Military Review

The US is considering a military response for Russia

90
Washington is studying military decisions to create a system of medium-range missiles in case Moscow does not return to the implementation of the provisions of the INF Treaty, reports RIA News Statement by Undersecretary of State Thomas Shannon




Although we are still striving to diplomatically resolve the issue of Russia's violation of the provisions of the treaty, the United States is also beginning to explore possible military solutions to create a medium-range ground-based missile system, which, if Russia does not begin to comply with the provisions of the INF Treaty, it will cease to operate as a result of the violations committed by Russia, would provide protection to the United States and our allies and compensate for Russia's military advantage, which it seeks by creating proscribed missiles,
Shannon said in an interview Merchant.

As the government of the Russian Federation knows, the agreement does not prohibit the conduct of research work that does not lead to the possession, production and conduct of flight tests of prohibited systems,
added a diplomat.

At the same time, he assured that the United States will not take any action in violation of the assumed obligations under the contract.

We are ready to stop the development of such systems, prohibited by the INF Treaty, if Russia returns to full and verifiable compliance with its obligations under the INF Treaty,
noted Shannon.

In turn, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said that if the United States went to the "scrapping" of the contract, then the response of Moscow will be instant and mirror.

We reaffirm that Russia is committed to the INF Treaty and is determined to implement it in full without any deviations from its requirements. But if the Americans take steps that signify the actual breakdown of the treaty, our answer will be, as the president (RF) President Vladimir Putin said, “instantaneous and mirror”
said Ryabkov.

Recall the INF Treaty signed in 1987 year and is of an indefinite nature. It prohibits the parties to have ground-based ballistic missiles and cruise missiles with a range of 500 to 5,5 thousands of kilometers. In the US, they have repeatedly accused the Russian Federation of violating the provisions of this treaty.
Photos used:
http://www.globallookpress.com
90 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Shura Perm
    Shura Perm 8 December 2017 09: 35 New
    19
    These penthouses are purple treaties, the same NATO should not have grown east ... we don’t need to sculpt grandmother
    1. Michael67
      Michael67 8 December 2017 09: 39 New
      13
      They lied, they lie and they will lie.
      Everything is turned upside down.
      When will dichlorvos come up for reptilians?
      How many excerpts do our diplomats have ...
      1. Monos
        Monos 8 December 2017 09: 59 New
        13
        The U.S. is also beginning to explore possible military solutions to create a system of land-based medium-range missiles

        The U.S. is also beginning to explore possible military solutions to create a system of land-based medium-range missiles

        Straightly breathed something familiar, refreshing. The piercing wind of the Cold War. As if the days of my troubled youth were back. smile
        1. electrooleg
          electrooleg 8 December 2017 11: 19 New
          +9
          Quote: Monos
          As if the days of my troubled youth were back.


          We demand the return of youth itself, and not just chatter about medium-sized missiles! winked
          1. Shurik70
            Shurik70 8 December 2017 13: 37 New
            +4
            Yes, we answered their answers in advance laughing
      2. Jackyun
        Jackyun 8 December 2017 10: 01 New
        +7
        Why sho you say that! Completeness, my friend. Did you forget the brilliant discovery of British scientists? According to their version of the Darkest, the reptiloid advises, because he succeeds. The striped cone, as usual, is a moron, and Petyunya is an alkaloid. The results, as they say, on the face. So no dichlorvos.
        1. Same lech
          Same lech 8 December 2017 10: 17 New
          +5
          Reptilid, moron, alkoloid smile what
          the devil didn’t know that these are aliens from a highly developed civilization ... probably the same devilry is happening on their planet ... however what

          you look at the Hollywood action movies PEOPLE IN BLACK and you don’t start to believe in such hell.
          1. novel66
            novel66 8 December 2017 10: 45 New
            +8
            here to visit the planet alkaloids - a continuous holiday!
            1. Same lech
              Same lech 8 December 2017 10: 47 New
              +5
              On New Year's Eve you will ... under my table, a bottle of braga is being prepared for a conversation with them. smile
              1. novel66
                novel66 8 December 2017 10: 49 New
                +7
                mash instead of champagne? recourse somehow thoughtful - is it not bad?
                1. Same lech
                  Same lech 8 December 2017 10: 51 New
                  +7
                  mash instead of champagne?


                  Well what are you ... smile I will drive 70 degrees into a folk drink ... then there will be a bad manners ...
                  champagne for women only.
                  1. novel66
                    novel66 8 December 2017 10: 52 New
                    +7
                    Respect! hi worthy preparation! drinks
              2. _MaX_
                _MaX_ 8 December 2017 10: 58 New
                +4
                If Russia will have medium-range missiles for the United States, this is not so critical, due to its remoteness. And in general the Americans do not really need them. In any case, they can deliver a nuclear strike. This agreement aims to take away the opportunity for Russia to comfortably ensure its security at the near borders. Americans then from whom to defend themselves, from Mexico and Canada? In the case of Russia, a completely different situation.
            2. Paranoid50
              Paranoid50 8 December 2017 11: 49 New
              +3
              Quote: novel xnumx
              to visit the planet alkaloids - a continuous holiday!

              Yes, how to say ... Alkaloids include: caffeine, codeine, morphine, tobokurarin (curare poison), cocaine, strychnine, nicotine, lysergic diethylamide (LSD), etc. Ready to fly? laughing
      3. Vanek
        Vanek 8 December 2017 11: 04 New
        +2
        Quote: Michael67
        They lied, they lie and they will lie.
        Everything is turned upside down.


        One must understand the whole depth of American logic. *
    2. Jedi
      Jedi 8 December 2017 09: 39 New
      10
      The United States believes that treaties are needed so that all of them comply, and they violate. "Exceptional" same. negative
      1. Chertt
        Chertt 8 December 2017 09: 46 New
        +3
        Quote: Jedi
        The United States believes that treaties are needed so that all of them comply, and they violate.

        Right. And when Russia, too, violates the contract, the mattresses have cognitive dissonance, and pain below the lower back
        1. Jedi
          Jedi 8 December 2017 09: 57 New
          +4
          Quote: Chertt
          lower back pain

          This they need to proctologist. lol
          1. novel66
            novel66 8 December 2017 10: 46 New
            +3
            for colonoscopy without Vaseline!
            1. Jedi
              Jedi 8 December 2017 11: 01 New
              +2
              Tough, but deserved and fair! good
              1. novel66
                novel66 8 December 2017 11: 10 New
                +3
                and, somewhere even useful, for early diagnosis laughing
      2. Nasrat
        Nasrat 8 December 2017 09: 50 New
        +7
        I believe that the latest Russian missile-related developments (Iskanders, Caliber, etc.) - really scared the United States - hence such irresponsible statements ... wink
        1. Ami du peuple
          Ami du peuple 8 December 2017 10: 00 New
          +2
          Quote: Nasr
          I believe that the latest Russian missile-related developments (Iskanders, Caliber, etc.) - really scared the United States - hence such irresponsible statements ...
          Another thing scares them - someone, in fact, dared to doubt the indisputable world leadership of the United States. And this is not only the "rogue countries" of Russia, Iran and the DPRK, but also the first world economy - China etc. So it burns in the Yankees that they are not able to give everyone a shortcut.
        2. dorz
          dorz 8 December 2017 10: 46 New
          +1
          Quote: Nasr
          I believe that the latest Russian missile-related developments (Iskanders, Caliber, etc.) - really scared the United States - hence such irresponsible statements ... wink

          The US needs a reason to deploy medium-range missiles in Europe.
          1. SergeBS
            SergeBS 8 December 2017 21: 39 New
            0
            Quote: dorz
            The US needs a reason to deploy medium-range missiles in Europe.

            The same for the Pan-Dosov missile defense systems are unified with the RSMD.
            The difference is minimal: another missile is placed in the machine, another flight task (PZ) is loaded via the standard interface. And in the warehouse, another rocket can lie without problems. PZ changes lekko. This is not a "flat roll, round drag."
    3. Smog
      Smog 8 December 2017 09: 40 New
      +2
      Alexander! good As always, capacious and colorful! good soldier
      1. Solomon Kane
        Solomon Kane 8 December 2017 09: 56 New
        +6
        The essence of all the claims of the State Department and the Pentagon should be stated in simple words: "Why do not you allow the world hegemon to destroy your country quickly and inexpensively, why do" Iskander "and" Yars "appear in response to the American missile defense? This only prolongs your torment. Russians give up! "
        Probably, the Americans are not so much concerned about the security of the European allies as their own insecurity in the event of a preemptive strike by the Pentagon and NATO against Russia, that is, the inevitability of a crushing retaliatory strike by the Russian Strategic Rocket Forces against the United States (immediately after the Iskander and Yars cleansing of the American missile defense system in Europe).
        S.K. Shoigu

        It’s said succinctly .... no one can impunity Russia with shock and awe,hi
    4. Ami du peuple
      Ami du peuple 8 December 2017 09: 42 New
      +6
      Quote: Shura Perm
      we don’t need to sculpt grandmother
      And grandpa too smile What cheeks to blow? You try, for starters, to deal with Kim the Third. And then tryndit about "our military response" to Russia. It is only thought that with a real attempt at a military solution to the North Korean problem, the entire warlike fuse will quickly dry up for the United States.
      It has long been known: "if you say - do, do not do - be silent." Neither do. nor can the Americans be silent. Hence the conclusion - ordinary pontorez. .
    5. Scalpel
      Scalpel 8 December 2017 12: 01 New
      0
      There was no NATO non-expansion treaty and blaming them for this is simply stupid.
      1. SergeBS
        SergeBS 8 December 2017 21: 44 New
        0
        Add the KEY phrase: "there was no contract in writing." Although the agreement written on paper does not stop the p. They are the masters of their word: they wanted - they gave, they wanted - they took it. And definitely the "gentleman" of the Naglosak spill is always right. Their attitude is this: everything around is wordless and powerless. All over the ball with the name Earth.
  2. Sail
    Sail 8 December 2017 09: 36 New
    +3
    Well, they scared each other in case "someone here and there sometimes" is normal, no one trusts anyone for a long time ...
  3. 210ox
    210ox 8 December 2017 09: 37 New
    +3
    Let them think what they want .. The main thing is that ours would not succumb to regular persuasion and negotiations with the subsequent destruction of missiles ... Tagged "Eye" in the ass ..
    1. Chertt
      Chertt 8 December 2017 09: 43 New
      +5
      Quote: 210ox
      Tagged "Eye" in the ass ..

      And now they are aiming at the Iskanders. Allegedly, new missiles violate all points of the INF Treaty. Well, firstly, not all ...... And even if that's all, hang out in the wood mattress covers
  4. Altona
    Altona 8 December 2017 09: 37 New
    +4
    The United States decided to finally break through the basic principles of international law and their latest statements and actions only convince me of this. The United States wants to be the sole hegemon in all areas, they stupidly want to incapacitate and shoot them down.
    1. Herman 4223
      Herman 4223 8 December 2017 10: 10 New
      +1
      In their opinion, there is the right of the United States, and everything else is a violation of rights, this is all their diplomacy.
      1. SergeBS
        SergeBS 8 December 2017 22: 04 New
        0
        Already stated a quote (not verified by me) I.V. Stalin: "I believed that democracy is the power of the people, but Mr. Roosevelt explained to me that democracy is the power of the American people." Short and clear.
  5. fedor13
    fedor13 8 December 2017 09: 40 New
    +3
    The whole world is guilty of something if it’s not American
  6. pvv113
    pvv113 8 December 2017 09: 40 New
    +4
    The United States has repeatedly accused the Russian Federation of violating the provisions of this treaty.

    Back to the conversation again:
    Hold the thief, - the thief shouts loudest
  7. rocket757
    rocket757 8 December 2017 09: 41 New
    +4
    Play by the rules invented in the states, definitely lose ... swam, we know. This line, which cannot be left, and so backed farther than you can afford, was counted against the wall!
    We will see!
    1. Grits
      Grits 8 December 2017 09: 47 New
      +3
      This is the line you cannot leave
      Just for this, the Rubezh rocket is being prepared
  8. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 8 December 2017 09: 45 New
    +6
    Old and hackneyed record. And why is the United States keeping quiet about the universal launchers of the Mk41 missile defense system deployed in Eastern Europe and which can launch cruise missiles covered by the treaty? Probably when Russia is “to blame” for the failure of the treaty, it sounds more weighty and promises financial profit.
    1. KCA
      KCA 8 December 2017 10: 28 New
      +1
      So we have “Ball” and “Bastion”, you can probably equip not only anti-ship missiles, but also with other variants of the RC, besides there is also “Club-K”, it also has universal launchers
      1. rotmistr60
        rotmistr60 8 December 2017 10: 36 New
        +3
        It would be bad if we did not have this. I’m talking about the constant statements of the American side that this is exclusively Russia violating the agreement, and they are white and fluffy.
    2. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 8 December 2017 10: 41 New
      +1
      "Eastern Europe and which can launch cruise missiles subject to the contract" ////

      They can, but there are no such missiles in them. It’s easy to check: mutual field checks.
      If Russia violates the agreement, Europe will suffer, but the USA will not. If the USA is violated, the European part of Russia will suffer. The treaty was initiated at the time of the USSR, and not the United States.
      When Pershing 2 appeared in Europe, the Politburo in the USSR realized that things were bad and thought better of it.
      1. Galaxy
        Galaxy 8 December 2017 11: 00 New
        +2
        Quite true, but it is worth considering that walking the rake with us is a national entertainment, followed by smearing the snot.
        1. rocket757
          rocket757 8 December 2017 11: 40 New
          +3
          In alliance, they did not sink to the snot, until the end of it.
          If something, then with a fist on the podium, on an extreme shoe (a joke) and an argument if something could be rolled out, such a solid, formidable, such as "Kuzkin’s mother" !!!
    3. Scalpel
      Scalpel 8 December 2017 12: 03 New
      0
      Launchers do not mean the presence of missiles in them. And if you have paranoia, then this is to the doctor.
  9. Chichikov
    Chichikov 8 December 2017 09: 45 New
    +4
    Some kind of children's skirmish - "Who are you?" "And who are you?". The Americans officially stated that they had begun research work, Russia did not declare. Probably nervous about the "Syrian experience." Understand that the "Caliber", at any time, can become "land", and the "Iskander", medium.
    As they say: - "Who, what, studied" (within the means), and Russian designers - to the "quick and effective answer"!
    1. rocket757
      rocket757 8 December 2017 11: 44 New
      +3
      We have such a chip - an asymmetric answer - it is possible to begin to form a proactive one.
  10. 1536
    1536 8 December 2017 09: 51 New
    +3
    What contracts with a bunch of professional cheaters can be? And what about? What rockets, honey? No need to invent!
  11. Old26
    Old26 8 December 2017 09: 55 New
    +1
    Quote: Smog
    Alexander! good As always, capacious and colorful! good soldier

    But it does not correspond to reality. None of the strategic agreements, which is typical, the Americans did not violate, as if we did not want to consider otherwise. And the agreement on the INF Treaty - for the first 2 or 3 years only, it did without recrimination. Then it became a kind of national game for both sides. As something happens that one of the parties does not like, so immediately the accusations begin. Moreover, unfounded on both sides. And the charges are not in violation of the contract (letter of the contract) but in some ephemeral violations of the "spirit" of the contract. Honestly, these mutual reproaches are tired of the order, but they are needed for the leadership of the countries. A great way to maintain the image of the enemy with their citizens.
    1. sogdy
      sogdy 8 December 2017 14: 11 New
      0
      Quote: Old26
      None of the strategic agreements, which is typical, the Americans did not violate

      The utilization of chemical weapons, biological weapons, a nuclear agreement - this is so, not strategic ...
    2. SergeBS
      SergeBS 8 December 2017 21: 51 New
      0
      Quote: Old26
      None of the strategic agreements, which is typical, the Americans did not violate

      Yeah. What about the disposal of nuclear warheads? The Russian Federation utilized it, but the p. En.dosov "did not succeed - they could not build the plant." And instead of disposal in warehouses placed. Lie, do not lie.
  12. Silver fox_2
    Silver fox_2 8 December 2017 10: 01 New
    0
    no contracts more than USA! need to dynamite America
  13. Verkhomnapule
    Verkhomnapule 8 December 2017 10: 07 New
    0
    you go through the woods, already tired of the bastards with their rotten whining, the interests of RUSSIA above all, we also need to score more often on all kinds of contracts and make mistakes in choosing goals for the aerospace forces, how many times, like a mistake came out, they attacked civilians, hospitals, government the forces of Syria and nothing they all got off the hands of their filthy !!!!! am
  14. Siberia 9444
    Siberia 9444 8 December 2017 10: 13 New
    0
    Fart just do not tear repeat
  15. Alexey-74
    Alexey-74 8 December 2017 10: 27 New
    +1
    All contracts with you gentlemen striped do not cost anything, you still do not fulfill them, and when you get a mirror answer, then immediately hysteria about Russia's failure to fulfill the agreements.
  16. gafarovsafar
    gafarovsafar 8 December 2017 10: 34 New
    0
    bzdun this shannon
  17. prior
    prior 8 December 2017 10: 50 New
    +2
    Unproven verbal diarrhea has become the norm in the political rhetoric of Westerners.
    1. rocket757
      rocket757 8 December 2017 11: 48 New
      +3
      He didn’t, but always was.
      Take an example from politicians from such a recent past and roll them the appropriate answer!
  18. svp67
    svp67 8 December 2017 11: 34 New
    +1
    and compensated for the military superiority of Russia, which it seeks by creating banned missiles,
    It’s interesting, even if so, then from our new borders to Moscow and St. Petersburg in some places less than 1000 km, but to Washington and New York .... and who is in greater danger?
  19. K-50
    K-50 8 December 2017 11: 44 New
    +1
    What, where and when did Russia violate the INF Treaty ???? Facts!!!!! And not your goats rabid bleating !!!!
    Pin dosniks cannot understand one thing at all, that Russia does not need to violate this treaty in order to send missiles across the ocean, others will fly there and we have them, maybe not in sufficient quantity to turn the states into fine dust and slag, but not enough will not seem.
    As for the INF missiles, I think that among the Geyropeans there are few people who want to attack Russia, and if that’s enough for them, the “Caliber” and the “Iskanders” will be enough, not enough. yes angry
  20. BAI
    BAI 8 December 2017 11: 49 New
    0
    In turn, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said that if the United States went to the "scrapping" of the contract, then the response of Moscow will be instant and mirror.

    There will be another formidable statement on Twitter.
    The IOC has already answered in the mirror.
  21. Kerensky
    Kerensky 8 December 2017 12: 05 New
    +1
    It forbids the parties to have ground-based ballistic missiles and cruise missiles with a range of 500 to 5,5 thousand kilometers.

    The country allows us. Everything that is "from 500" is closer to the fence. All that "up to 5.5 thousand" is at the bathhouse.
  22. bald
    bald 8 December 2017 12: 27 New
    +1
    Guys! - This is completely absurd, and since that time this topic has been absurd. Kilometers and other such nonsense. Everyone is armed as best he can. And then Russia was greatly bent and not with the assistance of inside, and this rat is still alive.
    1. rocket757
      rocket757 8 December 2017 12: 38 New
      +5
      Yes, they then spoiled a lot of good equipment, they showed it on TV.
      By the way, the rat doesn’t clog into the hole, it blinks constantly!
      That is our reality.
      1. bald
        bald 8 December 2017 12: 51 New
        +2
        I thought one thinks so - thanks. And I saw how they sawed the installations under the contract - the heart was bleeding, and the Americans simply laughed and put horseradish on us from a high tower. I have the honor.
        1. rocket757
          rocket757 8 December 2017 13: 16 New
          +4
          Had the misfortune to be present when the Pioneer missiles were blown up.
          There was disgust in everything, even there wasn’t even a sale of vegetables that year, everything hurt and died.
          I remember EVERYTHING, and I won’t forget anything about these goats ... and the Yeltsin center to hell, damn place.
          1. bald
            bald 8 December 2017 13: 22 New
            +1
            Thank God, Russia is special, it can get out of any situation.
            1. rocket757
              rocket757 8 December 2017 13: 48 New
              +4
              That's right. In that year, we adapted the overseas earthen pear to the table !!!
              Nothing went like chips crisp ... the truth is no snack from it!
  23. Sergey53
    Sergey53 8 December 2017 13: 06 New
    +1
    They comply with any contract as long as it is beneficial to them. As soon as the contract ceases to be profitable, they cease to fulfill it and leave it.
    1. bald
      bald 8 December 2017 13: 27 New
      +2
      And hell for them - they calmly violate all agreements. And what is the conclusion ?! - NEVER! DO NOT CONDITION WITH SALE RATS.
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 8 December 2017 13: 51 New
        +3
        They conclude any contract when it is FAVORABLE, to force them to at least get the garlic, they need to press the door with the Faberge to the crunch!
  24. vmo
    vmo 8 December 2017 13: 55 New
    0
    How sick of these aniki anicists were their dibelism!
  25. Old26
    Old26 8 December 2017 18: 47 New
    +1
    Quote: sogdy
    Quote: Old26
    None of the strategic agreements, which is typical, the Americans did not violate

    The utilization of chemical weapons, biological weapons, a nuclear agreement - this is so, not strategic ...


    Of course not. Strategic treaties (strategic arms treaties) are
    • Interim agreement OSV-1
    • OSV-2 agreement
    • START-1 Treaty
    • START-2 Treaty
    • START-3 Treaty
    • SOR Treaty
    • INF Treaty

    The following agreements are somewhat aloof from these fundamental agreements.
    • ABM Treaty
    • Three-environment Test Ban Treaty
    • Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty
    • Outer Space Treaty
    And what you write are not strategic agreements. Especially a nuclear agreement (one must understand the HEU-LEU agreement, or as the Gor-Chernomyrdin agreement is also called). As are not agreements on the destruction of chemical weapons, biological weapons and the cessation of work on geophysical weapons

    Quote: Nasr
    I believe that the latest Russian missile-related developments (Iskanders, Caliber, etc.) - really scared the United States - hence such irresponsible statements ... wink

    Especially Caliber. The same Caliber is based on the Granat and Relief missiles that we destroyed under the INF Treaty. There is nothing supernova that can scare America in these missiles. Moreover, they have much more. All this talk of scare - let's leave it to the media. It's their bread, scare your readers

    Quote: Silver Fox_2
    no contracts more than USA! need to dynamite America

    How to dynamite? Our A HIGH POWER ECONOMY THAT IS THE FIRST WORLD'S FIRST? Our GIANT GOLD RESERVES? OUR DOES NOT ATTACHED TO DOLLAR ECONOMY? Maybe before you offer, you should first think about what it will pour out to us ???
    1. SergeBS
      SergeBS 8 December 2017 22: 13 New
      0
      "Katz offers to surrender."
      How familiar. Well spread your legs like France in front of Hitler. Their main warrior then decided: "they will beat us," and all the paddling men stood up with cancer and smeared their ass with a lubricant. And we are not paddlers. am
      1. SergeBS
        SergeBS 8 December 2017 22: 34 New
        0
        Quote: Old26
        There is nothing supernova that can scare America in these missiles. Moreover, they have much more.

        Yeah. Toporov, for example. And other widely publicized shnyaga, which S.Sh.P is sneaking up at their satellites, killing as many as two birds with one stone:
        1. If something, the "otvetka" will fly to Europe. S.Sh.P. will not touch. "Strategic plan" is not new for a long time. It is enough to recall the 1st and 2nd world wars. am
        Well, quite "smart." They do not know either about the "dead hand" in the Strategic Missile Forces, or about the "Perimeter" (or do not want to know - they intend to slip into a freebie). laughing

        2. "Pay us, p.i.dosam exorbitantly for our wunderwaffles, so that the Russians do not offend you. We (p.i.nd.osy) explained - any Russian wants to feed you to his bear alive. Scary - well, so pay! We will become richer, and you, if anything, will receive an “answer” instead of us and die for the glory of the great Bucks - the emperor of the planet, and for the glory of the p.i. dossii, as a country where the main deity is Bucks. "
        Learn materiel.
  26. Old26
    Old26 9 December 2017 00: 27 New
    +1
    Quote: SergeBS
    Yeah. What about the disposal of nuclear warheads? The Russian Federation utilized it, but the p. En.dosov "did not succeed - they could not build the plant." And instead of disposal in warehouses placed. Lie, do not lie.

    Excuse me, are you pretending or biased on anti-Americanism ?? Then it would be better to learn the materiel before writing this

    Both Russia and the USA have disposed of their old stocks. The maximum reserves of the USSR / Russia were 45000 BG, the United States - 31700
    Now the Americans deployed 1393 strategic charges, expects to dismantle about 2300 units and about 3100 in warehouses (maybe less already)
    Now Russia has deployed 1561 strategic charges, expects the dismantling of about 2700 charges and about 2739 charges in warehouses

    So no need to whistle about what we disposed of, but they stored. Moreover, the plant for the disposal of nuclear munitions at the current level of funding from the Americans can carry out dismantling and modernization up to 300-330 charges per year.

    Quote: SergeBS
    Yeah. Toporov, for example. And other widely advertised shnyaga, which S.Sh.P is pricking up their satellites expensively, killing as many as two hares

    Here are the "Axes" they have and much more than we have the "Caliber". Moreover, we have "Gauges and anti-ship, and for firing on the ground, and they have exclusively" Axes "for hitting the ground

    Quote: SergeBS
    Well, quite "smart." They do not know either about the "dead hand" in the Strategic Missile Forces, or about the "Perimeter" (or do not want to know - they intend to slip into a freebie).

    Smart you are ours. Dead Arm is the American name for the Perimeter system. And they are well aware of this. They have, if not a copy of this system, but nonetheless have one. The Mirror system. Moreover, they were well aware of where and how many mine command missiles stood and where and how many Gornov. And now they know very well where we have deployed "Sirens". So your passage is past the ticket office

    Quote: SergeBS
    Learn materiel

    Teach yourself better, so as not to carry nonsense
    1. rocket757
      rocket757 9 December 2017 09: 26 New
      +3
      Old26
      A provocateur or a corrupt little soul!
      He does not smell of “Russian spirit”, the signs are obvious ... his white Yankees are so fluffy! comply with contracts ... also dumped any statistics, like a whole analytical department?
      In short, who understands ours - Our people don’t go to a bakery in a taxi !!! -
      Together we put the stigma - PROVOCATOR, NOT OUR! - and we drive this ......
    2. SergeBS
      SergeBS 9 December 2017 14: 06 New
      0
      Quote: Old26
      Dead Arm is the American name for the Perimeter system.

      Yes shazz. In the Strategic Missile Forces, in the event of a loss of communication with the command staffs, the SAMA rocket launched into the target that it had already laid down under the regulations. And it was already in the last century. ChSKh, nobody in the division knew who their missiles were aimed at. There will be a team - they will retarget, the missile will lose communication - it will go to a predetermined target.
    3. SergeBS
      SergeBS 9 December 2017 14: 31 New
      0
      Quote: Old26
      So no need to whistle about what we disposed of, but they stored. Moreover, the plant for the disposal of nuclear munitions at the current level of funding from the Americans can carry out dismantling and modernization up to 300-330 charges per year.

      In Google banned? Amers DO NOT have a nuclear warhead disposal plant. We have. Then think for yourself.
      You can also google about the atomic topic "needle against sieve." This is about the Amer uranium enrichment plants on the sieve and our centrifuge plants. At the same time, you will light up how RosAtom Hillary Clinton sponsored, and what it led to ...
  27. Old26
    Old26 9 December 2017 14: 36 New
    0
    Quote: rocket757
    treaties comply ...

    And to give an example of a violation of strategic agreements by the Americans weak? Hanging labels is a big deal. But to prove their point of view - for the majority it is an exorbitant burden. And statistics are statistics in Africa too. Without digital values, all conversations are a normal chatter, nothing confirmed by anything ...
    1. SergeBS
      SergeBS 9 December 2017 14: 41 New
      +1
      Quote: Old26
      And to give an example of the violation of strategic agreements by the Americans is weak?

      Yes Easy. How many nuclear warheads did the Americans dispose of under the contract, and not sent to the warehouse (in violation of the contract)?
      Given the fact that they do not have a recycling plant ...
    2. rocket757
      rocket757 9 December 2017 21: 43 New
      +3
      But it is weak for them to dispose of weapons-grade plutonium, and for them it is weak to destroy chemical weapons, and for them weakly to destroy INFs (like theirs / our moron’s label), and not push NATO to our borders weakly (they threw their / our moron marked) and further down the list ... ask your owners for a strument!
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 9 December 2017 22: 01 New
        +3
        Here's a joke !!! This is a tool, Old26, and they consider themselves no less than smart people ... joke, just not ours, just a tool of influence!
        It doesn’t reach their owners that on the site, in addition to young, greyhound puppies, there are also old ones from the former, and they collectively know more than any of their analytical department?
        What is the guaranteed term ... of a nuclear weapon?
        Why aren't YaB upgrading?
        Why is UB disposed of?
        Why can a bomb from the Second World War be blown up, and a post-war period bomb should be blown up on a regular base?
        And a lot of such questions, for understanding HU-IZ-HU?
  28. Old26
    Old26 9 December 2017 17: 58 New
    0
    Quote: SergeBS
    In Google banned? Amers DO NOT have a nuclear warhead disposal plant. We have

    No, it’s not like they banned me in Google. For they have a recycling plant. Say the name or find it yourself?

    Quote: SergeBS
    You can also google about the atomic topic "needle against sieve." This is about the Amer uranium enrichment plants on the sieve and our centrifuge plants. At the same time, you will light up how RosAtom Hillary Clinton sponsored, and what it led to ..

    I don’t care who Rosatom sponsored and who didn’t.

    Quote: SergeBS
    Yes shazz. In the Strategic Missile Forces, in the event of a loss of communication with the command staffs, the SAMA rocket launched into the target that it had already laid down under the regulations. And it was already in the last century. ChSKh, nobody in the division knew who their missiles were aimed at. There will be a team - they will retarget, the missile will lose communication - it will go to a predetermined target.

    Well, the fact that no one disputes a flight mission (and not one) is laid in advance. And that no one knew the goals in the divisions - no one argues about this. After a loss of communication, a missile could start ONLY when using a complex of command missiles. Their launch and further broadcasting of the teams to the lower links (up to the launch inclusively) made it possible to carry out the start command, and not because the connection was lost - by the automatic start.
    There was an experiment when missile launchers were launched from the PR divisions after the launch of the Kyrgyz Republic from the PR Rezhitsa division

    Quote: SergeBS
    Yes Easy. How many nuclear warheads did the Americans dispose of under the contract, and not sent to the warehouse (in violation of the contract)?

    Connoisseur! Find at least one contract parameter, how many warheads each of the parties must utilize. Even in such an agreement as the INF Treaty, where the number of destroyed missiles of such a parameter is announced DID NOT HAVE, and in strategic agreements of the SALT and START - all the more so. You will not find, even if you read all the agreed statements and annexes to the contracts. In short, the drain is counted. Blah blah and no specifics. You do not answer yourself, but translate the arrows to another one so that he answers. If it’s easy - give specifics.
    For example, the OSV-2 treaty is such and such a violation on the part of the USA and such on the part of the USSR. And so on other contracts. For missile defense, for example.
    1. SergeBS
      SergeBS 21 December 2017 01: 04 New
      0
      Quote: Old26
      Say the name or find it yourself?

      I’m not interested in the name. I myself can compose a dozen names. PRUF I want to this factory.
      Quote: Old26
      I don’t care who Rosatom sponsored and who didn’t.

      Those. merged. The A.M.Ersk sieve lost to the Russian needle. wink

      Quote: Old26
      Connoisseur! Find at least one contract parameter, how many warheads each of the parties must utilize.

      Well, since you know - enlighten. WITH PROOF! As for what was recorded, and what happened in fact. And look for YOURSELF warehouses with "recycled" nuclear warheads.

      Quote: Old26
      You do not answer yourself, but translate the arrows to another one so that he answers. If it’s easy - give specifics.

      So who claimed that there is a processing plant in the USA?
      Give specifics. Since if it is not there, the rest sounds like "I lied, but try to refute. Find a plant that is not there." Yes shazz!

      Quote: Old26
      For example, the OSV-2 treaty is such and such a violation on the part of the USA and such on the part of the USSR. And so on other contracts. For missile defense, for example.

      Well, just KNOW - show. For example, non-violation of the ABM Treaty.
      What about Romania, for example? Not a violation? And what?
  29. Terenin
    Terenin 9 December 2017 22: 47 New
    +3
    In the U.S. are considering military response for Russia. Oh how! What happened? fellow And before, they immediately answered, without consideration negative
  30. Kent0001
    Kent0001 9 December 2017 23: 51 New
    0
    Scum again want to flood Europe with their missiles. It is necessary to explain to Europeans that in the plans of the United States they are assigned a kind of radioactive ash and no more.
  31. Alexander Abdrakhmanov
    Alexander Abdrakhmanov 10 December 2017 00: 04 New
    0
    American politicians cannot live without a lie. Believers of the world that they can not others. They made the duck with the contract, to build it up ourselves, but we can’t. They have already reduced OO less than Russia, anyway they are pressuring us to reduce our weapons and not develop them. They have only false evidence, they themselves create it and are presented to us as truth.