Military Review

Good intentions are no reason to encourage defeatism

72
An expert analyst serving as a solution to utilitarian, strictly shop tasks cannot be based on the free interpretation of facts of great social and political importance.




One of the most frequently cited Russian military experts, Doctor of Military Sciences Konstantin Sivkov, published in the newspaper Military Industrial Courier (No. 11, 20-26.03. 2018 g. Https://vpk-news.ru/sites/default/files /pdf/VPK_11_724.pdf) article in which he expressed doubts about the feasibility and timeliness of the transfer of the Russian military industry to the production of conversion (civil) products due to the incompleteness of the rearmament process of the Russian armed forces. This speech, without any mention of the really ambiguous conversion problem, was instantly used by the media of a certain direction for propaganda “explaining” to the mass Russian reader the complete hopelessness of Russia's martial law in the face of the United States and NATO. As evidenced by the typical headlines of these specific publications. For example - “In Russia, they recognized the impotence of the United States” https://lenta.ru/news/2018/03/23/war/

Understanding perfectly the patriotic motivation of Konstantin Sivkov, who obviously seeks, without going into details, to strengthen his arguments in favor of continuing the expanded military production, which is hard to disagree with, I cannot help but pay attention to the following fact. This argument, simplified by the author, probably with a view to greater accessibility, turned out to be very useful for those publications that, to put it mildly, are not too interested in the calm and balanced presentation of this sensitive topic of the Russian audience. And judging by the headers openly beating on the brains, they are concerned, rather, about achieving the direct opposite effect. Namely - the demoralization and spread of defeatism in Russian society. That in conditions of tough confrontation with the same United States, on the verge of a direct military confrontation, can be interpreted as conducting military special propaganda in the interests of the enemy with the goal of moral corruption of the Russian population and undermining its trust in government bodies.

Given this, not entirely conscientious use of Mr. Sivkov’s remarks, I consider it appropriate to assess the degree of their actual and conceptual impeccability in order to understand whether the alarmist version of the clearly accented media about Russia's “military impotence” before the United States is true. So, the first group of arguments related to the naval fleet:

"Thus, the American fleet surpasses the Russian fleet by 12 times by aircraft carriers (while the Kuznetsov corresponds to about half of the American fellow in terms of combat potential), by cruisers - by 6,5 times, by destroyers - by five times, by multipurpose nuclear submarines - by four times.


Absolute numbers in this case do not cause any special doubts. Nevertheless, the very legitimacy of such an arithmetic approach to comparing the US Navy and the Russian Navy seems completely unfounded. As the author of these lines noted in his previous article, Russia and the United States are two diametrically opposed geopolitical entities. America, separated from almost the rest of the world by two oceans, a pronounced maritime power. The very existence of which, above all, is economic, depends on uninterrupted connections with overseas territories. It is precisely because of its virtually insular geopolitical position that the United States has historically been forced to build powerful naval forces as the main means of ensuring the safety of its maritime communications and a tool for projecting its military power to practically the whole world.

Russia, by virtue of its geographical location in the space of two continents - Europe and Asia, is, above all, a land power. And its safety and economic well-being are much less dependent on maritime communications than those of the United States. That is why the navy in Russia, for all its undoubted importance, has always played a subordinate role in relation to the land army, designed to protect the vast territory and virtually endless borders.

Given this fundamental circumstance, an attempt to purely arithmetic comparison of the Russian Navy and the US Navy looks completely unreasonable and devoid of any practical content. And, even more so, such a comparison can in no way be considered correct in assessing the overall ratio of the military capabilities of Russia and the United States.

It is characteristic that in this comparison, derogatory for Russia, Mr. Sivkov for some reason completely omitted the data on the ratio of the landing forces of both fleets. Although it would only benefit his argument. After all, the American amphibious forces, with their numerous UDC and docking ships, are many times greater than the Russian ones. But the captain of the first rank in retirement, apparently, understood in time that this would be completely frivolous. After all, one doesn’t even have to be a military expert to understand the obvious - the objectively motivated interest of the land superpower of Russia in projecting naval power into remote overseas territories is several times less than that of the traditionally imperialist maritime power of the United States. Accordingly, it is ridiculous to even raise the question of the need for the Russian fleet amphibious forces, comparable in scale to the American ones.

Among other things, one should not lose sight of the fact that the correlation of forces at sea is in no way reduced only to the number of warships. It is curious that the same expert K. Sivkov in his other article in the same publication confirms this fact in the most convincing way:

“Meanwhile, back in 2016, news was unnoticed by the media about the adoption of the Kh-32 anti-ship missile system for the Tu-22M3 DA (ex-MRA) aircraft. Her appearance is in service with our distant aviation seriously changing the alignment of oceanic and marine theater of operations. A naval strike group of the U.S. Navy, consisting of two cruisers or destroyers of the URO, under the most favorable conditions, is unable to repulse the strike of even a pair of Tu-22M3 aircraft carrying two X-32 missiles. At least one ship will be out of order with a probability of 0,6–0,7. A strike of a link consisting of three aircraft with a consumption of six X-32 missiles is guaranteed to destroy both ships.
24 PKR X-32 AUG will be fatal. The probability of failure or sinking of an aircraft carrier will amount to 0,75 – 0,85 with the destruction of two to three escort ships. Our planes will be at the turn of the attack, not entering the zone of action of enemy fighters. That is, the strike of a group from 12 Tu-22М3 with two anti-ship missiles on each one will be enough to destroy AUG with a high probability ”(https://vpk-news.ru/articles/41779).



Russian anti-ship missile X-32 under the wing of a long-range naval aviation bomber of the Russian Federation Tu-22М3

Thus, the naval part of the argumentation of this military expert in no way gives rise to defeatist media hysteria in the style "In Russia, they recognized impotence in the US."

Go ahead. Air Force:

“In the aerospace field, things are no better. On combat aircraft (fighters, bombers, attack aircraft), the US Air Force and Navy are almost four times as powerful as the Russian HQ and naval aircraft. At the same time, the latter is inferior to the American by about two orders of magnitude. Given the aircraft providing the overall quantitative superiority of US aircraft - almost eightfold. It is appropriate to recall our Su-57. First-class car, a worthy contender to the American F-22. But there are only four of them, and the F-22 is more than 200! In the support aircraft, DRLO airplanes are allocated, without which it is impossible to detect low-altitude targets like "Tomahawk" and "Caliber". Russia has about 16 of such machines, the USA has more than 60. Great is American superiority in the BTA aircraft, the importance of which was clearly shown by Syria. ”


Quantitative comparisons are the simplest, but the most insidious thing. Especially if you do not go into details. In which, as they say knowledgeable people, the devil himself hides. For a start, about the total number of military aircraft. Indeed, the United States has much more. But there is one "but." It is called the “technical readiness ratio” (KTG) of the aircraft fleet. So this coefficient in the US Air Force is steadily decreasing. As a result, the number of real combat-ready combat aircraft is significantly lower than the total figures that Mr. Sivkov orients, probably for greater impressiveness. For example, the number of B-1B combat-ready bombers is 52%. That is about half of the total number of these machines. Strategic bomber B-XNUMHA "Spirit" - the same picture! Only half of their fleet is ready to start. The CTG for the “worthy rival Su-2” of the F-57А fighter is already 22%. And, by the way, in the combat strength of their not 49, but only 200 pieces. Divide by two - we get somewhere 187 real aircraft of this type. Also, of course, a bit too much, but the difference is far from cosmic. Especially given the fact that the production of Su-93 in the Russian Federation is constantly increasing, and the release of the F-57A has long ceased.

Good intentions are no reason to encourage defeatism


And, perhaps, the most comical. KTG fleet of the newest American fighter F-35 is ... 54, 6%! That is, almost half of the new American "drifters" cannot participate in battle at all! So the numbers are really sly things.

Moreover, our esteemed expert, speaking of the fourfold superiority of the USA in bombers, clearly messed up something. Even from the above table it is clear that in total (taking into account the flightless half of the park!) Among the Americans in the 157 ranks are long-range bombers. Russia, in turn, has approximately 130 units (Tu-160 - 16, Tu-95 - 60, Tu-22М3-60). Even if this figure is given taking into account the aircraft of the "second stage". But after all, in the case of the United States, it is similarly formed! And where is the fourfold American superiority here? And this is not to mention the fact that all Russian heavy bombers are capable of striking long-range cruise missiles, which makes them a full-fledged strategic weapons.


Upgraded experienced strategic Tu-95MS bomber with an external suspension of eight new-type cruise missiles. Zhukovsky, 29.10.2015 (c) russianplanes.net

At the same time, almost half of American “strategists” can only make suicidal flights over the enemy’s well-defended air defense territory to drop free-falling bombs. In addition, the other half, still capable of carrying cruise missiles, are old B-52s, partly so decrepit that some of them have engines that fall off in flight.


Loading free-falling bombs on an American B-1 Lance bomberr

And this is not to mention the fact that the US Air Force, along with naval aviation, are scattered around the world in dozens of military bases, where their presence is strictly necessary to reinforce American domination over the countries there. And to pull them into one fist, for example - against the same Russia, the task is quite problematic, because for this you will have to expose the entire American global core network. And this is politically very undesirable for the United States.

Russia has practically no such foreign burdens. Not counting, perhaps, Syria, which plays a very useful role as a unique military training ground. Therefore, the Russian Aerospace Forces are much more free in their operational-strategic maneuver and can easily be concentrated on the directions of possible threats. At the same time, they can be much smaller and more compact than the excessively bloated US military aircraft, which, as we have just seen, looks impressive on paper, but are much less convincing in reality.

The expert K. Sivkov approaches the assessment of the correlation of forces between the Russian Federation and the United States using long-range cruise missiles, like the American Tomahawks:

“The Russian army is experiencing a serious shortage of ammunition for the WTO. According to open data, the number of "Tomahawks" in US aircraft is 4500 – 7500 units. And about 500 of such missiles are purchased annually. That is, over the course of 9 – 12 years, a complete replacement of arsenals has occurred. "Calibers" began to en masse to the troops from about the year 2013. There is no open data on production and availability. Estimated on the basis of information on the procurement of military equipment for the state defense order, the annual deliveries of “Calibrov” are from 30 – 40 to 50 – 60 units per year. This is quite consistent with the intensity of their use in Syria. The total stockpiles of such weapons in our aircraft can be estimated from 150 – 200 to 300 – 400 units. ”


Once again, Russia is being called on to keep up with the United States in a purely quantitative arms race. Meanwhile, even despite the lag of the Russian Federation in the timing and pace of arming the same "Caliber", associated with well-known historical reasons, there is no reason to overly dramatize this situation.

The Tomahawk CD, which has been in service with the United States for almost forty years, can hardly be considered the most modern and promising class of weapons, even from the point of view of the general philosophy of its use. Suffice it to recall that at one time this weapon of destruction was created as a tool for conducting, above all, a nuclear missile war between superpowers. And in the sense of it, of course, even in the case of a single application, has some military significance. However, in a non-nuclear military conflict, the shock power even of all Tomahawks combined is not impressive, to put it mildly. Do not forget that even 7 of thousands of such missiles, it is only seven thousand ordinary pretty low-powered aerial bombs. That is about the same as the American-British aircraft dropped in 1943 on the German city of Hamburg in just one day. And this did not affect the ability of the Third Reich to continue a world war.

The recent facts of the combat use of "Tomahawks" in Syria only confirm their highly controversial effectiveness. And really - to use almost 60 cruise missiles of this type to hit only one Syrian air base and to stop flights from it only for ... one day, this is almost a sentence for this weapon system!

Not to mention the fact that over the past forty years, anti-Tomahawk technologies have been brought to near perfection. The same Russia has developed a whole class of air defense systems, for example - “Pantsir”, specially designed for the destruction of low-flying KR. What makes it very problematic to hit them in the assigned target, protected by such advanced installations. And the highly developed Russian EW complexes capable of completely shutting down the American system of global GPS navigation in the territory of entire countries (as it is happening now in Syria) can completely disrupt the delivery of such a blow.

By the way, the lion’s share of this rather dubious weapon is on American surface ships, destroyer and cruiser classes, as well as multi-purpose nuclear submarines and is their main strike force. Considering the fact that the second specialty of the numerous American surface fleet is in missile defense, which is also questioned by the latest Russian missile defense systems, it is appropriate to talk about the increasing loss of their functional significance as an essential component of the modern US fleet (except SSBNs). military power.

It is also curious that neither the original analysis from the expert Sivkov, nor the propaganda “demotivator preparations” prepared on its basis contain exactly any data on the ratio of nuclear missile forces of the Russian Federation and the USA. Probably because this comparison cannot give anything particularly dramatic, due to the well-known fact of the existence of military-strategic parity between the two countries. There is no comparison on the military equipment of the ground forces, which in many key indicators (tanks, the latest air defense and electronic warfare systems, OTRK and others) is obviously not in favor of the United States and therefore, apparently, did not suit our expert.

But the fact of the matter is that, unlike unfair propaganda, professional military analysis cannot be built on the basis of this taste: it suits me - I take it into account, and this contradicts my calculations, so I don’t take it.

The ratio of the military capabilities of such states as Russia and the United States can only be correctly considered in its entirety. And only under this condition can we make sufficiently adequate general conclusions. Otherwise, it will be just another feed in favor of those spiteful critics who don’t feed them with bread, just give another reason to belittle Russia once again and scare the Russians with the supposed omnipotence of the United States.
Author:
72 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. aszzz888
    aszzz888 24 March 2018 05: 32
    +6
    This morality seems to me such - when discussing the conclusions of experts, be able to read between the lines. Everyone draws his own conclusions.
    1. dSK
      dSK 24 March 2018 10: 17
      +3
      Quote: aszzz888
      be able to read between the lines.

      About 20 European countries can expel Russian diplomats because of the case of poisoning a British spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Julia, The Times reports. According to the publication, the "unprecedented round of expulsions" will begin on March 26. (News 09:28, 24.03.18)
      Overseas "partners" persecute old woman Europe "for slaughter."
      1. Ascetic
        Ascetic 24 March 2018 10: 51
        +11
        Quote: dsk
        Overseas "partners" stubbornly persecute "old Europe" for slaughter. "

        Once every 100 years, a European woman unites against Russia, gets a lyule and calms down, the time has come to unite again and get? Has a generation grown up that did not know the bitterness of defeat and longing for revenge?
        Take the telegram
        Remember the coffin
        do not dig a hole in Russian
        Get a trench! am
    2. AID.S
      AID.S 25 March 2018 23: 25
      0
      Quote: aszzz888
      Everyone draws his own conclusions.

      Conclusions, conclusions ..., an acceptable result of the practical implementation (God forbid, of course!) Of theoretical disputes, from our point of view, there can be only one solution - a solution named after Sergeant Egorov and Jr. Sergeant Cantaria.
  2. ul_vitalii
    ul_vitalii 24 March 2018 05: 37
    +9
    Our triad defends our country and allows us to consistently, at the pace we have, carry out rearmament and create the latest weapons.
    1. ul_vitalii
      ul_vitalii 24 March 2018 05: 57
      +10
      Priorities in military development are chosen according to necessity and expediency, and the pace directly depends on economic growth and welfare in the country.
      1. ML-334
        ML-334 24 March 2018 06: 59
        +10
        We are expanding at defense enterprises, additional workshops have been built, in general there is stirring, and it pleases.
        1. aybolyt678
          aybolyt678 24 March 2018 09: 19
          +4
          Quote: ML-334
          We are expanding at defense enterprises, additional workshops have been built, in general there is stirring, and it pleases.

          depressing that the defense industry is not income but expenses. The more it is, the worse it is for everyone else, which is clearly seen when studying the assortment of goods in supermarkets
          1. yuriyselivanov
            24 March 2018 10: 22
            +8
            How many varieties of sausage should rot there. so that you are finally satisfied?
          2. sib.ataman
            sib.ataman 24 March 2018 11: 00
            +1
            That is why the issue is now being discussed at different levels from GDP to Sivkov about the conversion capabilities of the military-industrial complex, because there is no other economy for the production of TVNP in the Russian Federation, for well-known reasons. A so-called it is cheaper and more profitable for business to drag finished goods over the hill, to pack them in Russian packaging, and to simulate the average person under the guise of domestic import substitution, having received some other benefits from the state. But to prohibit this swindle is impossible, because there is no production itself, but there is nothing to replace! Well, the market is still with us! It would be more accurate to say, a large flea market behind mirrored display cases
          3. Plate
            Plate 24 March 2018 14: 49
            +7
            Depressing that the defense industry is not income but expenses

            Far from completely. Salaries to military personnel, employees of defense industry enterprises, and purchases by the Ministry of Defense of various materials (for example, construction materials) create demand for various goods, stimulating production (it’s a pity that not only ours). This is so that you do not consider the problem on the one hand.
            The more it is, the worse it is for everyone else

            Is it straight to all-all-all? Again, I do not agree. The production of heavy equipment (such as tanks, for example) is, in my opinion, a good consumer of metals, which means they can provide denyuzhki some part of the metallurgical industry, again, creating salaries. In addition, the military-industrial complex is a very large consumer of high-tech products. One electronics in the army - hoo: sighting and computing systems of military equipment, night vision devices, thermal imagers, communications equipment, equipment for electronic warfare equipment ... More from products that require high technology in its production and consumed defense industry, you can include: products chemical industry (explosives, armoring (it’s not only made of metals)), nuclear products (no comment), rocket science (the widest demand: from short-range missiles for various purposes to ICBMs and launch vehicles for launching military satellites into orbits ). And then ...
            It is, mind you, not just investing money and that’s it. Let's imagine that on one “fine” day, the military-industrial complex will stop its work. Jobs in these industries will disappear, a huge number of highly qualified personnel will be left without work, which will affect the entire economy as a whole. They will not receive wages, the demand created by them will decrease, and hence production will decrease in industries that are not connected with the Moscow Region in any way. Ash, how good it would be without the war industry.
            What is clearly seen when studying the assortment of goods in supermarkets

            In one country, they only cared about what was in the supermarkets, but did not care about the army, judging by the result of the bombing. The country was called Libya.
            Now, in general, I would like to say. Of course, in terms of the flow of money, the military-industrial complex consumes much more than it produces. But in terms of production ... It produces a lot. Even agriculture receives money from the military. They are an important consumer of manufactured products, do not forget about this, speaking about the harmfulness of the military-industrial complex. Although, of course, you should not get carried away with its expansion, you should try to use it to grow the “civilian” economy (although you should not get carried away with this either, otherwise the entire military industry can be converted).
            Well, I forgot about this. The military-industrial complex is also a source of scientific and technological innovation. Rich source. And inventions can be used in the civilian sphere even without enterprise conversion.
            1. aybolyt678
              aybolyt678 24 March 2018 16: 41
              +1
              Quote: Plate
              Is it straight to all-all-all? Again, I do not agree

              Dear Plate !!! very touched by the detailed answer, but all you are talking about is simply the redistribution of cash flows and is by no means one way to treat a sick economy. The defense industry is necessary in order for Russia to be robbed by the Russian Oligarchy. Other ways of distributing cash flows are Trade and the Banking System. As long as exchange rates are regulated by Trading on the Bank Exchange and not by the State structure, it will be more profitable and cheaper to bring decisively everything from abroad.
              1. Plate
                Plate 24 March 2018 18: 05
                +3
                Not One Way to Treat a Sick Economy

                I did not say that the war industry needs to cure a sick economy. I just wanted to point out to you that the defense industry does not just eat, but also gives returns. That there were no unambiguous assessments in the style of "From the defense of everyone is bad except the defense itself."
                The defense industry is needed to rob Russia

                Not understood. That is, through the same banks and trade that you are talking about, you can not rob? Through them, I think, it will be even easier. Because the state will not even try to monitor all trade, especially if formally there is nothing illegal there (well, say, how, from a purely legal point of view, refers to dealers who charge the price?).
                As long as exchange rates are regulated by Trading on the Bank Exchange and not by the State structure, it will be more profitable and cheaper to bring decisively everything from abroad.

                You can do without refusal from currency convertibility, I think. Raise duties, introduce laws to favor domestic producers (I personally can offer to oblige stores to give preference to domestic goods over foreign ones, if there are not very different price differences and the quality is similar), to introduce quotas in the end, if you are sure that we will quickly increase production. There are enough tools to support a domestic manufacturer.
                Regarding currency non-convertibility. I consider this a separate dispute. But I will express my position on this subject. Given the above, I see no reason to cancel the convertibility of the currency.
                1. aybolyt678
                  aybolyt678 24 March 2018 20: 55
                  +1
                  Quote: Plate
                  Do not understand. That is, through the same banks and trade that you are talking about, you can not rob?

                  you at least read the phrase to the end ... The defense industry is not to protect the People, but to protect the interests of the oligarchs. Protects their right to pump the bowels and not only in Russia .....
                  duties, quotas, etc. it’s all without an ideology that has legally significant power, nothing! this means that smugglers will bring everything. How much has changed after responding to sanctions? "Belarusian cheeses"? through the "brotherly RB" go both cheeses and meat and Polish apples and nothing can be done. because there are no executions, there is no ideology. There is a war, while trade and more. Measures must be military
                  1. Plate
                    Plate 24 March 2018 21: 20
                    +3
                    The defense industry is not to protect the People, but to protect the interests of the oligarchs

                    Maybe. But if, together with these oligarchs, the defense industry also protects me, then I am for it. How can you protect Russian oligarchs without protecting Russia, m?
                    How do duties and quotas expire due to lack of ideology? Smugglers can be caught without ideology too. Not because they go against ideology, but because they break the laws. And if we cannot catch, then from the adoption of any ideology our law enforcement agencies will suddenly become more effective (why not?).
                    "Belarusian cheeses"? through the "brotherly RB" go both cheeses and meat and Polish apples and nothing can be done. because there are no executions

                    Do you offer to shoot Belarusians? What prevents normal talk with Father on this subject and set harsh conditions if he does not want to? Ideology is not needed here. Here you only need the desire to create a sustainable source of income, and this can and should be done without ideology.
                    1. aybolyt678
                      aybolyt678 24 March 2018 22: 08
                      +2
                      Ideology is what unites people. In France, there was a proverb - in palaces and squares they think differently. The ideology of nationalism brought together completely different social strata of the Germans in the last century, for example. There, of course, there was a bust ... the modern lack of concepts of Honor, Conscience, Culture (a system of internal restrictions) and the Cult of consumerism raised a person who is not alien to earn in any way. Bribe, smuggling, elementary deception - if only there was money !!!
                      If an Ideology, the meaning of which would be the social significance of human actions for society, were developed and implemented and had a certain legal status, this would undoubtedly affect the work of law enforcement agencies.
                      Despite some communism in my opinion, I believe that the time has come to introduce an article on the state system into the Constitution. It should be Capitalism. Capital is the value that creates a new value and means the means of production, raw materials, the system of specialists' reproduction, do not confuse capital with luxury goods. Therefore: Everything for the construction of Capitalism! tax system, legal, ideological ... everything should be subject to the idea of ​​material and technical development
                      Quote: Plate
                      Do you offer to shoot Belarusians? What prevents normal talk with Father But about this and set harsh conditions
                      strict condition can only be shooting?
                      1. Plate
                        Plate 25 March 2018 09: 44
                        +1
                        By harsh conditions, I understood something, well ... For example, to declare that we either agree peacefully, as befits good friends, or we stop supplying oil to him cheaply, we review the price of nuclear fuel supplied, and we put restrictions on Belarusian butter, cheeses, cottage cheese, televisions, gas stoves ... But here we also need to offer them buns if we successfully agree that they do not become oriented toward the West because of this.
                        Bribe, smuggling, elementary deception - if only there was money !!!

                        But in countries with ideology, you want to say, this is not the case? In the same USSR, the shadow economy was huge, despite the ideology. In the countries of Western Europe and the USA, where there is an ideology of liberalism, where capitalism has long been working and has already settled down for normal work, there is still corruption, lobbyism, crime. Ideology does not cancel all of this.
                        The cult of consumerism

                        You started talking about the dangers of a consumer society (although you later began to glorify capitalism, which needed such a society for further development), but it began with the fact that I pointed out not “black and white” in the question “To develop the defense industry or abandon it?” " I think this discussion is no longer relevant to this issue.
      2. aybolyt678
        aybolyt678 24 March 2018 09: 22
        0
        Quote: ul_vitalii
        and the pace depends on economic growth and welfare in the country.

        economic growth rates are inversely related to defense growth rates
        1. Astoria
          Astoria 24 March 2018 18: 08
          +3
          economic growth rates are inversely related to defense growth rates
          - Well, here you are only partly right. Life is somewhat more colorful than the black and white range, or the dichotomy between the number of guns and the amount of oil.

          And to solve the stability of the financial system, a fixed exchange rate is not needed, then it is better to keep up with the times and refuse paper money in general and cash circulation in the Russian Federation in particular.
          1. aybolyt678
            aybolyt678 24 March 2018 21: 04
            0
            Quote: Astoria
            And to solve the problem of stability of the financial system, a fixed exchange rate is not needed,

            What is money? How is the currency value formed? which is better strong ruble or weak?
            which product is more competitive - cheap or expensive?
            if you read then think the currency is money or goods? in the case when they are traded on the exchange, it is better that it is cheaper, in the case when it is a measure of labor it is better if it is more expensive ....
            What is needed is a crisis, like the one in 1998. With the binding of the ruble not to the existing ZolValreservov and to the actual production of Consumer Goods. And the reform of the distribution of income from oil and gas production. and much more.
            1. karish
              karish 24 March 2018 21: 09
              0
              Quote: aybolyt678
              Is currency a money or a commodity?

              belay
              Money is the universal equivalent, serving as a measure of the value of any goods and services and capable of exchanging directly for them [1] [2] [3]. In its form, money can be a special commodity, a security, a sign of value, various goods or values, records on accounts [

              Currency (from Italian. Valuta) - national, foreign and international money, both in cash (in the form of banknotes, treasury notes, coins) and non-cash (in bank accounts and bank deposits), which are legal tender.

              you kind of wrote
              is currency money?
              Oil is butter.
              Quote: aybolyt678
              in the case when they are traded on the exchange, it is better that it is cheaper, in the case when it is a measure of labor it is better if it is more expensive ....

              belay
              Quote: aybolyt678
              What is needed is a crisis, like the one in 1998. With the binding of the ruble not to the existing ZolValreservov and to the actual production of Consumer Goods. And the reform of the distribution of income from oil and gas production. and much more

              1. aybolyt678
                aybolyt678 24 March 2018 22: 15
                0
                Quote: karish
                is currency money?
                Oil is butter.

                I read something in your comment, and realized that you are not versed in anything. Where is your own opinion and not from Wikipedia?
                If butter is butter, then why so many words: currency, money? rubles are now the currency and dollars are the currency, and why are they then different ??? why do entire states fall apart on these differences? their economies? Turn on your brains and go into details. You are a victim of the information war.
                Satan rules the ball there .....
                1. The comment was deleted.
            2. Astoria
              Astoria 24 March 2018 22: 20
              +2
              I already thought it was a sinful thing that you offer something clever, and you have an old song with a measure of labor, distribution ...
              What is needed is a crisis, like the one in 1998.
              - I think that you should go to the Aesculapius with such obsessive thoughts hi
    2. aybolyt678
      aybolyt678 24 March 2018 09: 21
      +1
      Quote: ul_vitalii
      Our triad defends our country

      sorry that the triad is useless in trade wars
      1. sib.ataman
        sib.ataman 24 March 2018 11: 23
        +3
        Not always! Mattresses have long been practicing this all over the world!
        1. Plate
          Plate 24 March 2018 16: 19
          +3
          In such matters, not only the triad, but also the ordinary army is not a sin to engage. After all, negotiating economic cooperation with someone is clearly easier when exercises are held next to the border ... lol
          1. aybolyt678
            aybolyt678 24 March 2018 16: 48
            0
            Quote: Plate
            After all, negotiating economic cooperation with someone is clearly easier when exercises are held next to the border ... lol

            cooperation can only consist in the procurement of specialist technologists. It is better to employ 100 engineers from Japan and America than 100 million workers in China. And than the Army’s teachings better to clean the ranks of the "Elite" on the model of 1937.
            1. Plate
              Plate 24 March 2018 18: 07
              +3
              I am sure that such a pure one will not help us to take any position of power in the negotiations on economic cooperation.
              1. aybolyt678
                aybolyt678 24 March 2018 21: 06
                0
                Quote: Plate
                I am sure that such a pure one will not help us to take any position of power in the negotiations on economic cooperation.

                I agree, but it will allow to take the position of the Mind
  3. andrewkor
    andrewkor 24 March 2018 06: 14
    +6
    It has long been known: having read the article of one author, you have the opinion of this author, having read one hundred articles of different authors, you have your own opinion. Of course you need time and brains!
  4. samarin1969
    samarin1969 24 March 2018 06: 25
    +1
    There is already a war in "Spain", and all the world media have carried away an inventory of the non-nuclear arsenals of the "RF" and NATO ...
    It is better to create a background for strengthening the country's defense capability than to write about the “collapsing” B-52s ... As the author of this article does not juggle with facts, and the potentials of the “RF” and NATO are too different. But NATO has learned how to unleash a non-nuclear war against the Russian Federation not directly, but through "free armies".
    1. yuriyselivanov
      24 March 2018 10: 23
      +1
      Yes. You obviously didn’t get along with counter-facts. Oh well. And thanks for that!
    2. aybolyt678
      aybolyt678 24 March 2018 16: 50
      0
      Quote: samarin1969
      But NATO has learned how to unleash a non-nuclear war against the Russian Federation not directly, but through "free armies".

      Yes Yes! In my opinion, something started with Kazakhstan
  5. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 24 March 2018 07: 08
    +5
    The fright of the Americans and NATO, after March 1, was completely obvious. The first shock they had was after the “Barkasiks” (by American standards) from the Caspian were sadanuli with “Caliber” for Syrian targets ... Well, and the howls of the striped ears that the president showed “cartoons” - and what, you need to put a couple of cruisers in Mediterranean "daggers" to be believed?
    1. Korax71
      Korax71 24 March 2018 13: 36
      0
      I would not want to disappoint you. But that during the launches of calibers, that after the first of March, there was no hysteria. Our media just know how to present some things in a bright light.
  6. Sailor
    Sailor 24 March 2018 07: 48
    +5
    The article is about nothing, or rather, that we will smash everyone and sink 200 Caliber, and 6500 Tamagavks will be lost in the vastness of our homeland.
    1. Vitaly Anisimov
      Vitaly Anisimov 24 March 2018 07: 51
      +6
      Quote: Sailor
      The article is about nothing, or rather, that we will smash everyone and sink 200 Caliber, and 6500 Tamagavks will be lost in the vastness of our homeland.

      How insightful you are ... I have nothing to add! laughing
      1. yuriyselivanov
        24 March 2018 10: 24
        +1
        To be honest, the author, too. The comrade said everything to himself.
    2. aybolyt678
      aybolyt678 24 March 2018 16: 52
      0
      Quote: Sailor
      The article is about nothing, or rather, that we will smash everyone and sink 200 Caliber, and 6500 Tamagavks will be lost in the vastness of our homeland.

      I even feel sorry that North Korea seemed to back up, but served as an example
  7. Glory1974
    Glory1974 24 March 2018 09: 04
    +5
    The correct article. There is no need to dash in horror at the fact that there is more to the USA. Our nuclear missile shield allows us to live absolutely calm, and our army is enough for local conflicts.
    I’m not saying that you need to scream cheers after these words, but you should not sprinkle ashes on your head. And Comrade Sivkov, with his articles, has long earned himself a dubious reputation.
    1. aybolyt678
      aybolyt678 24 March 2018 16: 55
      +1
      Quote: glory1974
      The correct article. There is no need to dash in horror at the fact that there is more to the USA. Our nuclear missile shield allows us to live absolutely calm, and our army is enough for local conflicts.

      look at the flags of the winners of the trade war at the supermarkets Auchan, IKEA, BAUcenter, etc ....
      1. Glory1974
        Glory1974 24 March 2018 17: 41
        +2
        look at the flags of the winners of the trade war at the supermarkets Auchan, IKEA, BAUcenter, etc.

        So what?
        1. aybolyt678
          aybolyt678 24 March 2018 21: 11
          +2
          and the fact that wars are fought not only for territories and resources, many wars are fought for markets. In fact, we lost this war.
          for erudition - a war for sales markets is a war for the right to live well. For resources - to survive, a war for territory is generally for the right to live.
          a nuclear missile shield protects the right of Russian oligarchs to the bowels of not only Russia but also Syria, for example
          1. Glory1974
            Glory1974 24 March 2018 21: 51
            +1
            War can be fought with completely different goals. For example, the Trojan War was fought over a woman. War can be cold, informational, economic, etc. This article is about the armed forces, and in your terminology about the war for territory and resources. War for markets is not considered here.
            At the same time, our life cannot be regarded as a football match. Do you think it ended and we lost with a certain score. Not really so.
  8. andrej-shironov
    andrej-shironov 24 March 2018 09: 42
    +6
    Dear Yuri, you, like Mr. Sivkov, greatly simplify the current situation in both the USA and Russia. I will explain why. A simple comparison of the availability of forces and means did not always play a fundamental role in the history of wars. You can give a lot of examples from history. Of course, any resources, this is important, no doubt. However, let me remind you: they are not fighting in numbers, they are fighting with skill! And I’ll add from myself: in all wars, the one who is more motivated, who has an idea and ideals who are not afraid to die for wins! Unfortunately, both Russia and the United States lack such potential as motivation and idea. We are somehow both colossi with feet of clay! The people there are fragmented there, there is no solidity, and this is a direct path to losing in any war. Unfortunately, liberal capitalism does not contribute to the unity of the nation. This is evidenced by the experience of WWII in Europe, when Hitler surrendered not the weakest in terms of resource army.
    Of course, now those who are in the habit of hatred, will write about me about the heroic deaths of our guys in Syria. Completely forgetting that society consists not only of people in uniform, but also of civilians.
    1. yuriyselivanov
      24 March 2018 10: 27
      +3
      You will be surprised, but I completely agree with you about the importance of the moral potential of the country. And he even wrote an article about it in VO called "The Battle of Hearts or the War of Motors?" Recommend.
      1. andrej-shironov
        andrej-shironov 24 March 2018 16: 24
        +1
        Yuri, I read it. But I did not understand your position on the current state of affairs in Russia. Do not enlighten? I ask this not to fast, but to understand.
    2. Vitaly Anisimov
      Vitaly Anisimov 24 March 2018 10: 42
      +2
      Of course, now those who are in the habit of hatred, will write about me about the heroic deaths of our guys in Syria. Completely forgetting that society consists not only of people in uniform, but also of civilians.

      There is still liberalism in Russia forever aching and stubbornly unwilling to leave "this country" !!! wink Here they are "on horseback" and receive grants .. And the most interesting thing is that they don’t work at all, but they eat and spend like some kind of regional center in the province (annual budget) And they also teach us from the media how we need to "live right" hehe
      Oh gentlemen, I feel sorry for you! But you still hit those .. bully
      1. andrej-shironov
        andrej-shironov 24 March 2018 16: 25
        0
        Vitaly, have you written this to me now?
    3. Anti-Corr.
      Anti-Corr. 24 March 2018 11: 12
      +2
      Quote: andrej-shironov
      Of course, now those who are in the habit of hatred, will write about me about the heroic deaths of our guys in Syria. Completely forgetting that society consists not only of people in uniform, but also of civilians.

      You wrote everything correctly, very much in tune with my comment yesterday, which you’ve safely “torn down,” and the meaning of the post was that society was divided overnight into those who were “for” and those who were “against,” although everyone wants the same same. And now, one part continues to drive imaginary “devils” in the form of fictional “columns” and State Department servants., And the second part says, they say, by the bread and bread, moreover, with rising prices and fiscal burden, the second part of the population will grow due to the first. And as for the people in uniform, I see one mood among those officers with whom I communicate, “we need to serve as long as they give us an apartment or money to buy it,” i.e. the goal is to serve one's own well-being and that’s all, no patriotic ideological stray, only money. I didn’t want to delve into it, but in certain circumstances the officer will be able to receive compensation payments of about 10-12 million rubles. This is all to the fact that in the current society no "scrapings" work, but money and a zombie worker work.
      1. askme
        askme 24 March 2018 12: 45
        +3
        Fortunately, this nonsense is absolutely contrary to reality. Reality is Major Filippov, reality is a major who has covered himself with a grenade, protecting an inexperienced soldier. And many others representing the real reality of the RF Armed Forces.

        Everything is back to square one. The scum philosophy is rapidly losing support among people. And no efforts of VO trolls, who are trying to create a virtual bubble of alternative reality, the same “zombie creature”, will not change this real reality. Rather, VO will be destroyed with its friendly team of professional trolls in the service of the Pentagon, than the current reality will change in the direction they are pulled back. And where the West has remained, where everything and everything is being sold and bought ...

        Russia has chosen the opposite vector. And its President. By a majority of votes, both those who came to the polls and the absolute number of those who have the right to vote in the country!
        1. Anti-Corr.
          Anti-Corr. 24 March 2018 13: 26
          +3
          Quote: askme
          Russia has chosen the opposite vector.

          It can be more specific. Or is it a Volokolamsk vector?
          1. Golovan Jack
            Golovan Jack 24 March 2018 13: 31
            +5
            Quote: Anti-Corr.
            Quote: askme
            Russia has chosen the opposite vector.

            It can be more specific. Or is it a Volokolamsk vector?

            You were gently hinted that you are lying.
            Where is more specific?
            1. Anti-Corr.
              Anti-Corr. 24 March 2018 13: 34
              +2
              Quote: Golovan Jack
              You were gently hinted that you are lying.

              I do not see any sense in this; this is the meaning of the nightingale.
              1. Golovan Jack
                Golovan Jack 24 March 2018 13: 35
                +6
                Quote: Anti-Corr.
                I don’t see any sense in it, this is the meaning of the nightingale

                What they said now - do you understand? Right?
                Not to mention what is "washed away"? belay
            2. andrej-shironov
              andrej-shironov 24 March 2018 16: 30
              +2
              Quote: Golovan Jack
              Quote: Anti-Corr.
              Quote: askme
              Russia has chosen the opposite vector.

              It can be more specific. Or is it a Volokolamsk vector?

              You were gently hinted that you are lying.
              Where is more specific?

              Jack, and I saw that it hinted to you that you're lying! laughing
        2. andrej-shironov
          andrej-shironov 24 March 2018 16: 28
          +1
          laughing Ilya, you are enchanting in your hatred of VO and the State Department. Not at all defending the editors of VO and their trolls, but I'm sorry for you, because you see the picture in a distorted form.
      2. andrej-shironov
        andrej-shironov 24 March 2018 16: 26
        +1
        Alex, thank God that there are still people on the site who understand how important the idea is in any business!
        1. Anti-Corr.
          Anti-Corr. 24 March 2018 18: 50
          +3
          Quote: andrej-shironov
          Alex, thank God that there are still people on the site who understand how important the idea is in any business!

          Colleague! drinks The thing is that thinking people still meet here, but as a species disappearing. I’m trying to explain to people that their leader would have won in any situation, even with 70 against, but thereby at least gave a clear signal to the authorities, and now what? We are waiting for another 6 difficult years of “Medvedivschina” and “Naibulism”. And the main thing is that they cannot understand that we are not enemies to each other, but we will all be together and “drown”. Any question asked about the program, team, ideals, we get a lot of crap and not a word of specificity. How so? What happened to people? We studied at the same schools, at universities, political economy and NK were studied ..., damn paradox. what
          1. andrej-shironov
            andrej-shironov 25 March 2018 09: 52
            +2
            good I agree with a colleague! There was a banal story, the loot once again defeated the ideals. Everything is like everywhere else in the world.
  9. sib.ataman
    sib.ataman 24 March 2018 11: 15
    0
    Regarding the experts, I already left a comment in the previous material, and in order not to repeat myself, I’ll add. The same Sivkov, if he is an adult, and not a young rising PR asterisk, should be aware that becoming a media friend, I hope not com_media (?), I must carefully give out my “products” to space, and not chase the quantity (well , possibly for $), to the detriment of quality. Otherwise, everyone has every reason to retrain this expert in the already indicated alternative options. Who likes what!
    1. Reserve officer
      Reserve officer 24 March 2018 12: 21
      +5
      As I understand it, are you the first time you encounter Konstantin Valentinovich’s analytics? Actually, “this young star” is already over 60, he is a captain of the first rank, doctor of military sciences, he served in the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. Probably, the influence of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, one of the founders of which he is, obliges to make sensational analytical reviews. With which, in my opinion, he is overly fond of.
      Well, how to perceive his creations is a personal matter for everyone. In my opinion, he became more a journalist than a military analyst. And in journalism - its own laws of the genre.
  10. Xscorpion
    Xscorpion 24 March 2018 13: 23
    +1
    Quote: Sailor
    The article is about nothing, or rather, that we will smash everyone and sink 200 Caliber, and 6500 Tamagavks will be lost in the vastness of our homeland.


    They don’t have so many missiles. In reality, the fleet has a little more than 1,7 thousand tomahawks in service. The entire fleet. Without taking into account that not all carriers are currently ready for battle. So on average they are now ready to launch at sea 1000-1200 missiles.
  11. mavrus
    mavrus 24 March 2018 15: 07
    +3
    Quote: aybolyt678
    Quote: ML-334
    We are expanding at defense enterprises, additional workshops have been built, in general there is stirring, and it pleases.

    depressing that the defense industry is not income but expenses. The more it is, the worse it is for everyone else, which is clearly seen when studying the assortment of goods in supermarkets

    If you don’t want to invest in your defense, it means investing in someone else’s.
    Z.Y. But seriously, here (IN) there are no bulkers, all people are adults and remember well how at the turn of the 80s, 90s ... they lied to us that the defense industry is one expense ... then, in general, everything was blown off the shelves.
  12. Radikal
    Radikal 24 March 2018 17: 35
    +3
    I read the next opus of the author, everything, as always. However, already reading the first lines I realized who was writing. I won’t even comment, I’ll ask only one question to the author - which military academy (or school) did he graduate from? winked
    1. yuriyselivanov
      24 March 2018 22: 00
      +2
      Introduce yourself first.
  13. tank64rus
    tank64rus 24 March 2018 20: 06
    +2
    The devil in the details is a fact. Concerned over 5 columns in power. They can make a balanced reduction in the defense industry if it exists, and the situation in the world is changing very quickly to turn it into a collapse. Some of the stupidity, and some just a traitor.
  14. Radikal
    Radikal 24 March 2018 20: 54
    +2
    Quote: tank64rus
    The devil in the details is a fact. Concerned over 5 columns in power. They can make a balanced reduction in the defense industry if it exists, and the situation in the world is changing very quickly to turn it into a collapse. Some of the stupidity, and some just a traitor.

    This is the main danger! The West relies solely on this factor, and not on a military solution to the "Russian question"! sad
  15. Radikal
    Radikal 24 March 2018 22: 40
    +1
    Quote: yuriyselivanov
    Introduce yourself first.

    Position, military rank ...? wassat
  16. high
    high 25 March 2018 11: 05
    0
    Alas, the dilemma of whom to believe: a professional military man, a doctor of military sciences or a journalist ...
    Apparently, only for myself, given the logic: the military budget of one country is an order of magnitude higher than another ...
  17. would
    would 25 March 2018 14: 01
    +1
    The author began to put it mildly not with that. More precisely, both articles are not about that.

    It was worth starting with why conversion production is needed primarily by the enterprises themselves. And the thing is that even a military order cannot keep a number of enterprises even corny afloat, and they need high-quality modernization. As examples, you can recall the manufacturer of modern technology (for example, Kurganets-25, BMD-4M, BMP-3, etc.) "Kurganmashzavod" which has a lot of debts including to the Moscow Region and generally goes bankrupt, you can recall Uralvagonzavod which is exactly like that It has a bunch of financial problems. There are, in particular, other enterprises where no one bankrupts anyone, but "only" massively reduce workers, and the remainder is transferred for example to half-time workers. Or even less.

    Certainly, leadership errors led to this. But at the same time, it would be foolish to deny that enterprises simply did not receive the necessary profit order from the state. Of course, we need tanks and aircraft carriers, and airplanes, and all-all-all. But the state, for objective reasons, cannot order all this, the liberals have fulfilled their task and brought the economy into crisis. No money. And their number will not increase from the mention of geopolitics, likely opponents, etc.

    And in this situation, the plants have two options

    1. Bankrupt and ultimately with a high probability of ceasing to exist.

    2. Trying to produce other products for the civilian market. That is, arrange a conversion.

    Moreover, the second option just falls into the state program of import substitution.

    Is it bad? Of course. This is only the result of a bad situation that results in exceptionally bad decisions and you have to choose the best from them.
  18. NordOst16
    NordOst16 25 March 2018 14: 44
    +1
    Indeed, the United States has significantly more. But there is one “but.” It is called the "coefficient of technical readiness" (CTG) of the aircraft fleet. So this coefficient in the US Air Force is steadily decreasing. As a result, the number of actually combat-ready combat aircraft is significantly lower than those general figures, which, probably for the sake of greater impressiveness, are guided by Mr. Sivkov.

    It is interesting, but is there open access to the CTG of the Russian Federation? Just with the same success, and we may have, that the fleet can be divided into two. Plus, it is not indicated (for both authors) what percentage of this fleet is new (modernized or new projects).
    The naval strike group of the U.S. Navy, consisting of two cruisers or destroyers URO, under the most favorable conditions, is unable to repulse the strike of even a pair of Tu-22M3 aircraft carrying two X-32 missiles.

    Well, to begin with, it’s not a fact that even 15 missiles in the Avik’s "belly" can send it to the bottom (if the warheads are not nuclear), make it unsuitable for their tasks - this is, but it’s unlikely to sink (but no more).
    And yes, and x32 - is it by chance not a modification of x22 with a "sweet" ta + ndmg fuel pair which, moreover, could not be in a refilled condition for more than several days? This rocket is not convenient and extremely dangerous to operate.
    Do not forget that even 7 thousand of these missiles, this is just seven thousand ordinary pretty low-power bombs. That is, about the same as the U.S.-British aviation dropped in 1943 on the German city of Hamburg alone in just one day.

    It seems to me that the author is disingenuous here because 7k of ammunition with a quo of several meters is far from the same because targets are destroyed with high probability and accuracy. And they should be used only for critical purposes (headquarters, bridges, etc.) the destruction of which will have an extremely negative effect on the enemy army. Another question, however, is whether it is worth chasing a bomber for several billion dollars, launching a cr worth several tens of thousands of dollars in a jihadmobile made on the knee.
    Not to mention the fact that over the past forty years, anti-Tomahawk technologies have been brought to near perfection. The same Russia has developed a whole class of air defense systems, for example - “Pantsir”, specially designed for the destruction of low-flying KR. What makes it very problematic to hit them in the assigned target, protected by such advanced installations. And the highly developed Russian EW complexes capable of completely shutting down the American system of global GPS navigation in the territory of entire countries (as it is happening now in Syria) can completely disrupt the delivery of such a blow.

    Well, methods of dealing with aviation have been honed since the beginning of the last century, which does not prevent aviation from remaining a formidable force on the battlefield.
    In addition, one must take into account how many complexes of the Russian Federation are armed with similar Shells and what kind of CTG do they have.
    And the presence of gps is not a necessary condition for the application of cr. The same Terkom feels great without satellites, and the compactness and capacity of modern drives allows you to enter extensive terrain maps into the rocket.
    There are absolutely no data on the ratio of nuclear missile forces of the Russian Federation and the USA

    I see no reason to compare this because it is an expensive weapon that will never be used.
    Absolute figures in this case are not in doubt. Nevertheless, the very legitimacy of such an arithmetic approach to comparing the US Navy and the Russian Navy seems completely unreasonable. As the author of these lines has already noted in his previous material, Russia and the United States are two diametrically opposite geopolitical entities.

    I completely agree for the tasks are different, and the budgets too. But at the same time, the state of the Russian fleet cannot but cause grief (as it was written in the cycle of the article A sad look at the future ...).
    That in a tough confrontation with the same US, on the verge of a direct military conflict, it can be regarded as conducting military special propaganda in the interests of the enemy with the aim of moral decay of the population of the Russian Federation and undermining its confidence in government.

    For a tough confrontation with the United States, we live too peacefully. If you wish the author, you can look at the DPRK, there is really a tough confrontation between the regime and the United States and its own people.
    And it’s always useful to criticize the authorities so that they don’t relax and remember their holy duty - serving the citizens of their state.