Military Review

The shabby British lion: "Go away, old fallen cat!" (h.1)

61
Causes of Mental Illness Exacerbation in London


The current gala concert of the fashionable British comedian group "Teresa and Boris" with songs about the Skripal traitor cruelly poisoned with combat poison A-232 Novice-5 has pretty much merry the inhabitants of our God-dedicated Fatherland. This Skripal and his daughter turned out to be relatives of Duncan MacLeod, who is from the Clan MacLeod and who will remain only one. Because only an immortal mountaineer could have survived after the application of CWA, as reported, is 8 times more poisonous than VX or VR (P-33), moreover, it is practically not amenable to neutralization. Subsequent speeches about the "ultimatum" and "hard answer", I believe, could argue with the best works of residents of the Comedy Club, including low-key. But analysts name different reasons for such inadequate behavior of the British leadership.



For example, the thesis that the British cover up internal problems with the scandal with the "immortal highlander" Skrypalem is very popular. Here are the consequences of Brexit, and the grandiose criminal pedophile scandal, and the internal political "struggle of the Nanai boys" among British politicians. It is possible, and even likely, that all these reasons played a role to some extent. Someone thought that all this hysteria was started with the aim of defaulting Russia almost with the aim of justifying a possible strike against Syria - not without that, but this was hardly the main goal. Considering the tough statements that have already been voiced from the very top of the military-political leadership of the Russian Federation, which do not allow double interpretation in general, it is clear that in response the RF Armed Forces can be very painful to knock - and then история with the traitor hovering between life and death, it will become quite petty and insignificant.

Traditional British Russophobia, expressed by Lord Palmerston as the phrase “how bad it is to live when no one is fighting with Russia,” also has a place to be. And a lot of "complexes of a small country", once the former powerful and strong, you can still call them phantom pain. They were an "empire, over which the sun never sets," and it was quite recently - until the 40-50-s. Hhv. And after that, they quickly became just a great power, even if it was led by the United States, but possessed quite decent military, military-technical and military-political capabilities and competencies. And in a very short period of time, about 15 years, Britain has lost them, becoming a typical European dwarf, even if it is the closest fish-sticky American shark. The only difference between the British Armed Forces, for example, from the German one, is the presence of a small amount of nuclear weaponsand it’s not all clear with him. But here is an understanding of where the hearth that this cricket should know, apparently, is not. And phantom pains of the disappeared power periodically push for the desire to play a “more important role” in the world, one of the consequences of which is the current exacerbation of paranoia in London.

After Brexit, Teresa May and Boris Johnson came up with the idea of ​​Global Britain. They say that it is a free and independent from the EU, Britain should play a leading role in Europe, leading European herds of lost sheep to a virtual battle with "Putin's Russia." And even better in the world to regain the leading position - dream Teresa and Boris. Political manilovshchina pure, almost like the Kiev junta with their eternal "mriyami" on any issue. The fact is that such "Wishlist" must be supported by appropriate strength. And with her problems.



Underdone relics

Let us examine in more detail the issue of British nuclear power (or, rather, relics, and not imperishable, but underdone). In the past, the British had both tactical and strategic nuclear and thermonuclear bombs, and cruise missiles with a Blue Steele (very primitive, but quite consistent with the level of 60's technology) of their design, and the bombers — that is, there was no “triad”, but The arsenal was quite versatile and the carriers had their own. Moreover, I must say that the family of medium nuclear bombers, called "V-bombers" - Vickers Valiant, Handley-Page Victor and Avro Vulcan, were original and very remarkable cars for their time, especially the latter.

But the submarine-based ballistic missiles never gave birth to their own, and they failed to create their MRBDs, so they relied on submarine missile carriers. Who developed with the help of American specialists and based on the Lafayette-type SSBN project, first arming their first SSBN of the “Resolution” SLBM “Polaris A-3” without MS, which the British put on their own, and then later upgraded to HSRHIN modified “Polaris” A-3ТК "with low power 6 combat units (BB). By the way, the British themselves denied that the boat was developed with the help of the United States, except, say, the missile compartment, which was American, but common features, however, are visible.

But gradually, the British rolled up all of their nuclear components, eventually leaving only SSBNs, which are Vanguard-type ships with the D5 American Trident-2 substitute for the SLBM. The 4 SSRB type "Vanguard" focuses the entire nuclear potential of the country, more precisely, its remnants. Now the operational readiness of the British 120 BB design with the maximum power up to 80-100act (together with the exchange and repair fund of charges a little more, about the 160 - but nothing more). The D5 SLBMs themselves do not belong to the Britons, the Americans rent 56 missiles (more precisely, already a little less than 50, after all, there were also combat training launches). The serial numbers of the missiles are not spelled out in the contract, it’s just a question of quantity, if Americans are required for technical reasons, they change the rocket for another - in general, this is a “car-sharing” rocket. Moreover, the missiles remain the property of the United States, and according to the START-3 Treaty, the Americans inform us about the charges of others' charges, which fundamentally contradicts the British practice of hiding information of the already insignificant nuclear secrets of the kingdom and strongly enrages London, but nothing can be done about it. On the whole, it is a strange situation, when a nuclear power does not have its own carriers either, and it’s hard to say who actually owns the country's nuclear missile potential.

But even the 56 SLBM would not even be enough to complete all the 4 missile carriers (each 16 silo PU). But this is not what the Britons need - they have only 1 SSBNs on duty at the same time, 1 is still in dock repair, that is, it does not need missiles, 1 is preparing for a hike, and 1 is carrying out post-breakdown service and repairs. The SSBN on duty in the sea carries an incomplete set of missiles for some time - instead of 16 submarines only 8, and only 5's warheads on a rocket, that is, 40 BB - this is all that all the Royal Cavalry has, as a means of retaliation. In general, it is comparable with the potentials of third-tier nuclear powers, such as India, Pakistan, and the DPRK. Theoretically, one of the SSBNs that are on pre-preparatory training could have been involved in the first strike, but there is no counter or counter-strike for the British - there is no anti-missile attack, and even if the signal comes from the Americans, it is likely that it will be too late.

RGCHIN developed by the British can carry 6 BB (theoretically and up to 8), that is, the maximum ammunition of this type of SSBN 96-128 BB. Moreover, part of the BB is in the minimum power configuration (blocks of variable power up to 150ct at the maximum), to compensate for the complete absence of TNW as a class, and to tie up the conflict. Nuclear doctrine involves the application of warning shocks of low power, including demonstration. Only here the idea of ​​placing a reduced power BB on an SLBM to compensate for a lack of TNW is idiotic. The problem is that the enemy, as soon as it detects a launch of an SLBM, will not wait until it arrives (where it arrives - it will know approximately already in the first minutes, and with accuracy to hundreds of meters - a little later) and observe what kind of power it will explosion. He will simply give the command to deliver a massive nuclear missile strike on Britain itself - and the BB will fly in response, certainly not of low power. After all, it is known that the SSBN on patrol is one and the BBs on the rockets are of different and different capacities, so why risk it?

Patrol SSBN type "Vanguard" in the Bay of Biscay, where in 2009. one of them (in fact, it was the ancestor of the type) ran into the French Triomfan SSBN and almost fell under the cancellation - both countries use Biscayka as a “bastion” of their strategic nuclear forces. Also, not so long ago, ideas were put forward to carry out military service by the British and French SSBNs in turn, protecting them together - of course, from lack of money, but this did not end with anything - 2014 arrived on time, tank reflect the army of the Russian Federation, which are preparing to enslave Europe, where can I save on matches? True, they continue to save, but on the other.

All royal cavalry, all royal army

With conventional military power, the situation is no better. The number of the Armed Forces of the United Kingdom (so far) is 153 thousand people. The British had never been particularly strong and numerous ground troops, though we recall von Bismarck, who joked that the British army that landed on the coast would order his police to simply arrest. But now the British land power has almost reached the bottom. The number of British NE 81 thous. in regular composition (of course, we are talking about the regular number, the actual smaller). There are two divisions - in fact, not connections, but administrative structures. The NW - 11 combat brigades, as well as brigades of support - on 1 artillery, engineering, reconnaissance and surveillance, medical, military police, logistics, on 2 - supply, communications. There is also a helicopter command, an air defense command, and various other units, in particular, three "regiments" (battalions) of infantry, stationed in the remnants of the British overseas possessions and marines. And, of course, the forces of special operations, in particular, the 22 regiment of the SAS (the other two regiments were transferred to the brigade of intelligence and observation).

SV are divided into "Reaction Force", designed for immediate use, including abroad - 3 tank brigades, tanks, BMP and other tracked vehicles, combined with the brigade MTO 3-th division, and 1 airmobile It is clear that “immediate” is very different from our or American notions of rapid deployment and levels of readiness, but it fits well into the unhurried norms of the alliance, where a consolidated light brigade is assembled for 5 days and larger forces in a few weeks.

Tank brigades should rather be translated as mechanized (as they used to be called), because translating Armored Infantry as "armored infantry" sounds to us, Russians, like a jumble. They consist of 2 tank "regiments" (in the reality of battalions) and 2 motorized infantry "regiments". There are also “flexible forces” (Adaptable Force) united in the 1 Division, intended mainly for the defense of Britain itself — the 7 infantry brigades on various wheeled armored vehicles, in particular MRAP and other equipment, which is suitable for traveling along rear roads but not suitable for combat. They are partly equipped with reservists. Of the other features of the construction of the SV, it can be noted that all the artillery of the tank, the infantry brigades, is concentrated in a separate artillery brigade, also consisting of 9 "regiments" (divisions), and it is inconvenient to manage such a structure. And from the artillery brigade, artillery is attached to combat brigades, which will necessarily cause problems with interaction and control.

Moreover, the current structure is not final. So, soon, instead of 3, tank brigades in the 3 division will have 2 mechanized and 2 "drums", and the total number of battalions will not change, just the brigade will facilitate. "Shock" is on BRM and other Ajax family machines (nee - ASCOD-2 from BAE), healthy and poorly protected 39-42 machines, which are now actively promoted as a new achievement by the British industry. And they are just as actively criticized for the high price tag, and for the large mass, dimensions, and weak weaponry and protection.

Techniques in the British army, in general, are no more than those of other military dwarfs, in which the armies of Germany, France, and other European "grandees of bygone times" degenerated. Thus, tanks "Challenger-2" in combat units, there are 162, just about 200. Frankly, this tank, even against the background of the Leopard-2, which turned out to be of little use in battle, looks rather pale - heavy, slow-moving, with a lot of flaws in protection, with an archaic weapon. Plans for its modernization have not come into being for the first decade, but nothing large-scale is being undertaken - usually everything depends on lack of funds or unwillingness to make large-scale changes, such as replacing the archaic 120mm rifled L30 gun with a smooth-bore Rh120. Now announced another tender on this topic.

There are about 400 BMP "Warrior" (here they started recently modernization can be considered successful), in the ranks, though not all, part of the storage. As well as more than 3 thousand different light armored vehicles such as BTR and MRAPs, more than 250 SAU, MLRS and towed howitzers (more than half - 105-mm light howitzers), less than a hundred combat helicopters, including the American 50 percussion "Apache". The worst thing is not the technology itself, but rather its very low technical readiness typical of the current European NATO countries. And the level of technical serviceability can hardly please the generals of the British General Staff.

To be continued ...
Author:
Photos used:
http://www.globallookpress.com/
61 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vard
    Vard 23 March 2018 05: 14
    +4
    The greatness of the British crown in the past .. Now she can only shit finely ...
    1. Uncle lee
      Uncle lee 23 March 2018 07: 03
      +9
      Quote: Vard
      she can only shit finely ...

      Therefore, the name is Small Britain! stop
    2. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 23 March 2018 07: 20
      +18
      It seems that the course towards memorizing the heading with geopolitics has been taken quite decisively.

      The greatness of the British crown was never in the ground forces.

      List of UK military allies:

      Belgium, Denmark, Iceland, Italy, Canada, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, USA, France, Greece, Turkey, Germany, Spain, Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Estonia , Albania, Croatia, Montenegro.

      List of military allies of Russia:

      Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan.

      Some territories under the indirect control of the UK

      England, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, Guernsey, Gibraltar, Jersey, Cayman Islands, Isle of Man, Turks and Cairos.

      Some territories under the indirect control of Russia

      South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Donetsk People’s Republic, Lugansk People’s Republic, Transnistrian Moldavian Republic.
      1. Ascetic
        Ascetic 23 March 2018 08: 27
        +40
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        List of military allies of Great Britain

        With such allies and enemies it is not necessary laughing
        Lord Palmerston would completely agree.

        In this regard, a joke
        The Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the UN walks along the corridor, muttering thoughtfully under his breath: “Where else five?” Where else five? They ask him: - What are you talking about?

        - You see, according to our estimates, five warheads are enough for the whole of Britain. And there are ten on the rocket. So we rack our brains - what to do with five more? ”
        1. Serge Gorely
          Serge Gorely 23 March 2018 11: 16
          +5
          Alexander III "Russia has only two allies: its army and navy"
          1. Sanichsan
            Sanichsan 23 March 2018 18: 09
            +3
            now they have added another VKS and Strategic Missile Forces.
            so now Russia has four allies! soldier
          2. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 24 March 2018 00: 36
            +5
            "Alexander III" Russia has only two allies: ... "//////

            He declared something, but he prudently entered the Entente.
            In alliance with France and England. He insured himself.
            1. tanit
              tanit 25 March 2018 08: 55
              +3
              Quote: voyaka uh
              He declared something, but he prudently entered the Entente. In alliance with France and England. He insured himself.

              But what, what was it, Nicholas 2? Alexander 3 entered into a defensive alliance only with France ..
        2. tima_ga
          tima_ga 29 March 2018 21: 08
          0
          I’ll take the joke, with your permission :)
      2. Vard
        Vard 23 March 2018 08: 36
        +8
        The problem of Britain is not Russia ... the problem of Britain is the uncontrolled growth of emigrants from Muslim countries ... This will ultimately destroy it ...
      3. Lopatov
        Lopatov 23 March 2018 08: 38
        +17
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        It seems that the course towards memorizing the heading with geopolitics has been taken quite decisively.
        The greatness of the British crown was never in the ground forces.
        List of UK military allies:

        Do you hint that the "greatness" of Great Britain has always been the ability to find those who will fight in its place?
        And which can be quickly betrayed immediately after their services become unnecessary ...
      4. Victor19
        Victor19 23 March 2018 10: 49
        +7
        As for Greece and, especially, Spain, for which this same Gibraltar is an unhealed wound, of course, it is said a lot. But essentially, you're right. Britain should be seen only as an integral part of NATO, and this is another reason. In the Hitler invasion army, the armies of the fascist allies occupied a significant role. They clearly did not differ in military successes, in particular, Romanians. But for the punitive and auxiliary functions were just the very thing.
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 23 March 2018 11: 47
          +2
          Quote: Victor19
          Gibraltar - a non-healing wound of course

          Spain is a member of NATO. And Gibraltar, if you do not understand what the second list is for, one of the British offshore companies. If you add to this the Dutch offshore companies, such European jurisdictions as Latvia, Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, Cyprus, as well as some Caribbean states that the US Treasury Department has been collecting for a long time, the results can be very obvious. By freezing the accounts and register of some residents of some islands, much more impressive geopolitical results can be achieved than a hundred warheads. If, of course, there is enough desire.
          1. Stirbjorn
            Stirbjorn 23 March 2018 16: 14
            +3
            Quote: Cherry Nine
            Spain is a member of NATO. And Gibraltar, if you do not understand what the second list is for, one of the British offshore companies. If you add to this the Dutch offshore companies, such European jurisdictions as Latvia, Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, Cyprus, as well as some Caribbean states that the US Treasury Department has been collecting for a long time, the results can be very obvious.
            With such offshore companies, where our elite has withdrawn a trillion dollars, no divisions are needed - they simply grab those who need it for causal places, the same Shuvalov and no war is needed.
        2. saigon
          saigon 23 March 2018 17: 40
          +1
          Of course, I apologize, but from what side are the Romanian troops and fascists.
          Moreover, Manstein spoke well of the Romanian soldiers and was extremely negative about the officers.
      5. shinobi
        shinobi 23 March 2018 11: 59
        +5
        So, as it were, this is the uniqueness of Russia. Russia could always fight alone against all. It was always sought to drag Russia into various alliances or drag it into the war on its side. And whoever it fought, ultimately won. It’s problematic to use the fruits of victories. That’s the king, then politics.
      6. NEOZ
        NEOZ 23 March 2018 12: 41
        +2
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        Some territories under the indirect control of the UK
        England, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, Guernsey, Gibraltar, Jersey, Cayman Islands, Isle of Man, Turks and Cairos.

        But what about the Falklands?
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 23 March 2018 13: 09
          0
          Quote: NEOZ
          But what about the Falklands?

          The list is only offshore.
          1. NEOZ
            NEOZ 23 March 2018 13: 38
            0
            Quote: Cherry Nine
            The list is only offshore.

            announce the whole list, please!
      7. Borik
        Borik 23 March 2018 16: 58
        +9
        List of UK military allies:
        Belgium, Denmark, Italy, Canada,, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, USA, France, Greece, Turkey, Germany, Spain, Hungary, Poland and Czech Republic, Romania, Bulgaria, Iceland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Estonia, Albania, Croatia, Montenegro. Luxembourg Latvia, Lithuania,

        Especially frightening is the last ten allies.
        1. faiver
          faiver 24 March 2018 10: 38
          0
          tortured by a bark? laughing
        2. Black Colonel
          Black Colonel 28 March 2018 09: 15
          0
          My letters harnessed in fear from my eyes! belay
      8. Baby sitter
        Baby sitter 23 March 2018 20: 47
        0
        So what? An island - he is an island in Africa ....
      9. EvilLion
        EvilLion 24 March 2018 13: 46
        0
        Not even funny, given the British policy of brilliant isolation and "Britain has no permanent allies, there are only permanent interests."
      10. Soho
        Soho 30 March 2018 05: 12
        +1
        Cherry Nine (1) March 23, 2018 07:20
        The greatness of the British crown was never in the ground forces.
        List of UK military allies:
        Belgium, Denmark, Iceland, Italy, Canada, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, USA, France, Greece, Turkey, Germany, Spain, Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Estonia , Albania, Croatia, Montenegro.

        Trying to pull an owl on a globe is not protected. Look for other arguments.
  2. Theodore
    Theodore 23 March 2018 06: 09
    +7
    The conclusion begs one! You can’t let women into power! Then the tantrums begin because of the PMS!
  3. AlexS
    AlexS 23 March 2018 06: 48
    +2
    The royal regime must be destroyed ...
  4. rkkasa xnumx
    rkkasa xnumx 23 March 2018 07: 29
    +5
    The article talks about the weakness of the British Armed Forces, but there is not a word about where it is very strong. Namely, that Britain is home to bourgeoisie from around the world, including Russia. The number of SSBNs and BBs is fading into the background when the true masters of the country and their servants, like deputies, are under control.
    1. Baby sitter
      Baby sitter 23 March 2018 20: 50
      +2
      so they collect them all there, so as not to catch one at a time ...
  5. inkass_98
    inkass_98 23 March 2018 07: 31
    +6
    Quote: Cherry Nine
    List of UK military allies:

    In addition to the United States, you can hug and cry on this list of allies of the rest. And I have a small question: in what time frame will all this wonderful coalition be able to defend Britain? And will they rise at all? For now, the NATO Council will decide that it would be nice to launch Art. 5 of the charter, nothing can remain of the offended.
    So let's live in harmony, to measure pisyunami - a children's occupation.
    1. Cossack 471
      Cossack 471 23 March 2018 09: 01
      +7
      Our ostrich policy has led to that. that they can easily blame us for any crime. and then they will set all countries on us. And we all build ourselves noble. NATO Secretary General came to a meeting with Putin with a voice recorder and so what? We were silent on gentlemenly. and if we did that. Yes, we would be immediately cheated in all the media and made to repent publicly. So they presented us with an ultimatum. why didn’t we immediately present the counter; "Do not submit evidence within 2 weeks. We will drag through the courts for defamation of several particularly active clowns." With such sluggish diplomacy, wait further on any arrivals. they are in this master. and the army has nothing to do with it. they just do not need it. nobody will attack them. Shulers cannot be played fair. in the terminal all the same deceived.
      1. Black Colonel
        Black Colonel 28 March 2018 09: 17
        0
        Who are the judges?
    2. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 23 March 2018 09: 18
      +8
      Quote: inkass_98
      the rest can be hugged and cry

      Cry

      Export of Russia 2017.

      China $ 42.4 billion 10.9%
      Netherlands $ 39.5 billion 10.2%
      Germany $ 27.8 billion 7.2%
      Belarus $ 19 billion 4.9%
      Turkey $ 18.6 billion 4.8%
      Italy $ 15.5 billion 4%
      South Korea $ 13.6 billion 3.5%
      Kazakhstan $ 12.8 billion 3.3%
      Poland $ 12.4 billion 3.2%
      USA $ 12 billion 3.1%
      Japan $ 11.5 billion 3%
      England $ 9.53 billion 2.5%
      Finland $ 9.28 billion 2.4%
      Ukraine $ 8.51 billion 2.2%
      Belgium $ 7.22 billion 1.9%

      So that there are no special illusions about China. When Iran came under EU sanctions (on the basis of atomic spirituality, let me remind you), the price of Iranian oil for China became the EMNIP about one and a half times lower than before.

      I also recall that Japan and South Korea are inclined to share the US position on foreign policy issues. Finland tends to share the EU / Germany position.

      Quote: inkass_98
      And will they rise at all?

      After the 44th US president showed what the 42nd US president’s signature on “guarantees of territorial integrity” of Ukraine stands, the 52nd Secretary of State Acheson’s signature under a much longer treaty raises serious doubts. However, it should be noted that President Vladimir Putin did almost as much to revive NATO as Presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama did to bury NATO. In one fell swoop, so to speak, with three beatings.

      There are certain doubts that the listed allies of Britain will stand up for her defense. There is no doubt that all of the listed allies of Russia will come off in any serious riff.

      Quote: Ascetic
      five warheads are enough for all of Britain

      Currently, there are two countries that often and with pleasure talk about nuclear ashes, and, besides this, are of no interest to anyone. The first is the DPRK.
      Getting up from your knees as it is.
      1. Cossack 471
        Cossack 471 23 March 2018 09: 27
        +6
        Well, as far as nuclear ashes are concerned, here the US generals are ahead of the rest. They simply talk about the "small" use of nuclear weapons. The Russian government and army leadership never allow such nonsense. but what people write on. it’s just their personal opinion and it doesn’t affect public policy in any way. But the paranoid McCain is easily able to warm up the Pentagon’s budget with his verbal diarrhea
        1. Cossack 471
          Cossack 471 23 March 2018 09: 33
          +6
          And about the "signatures of the presidents." If the Americans and Europeans did not begin to crush in Ukraine unceremoniously. then Yanukovych would simply lose the early elections and there would be no Crimea or Donbass. But I wanted everything at once ...
      2. inkass_98
        inkass_98 23 March 2018 09: 36
        +6
        Do not make me laugh. One of the last talking about nuclear ashes is May. She threatened to press a button.
        The discussion above was about Britain’s military allies, not about the trade balance. You yourself concluded - no one will fit in for her, if that. So there’s nothing to worry about.
        Z.Y. Why does the flag change so dramatically in you? Work under VPN laughing ?
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 23 March 2018 12: 55
          +2
          Quote: inkass_98
          May. She threatened to press a button.

          Seriously? Quote, if not difficult. Let me remind you that May does not speak Russian, if suddenly you did not know.
          Quote: inkass_98
          no one will fit for her, if that

          If you drew attention to the second list, then you learned that Britain itself holds a lot of people for the genitals of grandfather. And who will fit in there and how - obviously it is not up to you to decide.
      3. NEOZ
        NEOZ 23 March 2018 12: 45
        0
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        Putin did almost as much to rebuild NATO as Presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama did to bury NATO. In one fell swoop, so to speak, with three beatings.

        justify your speculation. What exactly did Putin do?
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 23 March 2018 13: 13
          +4
          Quote: NEOZ
          What exactly did Putin do?

          Any military alliance needs a convincing common enemy.
          1. The comment was deleted.
  6. Ignorer_RUS
    Ignorer_RUS 23 March 2018 10: 19
    +6
    "complexes of a small country", once a former mighty and strong "
    According to GDP, the UK in 2017 took 5th place in the world, exceeding Russia by 2,3 times
    1. MadCat
      MadCat 23 March 2018 10: 44
      +1
      Quote: Ignorer_RUS
      "complexes of a small country", once a former mighty and strong "
      According to GDP, the UK in 2017 took 5th place in the world, exceeding Russia by 2,3 times

      rather, the author of the article has a complex of getting up from his knees laughing
    2. dauria
      dauria 24 March 2018 00: 07
      +3
      According to GDP, the UK in 2017 took 5th place in the world, exceeding Russia by 2,3 times


      Britain is in 9th place, behind Brazil and Indonesia. China on the first, Russia on the fifth.
      And one more trifle - 75% of Britain's GDP is the service sector. In case of war, a well, a factory and a pig farm are still more important than a bank, a shopping and entertainment center and a nail salon with lawyers.
      And candy wrappers - China will lose only 10% of American papers, and GDP can be counted in liters of moonshine or sheep in kind exchange, or more precisely, in warheads.
      So everything is extremely simple - the whole world is afraid of Trump and Putin, not Teresa and Merkel, no matter how puffed up.
      1. Ignorer_RUS
        Ignorer_RUS 24 March 2018 20: 56
        0
        Proofs in the studio. Official statistics say different
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 24 March 2018 22: 04
          0
          Quote: Ignorer_RUS
          Official statistics say different

          In the Dauria post, one of the options for GDP at PPP is given. At your face value (exchange rate).
          1. Ignorer_RUS
            Ignorer_RUS 27 March 2018 20: 36
            0
            You can still calculate the rating of countries by GDP per capita, only this does not change much in the standard of living of ordinary Russian citizens. And so, yes. The shabby british lion ...
            1. Black Colonel
              Black Colonel 28 March 2018 09: 23
              0
              The article focuses on the military power of Great Britain, and not on the welfare of Russian citizens.
              1. Ignorer_RUS
                Ignorer_RUS 30 March 2018 11: 29
                0
                In addition to military power, the author for some reason begins to throw hats (question) the economic power of Great Britain
    3. Soho
      Soho 30 March 2018 05: 25
      +1
      Ignorer_GB March 23, 2018 10:19 New
      "complexes of a small country", once a former mighty and strong "
      According to GDP, the UK in 2017 took 5th place in the world, exceeding Russia by 2,3 times

      for those who find it difficult to understand what they read, the author points out in the article that the power of Great Britain (political, economic, military) fell by orders of magnitude compared to what it was from the 18th and up to the middle of the 20th century. What does Russia have to do with it? Not the Russian Federation and the UK are compared, but the UK's former and current. And then people like you: "You have to think before you write? But what, could you do that?" ....
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 30 March 2018 08: 48
        0
        Quote: Soho
        in the article, the author points out that the power of Great Britain (political, economic, military) fell by orders of magnitude compared to what it was from the 18th and until the mid-20th century

        1. What do I care about 18th century England?
        2. You write your comment on March 30th. By this day it is already known who has lost power and who is completely worth it.
        1. Soho
          Soho 30 March 2018 10: 44
          +1
          Cherry Nine (1)
          What do I care about 18th century England?

          1. And what are you getting from two accounts here? I did not contact you, but to Ignorer_RUS.
          2. You already with your zeal do not reach the point of absurdity, otherwise it becomes ridiculous laughing
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 30 March 2018 21: 12
            0
            You left 30 comments on March 2th, to my post and to the Ignorer post. I found it more rational to answer the second.
  7. Curious
    Curious 23 March 2018 11: 11
    +4
    Mighty, of course, Vyatkin. With one left, the once formidable island power was sunk. Reading this analyst, I recall the composers Daniel and Dmitry Pokrassy and the poet Vasily Lebedev-Kumach. Although they are not military analysts, they also wrote on the same topic. Exactly eighty years ago. Moreover, in poetry and music.
    We don’t want war, but we will protect ourselves, -
    We fortify the defense for a reason, -
    And in enemy land, we will crush the enemy
    Little blood, a mighty blow!
    As history later showed, such forecasts should be taken more seriously.
    1. Black Colonel
      Black Colonel 28 March 2018 09: 25
      0
      Do you take literary forecasts seriously?
      1. Curious
        Curious 28 March 2018 12: 34
        +1
        And how do you perceive Vyatkin?
  8. 1536
    1536 23 March 2018 12: 04
    +2
    There is nothing to talk with the British. As it turned out, it was the British who initiated the campaign to discredit and “deter” Russia. This should not get away with it. But they will go to war with us, we must make sure that there is nowhere to return to their military armadas "after the war!"
    Tired, right word.
    1. Black Colonel
      Black Colonel 28 March 2018 09: 27
      0
      Will they go to war? Some of the red islanders probably know the fate of the PQ-17.
  9. ares1988
    ares1988 23 March 2018 12: 29
    +5
    What does this agitation do in the armament category?
    1. fighter angel
      fighter angel 23 March 2018 16: 23
      +4
      Problems are evident in VO with authors and material. It has been two or three weeks at Armament as I see nothing worthy. Extreme normal work, in my opinion, is an article about our unmanned aircraft. Then everything.
  10. Altona
    Altona 23 March 2018 13: 39
    +2
    Quote: Cherry Nine
    Some territories under the indirect control of the UK

    England, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, Guernsey, Gibraltar, Jersey, Cayman Islands, Isle of Man, Turks and Cairos.

    ---------------------------------------
    These territories are guided by socio-economic factors, and not by the martial law of Great Britain. The same Gibraltar 90% voted for absenteeism from the EU, because he is in the EU and communicates with the EU.
  11. Altona
    Altona 23 March 2018 13: 41
    +3
    Quote: Cherry Nine
    Cry

    Export of Russia 2017.

    -----------------------------
    The official export figure is underestimated by 2,5-3 times ... Multiply and smile further ... And as for the monopoly of Russian gas-40% in the European market, I am generally silent.
  12. Altona
    Altona 23 March 2018 13: 44
    +3
    Quote: Cherry Nine
    There are currently two countries that often and with pleasure talk about nuclear ashes

    -------------------------------
    Why not talk? The United States immediately moves from words to military force. And in general, with our nuclear power one and a half of the world can not curse and do not wind snot on a fist. And if you think that the army and the strategic nuclear forces are not needed, then write immediately to the Pentagon, the men there do not know.