switch to the accelerated production of modern military equipment. But this mobilization resource, mobilization plans, is practically nonexistent. And the legislation in this regard is very, very lame. Therefore, the army will repulse the first blow, and if the war is protracted? I’m not sure that our government will be able to build something. With import substitution, we bumped into the wall and can’t do anything. There are no personnel, no technological equipment, no resource reserves to strengthen production. And we don’t have much to withstand the long blow of the enemy.


          2. What is a mobilization resource? And how does it compare with Putin’s statement on the complete transition of non-contract service, that is, a reduction in this mobilization resource.

          Old age alasbut judging by previous presidents and gene. to the secretaries from Brezhnev to Yeltsin, all the same 60-63 years is the limit for human mental activity in leadership positions, and this is the majority and exceptions only confirm the rule.

          When a person says that he believed too much to someone, like Putin at the Valdai Forum, then in a normal environment they say sucker.
          We must not forget the main mobilization resource that was destroyed during the rule of Putin and his team is education, Livanov and KO introducing the American education system and the test system of the Unified State (Essentially, a test is a hint system for losers.)

          a) the system of education of the USSR that remained in China was destroyed.
          b) launched US intelligence at nuclear facilities.
          c) they gave all the uranium.
          d) destroyed tank design bureaus Leningrad, Omsk
          e) destroyed the civil aircraft industry.
          f) helped the enemy by selling him the RD-180.
          g) they sell the enemy strategic titanium that goes to military aircraft USA F-22, F-35.
          h) sell to the enemy more than a dozen rare earth metals which are not in the USA.

          etc. You can still write a whole page.

          Now recall the policy of appeasing Hitler, when on June 20-21, trains with grain and ships loaded with iron ore sailed to Germany and what helped to avoid June 22, 1941?
          1. vladimirZ
            vladimirZ 26 October 2017 10: 23
            10
            1. There is only one way out Zyuganov becomes president and transfers the rails to the socialist economy, - SMP

            Why Zyuganov? Who cares who will be? The main thing is that this is a representative of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation - the only force with an ideology of social justice for all that can turn the tide in favor of the people and Russia, and restore the socialist state on a new basic basis of mixed state and private property.
            1. SMP
              SMP 26 October 2017 10: 27
              +2
              Why Zyuganov? Who cares who will be? The main thing is that it be a representative of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation - the only force with an ideology of social justice for all that can turn the tide in favor of the people and Russia


              You are right, Zyuganov has the same age level, and yes, it is impossible for the head of the party to be also the head of state. Zyuganov and the Communist Party team wise men will pick up a worthy person. Experience since Yeltsin.
            2. basmach
              basmach 26 October 2017 12: 00
              +7
              No, shy. Zyuganov is not that candidate. A couple of weeks ago, at a party meeting, I came up with the thought that Zyuganov’s time was over and the tradition of walking forward was bad. And I’ll tell you, quite a lot of people support me in this opinion (although most of them are opposed to those under 70, in the old tradition of “approving”). The very top of the party begins to rot, turning into a "systemic" opposition, i.e. built into the system .. And now Afonin is engaged in personnel and there will be nothing good from this. Now there is no (though quite possible it is simply not allowed to go up) bright leader capable of leading the party and leading the people. The "seat" in the Duma was "bored". The same Lebedev, the first secretary of the Tula regional committee. For him, the party is an LLC for existence. At the last elections to the State Duma, not only I, but also a number of comrades thought about whether to vote for him. Attracting the party with parliamentarism is a serious disease that can be cured, but the enthusiasm of the party leadership with one continuous parliamentarism and attempts to "negotiate" for good do not lead, only degeneration. He raised the question more than once — the party expresses the interests of the proletariat and the peasantry — and the deputies are entirely party nomenclature.
              But we’ll still fight, it’s too early to bury us.
              1. Pancir026
                Pancir026 26 October 2017 12: 07
                +2
                Quote: basmach
                but the enthusiasm of the party leadership for one continuous parliamentarism and attempts to "agree" on good does not lead to good, only degeneration.

                In the conditions of 90 and even in the middle of 10 years, there was no other way. Look at Zhirinovsky-everything that he is allowed to will be immediately CRIMINALLY punished by any communist. Why so, I think it is clear. And there are too many talkers among the Communist Party. Type Tsamaev or Tsareva in the North Ossetia -A, yes, sadly.
                But rot, husk will fall off in due time.
            3. Stirbjorn
              Stirbjorn 26 October 2017 13: 03
              +4
              Quote: vladimirZ
              Why Zyuganov? Who cares who will be? The main thing is that this is a representative of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation - the only force with an ideology of social justice for all that can turn the tide in favor of the people and Russia, and restore the socialist state on a new basic basis of mixed state and private property.

              Zyuganov will not be president, he has already given up the presidency in 96, why did he need it now, in old age. I would like the sane representatives of the Communist Party to join the Council of Popular Leaders, which by the way includes Ivashov, and nominate a single candidate (only not Zyuganov) - at least the same Grudinin, or Boldyrev
            4. VS
              VS 27 October 2017 10: 33
              +1
              That's just not Zyuganov .. That .... political trust)))

              And about June 22 - if it happens - we all pump up .. The people will think in a week - and we need it - to fight for Putin’s oligarchs?)) And - the "domestic war" will be repeated 1914))))
          2. killganoff
            killganoff 28 October 2017 14: 15
            +1
            The only good news is that the people, although VERY SLOWLY, are beginning to realize the essence of the current government!
            1. Suhow
              Suhow 29 October 2017 13: 54
              0
              the essence of the current government Very slowly realize, not only from you, but also here ... Very slowly and Very few ... well (here) we have much more powders of brains.
        2. Evgeniy667b
          Evgeniy667b 31 October 2017 13: 05
          0
          The duplicity of GDP will cost Russia dearly !!! And already bypassed. And what is his new term ??? What are we talking about, sick on the head ???
      2. To be or not to be
        To be or not to be 26 October 2017 09: 42
        +5
        General, where was he in the 90s ... Where were the stripes .. Where was the last marshal of the Union? Great and mighty fell ... and they were gone. Went into the shadows for better times ... Have got used to the new capitalism .. ??
        For more than 20 years, the General has been doing the same thing ..
        1. Grandfather
          Grandfather 26 October 2017 13: 50
          +4
          No, shy. Zyuganov is not that candidate.
          You opened our eyes ... "lift my eyelids ...!" (Wii.) seriously ??? and who, that candidate? let me guess .... yeah ... 146% Putin !!! Urya !!!!!
        2. killganoff
          killganoff 28 October 2017 14: 45
          +1
          Quote: To be or not to be
          General, where was he in the 90s ... Where were the stripes .. Where was the last marshal of the Union? Great and mighty fell ... and they were gone. Went into the shadows for better times ... Have got used to the new capitalism .. ??
          For more than 20 years, the General has been doing the same thing ..


          For your information, many sons of the Fatherland, in those distant and not very distant years, were eliminated: Marshal Akhromeev SF; General Swan (presidential candidate); General Troshev G.N .; General Romanov A.A; General Rokhlin L.Ya .; General Dubrov G.K .; Lieutenant General Debashvili B.; Major General Ivanov Yu.I. .... And there are many more surnames not mentioned by me. Kingdom of heaven to the patriots of the Fatherland!
          For general development, take an interest in the circumstances of the death of these names, and then reproach the Russian officers for cowardice, their fault is only in directness! The death of Lev Yakovlevich Rokhlin, who planned the impeachment of Yeltsin, was especially indicative ... In addition to the physical elimination of those who were objectionable to the government, there were other methods: Colonel V. Kvachkov. To you as an example.
          PS General Colonel Ivashov L.G. in 2011, he submitted documents as a candidate for the President of the Russian Federation 2012 - the election commission did everything to prevent him from being elected.
          And the speech of the UNAUTHORIZED BLACKED GENERAL:
          His words are relevant now more than ever!
          The only thing, after the reforms, was systematically eliminating the possibility of a military coup, and there were practically no ideological ones, mostly only mercenaries in the army.
  2. LeftPers
    LeftPers 26 October 2017 05: 32
    10
    Whenever Ivashov is read, the persistent feeling “Everything has disappeared” and a desire to strangle oneself visit.
    1. 210ox
      210ox 26 October 2017 05: 54
      15
      And how are you still alive? Overpowering a strong desire? Surviving spite Ivashova?
      Quote: LeftPers
      Whenever Ivashov is read, the persistent feeling “Everything has disappeared” and a desire to strangle oneself visit.
      1. LeftPers
        LeftPers 26 October 2017 11: 31
        +3
        No, I just try not to read it, I don’t like pessimists.
        1. 210ox
          210ox 26 October 2017 18: 22
          +1
          With pink glasses you can’t go far. You can get into the camp with a rainbow flag.
          Quote: LeftPers
          No, I just try not to read it, I don’t like pessimists.
    2. Uncle lee
      Uncle lee 26 October 2017 06: 42
      10
      Quote: LeftPers
      desire to strangle oneself.

      And you listen to Nadezhdin and want to live in friendship and understanding with friends of the Shtatovtsy!
    3. esaul1950
      esaul1950 28 October 2017 18: 05
      0
      Give you a rope?
  3. Yarik
    Yarik 26 October 2017 05: 41
    25
    Quote: LeftPers
    Whenever Ivashov is read, the persistent feeling “Everything has disappeared” and a desire to strangle oneself visit.


    And when you listen to Putin-the desire to go buy ice cream and a balloon. wassat
    1. Same lech
      Same lech 26 October 2017 05: 55
      +2
      smile good

      Bravo ... natural selection ... to whom the gallows and to someone the ice cream.
    2. To be or not to be
      To be or not to be 26 October 2017 11: 36
      +2
      ".. a desire to go buy ice cream and a balloon."
      I love Soviet popsicle in chocolate for 28 cents hi
      You can even without chocolate. But 20 kopecks of Soviet
  4. samarin1969
    samarin1969 26 October 2017 06: 21
    11
    "... already during the presidency of Putin, powerful movements ..." ... since the spring of 2014, it has been said about certain "businessmen-patriots", about "patriotic towers" surrounded by himself ... ".... What- it’s not noticeable ...
    There are only “non-dangerous” ones for the elite, Ivashov, Delyagin, Fedorov, etc. ... As long as they are given ether, it means they are not taken seriously.
    1. AID.S
      AID.S 26 October 2017 14: 01
      0
      Quote: samarin1969
      "... already during the presidency of Putin, powerful movements ..." ... since the spring of 2014, it has been said about certain "businessmen-patriots", about "patriotic towers" surrounded by himself ... ".... What- it’s not noticeable ...

      Putin is surrounded by a comprador bourgeoisie, part of which the West, through sanctions, has forced it to become "patriotic."
  5. XII Legion
    XII Legion 26 October 2017 06: 34
    16
    Does increasing NATO presence at borders pose a threat to Russia

    Naturally
    Vladimir Putin replied: “This does not bother us. Everything's under control".

    Yeah
    We do not have a mobilization resource

    Stunned
    For 18 years of "asceticism" and "soulful-patriotic" leadership of the country, you can even probably grow.
    The Pentagon has begun to create a strategic system for an instant global strike. What kind of system is this and how should we respond to it: in Putin's way (“does not bother”) or in Minoboron's style (with fears)

    Better last. Let the specialists do
    Comprehensively
  6. ADmA_RUS
    ADmA_RUS 26 October 2017 06: 44
    0
    And because the Americans are actively building terminals in Europe to receive their liquefied gas
    I did not read further. Expert Level - Boch.
    1. Gardamir
      Gardamir 26 October 2017 08: 36
      12
      Expert level
      Colonel General, specialist in the field of geopolitics and conflict management. President of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems. In Yeltsin's times, under his leadership, the famous throw on Pristina was made, which showed that Russia would never kneel.
      1. ADmA_RUS
        ADmA_RUS 26 October 2017 22: 39
        +1
        1. He reasoned outside his sphere of competence.
        2. It is not difficult to become a professional, it is difficult for them to remain. As soon as he resigned, the volumes and quality of incoming information fell. Even if you are smart at least three times, there is simply not enough reliable information.
        3. Even if the EU begins to build terminals in bulk, they still have to build a new gas infrastructure. What does not happen in droves.
        4. Existing terminals are idle.
  7. Mar.Tirah
    Mar.Tirah 26 October 2017 07: 01
    +9
    Quote: samarin1969
    Since they are being given ether, it means they are not taken seriously.

    But what about ????? But what about the beginning of the operation in Syria? Who was constantly present, supporting Assad on behalf of Putin? Why is Ivashov? And who planned the attack of our paratroopers on Pristina. Who exposed the threats of preparing a global strike by the United States, and the response strategy .. Again, why is Ivashov? He has some oddities, I agree. But it’s more likely age-related and personal. It has nothing to do with the country's defense capability.
    1. Golovan Jack
      Golovan Jack 26 October 2017 07: 12
      +8
      Quote: Mar. Tira
      Who revealed the threat of preparing a global strike by the United States ... Again, why is Ivashov?

      Do you believe in what you are writing? If you believe it, this is very good ...
      Yeah, Ivashov ... came and defeated everyone. And the GRU and other competent ones, they’ve probably "woofed", probably.
      Ivashov merely voiced in the press what he was allowed to voice. You don’t think, I hope that in his articles there is really complete information about the same "global blow"? I really hope that you don’t think so wink
      1. Doliva63
        Doliva63 26 October 2017 11: 33
        +6
        Already in the late 80s, the GRU (which has been gone, by the way, a long time ago) was engaged mainly in industrial espionage. And judging by the convulsive and stupid reformation of military intelligence, no one really knows what to want from it. And "bringing to normal battle" is a long and difficult process. I'm not sure that we will return to the level of the 70s soon.
  8. Golovan Jack
    Golovan Jack 26 October 2017 07: 05
    11
    Another "alarm !!!" from Ivashov. Sweat, blood, sand and bees mixed up fellow

    Particularly amused by this ... passage:
    Fast global strike program provides for 32 thousand high-precision cruise missiles. Moreover, the strategic range of at least 6 thousand kilometers, high accuracy and speed of up to 5 max. These are the means against which no one today, including Russia, has reliable protection.

    Duc, this ... "of these funds"for the time being, too, and when there will be more ... and where then what"today"the Russian Federation" has no protection "from them?
    PS: and what kind of cruise missiles are these, "at a speed of up to five swoops"? By the way, one is also ... "to five" laughing
  9. Nix1986
    Nix1986 26 October 2017 07: 08
    +3
    "instant global strike" is the same whim as SOI. Everything that starts with the word “global” works well with countries that do not have nuclear weapons. And those who have it, even if one missile breaks through missile defense, makes this global strike an unacceptable means.
    1. g1washntwn
      g1washntwn 26 October 2017 08: 04
      11
      Why not? For profit, you can sacrifice for example Britain, France ... yes, do not care, all of Europe and a few of its millionaires. But then you can, with angry cries about wild barbarians, boldly genocide Russian resources to the rest of the living world. And now, supposedly standing on the side, they will be the first to go on to share the burnt pie.
      To do this, more effective measures were needed for the Americans to withdraw from the ABM Treaty than the answers "everything is under control." Now missiles in Siberia can still take off in response, and tomorrow?
      1. Nix1986
        Nix1986 26 October 2017 08: 49
        +1
        Suitable as a plot for the game or as a script for the next book by Tom Clancy, but not in reality.
        1. g1washntwn
          g1washntwn 26 October 2017 09: 09
          +5
          And will reality really differ so much from Defcon for those in the bunkers? Especially having such a cheat as RSD disguised as missile defense, orbiting shock complexes and hypersonic mass carriers.
          Here the question is not even who will manage to inflict on whom and how much slap. Who will recover faster. Who will replenish the mobile reserve with us after the cities are covered? We do not have pre-war Russia ... grannies from rotting villages? A drunken "electorate" of ravaged mono-cities?
          1. Nix1986
            Nix1986 26 October 2017 09: 16
            0
            Global nuclear war has the same percentage of probability as the appearance of aliens around the world. Only the majority considers it to be fantastic, but for some reason the first is not. In any case, from the beginning of the 50s we had horror stories above the roof, from the harp to the SDI, we would react to everything the same way, then, taking into account the budget, we would live in dugouts. It is necessary to evaluate the probability of the enemy’s actions, their success and taking into account a sober approach in assessing their ability to respond to this. And articles on the global nuclear war on this site are born every week, I would be surprised if they were not.
            1. g1washntwn
              g1washntwn 26 October 2017 09: 51
              +3
              Previously, a plane with a cell phone was a fantasy and terrorists who crash into skyscrapers only in the movies. And the probability, it is even in the simplest formula 2 + 2, success / efficiency / profitability and other mathematical models have nothing to do with it.
    2. Stirbjorn
      Stirbjorn 26 October 2017 13: 07
      +1
      Quote: Nix1986
      "instant global strike" is the same whim as SOI. Everything that starts with the word “global” works well with countries that do not have nuclear weapons. And those who have it, even if one missile breaks through missile defense, makes this global strike an unacceptable means.
      Perhaps you are right, because even in the DPRK, the United States did not dare to strike
      1. Nix1986
        Nix1986 26 October 2017 13: 28
        +2
        No matter how the opponents of nuclear weapons spin here, it gave us almost 70 years without a big war. For the opportunity to get an answer in full flowed from a personal concept and fear into a state one and makes you think 10 times before unleashing a conflict.
    3. Suhow
      Suhow 29 October 2017 14: 08
      0
      partially = + = you, but one missile for an unacceptable strike is not enough in my opinion. but the retaliatory nuclear defeat of densely populated and technologically necessary objects for the enemy is just right ...
  10. Alex66
    Alex66 26 October 2017 07: 18
    11
    The whole task of the current government is to hold on for another 20-30 years when those who remember the USSR die out and it will be possible to bring down all the lies on all the achievements of the October Revolution. To do this, Yeltsin went on a betrayal, Putin will go, the only thing that can save Russia is the contradictions between the bourgeoisie, they simply cannot share everything equally and will begin to tear each other. Unfortunately, Russia will only be able to recover on the ruins, the Communists succeeded twice.
    1. Bastinda
      Bastinda 26 October 2017 08: 17
      +8
      There are no communists. laughing
      The enemy, too, learned a lot. The main weapon now is not rockets, but the WTO! The domestic market (except for the food industry and mining) is practically seized, our enterprises are crowded out and are gradually falling apart. They turn us into a gas station.
      It will be much more difficult to recover after such a blow. And the control of the "banana" republics has long been worked out.
    2. Nix1986
      Nix1986 26 October 2017 13: 31
      +2
      Why are you contradicting yourself? Hasn't the communist state collapsed? Didn’t the Communists ruin him? Weren't Berezovsky, Chubais, and the other Shobla communists before? If you really want to believe in something bright and sublime, then believe in elves, they have long and fat ears.
  11. Seraphimamur
    Seraphimamur 26 October 2017 07: 31
    +1
    Lenya is a passionate follower of the apocalyptic trend in literature, being in the trend of our media. I have never read anything positive from him. Maybe someone read? If yes, give a link.
  12. Gardamir
    Gardamir 26 October 2017 08: 30
    11
    Everything is very interesting, of course. But shells, tanks, planes in our time, even somewhere secondary. If we know a potential adversary, then why transfer billions? Are they so well armed that money is not needed?
  13. kuz363
    kuz363 26 October 2017 08: 42
    +7
    Ivashov thinks in the old categories of the Second World War. What will be the evacuation of industry and workers, the organization of new industries, the heroism of the population. None of this will happen! After the first signs of a US strike, the president, ministers. oligarchs, authorities and deputies will flee to the West or Arab countries, and at airports they will be waiting for aircraft with engines turned on. No mobilization resources will work. Of course, some elite military units will stand up to the victory, so to speak, but it will come very soon in view of the superiority of NATO forces. Well, what can I say if the superiority of NATO aviation alone is 20-30 times higher than Russian! They just burn thousands of Russian tanks like candles and that’s it. And how the rest of the military will behave is also unknown. The population will simply be thrown to independent survival. But only those who live in rural areas far from large cities will survive. The rest are not. Japan and China - what will they see as they divide the territory of Russia without them? No matter how! Siberia and the Far East are chopped off right away. Russia is simply physically unable to preserve its territory in case of war.
    1. astronom1973n
      astronom1973n 26 October 2017 09: 03
      +7
      What are we smoking? laughing
      1. 34 region
        34 region 26 October 2017 13: 13
        +6
        09.03. Astronomer! What fantastic did he say? In the event of the outbreak of war, all officials who have something there, quickly go there and go black. And given the huge share of foreign companies in the structure of our economy, the work of our economy for the needs of the war is very doubtful. We can’t replace import substitution in any way, and in case of limited supplies, we’ll get up altogether. The fact that we are importing by the left ways today, tomorrow we will not be able to. In case of war, the borders will be blocked. Well, with China it may still be open. So what is the inadequacy of the comment from 08.42? Talking about a quick war is also not worth it. Just look at LDNR and Syria. There is no speed anywhere.
    2. esaul1950
      esaul1950 28 October 2017 18: 09
      +1
      guard, save yourself who can, everything is lost, the tanks are on fire, planes are falling, locomotives do not go, where should the poor Christian go?
  14. VadimSt
    VadimSt 26 October 2017 09: 00
    +3
    Well, honestly, you read this grandfather, day to day, and a firm thought will sit down - it's time to give up!
    1. zak167
      zak167 26 October 2017 11: 10
      +2
      Absolutely true. Grandfather writes heartbreaking articles about how defenseless and weak we are obviously on order and for a decent fee.
    2. 34 region
      34 region 26 October 2017 13: 27
      +5
      09.00. Vadim! Well write a bravura article-We all broke! He has not a word about giving up. Therefore, do not slander him. But yelling with calf delight as everything is fine, definitely not worth it. They gave the USA the opportunity to take over Ukraine. Dip property was chopped off, but we didn’t even answer. Why talk about more? Entering the Western world, Russia surrenders itself. And it’s time to give up began to sound with us since the 80s. In the 90s, they organizedly surrendered. And an article about what they surrendered, and not that it is time to give up. To give up if you gave up in the early 90's. But some especially naive still believe in independence! Instead of creating and developing scientific and engineering schools, we ask (ask) for their technology! And our desire to get their investment instead of investing ourselves ?! Or does Vadim think that the winners always ask, and the vanquished point and impose sanctions?
      1. VadimSt
        VadimSt 26 October 2017 19: 17
        +1
        I. not about bravado as an alternative, but about unbridled - "Everything is wrong" ...! "Here we are, in due time, yes I would ...".
        And this, not only in the current article. He himself did a lot to prevent everything that happened in 90, and after. His bikes are popular among those who today have reached the age of 40-45, who in those years went to school.
        Here, it is often said how Western politicians and generals see their eyes after resigning. Ivashov, the same type of "irreplaceable" senior citizen-general, only our spill.
        1. 34 region
          34 region 27 October 2017 11: 15
          0
          19.17. Vadim! Good comment! Yes! At one time, dignitaries did the same as the faces of Yanukovych. Nothing depended on the rank and file of the country. Does he have tales or not? Well, in the 90s we got a lot of tales too. And many believed them. Rubbed bikes today. Are our politicians ripening after retirement? Judging by Gorbachev, no. You can certainly blame Yazov. Why didn’t he raise the army ?! And what would begin after that? Commies stoke people in the blood for the sake of their power! Wouldn't that be? Stopudovo would be.
  15. groks
    groks 26 October 2017 09: 17
    +1
    The usual election campaign. What for? There’s no one to choose from anyway.
  16. Antianglosax
    Antianglosax 26 October 2017 09: 57
    +2
    Amero-animals can jump if they are 100% sure of their impunity and the absence of a retaliatory strike. And until then, they still oh how far, and we are not going to wait for them. To impose mattresses and small Britain around the perimeters with powerful nuclear charges and you can sleep peacefully - geeks do not twitch.
    1. 34 region
      34 region 26 October 2017 13: 39
      0
      09.57. Anti-anglosax! These gentlemen jumped already in the 90s. And bombed with cola, jeans and chewing gum. The bombing showed very high efficiency. And all the nuclear forces, the army, navy and aviation could not contain the onslaught of such weapons! hi In the case of developing immunity to chewing gum, radical weapons are run in. The first time it was run in Europe in the 30s of the last century. Capstrany radical regime spread easily. What impose impudent Saxons, I do not know. Having such destructive weapons as the golden donkey and radicalism in the arsenal of arrogant Saxons is very difficult to impose on them.
  17. midshipman
    midshipman 26 October 2017 10: 16
    +2
    Dear Leonid Grigoryevich, NATO’s non-nuclear deterrence in Europe is not only medium-range missiles, but also accurate attacks by army and attack aircraft from low altitudes in established geographical coordinates. It was shown to Europe back in 1985. I have the honor.
  18. zak167
    zak167 26 October 2017 11: 08
    +2
    It’s time for the general to retire. And that is not an article in his execution. This is another horror story. It’s not yet clear what purpose Ivashov is pursuing, constantly telling us that everything is bad. That we are powerless before the main enemy. It is obvious that all of him speeches in favor of the liberals who are even now ready to surrender Russia with giblets.
  19. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 26 October 2017 11: 25
    +1
    I sincerely respect Ivashov, but lately he has been too pessimistic although he operates with seemingly known facts. Perhaps age makes itself felt.
  20. Nemesis
    Nemesis 26 October 2017 12: 15
    +2
    The United States and its missile defense can only be confronted today by increasing the number of Strategic Missile Forces missiles, canceling all agreements with the United States as not meeting the interests of the Russian defense. If there are not enough nuclear warheads for strategic and cruise missiles, take them from tactical warheads so that each cruise missile of the X-101 and Caliber type has a nuclear warhead of at least 40 kt. If this is not enough, put warheads with the most fierce chemical warfare agents on part of the missiles, placing them in capsules eliminating their corrosion.
  21. Fedor1
    Fedor1 26 October 2017 12: 46
    +3
    The articles of the general cut ears very much and lowers the bravura mood. The truth has this property.
  22. 1536
    1536 26 October 2017 12: 48
    0
    If the Russian Ministry of Defense is afraid of anyone or something, it is justifiable that the President and his administration are not worried. After all, it is not she who will destroy and grind the enemy in the event of an attack on the Russian Federation by NATO and US forces. In this case, it is undesirable to mix military and political components. And then the whole people will turn into "alarmists" ...
  23. av58
    av58 26 October 2017 13: 34
    +1
    Ivashov begins to annoy. You can and should talk about facts, risks, mistakes, give an interpretation, make suggestions, but do not hysteria.
  24. viktorch
    viktorch 26 October 2017 13: 43
    +1
    practically revealed HPP, well done authors
    ps That was sarcasm

    what else is the darkest to say? I do not control anything, I know nothing, and I have no real plans? and “victories” is a media chewing gum generated ex post? Well, he doesn’t seem to be, and no one will say which of the pravluks is recognized in political impotence? Yes, not one.
  25. Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 26 October 2017 14: 15
    0
    And where to get this very mobresource? In TOY Russia, Suvorov said: "We are Russians - what a delight!" and everyone understood him. And in this one? In the USSR there was "a people and a party - one." And while they were united, they tear to pieces they wanted.
    What now? Of course, paintball and other outdoor games, which suddenly became possible and popular, give something. But they do not give what war wins. Yes, the teams that are used to running around with game weapons (and real security officials who suddenly fondly loved this thing in their “free” time) are already familiar with tactics, technology, have worked out interaction ... But wars are waged by this. And then others win!
    The moral-volitional qualities of the fighters prevail. How are we with them? What are the "Russians" united with (the concept of "Russian" is clearly not welcomed by the authorities)? Of course, 80% of the population who in any other countries give an unconditional right to declare a country mono-ethnic is not important. That is, the Russian idea is not necessary. Can we unite around the party? Around what? Pssst ... merged. Why are we going to die, people?
  26. The comment was deleted.
  27. The comment was deleted.
  28. Ivan Ivanov
    Ivan Ivanov 26 October 2017 15: 03
    +1
    I also did not understand the emotions of GDP towards the states. There is no claim to the states, but to oneself. The same as saying: we are complete untrained eccentrics
  29. gorenina91
    gorenina91 26 October 2017 18: 03
    0
    -Ivashov says everything correctly .., but for some reason he always has one focus ... -this is a threat to NATO and Western Europe ... -Everything is right ... but there is still a very scary and even more insidious "partner "... is China ...
    -This is a "partner" in which case without any twinge of conscience he will take away everything that is possible from the wounded in the battles with the West of Russia (this is just an assumption) ... and will easily and treacherously take advantage of the "favorable" situation for him ...
    - I think .. that today it is China that poses the greatest threat to Russia ...
  30. andrej-shironov
    andrej-shironov 26 October 2017 18: 45
    +1
    The problem is not the mobilization resource as such, the problem is the disunity of people in Russia. Power in fact is slurred and not legitimate, there is no idea, no ideology, no leader as such. Around what or whom to mobilize you will not understand. And the current government officials for the most part do not have authority among the people. In a word, the people themselves and the power itself. No wonder the authorities rested in the creation of the Russian Guard and the contract army. But something tells me that this will not help the authorities.
  31. Radikal
    Radikal 26 October 2017 19: 59
    +1
    We must not forget the main mobilization resource that was destroyed during the rule of Putin and his team is education, Livanov and KO introducing the American education system and the EG test system (in essence, a test is a clue system for doubles.)
    a) the system of education of the USSR that remained in China was destroyed.
    b) launched US intelligence at nuclear facilities.
    c) they gave all the uranium.
    d) destroyed tank design bureaus Leningrad, Omsk
    e) destroyed the civil aircraft industry.
    f) helped the enemy by selling him the RD-180.
    g) they sell the enemy strategic titanium that goes to military aircraft USA F-22, F-35.
    h) sell to the enemy more than a dozen rare earth metals which are not in the USA.
    etc. You can still write a whole page.

    In the context of what was said: the other day, on NTV news, the storyline was characteristic, and it sounded as if a significant event had happened, another achievement. Guess what? But the fact that the Boeing Corporation has successfully produced a brand new aircraft commissioned by one well-known Russian airline, and that the name of this company is “Victory” is curious (and in my opinion blasphemous)! And then - the pilots, company representatives vied, excitedly told us all what a wonderful airplane it was. and how convenient it is to manage, and ... solid honey and molasses. Honestly, if you follow the logic of this plot, you could only say that our aircraft compared to this "miracle" just sucks, or something like that! The mood after this plot was disgusting! Here is such a "breakthrough"! am
  32. Fedya2017
    Fedya2017 26 October 2017 23: 35
    +3
    Ivashov did not say the main thing ... We do not have not only a mobilization resource, we do not have a national-patriotic elite of the state. The recent direct refusal of the government to pass a law on the de-offshorization of Russian capital has clearly and directly confirmed this ...
  33. Radikal
    Radikal 27 October 2017 10: 12
    +2
    Quote: Fedya2017
    Ivashov did not say the main thing ... We do not have not only a mobilization resource, we do not have a national-patriotic elite of the state. The recent direct refusal of the government to pass a law on the de-offshorization of Russian capital has clearly and directly confirmed this ...

    I agree with you, just Ivashov is a delicate person, and an officer, and probably the exact same opinion about our so-called the elite. sad
  34. Ilja2016
    Ilja2016 28 October 2017 14: 24
    0
    Quote: Nix1986
    "instant global strike" is the same whim as SOI. Everything that starts with the word “global” works well with countries that do not have nuclear weapons. And those who have it, even if one missile breaks through missile defense, makes this global strike an unacceptable means.

    I agree with you this is another horror story
  35. esaul1950
    esaul1950 28 October 2017 18: 11
    0
    Quote: VadimSt
    I. not about bravado as an alternative, but about unbridled - "Everything is wrong" ...! "Here we are, in due time, yes I would ...".
    And this, not only in the current article. He himself did a lot to prevent everything that happened in 90, and after. His bikes are popular among those who today have reached the age of 40-45, who in those years went to school.
    Here, it is often said how Western politicians and generals see their eyes after resigning. Ivashov, the same type of "irreplaceable" senior citizen-general, only our spill.

    D..beat, you don’t know who and what Ivashov is, and there you are, our liberalist.