Military Review

The US Congress has allocated funds to create a new medium-range missile.

89
It became known that the US Congress approved the project to create a new medium-range missile. US parliamentarians agreed to allocate funds for this program, announcing that Russia "violated the agreement on the elimination of the INF". This is a typical American principle of relations, when contracts are signed by two parties, including the United States, and ultimately only one party fulfills them, and this is not the United States at all.


So it was with the treaty on the elimination of the INF Treaty, so it was with the treaty for the destruction of the chemical weapons. Russia has eliminated all its chemical arsenals ahead of time, allowing American experts to enter the sites. And in the United States they still claim that "there are no funds for the destruction of chemical weapons." This is despite the fact that the congressional approved US military budget for 2018 a year is almost 600 billion dollars.

At the first stage, Congress allocates 58 million dollars for the development of a medium-range land rocket. In this case, the interpretation looks "wonderful":
Congress gives permission to implement the project to create a medium-range ground-launched missile, but does not oblige the Pentagon to carry out such developments.


The US Congress has allocated funds to create a new medium-range missile.


Such a turn, according to the United States themselves, allows us to say that they "do not violate the INF Treaty."

The logic is amazing: here you have a 58 million dollars to build a rocket, but don't say that you will create this rocket ... Are American taxpayers held for idiots?
Photos used:
Wikipedia
89 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Grandfather
    Grandfather 9 November 2017 06: 59 New
    +2
    The US Congress has allocated funds to create a new medium-range missile.
    the "race" is in full swing.
    1. Logall
      Logall 9 November 2017 07: 02 New
      19
      Another reason not to conclude any contracts with the USA!
      It remains only to conclude an agreement with them on the complete elimination of nuclear weapons! Urgently liquidate and dig a grave for yourself ... Although no, they themselves will fill everything here with earth ...
      1. 210ox
        210ox 9 November 2017 07: 14 New
        +4
        "Courier" in service! There is nowhere to go
        1. Moore
          Moore 9 November 2017 08: 37 New
          +1
          But don’t you think that for the 58 million dead presidents they simply want to make us one hundred yards away?
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. sanches-nk
          sanches-nk 9 November 2017 09: 38 New
          +2
          It is necessary, by hook or by crook, to install their own RSDs in Latin America and Cuba. Or hold serious negotiations with the United States and explain that if they do not remove their missile defense and strike systems from Europe, ours will be in Latin America and Cuba. No need to spray like the USSR, and there are no such resources. But a couple of military bases near the belly with medium-range missiles, both ballistic and cruise, I think they will be useful for sobering up. But when they take such steps, they are not afraid of the consequences, why should we then be afraid of them ?!
          1. weksha50
            weksha50 9 November 2017 10: 58 New
            +1
            Quote: sanches-nk
            to hold serious negotiations with the United States and explain that if they do not remove their missile defense and strike systems from Europe, ours will be in Latin America and Cuba.


            Himself - not funny? lol
            1. sanches-nk
              sanches-nk 10 November 2017 19: 59 New
              0
              I do not share sarcasm. It is clear that most likely they will brush it off. But here everything depends on who and with whom will speak and how serious the arguments will be. Of course, actions determine more, but it would be worthwhile to warn not just blah blah blah on TV, but in serious circles and at the expert level, put everything on your fingers
        4. NEXUS
          NEXUS 9 November 2017 10: 37 New
          +3
          Quote: 210ox
          There is nowhere to go

          I wonder what our answer will be.
          Are American taxpayers holding idiots?

          Did it become clear just now?
          1. Elephant
            Elephant 9 November 2017 17: 22 New
            0
            They also hold us for idiots ...
    2. siberalt
      siberalt 9 November 2017 07: 18 New
      0
      The USA is constantly "emitting" something and spoiling the air around the world. It is a no brainer that the "medium range" for delivery to Europe. BV, it seems they are losing.
    3. dSK
      dSK 9 November 2017 07: 29 New
      +2
      Big "hunt" of the USA: the media said that the Pentagon began to buy up Russia's military secrets around the world - Russia suspected India that she had given the United States the secrets of a Russian submarine.
      States implement the strategy of the Egyptian pharaohs - why conquer foreign countries when you can "buy". Unlimited printing press - no gold even needed.
      1. SPACE
        SPACE 9 November 2017 09: 00 New
        0
        Quote: dsk
        States implement the strategy of the Egyptian pharaohs - why conquer foreign countries when you can "buy". Unlimited printing press - no gold even needed.

        Well, they print money, but for some reason the debt is growing, although it’s clear that they live and arm themselves on credit, which they can’t give and cannot collect, generally play all-in for victory in the upcoming war, enslavement of the whole world and trophies, naive )))
        Well, for normal people, idiocy is unacceptable, and for Americans it has become one of the secret politics tools that scum usually resort to, and most importantly, not from a good life. And all because the norms of international law, the economy, which they had imposed and approved yesterday all over the world yesterday, began to fetter them today, and in front of them on the horizon was the fate of becoming Northern Brazil ...
        1. Dembel77
          Dembel77 10 November 2017 17: 41 New
          0
          The logic is amazing: here you have a 58 million dollars to build a rocket, but don't say that you will create this rocket ... Are American taxpayers held for idiots?
          Not at all. That they are holding us for suckers ... but in vain. And chemical weapons and INF can be easily recreated anew, they were only destroyed in vain. Well, who knew that during the time of Gorbachev and Yeltsin there would be so many traitors in the government ...
  2. Herculesic
    Herculesic 9 November 2017 07: 02 New
    +5
    That's wonderful! !! With these actions, the United States completely untied our hands to create ground-based short- and medium-range missiles! !! God himself demands that we immediately take advantage of the stupid Yankee claim, and without further ado, begin the development, testing and production of such missiles, ignoring all sorts of screeching and grunting "partneroffs" about their violations of the violated agreement! !!!!!
    1. INTER
      INTER 9 November 2017 07: 12 New
      +1
      Quote: Herkulesich
      With these actions, the United States completely untied our hands to create ground-based short and medium-range missiles! !

      Surely we already have them!)))
    2. Logall
      Logall 9 November 2017 07: 14 New
      12
      Do you understand what this threatens?
      Actually, it’s not around the United States that our bases are standing ... They can provide all their countries with allies of these missiles! We can only get these bullets to Alaska! Russia - this is not necessary, not profitable!
      1. Herculesic
        Herculesic 9 November 2017 07: 39 New
        +3
        Alexander! !! hi we just need to be lower — to ignore all the claims of the United States, and stubbornly create missiles, stubbornly denying all the charges as false, the main thing is not to allow information leakage, or to stuff the US special services with desa! !!!
        1. Logall
          Logall 9 November 2017 07: 41 New
          12
          Quote: Herkulesich
          the main thing is not to allow information leakage,

          That is the whole problem! Traitors were at all times. 30 silver coins are always in price!
      2. dog breeder
        dog breeder 9 November 2017 07: 41 New
        +4
        So they have already said so in plain text! And they will supply them to their NATO partners! And we, therefore, have to sit and wait for something irreparable to happen, as in Serbia or Ukraine, and then blame everything on the force majeure of circumstances? Well, I think so, you know the saying about the kidneys and Borjomi. In any case, an answer is needed. Which one? To warn, at least, the NATO countries in Europe that the "table is laid"!
        1. Lycan
          Lycan 9 November 2017 09: 24 New
          0
          Quote: dog breeder
          we, therefore, have to sit and wait when something irreparable happens, like in Serbia or Ukraine, and then blame everything on the force majeure of circumstances?

          Or in June 1941 ...
      3. 73bor
        73bor 9 November 2017 08: 03 New
        0
        On the contrary, for Russia, these missiles are vital, and the United States does not need them at all!
      4. Wedmak
        Wedmak 9 November 2017 08: 11 New
        +1
        We can only get these bullets to Alaska!

        I see no technical obstacles to push Yars on US allies in Europe. Well, absolutely none. Reprogram the flight sequence diagram, hang a complete set of warheads.
        The United States has clearly stepped over all the boundaries of the reasonable with its puns and diverging actions.
        I hope you do not propose to sit and watch how medium-range missile launchers also grow at our borders, in addition to bases. But it is necessary that everyone knows: if there are American missiles or military on your land, then you are in the first hundred targets for destruction. That’s the whole conversation.
        It looks like the USA does not understand differently.
        1. d ^ Amir
          d ^ Amir 9 November 2017 08: 33 New
          +1
          you don’t offer to sit and watch how medium-range missile launchers also grow at our borders in addition to bases

          they are ALREADY being built in full swing !!!!! and radars and launchers !!!!! missile defense in Europe from the DPRK did not forget ???? and so there are UNIVERSAL launchers .... you can launch a missile defense, or you can also launch a medium-range missile with a megaton warhead ....
          1. Wedmak
            Wedmak 9 November 2017 08: 39 New
            +3
            so there launchers are UNIVERSAL

            What are you talking about? Those that MK41 in my opinion only KR and anti-aircraft can let. About ballistic never heard. And Tomahawk is the largest missile that you can put there.
            1. d ^ Amir
              d ^ Amir 9 November 2017 08: 43 New
              0
              nevertheless, the message is clear ... for us and long-range missiles with the regime of enveloping the relief from such a distance it will not be very fun ...
              1. Wedmak
                Wedmak 9 November 2017 08: 53 New
                +1
                Nevertheless, the message is clear ...

                Duc, the stump is clear. We can repulse the mass attack of the Kyrgyz Republic, but of course the losses will be large.
                I really doubt that if they trample, then only the Kyrgyz Republic. Russia is not Syria, not Yugoslavia and not Afghanistan. Here they trample from all directions and from all cracks. And the Kyrgyz Republic, and ICBMs, and electronic warfare will work globally, in the tactical directions of the infantry ballistic missile systems (which supposedly are not available now), MLRS, tanks, and aviation.
                In general, either to pile up with the whole bunch, with a small chance to lose command before the otvetka arrives, or gloriously die from a retaliatory nuclear strike. And to all.
                1. d ^ Amir
                  d ^ Amir 9 November 2017 08: 56 New
                  0
                  or die nicely from a retaliatory nuclear strike

                  in this connection the question ... where is such certainty that the answer will not arrive ??? their missile defense, even at the peak of power, will not be knocked down by all combat units ... and new ones with the possibility of maneuver will not be knocked down all the more ...
                  1. Wedmak
                    Wedmak 9 November 2017 09: 03 New
                    +3
                    where is such confidence that the answer will not arrive?

                    But there is no such certainty. There is another indicator - the percentage of losses from retaliation. As soon as it becomes smaller than in the plans of the US command, they will already think seriously. They will get plans with tactical schemes, sequences and force of strikes ... The main thing here is to start ... Europe is not a pity, it will pull off the forces of the Russian Federation, bind them, partially destroy ... and here we are, on a white horse. In general, you understand what I mean.
                  2. Vadim237
                    Vadim237 9 November 2017 09: 25 New
                    +1
                    "Their missile defense, even at the peak of power, will not be knocked down by all the warheads ... and the new ones with the ability to maneuver will not be knocked down all the more ..." We don’t know this, especially since we don’t have maneuvering warheads, it’s just a predefined program of a complex path .
                    1. d ^ Amir
                      d ^ Amir 9 November 2017 09: 56 New
                      0
                      You are right ... there are no maneuvering units so far .... but they will ....
                      http://www.arms-expo.ru/analytics/novye-razrabotk
                      i- / perekhodim-na-giperzvuk /
                  3. zoolu350
                    zoolu350 9 November 2017 18: 23 New
                    0
                    Are you hinting at the “allegiance” of the Russian oligarchy?
                    1. d ^ Amir
                      d ^ Amir 9 November 2017 20: 23 New
                      0
                      how much do you think our leaders dream of participating in an event such as the Hague trial of the leadership of Serbia ???? and as the main "stars" ??? despite the fact that the main accusers are all sorts of McCain and others like them ??? I mean, at the hint of a shadow of an attempt to think that “it is possible” .... in general, from that moment on, someone like Torquemada or Ignatius Loyola, for example, will be a model of non-malicious critic
        2. Lycan
          Lycan 9 November 2017 09: 34 New
          +1
          Quote: Wedmak
          I see no technical obstacles to push Yars on US allies in Europe.

          There are no technical problems. But the problem of the “consequences” is hanging with a domoclass sword right in front of the nose.
          Are you ready for the Russian Federation to start a full-scale war with the loss of reputation and trust of all possible allies?
          Have the army been completely rearmament? Ready to repel all shock waves? Something is there with Armata, but the Su-57 does not go well ... and the defense of the Shairat base was not particularly impressive.
          And the transfer of the economy to military tracks with a cutback in all incomes of the population and enterprises in favor of army supply - do you think the country is ready?
          PS: It’s significant, but on the hot head with fists, everyone is happy to wave. And if you shove it shafting into the hole, the mind immediately wakes up.
          1. Wedmak
            Wedmak 9 November 2017 09: 56 New
            +2
            Are you ready for the Russian Federation to start a full-scale war with the loss of reputation and trust of all possible allies?

            And at least with a word, where did we say that we can start? I have not heard such a thing ... that we answer - I heard. What do we start ourselves - never.
            Have the army been completely rearmament?

            In the process, the percentage of new equipment has already gone for 60%, if I remember correctly. This is very, very decent. Given the latest news from Europe and the UK about the state of their troops.
            Ready to repel all shock waves?

            Nobody is ready for this. Are the attackers ready for significant losses?
            Something there with Armata, but with the Su-57 does not go well ...

            A hundred T-14 ordered and we must think it is supplied for test operation. Su-57 is waiting for its native engines, but for now the plant is preparing for the series. I don’t think it will be big, because mainly will be Su-30, Su-35 and MIG-35. Also very, very good aircraft.
            and the defense of Shairat base was not particularly impressive

            Did someone defend her? Did you have to? In general, there are more questions: Where did 36 missiles go? Who or what were they aiming at? Why at all? Impact efficiency is also lower than printus. Even if you accept the US version that all the missiles, 59 pieces, were destroyed, then: 6 MiG-23 military aircraft, a warehouse for material and technical property, a training building, a canteen, a radar station; the runway, taxiways and aircraft of the Syrian Air Force in the parking lots were not damaged, 4 (7 according to the Syrian version) died, two were missing, 6 was injured in fire fighting. Somehow the Tomahawks did not fit in with the declared high efficiency.
            the transfer of the economy to military tracks with a cut in all incomes of the population and enterprises in favor of army supply

            Will there be options? Although yes ... some will give up - working for the enemy is also an option. You can at least stay alive. Or maybe not.
            And shove it shafting into the hole

            Did you shove it now or have you not started it yet?
            1. Lycan
              Lycan 9 November 2017 12: 28 New
              0
              Quote: Wedmak
              And at least with a word, where did we say that we can start?

              It may be mistaken, but I understood your comment just like that (as a preemptive "rationalizing" Caucasoid blow).
              Quote: Wedmak
              the percentage of new equipment has already gone 60%

              It’s decent for a country in peacetime, but not at the height of “bullying on European allies” - damp and short-sighted.
              Quote: Wedmak
              Given the latest news from Europe and the UK about the state of their troops.

              Whatever it may seem, one should not underestimate probable opponents. Each geostrategic. ones - their surprises: it may turn out that the country lives in visible poverty simply because it is defined as a springboard for the most covert storage of an incredible number of “short-range and medium-range“ funds ”(the agreement on which Trump is being wiped today) or even worse — subsurface mine complexes of ICBMs.
              Quote: Wedmak
              Are the attackers ready for significant losses?

              No one will ask the attackers. Remember who is NATO? And who is building a military all over Europe. base, remember? It will be like one movie: "What are you fighting? Well, a handful - and go!". Their readiness to receive a "response" from the enemy - the main "player" is of little concern.
              Quote: Wedmak
              A hundred T-14s have been ordered and one must think it is being delivered for test operation. Su-57 is waiting for its native engines,

              Who is waiting, who is testing ... (If, as I understand - go for preventive action) then this is not what we need ...
              Quote: Wedmak
              Somehow the Tomahawks did not fit in with the declared high efficiency.

              Whatever the Tomahawks, with efficiency - performance always takes place to be. Do you think that the Shtatovs have not tested the "axes" for combat readiness before? So far, this fact worries - why weren't 100% of the "axes" shot down? I admit that the performance will precede. arrangements.
              But we must understand that if we are the next, then we will fly several orders of magnitude more than this "garbage with unknown hit accuracy."
              Quote: Wedmak
              the transfer of the economy to military tracks with a cut in all incomes of the population and enterprises in favor of army supply

              Will there be options? Although yes ... some will give up - working for the enemy is also an option.

              If, as I did not understand above, we are the target of the first attack.
              Quote: Wedmak
              And shove it shafting into the hole

              Did you shove it now or have you not started it yet?

              This is if you show your daring with an objective Nedorearmament. For example, the DPRK - the whole nation (through gnashing of teeth and mean tears) self-complacently and boasts to foreign journalists that the country is almost ready to "storm the sky." But if Trump is to restrain himself, to give the go-ahead and "probe" their air defense by the Tomogawks - it’s a pity for the North Koreans, but their air defense will most likely not be such as to reflect "military technology products with a budget larger than the total military of all the countries of the rest of the world."
              1. Wedmak
                Wedmak 9 November 2017 12: 55 New
                0
                In some ways, I agree with you. Maybe somewhere we are not ready to repel the blow. Only here and wait until we disarm, and give up, as it does not want to. Something needs to be done, and the choice of options is not so big.
                1. Lycan
                  Lycan 9 November 2017 13: 55 New
                  0
                  Hoping for the best, but getting ready for ....
                  Get ready so in all directions, in order not to have to defend at all, or nominally, with marginal minimum of losses.
          2. weksha50
            weksha50 9 November 2017 11: 41 New
            +1
            Quote: Lycan
            Ready to repel all shock waves? Something is there with Armata, but the Su-57 is not going well ... and the defense of the Shairat base was not particularly impressive.


            This, in general, does not apply to the reflection of a global blow ...
            And here: "And the transfer of the economy to military tracks with a cut in all incomes of the population and enterprises in favor of army supply - do you think the country is ready?"... - against this - no arguing ...
            For some reason, people are not trying to connect the hostilities with the economic capabilities of the country ... Especially not the Soviet country, but the current one, the mobilization of which until now no one has worked out seriously ... So, they make small, insignificant attempts, mainly - on paper...
            My classmate in the spring of this year gave a lecture for mayors and other leaders of the region ... They were gathered just for this notorious mob training ... In general, they sleep, talk about their affairs, play smartphones and tablets ...
            In short - they sit out, because they forced ... In the brain, none of them takes this problem ... It is not interesting to them ... No.
        3. weksha50
          weksha50 9 November 2017 11: 11 New
          0
          Quote: Wedmak
          It looks like the USA does not understand differently.


          It is the Europeans who will not understand in any way that they are being framed ...
      5. IL-18
        IL-18 9 November 2017 10: 27 New
        +2
        France and Great Britain have nuclear weapons. Why didn’t they leave a couple of regiments under the INF Treaty for these countries, this is a rhetorical question. But there must be some kind of delivery vehicle for a quick and immediate nuclear charge. At the very least, the State Duma and the Federation Council can highlight something under this pretext, while the Moscow Region itself will decide, inappropriately.
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 9 November 2017 11: 10 New
          0
          But there must be some kind of delivery vehicle for a quick and immediate nuclear charge.

          It should not, it is. These are airplanes. And freely falling nuclear bombs are stored there. How are these planes going to make their way through the air defense system and whether he has time to get away from the flash other questions. From another cartoon.
      6. weksha50
        weksha50 9 November 2017 11: 09 New
        0
        Quote: Logall
        Do you understand what this threatens?
        Actually, it’s not around the United States that our bases are standing ... They can provide all their countries with allies of these missiles!


        What is the whole point ...
        What strikes me is different: stupidity, stupidity, the absolute prostration of both European politicians and their peoples ...
        Remember how in the 70-80s there were protest marches against the deployment of American RSD missiles in Europe? It is in these countries ...
        Because people were skillfully brought to the fact that THEY, and NOT THE USA, are becoming target No. 1 ... And the USA remains far beyond the hill, that is, beyond the ocean ...
        And now ??? They install missile defense - in general, with a neutral protest activity ... And some rabid ones even ask him to install it ...
        Germany keeps on its territory the tactical nuclear weapons of the United States and even allows it to be modernized ...
        Polish pilots learn to use tactical nuclear weapons ...
        There was still not enough to all of this - the location of American RSD and OTR missiles in European countries ...
        The answer should be adequate - both diplomatic-political and industrial-military ...
        The media should by all means bring to the inhabitants of Europe the fact that the alleged threat from Russia is only a RESPONSE to US aggression, which substitutes THEIR Europeans ...
        Well, the fact that our nuclear triad needs to be strengthened doesn’t go to the grandmother ... Russia should always be ready to punish the main arsonist - the United States ... And Europe ... Europe in time ... All there one heap ... Spit (a few MT) - and half of Europe drowned ...
    3. just exp
      just exp 9 November 2017 08: 21 New
      +1
      it’s just not beneficial for us that the INF Treaty disappears.
      we still remember how dangerous perching was.
      and the mattresses in full preparation for war.
      and most likely this war will be.
      1. Wedmak
        Wedmak 9 November 2017 08: 26 New
        +2
        it’s just not beneficial for us that the INF Treaty disappears.

        But the United States, this agreement is not beneficial. Therefore, it is a lever of pressure on Moscow. The conclusion from this is simple - medium-range missiles will soon be stationed in Poland and Romania. And let them not deceive that now in the USA there are no such missiles. Lies. They are being tested like targets.
  3. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 9 November 2017 07: 12 New
    +4
    It is necessary to behave with Americans. Enough to play with one goal. Put on all previously concluded agreements while loudly declaring that the United States violates them and does not comply. It is not possible to work honestly with this country. Do not try to look law-abiding in the eyes of the West. They will not only not understand this, but will also consider it weakness.
    1. weksha50
      weksha50 9 November 2017 11: 44 New
      0
      Quote: rotmistr60
      It is necessary to behave with Americans. Enough to play with one goal.


      Even better is to work ahead of the curve ... So that they think about mirroring, and not us ...
  4. Observer2014
    Observer2014 9 November 2017 07: 12 New
    +5
    Are American taxpayers holding idiots?
    This is a question for American taxpayers. They all accept these guidelines as idiots with all these treaties.
    And the question is backfill. We will now resume chemical weapons when will we? Or will we proudly wait until it is used against us?
    1. askort154
      askort154 9 November 2017 07: 50 New
      +3
      Observer 2014 .....And the question is backfill. We will now resume chemical weapons when will we? Or will we proudly wait until it is used against us?


      A chemical weapon, it’s the 19-20th century, a double-edged sword, and its long storage is not a safe and very expensive pleasure. But medium-range missiles, they will cover our European part, like a pack of wolves prey.
  5. turcom
    turcom 9 November 2017 07: 54 New
    0
    Here you go! The State Duma gives permission for the implementation of the project to create new types of chemical weapons, but does not oblige the MO to carry out such developments.
    1. weksha50
      weksha50 9 November 2017 11: 47 New
      0
      Quote: turcom
      The State Duma gives permission for the implementation of the project to create new types of chemical weapons, but does not oblige the MO to carry out such developments.


      Why are you so obsessed with chemical weapons? No, they destroyed it ... And to develop a new one - is it not too expensive and long ???
      Do you miss nuclear weapons ??? It’s better to use this money (for the reconstruction of chemical weapons) for the production of new carriers and warheads of the nuclear triad ... And tactical nuclear weapons for Europe also need to ...
  6. Wedmak
    Wedmak 9 November 2017 08: 04 New
    +1
    Are American taxpayers holding idiots?

    For idiots hold the whole world. Apparently, hoping that the word order in American documents and voiced to the public can somehow affect their meaning. They completely started playing democracy - we say one thing, in reality it turns out quite another. And as practice shows, the exact opposite.
  7. Old26
    Old26 9 November 2017 08: 08 New
    +6
    Quote: Herkulesich
    That's wonderful! !! With these actions, the United States completely untied our hands to create ground-based short- and medium-range missiles! !! God himself demands that we immediately take advantage of the stupid Yankee claim, and without further ado, begin the development, testing and production of such missiles, ignoring all sorts of screeching and grunting "partneroffs" about their violations of the violated agreement! !!!!!

    What the Americans said is not a violation of the INF Treaty. And we can do the same thing - to allocate funds for development
    But if we start to produce and test, then accusations from the category of ephemeral, which are nothing more than mutual political accusations, the so-called accusations of violating the spirit of the treaty will go into the category of real violations of the letter of the treaty. . True as you say GRUNT partners will cost us such gigantic losses that it is not known who will grunt later. We or partners

    Quote: Logall
    Do you understand what this threatens?
    Actually, it’s not around the United States that our bases are standing ... They can provide all their countries with allies of these missiles! We can only get these bullets to Alaska! Russia - this is not necessary, not profitable!

    Kamrad does not understand. And not only he. The main thing is to have a cheers-patriotic post. And to calculate the consequence - this is not a royal matter ...
    It’s not interesting for anyone to listen to the need to invest gigantic sums to counter this threat. What for the USA - what is the agreement, what is not, it doesn’t matter to them. There is - well, no - and it will do. Basically, everything will fall on the head of Europeans. Wait, now experts will come up who will argue that it is necessary to deploy such missiles in Chukotka. Thus, we will “tear” the Americans. And the opinion of people who even proved the Politburo (which, if it rests, then extinguish the light) that a full-fledged deployment of the PGRK in Chukotka is impossible is an empty phrase for them

    Quote: rotmistr60
    It is necessary to behave with Americans. Enough to play with one goal. Put on all previously concluded agreements while loudly declaring that the United States violates them and does not comply. It is not possible to work honestly with this country. Do not try to look law-abiding in the eyes of the West. They will not only not understand this, but will also consider it weakness.

    The difference is that in the media you can pop about anything. Won Ksyusha, the presidential candidate in Russia, is rattling that she is FOR sanctions against Russia, since Russia is a monster that violates all written and unwritten international laws.
    You can crack about the violation of the Treaties by Russia or the United States - this is the bread of journalists. But each of the parties calculates the consequences of such a step, in contrast to the magazines and equated writers on the Internet. This is the main thing to "crow" earlier than others.
    They didn’t ask themselves the question why the Americans or we didn’t withdraw, as you say from all the treaties with such massive non-compliance by the parties with the provisions of these treaties about which the media of both parties are shouting?
    Or maybe they don’t leave the contracts because, by and large, there are no serious violations of these contracts? We (and they too) can scream as much as we like about mutual violation of contracts. But mutual inspections, which take place peacefully, without all this journalistic scream, speak of something else.

    It zhurnalyugi can yell about law-abiding. And those who make decisions are guided not by a journalistic oror, but by quite real information.

    But the calls to withdraw from all agreements indicate that such people do not even want to calculate at least the minimum consequences of such a step. The earliest to write is the desire of each of them. But at least read the article of the contract in order to understand that all this crackling is not worth the egg - no, it’s difficult, you have to read the contract, and even with a pencil in your hand .. Here’s the article of the contract

    Article VI
    1. Upon entry into force of this Agreement and hereinafter none of the Parties:
    a) does not produce no medium-range missiles does not conduct flight tests of such missiles и does not produce any stages of such missiles


    The latter concerns those steps that were, that is, the steps of the Pershing and Pioneers.
    Nowhere is it said that you cannot develop. It is impossible to produce (in iron), it is impossible to test. And on paper or on the computer screen - at least create such projects every day.
    To develop - no one forbids.

    In particular, we developed a “threshold” Rubezh rocket. It was created thanks to such tricks of the treaties. There are no complaints to it, since during the tests it flew to a range of at least 5600 km. So this is an ICBM. But no one ever said what a load. Maybe with one block she flew to 5600, but with 3 or 6 more than 4500 km she won’t pull and she will be a pure BRDS ....
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 9 November 2017 08: 33 New
      0
      What the Americans said is not a violation of the INF Treaty.

      Well, yes, yes ... And the fact that the Americans essentially already have a ballistic missile in the form of targets (they fly in the iron!) Is not a violation? What is the difference between a medium-range target and a ballistic missile defense? The name is only. Who saw and controlled the internal structure of these targets? Maybe there is a blank disc instead of a combat warhead, and is everything else quite suitable for use?
      Remembering the events of the last 10-15 years, do you even believe in what the United States says?
    2. d ^ Amir
      d ^ Amir 9 November 2017 08: 41 New
      0
      never said what a load

      moreover, either on Yars or on Topol it was said that with minimal effort ... almost changing the dosage of the fuel or its components, "the trousers are turning ... the trousers are turning ..." ... in general, the Kuban water flows rivers where the Bolsheviks say "....
      1. dim7ka
        dim7ka 9 November 2017 13: 12 New
        +2
        And the American Trident can fly in the same way, only at the same time accuracy drops very much and it is not profitable.
        1. d ^ Amir
          d ^ Amir 9 November 2017 13: 19 New
          0
          Well, profitable - not profitable ...... the criteria may be completely different .... and as we know - this thing always flies to the epicenter ....
  8. venik
    venik 9 November 2017 08: 15 New
    +1
    Well, that’s all and “fell into place” .... As has long been known, the thief’s screaming “hold the thief” is usually the loudest !!!
    Now the Russian Federation can officially allocate "funds for the development" of a land version of the "Caliber" and "Iskander" extended range, the wording "we do not oblige the MO to carry them out!"
  9. Djusha
    Djusha 9 November 2017 08: 42 New
    +2
    Come on, for $ 58 million in America, even an army pencil will not be developed. Amount Nothing
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 9 November 2017 09: 08 New
      0
      for 58 million dollars in America even an army pencil will not be developed

      And they don’t have to develop anything.
      The U.S. military has tested the THAAD missile defense system, similar to the one deployed on the Korean Peninsula. During the tests, a target in the form of a medium-range ballistic missile was successfully shot down, reports Reuters.

      Read more at RBC:
      http://www.rbc.ru/rbcfreenews/5965616d9a794700da9
      96a08

      Attention, a question !! Where does the US get a target in the form of a medium-range ballistic missile ?? And how is this target so different from the combat infantry infantry regiment that it does not pass under the agreement on the destruction of these infantry infantry regiment?
      And 58 million dollars just go to a couple of yachts generals and reprogramming these targets.
      1. The comment was deleted.
  10. Butchcassidy
    Butchcassidy 9 November 2017 08: 48 New
    0
    As for the American taxpayers, I don’t know, but 58 million Baku for R&D will not be enough.
    1. IL-18
      IL-18 9 November 2017 10: 38 New
      +2
      $ 10 billion was spent on the development of Stealth technology, of which another $. And the digitization of documentation on the production of Pershing is quite normal.
      1. Butchcassidy
        Butchcassidy 9 November 2017 11: 45 New
        0
        If it is about this, then yes. I do not know, however, how much it makes sense to restart the production of rockets that are already 40 years old. However, if they had nuclear warheads left in storage, then Pershing-3 might be filmed.
  11. opus
    opus 9 November 2017 08: 57 New
    +3
    Quote: Author
    The US Congress has allocated funds to create a new medium-range missile.

    The author lies godlessly.
    1. Not "highlighted"
    Xnumx. And not to create.
    ================
    It project defense budget for 2018 year.
    Who wants to read
    https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/imo/media/d
    oc/SASC%20Summary%20of%20FY18%20NDAA%20Conference
    % 20Report.pdf

    Authorizes $ 58 million for measures in response to the Russian violation of the INF
    Treaty, including a research and development program on a ground-launched intermediate-range missile, which in violation of the United States of the treaty.


    still very different from
    Congress allocated funds to create a new rocket medium range


    Quote: Author
    Are American taxpayers holding idiots?

    1.What are we up to the American taxpayers - me here we are
    2.My opinion is the author and they keep everyone here for idiots
    1. IL-18
      IL-18 9 November 2017 10: 46 New
      +3
      In some old movie it was about:
      “Do you know so well what happened in Ancient Egypt?”
      - Yes, I read papyrus.
      Journalism now ... In one program they checked what the Pravda newspaper lied to during its existence in the USSR. It turned out NOTHING.
  12. 44Serega44
    44Serega44 9 November 2017 09: 04 New
    0
    Courier and OKA in the studio !!!!!!!!!! Let’s fly))) on polygons at least))). And given the tech evolution. over the past 27 years, they will also be more compact))) which cannot but rejoice, because number of pieces on transport can increase from 1st to at least 2).
    And of course, a base on CUBA is needed (especially the Stripes strengthened sanctions against Liberty Island). And from Venezuela you can wave them.
  13. Old26
    Old26 9 November 2017 09: 05 New
    +4
    Quote: d ^ Amir
    they are ALREADY being built in full swing !!!!! and radars and launchers !!!!! missile defense in Europe from the DPRK did not forget ???? and so there are UNIVERSAL launchers .... you can launch a missile defense, or you can also launch a medium-range missile with a megaton warhead ....

    Announce the complete list of these megaton warhead missiles

    Quote: Wedmak
    Well, yes, yes ... And the fact that the Americans essentially already have a ballistic missile in the form of targets (they fly in the iron!) Is not a violation? What is the difference between a medium-range target and a ballistic missile defense? The name is only. Who saw and controlled the internal structure of these targets? Maybe there is a blank disc instead of a combat warhead, and is everything else quite suitable for use?
    Remembering the events of the last 10-15 years, do you even believe in what the United States says?

    Alas, comrade. THIS IS NOT A VIOLATION. There is a corresponding article of this contract. We will not nod to past leaders, the appearance of this article is the fault of both the military and, most importantly, politicians such as Gorbi and Shevarnadze.
    In such cases, I always ask the opponent one question, but what is characteristic is never to get an answer to him.
    Yes, the existence of these target missiles can be considered a violation not of the letter (article) of the contract, but as it is customary to say the spirit (that is, some meaning) of the contract. It is unlikely that they can be called full-fledged BMD due to their small payload. But it's not that. Over the past 15 years, we have begun to write off such solid propellant rockets. like "Poplar". We write off used exclusively in the form of an experimental carrier "Topol-E"
    Question. WHAT HINDERED AND DETAINED on the basis of decommissioned Topol missiles to create a family of mine-missiles for working out their own missile defense? What prevents to create at least THREE types of such targets?
    1. On the basis of 1 and 2 steps of "Poplar"
    2, On the basis of 1 and 3 steps of "Poplar"
    3. On the basis of 2 and 3 steps of "Poplar"
    What? In fact, quite legally, we could have a line of "targets" similar to the Americans. But we prefer to blame the other side for creating this line of “pseudo RBDS” on completely legitimate grounds ...

    Control the internal structure of the targets? What for? And so the characteristics of the steps of these targets are known. Offhand, these are steps from the old "Minutemans" and "Tridents"

    Quote: Wedmak
    Maybe there is a blank disc instead of a combat warhead, and is everything else quite suitable for use?

    Everything can be. Although the characteristics of these targets do not give the result that is necessary for the DBM. The payload is too small. But essentially you are right. Telemetry equipment can be installed technically, or a warhead can be

    Quote: Wedmak
    Remembering the events of the last 10-15 years, do you even believe in what the United States says?

    A matter of faith is actually a matter of priests. I will not quote Mueller from 17 instants: "No one can be trusted. I can."
    I will say a little differently. I adhere to the principle in such cases, voiced for quite some time by one of the famous politicians, namely:
    I DO NOT NEED TO KNOW YOUR INTENTIONS. IT IS ENOUGH TO ME TO KNOW YOUR OPPORTUNITIES
    Therefore, what they say is my last interest. For I understand perfectly well that conversations are most often for domestic consumption. A way to create in the people the desired reaction to a particular stimulus
    Neither Americans nor we are angels. Both we and they had breaches of contracts, but those that did not cast doubt on certain contracts. But somehow it is being settled. And if you believe everything that is broadcast to us from TV screens and other media - so soon you can become paranoid.
    The most common example is missile defense in Europe. This is actually a separate conversation, quite large. But ours, those at the helm, managed to form an opinion among the people about this missile defense system.
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 9 November 2017 09: 27 New
      0
      WHAT HINDERED AND DETAINED on the basis of decommissioned Topol missiles to create a family of mine-missiles for working out their own missile defense?

      Good question. But I think this would be another reason to impose sanctions against us, or even worse. For to prove that it is impossible for the Americans to target. As they did not prove at one time that the Oka is not a BRRS (destroyed), or the Tu-22M is not a strategist (I had to remove the refueling rods).
      The bottom line is: the United States violates the treaties all the time, and as soon as the treaty becomes unprofitable for them, they leave it. Even to take the destruction of the BRDS - ours were sawed and destroyed, the United States dismantled and stored the steps separately. Now we don’t have any hints at the BRDS, and if anything, they will have to restore production from scratch. And the United States not only has a warehouse of finished steps, it also constantly tests the "target". And so it is everywhere.
      Of course, I don’t know what is being developed and tested there in the depths of the defense. Maybe there is an answer. But such an attitude of the United States to treaties allows us to ask a question: how to conduct business with a partner who does not comply with treaties?
      1. Sergey53
        Sergey53 9 November 2017 10: 15 New
        0
        It’s just that when you conclude an agreement, you need to make less concessions and better defend your own interests of the country. How could you conclude an agreement under which we are the missile regime and the Americans are storing the third stage and not cutting it. I’m silent about Oka. And so everyone can see that our signers wanted to bend.
  14. Alexey-74
    Alexey-74 9 November 2017 09: 40 New
    0
    So gradually get involved in the arms race.
  15. Sergey53
    Sergey53 9 November 2017 10: 01 New
    0
    This means that the “doves of the world” are leaving the treaty on medium and short-range missiles. They really didn’t observe them before. Producing them under the guise of targets for testing their missile defense.
  16. Old26
    Old26 9 November 2017 10: 04 New
    +5
    Quote: Wedmak
    Good question. But I think this would be another reason to impose sanctions against us, or even worse. For to prove that it is impossible for the Americans to target.

    But did they prove to us that these are targets? I see no obstacles and we can prove that these are targets. Moreover, I am 100% sure that the US military would have accepted this evidence, but politicians. So they never accept anything. The main thing for them is PR

    Quote: Wedmak
    As at one time they did not prove that the Oka is not a BRDS (destroyed).

    And no one "kept" her for the BRDS. This missile was not even a shorter range missile. And from Thatcher’s recollections, one can understand that when asking Gorbi, “Oka” will also go “Under the knife,” such as “this would strengthen good neighborliness”, she was most afraid that Gorbachev would say no. But he said yes. Our military was shocked by this outrage, and the American military - they did not expect such a “gift” from the USSR. This is not a question of proof, but an elementary betrayal of the interests of one’s own country

    Quote: Wedmak
    or Tu-22M is not a strategist (I had to remove the refueling rods).

    Alas, comrade, we like it or not, but there are certain parameters that divide the same aviation into strategists and tactical. Strategists are those cars that are able to reach the United States, that is, to cover a distance of 5500 km. And do not care that he can not go back. Flew - means a strategist. That TU-22M and had this ability to fly one way. And having removed the refueling bar - lost this opportunity

    Quote: Wedmak
    The bottom line is: the United States violates the treaties all the time, and as soon as the treaty becomes unprofitable for them, they leave it.

    This is the second question I usually ask and get no answer. Give an example of how Americans constantly violate agreements concluded with us, that is, strategic ones. All the rest are of little interest to me, with whom they entered into and how to observe them.

    Quote: Wedmak
    Even to take the destruction of the BRDS - ours were sawed and destroyed, the United States dismantled and stored the steps separately.

    The most significant fake, which is regularly supported by our various ANALYTICS from the media. The Americans, just like we did the destruction. Destroyed cruise missiles. They were sawed along, but not crushed and not blown up. like we have. Destroyed 1 and 2 stages of the Pershing-1B rocket and 2 stages of the Pershing-2. The control system and the first stage were used in some space carriers (by the way, it is also not prohibited by the INF Treaty)

    Quote: Wedmak
    Now we don’t have any hints at the BRDS, and if anything, their production will have to be restored from scratch. And the United States not only has a warehouse of finished steps, it also constantly tests the "target". And so it is everywhere.

    Do you seriously think that steps from Pershing are kept for 30 years? As for the targets. We have already talked about this. This is not a breach of contract.

    Quote: Wedmak
    And so it is everywhere.

    The most common answer. The main thing is not to worry about the arguments. it is enough to state that they always and everywhere violate. And that’s all. Success is ensured. At any level

    Quote: Wedmak
    Of course, I don’t know what is being developed and tested there in the depths of the defense. Maybe there is an answer. But such an attitude of the USA towards treaties allows us to ask a question: how to conduct business with a partner who does not comply with treaties?

    This is a duplication of my second question. An example of non-compliance with the Soviet-American and Russian-American strategic arms treaties
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 9 November 2017 10: 40 New
      0
      But did they prove to us that these are targets?

      As far as I know, no. They only assure, “I swear by my mom” is the target.
      This is not a question of proof, but an elementary betrayal

      I think the question is a little deeper here, but not the point. The Americans rather sold this solution.
      Here TU-22M possessed this ability to fly one-way

      With a few refueling. The story was like a different one or a legend: during the flight of the Tu-22M from the west of our country to the east, the plane refueled 4 times, and the US satellites watched it, only they missed one refueling, which affected the calculations. The total conclusion was: Tu-22M strategist. No evidence helped, it was very tasty for the Americans to limit the range of such an aircraft.
      Give an example of how Americans constantly violate agreements concluded with us, that is, strategic ones.

      Installation in Poland and Romania of ground-based PU cruise missiles. They are forbidden, right? Nevertheless MK-41, universal PU. Although the Americans again "swear by their mother" that there is only missile defense. Bullshit on vegetable oil. Upload there Tomahawks a matter of several hours.
      The Americans do not formally violate the treaties, but actually circumvent their wording, presenting their violations in a different way. Not a BDSD, but a target. Not land-based missile launchers of the Kyrgyz Republic, but sea missiles with missiles. It turns out to be a little different for verification.
      Do you seriously believe that for 30 years steps from Pershing are stored?

      Of course not. But their presence, allowed to save, or even increase the possibility of starting their production in the shortest possible time.

      no need to care about the arguments. it’s enough to say that they always and everywhere violate

      What arguments do you need if the United States proclaims one thing by mouth, vowing that it will be so, but the next day they do what they need, completely forgetting their promises. Do you really need to list the whole list? A direct deception is also not considered? Powell’s famous test tube will be heard for a long time by the people of Iraq.
  17. meGrail
    meGrail 9 November 2017 10: 26 New
    0
    Wow, in vain did not bring a link to the document!
    There are so many interesting things!
    https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/imo/media/d
    oc/SASC%20Summary%20of%20FY18%20NDAA%20Conference
    % 20Report.pdf -
    There is a whole point "Countering Russian Aggression"
    and it starts with "$ 4.6 billion for the European Deterrence Initiative" - ​​and that's it, against the Russians!
  18. Professor
    Professor 9 November 2017 10: 28 New
    +1
    Are American taxpayers holding idiots?

    VO cares about American taxpayers? How cute. love

    About the rocket. The contract does not prohibit R&D.
  19. ROM1077
    ROM1077 9 November 2017 10: 43 New
    0
    it is time for Russia to stamp medium-sized rockets under the same pretext ...
  20. weksha50
    weksha50 9 November 2017 10: 56 New
    0
    “This was the case with the agreement on the elimination of INF, the same was with the agreement on the destruction of chemical weapons. Russia liquidated all its chemical arsenals ahead of schedule, allowing American experts to operate facilities. And in the USA they still say that“ there are no funds for the destruction of chemical weapons"" ...

    It hurts for all the mistakes made by the Russian leadership ... No, not mistakes ... For the betrayal that no one stopped, and no one has paid so far for this ...
    The fact that Russia urgently needs to return the production of RSD, which was cut into the US service, is an axiom ...
    Only now Amers will put their RSD around our borders and will, in which case, immediately hit the territory of Russia ... But we, with our RSD, will only reach Europe ...
    There is only one conclusion: to speed up the actions of both the government with the Ministry of Finance, and the NII-KB enterprise of the military-industrial complex to produce submarine strategists, new PGRK and - similarly - Barguzin BZHRK ...
    Although, to be honest, the development, production and commissioning of Barguzin will take a lot of time and a lot of money ... I would temporarily freeze this project in favor of the production of OTRK, RSD, APL-PRKR, and PGRK Strategic Missile Forces complexes .. .
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 9 November 2017 11: 00 New
      +1
      And we, with our RSDs, will only reach Europe.

      Who told you that? In the case of a global mess, everything that can carry warheads will take off. Well, think about it, it will fly to the United States half an hour later and in a different weight category, ultimately there is no difference.
  21. Technologist
    Technologist 9 November 2017 11: 35 New
    +1
    Quote: Logall
    We can only get these bullets to Alaska!

    The “pioneers” stationed in Anadyr-1 (Gudym) kept sight of the largest US Navy base, Kitsap, Washington. So, for information.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  22. Zomanus
    Zomanus 9 November 2017 13: 34 New
    0
    And we have Boundary, Sarmat and Barguzin are slowly being drank ...
    Maybe the Americans figured it out and ofigel.
    And again, to build bases in the Arctic, on the islands,
    we, too, didn’t just start.
  23. Victor-M
    Victor-M 9 November 2017 14: 22 New
    0
    The agreement with the Americans, this is a deal with Satan, losing in advance.
  24. a.sirin
    a.sirin 9 November 2017 18: 30 New
    +1
    Reading posts one gets the feeling that someone lives in another country. In the sense of "fool". In the budget of the country - this one - about 40% falls on all kinds of defense-power articles ... I hope that the costs of parasites from the Russian Guard are also included here, although there are doubts.
    Do you want to fight America? And what will happen if the degree of the race rises, and wars are embarrassing! - all no and no?
    For about 5-6 years ... no thoughts in heroic minds?
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 9 November 2017 18: 39 New
      0
      And what do you suggest?
      1. a.sirin
        a.sirin 9 November 2017 21: 34 New
        +1
        First of all, choose "partners" for growth.
        Outside of the thermonuclear conflict, Russia is generally not a gamer. Yes, they demonstrated something in Syria, only now - WHAT? The ability to bomb with ballistic bombs from a height above the reach of the "thousand leaders"? The achievement, of course, is huge, only what about education? With medicine? With science? Without them, what will happen to the country in 10-15 years? All the economic positives, to which many glorifiers of the Motherland are referred by world standards, are generally insignificant. China has become a power commensurate with the United States for 37 years. It is necessary to focus on the living standards of the people - firstly, secondly and - thirdly.
        Otherwise, the departure from the country of the most promising and brainy will continue, and it is going very intensively. It’s just that at the age of 19-25, you don’t immediately recognize the future Game or Novoselov or Mask.
        But battling with America is guaranteed to end the same way as in 91
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 10 November 2017 08: 08 New
          0
          The achievement, of course, is huge, only what about education?

          What about education? Here is a vivid example that not everything is as bad as you think.
          https://ria.ru/press_release/20170724/1499036466.
          html
          With medicine?

          The collapse after 90's is not so easy to overcome, but hospitals are being built and doctors are really treating. This is not on TV, it was I myself who fell into their hands.
          With science?

          Well .. how to tell you. We are in first place in the nuclear industry - fast reactors operate only with us. Without science, there is nothing at all. From 2000 to 2011 in Dubna they got 6 new heavy elements, 2 are recognized and got their names. We also have 0.56 PW pulsed lasers (Petawatt !!!). Spectrometers, Earth sensing satellites ... in short, just type "the scientific achievements of Russia in the 21 century" and admire yourself.
          The aircraft industry is gaining momentum slowly. If it were not for the breakdown of relations between Ukraine, it would be better of course. Space seems to be like a new rocket, they built a spaceport, there are plans for Mars.
          But battling with America is guaranteed to end the same way as in 91

          Not a fact.
          1. a.sirin
            a.sirin 10 November 2017 14: 59 New
            +1
            In order not to get into a discussion with you, briefly: I am a nuclear physicist by training (Leningrad State University named after Zhdanov 85), in 89 - candidate of physics and mathematics, from 93 d. In science until 2003. What and how do we know with science completely, as well as with education, because still connected with this. That's all
            By air: there are no at least theoretically profitable projects - without sucking the budget - no.
            Space: there are no plans - real ones, no new rocket, no launch site.
            There is no money, but you rejoice
  25. Operator
    Operator 9 November 2017 20: 23 New
    0
    Our answer is the deployment of the Pioneer 2 RSD at the Anadyr missile base (Chukotka Autonomous Region) with a range of up to Los Angeles (California).
  26. Old26
    Old26 9 November 2017 23: 46 New
    +1
    Quote: 44Serge44
    Courier and OKA in the studio !!!!!!!!!!

    But "Elbrus" or FAU-2 (R-1) is not necessary in the studio? Tell me, dear, why is the Oka better than the two-horned? Or is the “Courier” with a one-piece warhead non-existent and not passed a single flight test better than the “many-headed” Frontier?

    Quote: 44Serge44
    And of course, a base on CUBA is needed (especially the Stripes strengthened sanctions against Liberty Island). And from Venezuela you can wave them.

    And the Cubans and Venezuelans agree that we put rockets in them. Or spit on them? Or who they say will ask this riffraff? But are not you afraid that the Cubans and Venezuelans will send us on foot erotic journey?

    Quote: Sergey53
    This means that the “doves of the world” are leaving the treaty on medium and short-range missiles.

    Do not go out. Money is allocated for the development of the concept. But the concept and the way out of the contract, and even more so the creation of something from this area, is this. as they say in Odessa, two big differences

    Quote: Wedmak
    As far as I know, no. They only assure, “I swear by my mom” is the target.

    Read the "Bulletin of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs" for about 1988-1991. There were a lot of materials on this topic. Up to the equipment that was used to monitor the implementation of the contract. So it’s not worth making idiots out of our inspectors. they clearly performed their duties
    Here is one of the photos. Soviet inspector examines ground-based Tomahawk missile before its destruction (October 1988).

    And you think that these people were led to "swear by my mother"? Do not make me laugh. Inspectors are top-notch professionals. First of all, scouts. Do you think they are idiots, capable of insisting on this ??

    Quote: Wedmak
    I think the question is a little deeper here, but not the point. The Americans rather sold this solution.

    We can assume that they were pushing. But the sole decision was applied by the top in the person of Gorbachev and Shevarnadze.

    Quote: Wedmak
    With a few refueling. The story was like a different one or a legend: during the flight of the Tu-22M from the west of our country to the east, the plane refueled 4 times, and the US satellites watched it, only they missed one refueling, which affected the calculations. The total conclusion was: Tu-22M strategist. No evidence helped, it was very tasty for the Americans to limit the range of such an aircraft.

    I don’t know how they could do this, especially in real time? Was the satellite tied to an airplane? I think everything was easier. Of course, they received information, but not at all by calculating the number of gas stations. The radius (I will emphasize the radius) of the action of this aircraft with different loads is known. Many parameters are simply miscalculated. For this intelligence and eat your bread.

    Quote: Wedmak
    Installation in Poland and Romania of ground-based PU cruise missiles. They are forbidden, right? Nevertheless MK-41, universal PU. Although the Americans again "swear by their mother" that there is only missile defense. Bullshit on vegetable oil. Upload there Tomahawks a matter of several hours.
    The Americans do not formally violate the treaties, but actually circumvent their wording, presenting their violations in a different way. Not a BDSD, but a target. Not land-based missile launchers of the Kyrgyz Republic, but sea missiles with missiles. It turns out to be a little different for verification.

    If you read the agreement, then it speaks exclusively about the launchers of the R-12, R-14, RSD-10 Pioneer, RK-55, OTR-22 Temp-S, OTR-23 Oka missiles with ours sides and launchers of Pershing-1A / B, Pershing-2 missiles and Griffon missiles.
    Yes, the MK-41 installations are universal, so what? And stop trumping that "mom swear." We a priori believe that the MK-41 is a violation and there are Tomahawks instead of the “Standards”. Okay. Then the question is, what about the Iskander launcher? After all, we only hear that the Iskander’s range of 500 km is for eye contact. But the party will order and it will fly a distance of 1000, or even 2000 km. Or the R-500 cruise missile. The network only shows the radii of this CR in 2500 km. Is it a breach of contract and a Iskander launcher breach?
    Yes, you can upload tomahawks to these launchers in a few hours. Load the rockets at the Iskander launcher - approximately 30 minutes. What conclusions can be drawn from this

    That is precisely what formally the Americans do not violate the INF Treaty. Target missiles are designed in accordance with the articles. That is, there is no violation of the "LETTER" of the contract. And there is a violation of a certain "SPIRIT" agreement. But "spirit" is not a specific article of the treaty, but its interpretation by people. We consider the presence of these “targets” and universal launchers to be a violation of the “Spirit” —they have missiles, in particular cruise missiles, which they also violate the “spirit” of this treaty and, accordingly, the launch of these missiles (at least in the form of an Iskander launcher) ". What's next? Will we measure with them or will we come to some sort of compromise?

    Quote: Wedmak
    Of course not. But their presence, allowed to save, or even increase the possibility of starting their production in the shortest possible time.

    To save, or even increase the possibility of starting their production, depends not on whether these stages are in the arsenal, but on whether there is an assembly plant necessary for serial assembly of missiles, if there are factories for the production of components of such missiles (fuel engines, electronics, warheads), And only the presence or absence of this will affect the ability to create and the speed of production. Well, plus the time to adapt old projects to new technologies

    Quote: Wedmak
    What arguments do you need if the United States proclaims one thing by mouth, vowing that it will be so, but the next day they do what they need, completely forgetting their promises. Do you really need to list the whole list? A direct deception is also not considered? Powell’s famous test tube will be heard for a long time by the people of Iraq.

    We often like to put an equal sign between treaties between Russia (the USSR) and the USA and treaties with all other countries. And when they say that the Americans do not comply with the treaty, they mean that they do not comply with the treaty with Russia (the USSR). And as I said, I have little interest in the moral (or immoral) face of the United States in relation to other countries. But when in a conversation about Russia and strategic weapons they begin to say that the agreement with the USA does not even cost the paper on which they are written, that the Americans do not comply with them, I ask a question. ARGUMENTS !!!! Give examples of the fact that the United States always violates strategic agreements with the Soviet Union (Russia). But alas, usually they immediately go to other countries, remember the same Powell and so on. I know very well that Americans spit on most countries and act in ways that are beneficial to them. That's just all this is extrapolated to the contract with us. Therefore, ARGUMENTS ....

    Quote: Technologist
    Quote: Logall
    We can only get these bullets to Alaska!

    The “pioneers” stationed in Anadyr-1 (Gudym) kept sight of the largest US Navy base, Kitsap, Washington. So, for information.

    So, for information. "Pioneers" in Gudyma never stood. There was deployed one division of the 83rd missile regiment with 4 ground launchers R-14, which stood in service there from 1962 to 1969
    1. Technologist
      Technologist 13 November 2017 10: 25 New
      0
      And where did such infa come from ??? Do not say what you do not know))

      And by the way, whose friend are you ???)
  27. datur
    datur 10 November 2017 01: 56 New
    0
    Our Serdyukov and his comrades are crying !!!! wink
  28. Vlad5307
    Vlad5307 10 November 2017 14: 23 New
    0
    Are American taxpayers holding idiots?

    For idiots they keep us. In order for the FSA to comply with the agreement, it is necessary for them to come out sideways. They do not comply with chemical weapons - so let the warehouses with them be torn, then money and destruction technologies will appear all at once! hi
  29. Old26
    Old26 13 November 2017 11: 26 New
    0
    Quote: Technologist
    And where did such infa come from ??? Do not say what you do not know))

    And by the way, whose friend are you ???)

    Where does the information come from that the Pioneers were not standing there?
    1. The form of the 83rd regiment on the same encyclopedia of the Strategic Missile Forces
    2. Memoirs of General Kozyb.
    In addition, the deployment of the “Pioneers” began when there was no missile regiment and e6th infrastructure there for about 6 years. And no other regiment was deployed there.