Military Review

All the same, Russia is breaking it! US is preparing to withdraw from the INF Treaty

138
The Committee on the Affairs of the Armed Forces of the House of Representatives of the US Congress called for the annulment of the US-Soviet Treaty of Medium and Short-Range Missiles (INF) in the event that Russia does not comply with it.


The resolution of the committee, adopted by a majority vote of the Republican faction, states that the United States should not consider itself bound by the contract unless President Trump confirms its full compliance with the Russian side, Radio Liberty reports

All the same, Russia is breaking it! US is preparing to withdraw from the INF Treaty


Member of the committee, Republican Mike Gallagher called this measure an attempt by the United States to "push Russia to comply" with the INF Treaty, the newspaper writes.

The INF Treaty has long been a subject of dispute between those who consider it necessary to preserve the agreements concluded between the superpowers during the Cold War era and, if necessary, to modernize them, and those who propose abolishing them as an anachronism preventing America from updating its weapons.

Withdrawal from the INF Treaty will allow the United States to invest in the development of a new generation of ground-based cruise missiles, which will serve as a counterweight to the Chinese missile armsnot covered by any disarmament agreements
- Admiral Phil Davidson, commander of US forces in the Pacific, said at a congressional hearing.

In recent years, Moscow and Washington have regularly accused each other of violating the INF Treaty. In the US Congress, there were even calls to develop a bill that would directly accuse Russia of violating this document and prepare the ground for the United States to withdraw from it in the same way that Washington withdrew from the ABM Treaty.
Photos used:
http://www.globallookpress.com/
138 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Dezinto
    Dezinto 12 May 2018 16: 07
    +29
    "Burned shed, burn and hut" ©

    I mean that the whole world order went to the seams.
    1. Aristarkh Lyudvigovich
      Aristarkh Lyudvigovich 12 May 2018 16: 15
      +9
      Quote: DEZINTO
      the whole world order went to the seams.

      Double standards rule. The INF Treaty is no longer a tenant. And given the fact that China and other countries that have WMDs have not signed the treaty, it loses all relevance.
      1. Morosha
        Morosha 12 May 2018 16: 19
        +10
        And Pershing 2 will return, but does Russia need this? We must comply with the agreement, especially since it is in the interests of Russia.
        1. svp67
          svp67 12 May 2018 16: 27
          +13
          Quote: Morosha
          We must comply with the agreement, especially since it is in the interests of Russia.

          And here there are already many questions. Around us there are a lot of countries that have come close to or have already crossed the line of knowledge and skills in the design and manufacture of such missiles, and there is nothing special for us to answer.
          1. Aaron Zawi
            Aaron Zawi 12 May 2018 16: 44
            +4
            Quote: svp67
            Quote: Morosha
            We must comply with the agreement, especially since it is in the interests of Russia.

            And here there are already many questions. Around us there are a lot of countries that have come close to or have already crossed the line of knowledge and skills in the design and manufacture of such missiles, and there is nothing special for us to answer.

            Iskander, in the opinion that prevails in the West, is a missile with a range of up to 1500 km. The official 500 is an understated performance, i.e. in the West they believe that Iskander is a missile that violated the treaty. As far as this is true, I won’t judge.
            1. svp67
              svp67 12 May 2018 17: 09
              +9
              Quote: Aron Zaavi
              Iskander is a missile that violated the treaty.

              "Iskander" "Iskander" discord. The USA accuses us of violation due to one of the missiles for this complex. But we also have a number of complaints against them and it is precisely in compliance with this agreement that they are not going to discuss this. Since it’s more profitable for them to just get out of it.
              1. Alex777
                Alex777 12 May 2018 19: 49
                +2
                Their exit from the INF Treaty is our exit from the OSV-3. For 3 times or 10 times to destroy the world - does not matter. And they will be afraid. hi
                1. hrych
                  hrych 12 May 2018 21: 49
                  +5
                  Quote: Alex777
                  Their exit from the INF Treaty is our exit from the OSV-3

                  There is one caveat - medium-range missiles - Pioneer or SS-20, located in Chukotka, shot through the entire West Coast of the United States and its Pacific bases. Those. from the territory of the USSR, we attacked with this class of missiles the territory of the United States, and of all of Alaska and Canada. Theoretically, the agreement was mutually beneficial, we also do not need to fly to the centers of the Russian Federation in Europe. On the other hand, Russia needs to attack London, Los Angeles and Beijing, which make SD missiles. In short, we need to consider all the pros and cons, But the pros for us are more because, at least, China and Pakistan we need to consider.
                  1. Grits
                    Grits 13 May 2018 07: 02
                    +3
                    All would be nothing ... But again, this is a huge cost for the deployment of combat missiles SD. A bunch of dough is all worth it. Americans can afford spending money (they draw money), but we cannot.
                    1. hrych
                      hrych 13 May 2018 07: 59
                      0
                      On the contrary, they don’t have enough money, it’s a huge debt, and not ours, it’s they have inflated the financial bubble and they have a loss of production due to the departure of jobs in China, they need to buy as much oil as mined by the United States, and this is almost the entire volume of production of Saudi Arabia. This they need to contain almost a thousand military bases and a dozen carrier groups, which Russia is stupidly unable to threaten geographically. And the deployment of a BR for the Russian Federation, and with the experience of mobile ICBMs, is not a problem. The border is ready, but so far we are not letting it into the series. Of course, they can put Tomahawks on ground installations, which they do to quiet, so we have Iskander’s CD again on a mobile platform and we can throw containers with gauges along the borders. By the way, the deployment of SD missiles is much cheaper than ICBMs and all the more so in the maintenance of thousands of bases and AUGs.
                      1. mvg
                        mvg 13 May 2018 20: 51
                        0
                        US oil has been stockpiled, and now it is being sold. Moreover, the entire BV for them. Do not give a damn about their 20 trillion debt, who will show them what? I do not think that we have Iskander in bulk. Moreover, we are cutting the military budget, and they are increasing. The flight time of missiles from Poland or Japan is minimal, and this further increases the chances of 3000 Axes. And Pershing is still not out of date.
                        PS: The New Cold War. And we already lost one, although we were in a better position. In the end, this is not good.
            2. just exp
              just exp 12 May 2018 19: 05
              +3
              no . presenting them to a non-iskander. and iskander-k.
              and these are different missiles .1i this is a ballistic 2nd winged.
              here they are trying to prove that 2nd violates the contract.
        2. Vadim237
          Vadim237 12 May 2018 16: 37
          +2
          Well, Russia is ready to withdraw from this treaty, there are subsonic missiles, and there are launchers for them.
          1. Arberes
            Arberes 12 May 2018 18: 46
            +2
            Quote: Vadim237
            rockets are subsonic; there are launchers for them.


            It remains only a little. Off the coast of the usa all this economy to place. I wonder who from the border countries agrees to this? And another friend of mine on this site suggested that they (the states) “Karakurt” be frightened with a ma-a-a-scarlet set of subsonic “Caliber” aboard them.
            True, they still need to be done!
            1. MadCat
              MadCat 12 May 2018 20: 08
              +1
              Quote: Arberes
              . I wonder who from the border countries agrees to this?

              no one, even under the USSR, would agree.
              1. Arberes
                Arberes 12 May 2018 20: 37
                +2
                Quote: MadCat
                even under the USSR they would not agree.

                And now even more so. Everyone knows perfectly well how this whole undertaking will end at the side of the world hegemon. hi
          2. Proxima
            Proxima 12 May 2018 19: 06
            +4
            Quote: Vadim237
            Well, Russia is ready to withdraw from this treaty, there are subsonic missiles, and there are launchers for them.

            Is Russia ready? Dear, at least look at the map. The United States theoretically can deliver medium- and short-range missiles anywhere - from Estonia and Ukraine to Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan. Let me remind you that from Moscow and let's say just over 600 km to Kharkov (just that!).
            And where are we going to put such missiles - in Mexico, in Canada? True, we tried in Cuba ...
            Due to the changed geopolitical picture of the USA, this agreement is not profitable and they in every way they will seek a way out of it.
            1. Arberes
              Arberes 12 May 2018 19: 20
              +4
              Quote: Proxima
              ending with Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan.

              Well, at the expense of these countries, you, dear Proxima hi got excited, and that's all for sure. The alignment is completely not in our favor.
              1. Alex777
                Alex777 12 May 2018 19: 52
                +1
                Therefore, let the Poseidons catch. hi
                1. Arberes
                  Arberes 12 May 2018 20: 02
                  +2
                  Sometimes a visual demonstration of a flag is more effective than a hidden threat. "Poseidon" - is it at all? I'd like to believe that it is already standing guard over our Motherland.
              2. Proxima
                Proxima 12 May 2018 21: 57
                +2
                Quote: Arberes
                Quote: Proxima
                ending with Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan.

                Well, at the expense of these countries, you, dear Proxima hi got excited, and that's all for sure. The alignment is completely not in our favor.

                The keyword is "theoretically." And so, I come to visit the cottage (Kingisepp district of the Leningrad region), fry kebabs and know perfectly well that in a few kilometers (Estonia) there are NATO units. Stalin must be turning over in his grave, to near the administrative border of the Leningrad region .. belay
                1. mvg
                  mvg 13 May 2018 21: 02
                  0
                  25 km from Kingisepp to Narva, you can’t even catch a grunt. And to St. Petersburg 130 km.
                  1. hrych
                    hrych 13 May 2018 21: 40
                    0
                    These distances are not for SD barrels, but for tactical missiles and even nuclear artillery. Pershing in order to place it is still necessary the consent of the country, although there are balts, etc., but there are Cuba and Venezuela and Bolivia who are not opposed to deploying our missiles.
                    Quote: mvg
                    I do not think that we have Iskander in bulk. Moreover, we are cutting the military budget, and they are increasing.


                    They are forced to increase the budget, and we invested in the military-industrial complex, set up assembly shops for spanking rockets, like sausages, invested in production, now there is an opportunity to rest on our laurels and reduce costs, we have also deployed a military satellite group, and now we need not worry. Also closed the SPRN holes, which required large investments, now the systems on duty were built. They have the same expenses for the supply of bases and fleets, and the introduction of f-35, the conduct of the war in Afghanistan, and against the igiloids. They also have to invest a lot of money in deterring China, but ours is easier.
                    1. mvg
                      mvg 14 May 2018 00: 55
                      0
                      Just to the Urals, where are our main factories and ICBMs.
                      Many bases in Europe are on the balance of these states.
                      The supply of bases and fleets, well, they somehow still contained them in large quantities.
                      PS: We have Crimea, Donbass, Syria and a bunch of enemies around the perimeter. In my opinion, only Belarusians are neutral.
                      1. hrych
                        hrych 14 May 2018 07: 31
                        0
                        As you noticed, for every walking launcher of the Iskander there is a Charging machine. 2 missiles in the launcher and 2 missiles in the transport-loading machine, i.e. 4 on the snout. Those. In the photo there are 64 rockets, and given. that this is a mobile carrier of nuclear weapons, the hysteria is understandable. We don’t touch the Kyrgyz Republic, the declared range of 500 km of the BR, of course, under the INF Treaty. But the aviation counterpart - Dagger, did not hesitate to voice its range of 2 thousand. It is clear that the carrier lifts it to a height, it is clear that a couple of swoops at an altitude of 20 thousand meters, its starting parameters. But not from 500 to 2000, so Western specialists attribute the range closer to a thousand to Iskander, but in a nuclear version, where a tactical charge is 5 times lighter than a half-ton high-explosive, they converge in the possibility of a London attack from Kaliningrad. Crimea and Kaliningrad give us the opportunity to shoot through the whole of Europe right now. If the Americans exchanged their Pershing and ground Tomahawks for our SS-20 (which, in addition to mobility was also with a split head), then apparently not from altruism, there was already Iskander's mother - Oka and the ground version of Pope Caliber - Granat (Relief). And apparently the Americans were afraid of these things in Cuba, all this economy was already mobile and compact. Let them think. We are ready, because their missile defense in Europe has already been regarded as a violation of the treaty and taken measures.
            2. Vadim237
              Vadim237 12 May 2018 20: 02
              +2
              Russian subsonic missiles do not carry a threat - they are easy to detect and shoot down in flat areas.
              1. Arberes
                Arberes 12 May 2018 20: 07
                +2
                Quote: Vadim237
                Russian subsonic missiles do not carry a threat


                The decisive factor is flying time. 8-10 minutes to make a decision is very small. hi
              2. MadCat
                MadCat 12 May 2018 20: 11
                +1
                Quote: Vadim237
                Russian subsonic missiles do not carry a threat - they are easy to detect and shoot down in flat areas.

                Yeah, the victory will be, 77% of the interest will be shot down, but you will already be on the drum, as there will be enough remaining ones.
                1. Albert1988
                  Albert1988 12 May 2018 21: 52
                  0
                  Quote: MadCat
                  77% percent will be shot down

                  Why not 88? or not 99?
                  1. MadCat
                    MadCat 13 May 2018 00: 00
                    0
                    Quote: Albert1988
                    Quote: MadCat
                    77% percent will be shot down

                    Why not 88? or not 99?

                    How why? Less is not fashionable, it sounds beautiful when reporting a victory.
                    Quote: Vadim237
                    Enough for that - there are no ground-based nuclear warheads on the Tomahawks. There are only ordinary warheads.

                    If they withdraw from the contract, they will be wherever possible.
                2. Vadim237
                  Vadim237 12 May 2018 22: 31
                  +1
                  Enough for that - there are no ground-based nuclear warheads on the Tomahawks. There are only ordinary warheads.
            3. hrych
              hrych 13 May 2018 08: 11
              0
              Quote: Proxima
              Dear, at least look at the map

              So take a look at the map yourself, from Anadyr in Chukotka to Los Angeles 5400 km fly in a straight line, and the Pioneer SD missile could reach 5500 km and shoot through the entire West coast of the United States. Or is the USA for you only on the Atlantic coast? More than 50 million people and more than 18% of the US population live on the West Coast of the United States; there are Navy bases and megacities as priority goals.
          3. Grits
            Grits 13 May 2018 07: 03
            0
            We also have a ready-made "Frontier". Where to put it? Neither Cuba nor Nicaragua will agree.
        3. Black_Vatnik
          Black_Vatnik 12 May 2018 16: 44
          +7
          We must comply with the agreement, especially since it is in the interests of Russia.


          It is in Russia's interests that NATO planes do not stand at its borders, only whom in this case are the interests of Russia already being scratched, right?
        4. Serge Gorely
          Serge Gorely 12 May 2018 16: 46
          +4
          Meanwhile, Michael Gorbachev chewing pizza Hut, whispered, well, I couldn’t ...
        5. Fedor egoist
          Fedor egoist 12 May 2018 17: 12
          +13
          Quote: Morosha
          And Pershing 2 will return, but does Russia need this?

          "Pershing" will not return, there are none already. W85 removed from them are used on the B-61. The United States does not currently have the ability to produce SLBMs, nor is there the possibility of producing nuclear warheads. The Russian Federation has the opportunity to deploy in-line production of both of these for several months. By TNW we are ahead of the rest with a wide margin.
          If you already decided to dig a hole with Europe ... well, we won’t take away a shovel from them. Let them dig.
          1. Vadim237
            Vadim237 12 May 2018 17: 33
            +5
            "The United States does not currently have the opportunity to produce nuclear warheads." - Who told you that?
            1. Fedor egoist
              Fedor egoist 12 May 2018 18: 07
              +7
              Quote: Vadim237
              "The United States does not currently have the opportunity to produce nuclear warheads." - Who told you that?

              The production of NFC is not quite the same as the production of iPhones. The continuity of the production cycle is very important. The United States, no matter how hard it is to believe, has lost the technological capabilities to create a nuclear warhead from scratch. They can still upgrade existing ones and utilize debited ones, but to create new ones is no longer there. And they won’t be able to for another 10 years.
              I hope you can understand why they don’t shout about this fact on every corner? This is a shame for a nuclear power. North Korea can do nuclear weapons, but the USA can’t.
              1. Vadim237
                Vadim237 12 May 2018 19: 55
                0
                "The United States, no matter how hard it is to believe, has lost the technological capabilities to create." Come on, the program for modernizing the US nuclear potential until 2030 - almost a trillion bucks, includes the creation of new nuclear submarines, cruise missiles, bombers, ICBMs and new warheads.
                1. Albert1988
                  Albert1988 12 May 2018 21: 54
                  0
                  Quote: Vadim237
                  almost a trillion bucks

                  So they need this very trillion to long and hard to restore these same production.
          2. just exp
            just exp 12 May 2018 19: 06
            0
            the perchs themselves will not return like the Oka. but just as Oka had a receiver (yes, the same Iskander) so in Pershing he can appear.
            1. Albert1988
              Albert1988 12 May 2018 21: 59
              +1
              Quote: just explo
              the perchs themselves will not return like the Oka. but just as Oka had a receiver (yes, the same Iskander) so in Pershing he can appear.

              For a long time, such an “interesting” assumption has walked in the information space that the American missile defense is just a cover for the deployment of just such missiles, based on the fact that the missile launchers for missile defense are universal and shock missiles can easily fit into them. Just an assumption, but as they say, there is no smoke without fire ...
              1. just exp
                just exp 13 May 2018 22: 04
                0
                this is not an "interesting" assumption, it is actually an official presentation. for Putin openly talked about the fact that GBI can be used as RSD.
          3. 7gor
            7gor 13 May 2018 01: 51
            0
            Fedor for optimism +
        6. igorka357
          igorka357 12 May 2018 17: 41
          +10
          It is necessary that there are a lot of SMD nuclear missiles in Kaliningrad and the Crimea .. there are very many in the Far East and Transbaikalia .. Russia is in the ring of enemies, we don’t need this agreement, we lost Cuba, Venezuela almost too ... we’ve already been knocked down by all of us ! Brush with nuclear weapons, and if anything ... we’ll pull it all off, our steam locomotive is very powerful .. and we’ll turn the planet from orbit! She’s not fucked to live without Russia !!!
          1. Vadim237
            Vadim237 12 May 2018 23: 03
            0
            Why are there many nuclear missiles - you need another 100 ICBMs, each with 20 individual guidance warheads - everything in place with the Strategic Missile Forces 4000 warheads - enough to destroy 60 - 70% of the entire US infrastructure and make the lion's share of the territory unsuitable for life within one year , and there is 100% end to the state.
          2. 7gor
            7gor 13 May 2018 01: 54
            0
            Igorka, for power +
        7. Servisinzhener
          Servisinzhener 12 May 2018 18: 16
          +1
          And how will it be possible to comply with the agreement from which the second party will withdraw?
        8. Piramidon
          Piramidon 12 May 2018 19: 49
          +1
          Quote: Morosha
          We must comply with the agreement, especially since it is in the interests of Russia.

          The point is that we and the Americans will not have INFs, but will the rest of NATO have them?
        9. vladfill
          vladfill 12 May 2018 20: 11
          +1
          “We can counter any threat. Estonian Defense Minister visits the Hedgehog exercises”

          "We must comply with the agreement, especially since it is in Russia's interests."

          ..... and even in conditions where the Limitrophs are tweeting something similar to the Secretary of Defense
          Estonia?
      2. Greg Miller
        Greg Miller 12 May 2018 16: 44
        +2
        Quote: Aristarkh Lyudvigovich
        Quote: DEZINTO
        the whole world order went to the seams.

        Double standards rule. The INF Treaty is no longer a tenant. And given the fact that China and other countries that have WMDs have not signed the treaty, it loses all relevance.

        Well, in the destruction of WMD Russia ahead of the rest .... Chemical weapons were destroyed first of all and are proud of it ....
        1. igorka357
          igorka357 12 May 2018 17: 44
          +4
          Chemical, this is poisoning, pain, torment ... we are not like that ... we will burn in seconds in nuclear hell .. without torment! Russia is a humane country!
    2. svp67
      svp67 12 May 2018 16: 24
      +8
      Quote: DEZINTO
      I mean that the whole world order went to the seams.

      He “cracked” the day the “socialist system” collapsed ... And now it's just agony.
      1. Russia
        Russia 12 May 2018 16: 31
        +7
        Then Iskander would smite them in the mouth instead of a cigar. You will have to charge sea containers, and roll them with all types of transport.
      2. Greg Miller
        Greg Miller 12 May 2018 16: 32
        +16
        Any agreement with the United States, not backed up by its military strength and determination to apply it, is worth no more than the paper on which it is printed ... For weakness, cowardice and stupidity it is usually customary to pay a lot of blood ...
        1. Alexander 3
          Alexander 3 12 May 2018 16: 55
          +4
          I think the lessons of the 41st we remember and take into account.
          1. Greg Miller
            Greg Miller 12 May 2018 17: 01
            +6
            I’m sorry, but it only seems to you ... The ruling elite of Russia did not draw any conclusions either from the 41st, from the 91st, or even from current events ...
            1. Alexander 3
              Alexander 3 12 May 2018 17: 12
              +1
              I think we should at least listen to the cries of "friends" about our weapons and our presence in the zones of their interests.
              1. Greg Miller
                Greg Miller 12 May 2018 17: 28
                +3
                Yes, our new weapons look beautiful at parades and air shows .. But for some reason, the T-72 remains the main tank in the troops ... Not the T-14 or even the T-90, but the T-72 !!! To amplify from storage bases T-80 and BMP-1, even began to pull. By the number of fighter jets that are in service with the Armed Forces, we are already inferior not only to the USA and China, but also to Israel (!) And the rate of launching new aircraft is much lower than the rate of cancellation ... So, we are on the right track, GENTLEMEN !!!
        2. igorka357
          igorka357 12 May 2018 17: 45
          +3
          Only humanity will pay, let them not think they will sit out in caves!
          1. Russia
            Russia 12 May 2018 17: 49
            +6
            All caves are already occupied by bears, our brothers. smile
            1. Vadim237
              Vadim237 12 May 2018 23: 05
              +1
              So the zakuson himself will run into the cave.
              1. igorka357
                igorka357 13 May 2018 01: 52
                0
                Ha ha .. hit the mark .. good
    3. Alekseev
      Alekseev 12 May 2018 19: 12
      +1
      Quote: DEZINTO
      I mean that the whole world order went to the seams.

      You hurried it ...
      For some time, did the world order follow paper contracts?
      Any contract is valid if the parties are either profitable to comply with it, or they, for one reason or another, can not comply.
      The text is drawn up only for the sake of order, so that it would be convenient to work on compliance with certain agreements.
      While it is profitable.
  2. newcomer
    newcomer 12 May 2018 16: 11
    +4
    RIAC’s funeral is beneficial for the Yankees, destructive for gay players, painful but not fatal for us. Yankees profitable, because they are already sneaking to our borders_ on the border, it's mine. it’s disastrous for the Geyrops, because they substitute targets on their territory for these missiles. it’s painful, not fatal to us, because I don’t think that our short-range complexes were not preserved in the storehouses. unties our hands, riveting short-range missiles. I still dare to suggest that the Geyropeans are not very happy, to put it mildly.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 12 May 2018 16: 41
      +3
      A dozen C 400 divisions along the entire length of the western border of Russia will minimize the effectiveness of the infantry-fighting infantry division deployed in Europe.
      1. newcomer
        newcomer 12 May 2018 16: 48
        +1
        that’s how it is, it’s possible and cheaper to manage this threat. but the very fact of the appearance of short-range mobile missiles on our borders is not only from the west: there are Finns and Swedes, possibly Georgia (grisins), possibly Ukrland, as an option depressingly.
        1. igorka357
          igorka357 12 May 2018 17: 47
          +2
          And the Finns have nothing to do with it, they’re still neutral, they seem to remember ... even if there were losses from us .. we’ll still push everyone on the mainland !!!
          1. newcomer
            newcomer 12 May 2018 18: 39
            +2
            still remember. that’s precisely why, and moreover.
    2. Piramidon
      Piramidon 12 May 2018 19: 53
      +3
      Quote: newbie
      I don’t think that our short-range complexes didn’t keep in the zashniks

      I hope that after the US withdraws from the treaty, the range of the Iskanders will increase dramatically.
      1. newcomer
        newcomer 12 May 2018 21: 29
        0
        In my opinion, the range of the Iskander is universal, so to speak.
  3. Basil50
    Basil50 12 May 2018 16: 11
    +2
    One contract is more or less, there is no particular difference. But I really hope that the government of RUSSIA will conclude that the United States is unreliable as a partner in negotiations and in compliance with the signed and ratified treaty. That would have also introduced responsibility for certain projects. Let them pay for the loss of RUSSIA from their own pockets. But it's all a dream. We don’t even get jailed for an outright theft; the only condition is to steal a lot from the treasury.
    1. vovanpain
      vovanpain 12 May 2018 16: 26
      +8
      Quote: Vasily50
      But I really hope that the government of RUSSIA will conclude that the United States is unreliable as a partner in negotiations and in compliance with the signed and ratified treaty

      Well, actually, our governments did not teach anything to get the mattresses out of the 1972 missile defense treaty, they call for prudence, but you can just as well persuade tigers to refuse meat.
      Quote: Vasily50
      Let them pay for the loss of RUSSIA from their own pockets.

      It’s kind of paid, as soon as a corrupt official is sentenced to 100 fine lyamov, though according to the documents he has a salary of 10000 rubles, they’ll calculate 7 or 500% a month and he will give how many hundreds of years laughing A confiscation is prohibited not 37 years. hi
      1. igorka357
        igorka357 12 May 2018 17: 50
        +5
        Volodya, don’t catch up the blizzard .. when the country gets on a military track, all the capital that remained in Russia will go where it should, all the plants belonging to not the Russian Federation but .. located on the territory of it will become its factories .. so it was already, you read if that .. hi
    2. Nyrobsky
      Nyrobsky 12 May 2018 16: 45
      +5
      Quote: Vasily50
      But it's all a dream. We don’t even get jailed for an outright theft; the only condition is to steal a lot from the treasury.

      Breathe in "basil50", otherwise they took such a dispersal, which carries you already by inertia. That's it, the elections have already ended, the inauguration has already taken place, the prime minister has already been appointed .... what else is there? - the cabinet has already been scraped ... In short, relax a little, at least until 2022 ... What will we do with the USA?
      1. igorka357
        igorka357 12 May 2018 17: 52
        +1
        And we have nothing to take off, we must go our own way! And if the United States begins to do something militarily, well ... it's not for us to decide ..!
  4. alex-cn
    alex-cn 12 May 2018 16: 19
    0
    "allow the United States to invest"
    And then again and recapture them in Europe.
    Business with and nothing more ...
  5. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 12 May 2018 16: 20
    +2
    Do they, striped-eared, hope to "stick" rockets in Europe to have the advantage of a "preemptive strike"? Do they seriously think that Europe will become the silent hostage of the inadequate Yankees? At the same time, they continue to wring her hands ...
    Firstly, any blow to the territory of Russia will lead to a sizzling blow to the territory of the United States. Moreover, the surviving neighbors of Amers will happily "clean up" the territory of the decrepit lion. And sail from the islands laughing
    Secondly, Europe doesn’t need to get any stars for reckless Yankees ...
    1. Greg Miller
      Greg Miller 12 May 2018 16: 40
      +4
      It will become ... Enough of Poland and the Baltic states alone, who themselves will beg the United States to lodge these missiles with them ... How can besides empty words, regrets and concerns be able to answer this? It seems to me that only one - an increase in the purchase of US bonds.
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 12 May 2018 22: 47
        0
        The only thing they can put there at the moment is subsonic cruise missiles, in conventional military equipment, this is for the next 8 to 10 years, until they create and put into the series of ballistic missile defense.
    2. Kasym
      Kasym 12 May 2018 16: 43
      +4
      Poles with the Baltic states are only too happy to provide such a service to the owner. Albania, Romania, maybe Bulgaria. But Kiev will kiss Trump's legs for such a base. hi
      Russia would not hurt to prepare an alternative capital beyond the Urals.
      1. igorka357
        igorka357 12 May 2018 17: 53
        +1
        And we don’t need the capital there, it is enough to throw plants there, which has already been done once!
      2. Vadim237
        Vadim237 12 May 2018 22: 42
        0
        Novosibirsk - why are you not the capital number 2
      3. asv363
        asv363 13 May 2018 08: 05
        +2
        Poles with the Baltic states are only too happy to provide such a service to the owner. Albania, Romania, maybe Bulgaria. But Kiev will kiss Trump's legs for such a base.

        Among other things, for the deployment of INF in these countries, it will be necessary to greatly increase the level of training of physical protection for future sensitive facilities. At least in Ukraine there are nuclear power plants in Ukraine, Romania and the Republic of Bulgaria, in the Baltic states there is really nothing.

        My private opinion is that the people of Bulgaria will not allow this.
    3. donavi49
      donavi49 12 May 2018 16: 45
      +8
      Europe is very generalized.

      Let's specifically:
      Sprats - anything with joy. To die with smiles on their faces - knowing that they had made a passive contribution to the nuclear attack on the accursed invaders, who humiliated them with the construction of factories and cities since Imperial times. This is the dream of all sprats. Here - this direction is already there.

      Poles - similarly. Total and more! They even pay for what they place.

      Romania is happy.

      Ukraine - no comment. How much is there from Kharkiv even Toporov to fly to any Baltimore / Buturlinovka (past the most equipped air units in the west now)? 15 minutes?

      Georgia is similar. Despite the change of power.

      The opinion of Austria, Hungary, Spain, Italy and even Germany from France is not so important.
      1. Nyrobsky
        Nyrobsky 12 May 2018 17: 12
        +2
        Quote: donavi49
        Sprats - anything with joy. To die with smiles on their faces - knowing that they had made a passive contribution to the nuclear attack on the accursed invaders, who humiliated them with the construction of factories and cities since Imperial times. This is the dream of all sprats. Here - this direction is already there.

        The direction then may be there .... There is no understanding. The fact that they are being put under attack, they will already understand while sitting on the ashes of their Sejm.
      2. igorka357
        igorka357 12 May 2018 17: 55
        +1
        Nuclear weapons on the territory of Ukraine? Are you serious ... Amertsy are not such stupid people, that’s all ... or rather the whole world will understand what it smells like!
        1. donavi49
          donavi49 12 May 2018 19: 09
          0
          AND? They have an active program for deploying nuclear weapons in the territory of the Allied countries. How is this different from, say, Turkey or Germany? The owner of nuclear weapons is the United States, it will be located on the actual territory of the United States (the base allocated by the government).
          1. Nyrobsky
            Nyrobsky 12 May 2018 22: 15
            +1
            Quote: donavi49
            AND? They have an active program for deploying nuclear weapons in the territory of the Allied countries. How is this different from, say, Turkey or Germany? The owner of nuclear weapons is the USA, it will be located in the actual territory of the USA (base allocated by the government).
            The leased land is not US property, and the location of nuclear weapons is determined by agreement.
    4. Vadim237
      Vadim237 12 May 2018 16: 46
      +3
      European countries such as Hungary, the Czech Republic, Romania, Poland, Ukraine, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia would be happy to host medium-range winged and BR installations - they wanted to give a damn about everything that could happen to them because of this.
    5. Borders
      Borders 12 May 2018 16: 47
      +3
      "... They, the striped-eared ones, hope to" stick "rockets in Europe to have the advantage of a" preemptive strike "..."

      they ALREADY did it ...
    6. Piramidon
      Piramidon 12 May 2018 23: 09
      0
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Do they seriously think that Europe will become the silent hostage of the inadequate Yankees?

      Who is asking them? It has long been. All, like a hedgehog with needles, striped bases studded.
  6. RUS33
    RUS33 12 May 2018 16: 38
    0
    SShPind ... and they are non-negotiable. They want to sign, they want to break the contracts.
    No one will soon sign anything with them.
  7. Altona
    Altona 12 May 2018 16: 40
    +8
    Quote: DEZINTO
    I mean that the whole world order went to the seams.

    ---------------------------------
    Well, how do you want? The pressure will only increase. Further it will be even tougher, because not Russia is the main country of capitalism, but you know which one. And even those in the United States who advise against pressure on Russia are also not our allies. They simply propose acting thinner, with a scalpel, and not with an ax. Now the fashionable term "hybrid war" is used; this concept includes some kind of ideological format. Is the ideological format different with the USA? Absolutely the same, "chop loot all over the Earth, push beavers to the delight of people." Trump sells Patriot; GDP sells S-400. What is the difference? You see? I personally do not see. Copying each other's actions. There is an enclave war between us and the USA. We have enclaves along the borders of Donbass, Transnistria, Abkhazia and South Ossetia. We have “situational allies” —Iran, Belarus, Kazakhstan, China, Turkey, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and something from Central Asia — Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan. Why "situational"? Because their "multi-vector nature" can easily turn into both our and the American side, and you yourself know why they will change the government, block accounts and so on. The United States has enclaves in Syria, and they are trying to make them strong. Syria is conditionally under Russian influence. And the United States simply believes that in a conversation with the "rebellious country" one trump card should be kicked out after another. Russia's place in the UN and the Security Council is also a matter of time. So see for yourself, gentlemen, commentators. Further it will be worse internationally.
    PS I wanted to write an article for you, but oh well, you can think of it yourself. If not, let me tell you.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 12 May 2018 17: 02
      +2
      Belarus, Kazakhstan, Turkey, Armenia - these allies should be treated with caution.
    2. ANCIENT
      ANCIENT 12 May 2018 17: 02
      +2
      The pressure will not just increase - it will increase all the chapels! So let's see who has a small intestine!
      1. AUL
        AUL 12 May 2018 17: 31
        +2
        The only trouble is that they press on us, and not we on them! We are concerned.
    3. utyutkin
      utyutkin 12 May 2018 19: 23
      0
      Quote: Altona
      Trump sells Patriot; GDP sells S-400. What is the difference? You see? I personally do not see. Copying each other's actions

      what you see poorly is obvious. strange reasoning and strange conclusions. your trouble is that you do not see and do not hear the main thing. the problem is not at all the pressure on Russia, not in the allies and not in ideology. the problem is that in the world there is a country for which there are NO rules! and who believes that he can do whatever he wants. if only some country outside the NATO block is interested in the United States at least something, it will be bombed in a few days. no matter under what pretext. and they will bomb it until it turns into a desert. and even if a country enters the bloc, they will most likely throw it out and bomb it. Putin said they don’t want to hear us, that is, something needs to be done so that the United States wants to hear . Well, it’s clear that the simplest thing in this case is to squeeze the Baltic states or Poland, but the states have quickly turned around :). Persuading Finland to join NATO is essentially an attempt to get it out of a possible Russian strike. but in general and in general they are unlikely to be able to force Russia to attack these countries unless they only try to deploy nuclear-powered warheads on their territory. but it is unlikely that these countries will agree to deploy them. Then what remains is to try to cover up Syria (the idea is good but difficult to implement. Syria is far away and the United States Iran’s only ally began to sharply push, apparently they realized that Russia could not cope without it.) We must think. and the old move with Cuba is unlikely to succeed. This is the policy of the gentlemen. very interesting country nicaragua.
  8. -ш-
    -ш- 12 May 2018 16: 52
    +1
    but they didn’t think that Russia would have medium-range hypersonic missiles?
    1. ANCIENT
      ANCIENT 12 May 2018 17: 01
      +2
      We just have intercontinental missiles "learn" to fly at short and medium distances!
    2. Vadim237
      Vadim237 12 May 2018 17: 04
      0
      In the United States, they are already testing a hypersonic shock drone - SR 72.
    3. Yak28
      Yak28 12 May 2018 17: 05
      0
      They don’t think for a long time, the states didn’t fight on their territory, they don’t taste the situation at all
  9. Golovan Jack
    Golovan Jack 12 May 2018 16: 58
    0
    OFF: Who still does not know what is hutspa - here is a striking example:
    Quote: Altona
    PS I wanted to write an article for you, but oh well, you can think of it yourself. If not, tell me
  10. ANCIENT
    ANCIENT 12 May 2018 16: 59
    +2
    So they will untie our hands too! As the saying goes, "a woman with a cart is easier"!
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 12 May 2018 17: 04
      +1
      What?

      Missiles deployed in Poland-the Baltic states-Ukraine-Georgia-Romania. They will have the ability to destroy targets to the Urals. Or at least overload the air defense / missile defense.

      Missiles stationed in the Western Military District / Kaliningrad - will destroy the shooting empty bases in Poland-the Baltic States-Ukraine-Georgia-Romania and partially named countries that will die with smiles on their faces for the glory of their Suzerain.

      Only the ICBMs reach the United States - and they are limited to START3. Plus flying time.
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 12 May 2018 17: 38
        0
        Additional air defense missile defense divisions, including the C 500, will have to be countered.
      2. Servisinzhener
        Servisinzhener 12 May 2018 18: 20
        0
        There is not only retaliatory strike, but also retaliatory and preventive wink
      3. asv363
        asv363 13 May 2018 08: 42
        +2
        Only the ICBMs reach the United States - and they are limited to START3. Plus flying time.

        If my insanity does not fail me, its (START-3) validity period will end in 2021.
  11. Yak28
    Yak28 12 May 2018 17: 03
    0
    It has long been clear that many people don’t want to comply with world agreements, our country is large, we can return to nuclear testing and stick nuclear mines all over the country, there’s a good place. There are more airfields to do, more airplanes. Bourgeois will have enough money to shake, there’s still to be washed . wink It’s necessary to take military infrastructure into space, to destroy enemy satellites. The USA naively hopes that in case of war they will be covered with European meat, and they will throw three points with impunity, but it’s not so possible to score a decisive ball from your own half. populated than Russia and the infrastructure is more developed, they will suffer more damage for any. wink
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 12 May 2018 17: 08
      0
      They have a belief that missile defense systems will save them.
      1. Yak28
        Yak28 12 May 2018 17: 14
        0
        Hitler also believed in an imminent victory. But the Americans' faith in their invincibility can destroy the entire continent and greatly undermine the health of the planet. June 22, the main thing is not to wait, we must work in advance
  12. Heterocapsa
    Heterocapsa 12 May 2018 17: 13
    +1
    Yes, annul all the agreements already. All the same, they do not work. Everyone rules everything to drink as he wants. It is time for this world to go to the forefathers.
  13. Maximys
    Maximys 12 May 2018 17: 33
    0
    Yes, it’s hard when there is no oil in the head.
  14. Altona
    Altona 12 May 2018 17: 35
    +1
    Quote: Golovan Jack
    OFF: Who still does not know what is hutspa - here is a striking example:

    --------------------------------
    Here a bright character appeared with the characteristic nickname of the State Duma, whose guide limit is 30 Indians. Who does not know what a typical resident of New Sobyaninsk looks like, you can admire. As usual, he admitted that he was flood, wrote OFF.
  15. Altona
    Altona 12 May 2018 17: 51
    0
    Quote: Fedor Egoist
    The Russian Federation has the opportunity to deploy in-line production of both of these for several months. By TNW we are ahead of the rest with a wide margin.

    -------------------------------
    That is why Americans need to act with a scalpel, not an ax, so that these plants in Russia are strangled in a financial or managerial way, putting some bribed people there. And the USA is waving an ax.
  16. impostor
    impostor 12 May 2018 18: 00
    0
    Mgm ... gracefully ...
    "With a flick of the wrist, the pants turn ... the pants turn ... the pants turn ... In elegant shorts!"
    This is about ABM launch containers, which are poked where the perings were
  17. Servisinzhener
    Servisinzhener 12 May 2018 18: 25
    0
    At the moment, agreeing on anything with the United States and Western countries is completely pointless. Because they will be respected for a maximum of a couple of years, if at all. And as practice shows, they are torn, not even because of the interests of the country, but for momentary political reasons.
  18. razved
    razved 12 May 2018 19: 09
    0
    Exiting the ABM Treaty was only the first step. The exit from the INF Treaty is a logical continuation ... I would like to hope that there was enough time for preparation ...
  19. Panikovsky
    Panikovsky 12 May 2018 19: 23
    +1
    Well, yes, Europe said that Iran does not violate the JCPOA plan, but there are serious arguments here, a large share of the probability, from their point of view. That's all, there are no other arguments. Guys, how to talk with such a "specific kid"? And does it make sense to talk to him until he exhales his cannabis from his sleepy lungs?
  20. Dzafdet
    Dzafdet 12 May 2018 19: 30
    0
    Quote: Aaron Zawi
    Quote: svp67
    Quote: Morosha
    We must comply with the agreement, especially since it is in the interests of Russia.

    And here there are already many questions. Around us there are a lot of countries that have come close to or have already crossed the line of knowledge and skills in the design and manufacture of such missiles, and there is nothing special for us to answer.

    Iskander, in the opinion that prevails in the West, is a missile with a range of up to 1500 km. The official 500 is an understated performance, i.e. in the West they believe that Iskander is a missile that violated the treaty. As far as this is true, I won’t judge.

    We are talking about a cruise missile from the complex, and not about OTR ... Just the Darkest said that the answer will be quick and asymmetric ...
  21. Old26
    Old26 12 May 2018 20: 12
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    Quote: Aron Zaavi
    Iskander is a missile that violated the treaty.

    "Iskander" "Iskander" discord. The USA accuses us of violation due to one of the missiles for this complex. But we also have a number of complaints against them and it is precisely in compliance with this agreement that they are not going to discuss this. Since it’s more profitable for them to just get out of it.

    I agree, Sergey! and in general all this “ping-pong” accusations they are us, and we are pretty fed up with them. If you have something to present - present. and not all these violations of the "spirit" of the contract.

    There are claims to the Iskander ballistic options - let's create a joint commission and joint combat crew. who will try to launch the BR at a range of more than 500. Launch - we are to blame. No - let them go through the forest. The same thing applies to cruise missiles of this complex.
    Theirs MK-41 in Europe. Arrange inspection. If there are "axes" in them - a violation by the Americans. if not, nefig tell us what could be placed there

    Quote: Vadim237
    Well, Russia is ready to withdraw from this treaty, there are subsonic missiles, and there are launchers for them.

    Is Russia ready for the fact that under our nose, in the same Baltic region, the Pershing reincarnations will be deployed, which will fly to Moscow not in 7-10 minutes, as in the 80s, but only 3-4? And to Leningrad in general 2-3 minutes? Are we ready for this?

    Quote: Fedor Egoist
    "Pershing" will not return, there are none already. W85 removed from them are used on the B-61. The United States does not currently have the ability to produce SLBMs, nor is there the possibility of producing nuclear warheads. The Russian Federation has the opportunity to deploy in-line production of both of these for several months. By TNW we are ahead of the rest with a wide margin.
    If you already decided to dig a hole with Europe ... well, we won’t take away a shovel from them. Let them dig.

    You're right. Pershing in the form in which they existed did not return. And the W-85 are used. But what prevents the same Americans from using the BGs they have in operational and long-term storage from other products, in particular those that should be used, if necessary, for the return potential of Minutmen-3
    The factory for the production of BR, EMNIP it is called "Hercules", they simply mothballed.
    They developed several types of target missiles, which by their nature are almost ready to launch ballistic missiles. But in Russia? You are talking in a few months to deploy in-line production. One and only question: WHERE. Our only plant that produces solid fuel rockets and so works with overload. As a result, about half a hundred ICBMs and SLBMs a year and 2 Iskander regiment kits. To put the ballistic missile on the stream, we need a new plant. If you do this, then rearmament plans will fly to hell

    Quote: Vadim237
    "The United States does not currently have the opportunity to produce nuclear warheads." - Who told you that?

    Actually, he's right. The production of new nuclear ammunition will be ready no earlier than 25025, and by 2030 the quantity of ammunition (new) will range from 10 to 80 per year. In this regard, the Americans were "broken"

    Quote: Fedor Egoist
    I hope you can understand why they don’t shout about this fact on every corner? This is a shame for a nuclear power. North Korea can do nuclear weapons, but the USA can’t.

    But these are, in principle, known facts. Enough to read, for example. latest report from their ministry of energy. The euphoria of the collapse of the USSR played a cruel joke with them. They "scored" this, hoping that they had a big deal in DPS, and Russia, like the Soviet Union, was about to fall apart. As a result, Russia not only did not fall apart, but also did not lose these technologies. The Americans have to do everything anew, including and certify their materials used in the production of nuclear weapons. And these are months, or even years.

    Quote: Rusland
    Then Iskander would smite them in the mouth instead of a cigar. You will have to charge sea containers, and roll them with all types of transport.

    And there are so many of these modes of transport. Do not fall for the bait of advertising. In the nearly 20 years that we have been carrying these containers at all exhibitions, NOT ONE country has ordered them, although it would seem that they have "know-how", the enemy does not, take it - but alas

    Quote: Vadim237
    A dozen C 400 divisions along the entire length of the western border of Russia will minimize the effectiveness of the infantry-fighting infantry division deployed in Europe.

    especially considering the range of ranges and heights we can intercept ballistic missiles with these complexes. It would be interesting to see how you will intercept a ballistic missile going at an altitude of, for example, 60 km, when the reach in height of interception of missiles of the S-400 complex (for ballistic missiles) is 30 kilometers, no more ...

    Quote: Vasily50
    One contract is more or less, there is no particular difference. But I really hope that the government of RUSSIA will conclude that the United States is unreliable as a partner in negotiations and in compliance with the signed and ratified treaty. That would have also introduced responsibility for certain projects. Let them pay for the loss of RUSSIA from their own pockets. But it's all a dream. We don’t even get jailed for an outright theft; the only condition is to steal a lot from the treasury.

    Whatever we think and talk about them, but so far they are fulfilling strategic agreements. Sometimes with flaws (well, here they were with us), but in general they

    Quote: Mountain Shooter
    Do they, striped-eared, hope to "stick" rockets in Europe to have the advantage of a "preemptive strike"? Do they seriously think that Europe will become the silent hostage of the inadequate Yankees? At the same time, they continue to wring her hands ...
    Firstly, any blow to the territory of Russia will lead to a sizzling blow to the territory of the United States. Moreover, the surviving neighbors of Amers will happily "clean up" the territory of the decrepit lion. And from the islands they will sail laughing
    Secondly, Europe doesn’t need to get any stars for reckless Yankees ...

    You know, Eugene, “old Europe” will not become a silent hostage. The Americans do not have to hope that the FRG, England or Italy will again agree to deploy medium-range missiles on their territory. But there is, after all, a number of Young Man soldiers who will climb out of their skin to be placed with them. And they do not care about their population. The main thing is that against the Russians. The same Poles are willing to place shock missiles, Baltic states. There is nothing to say about Ukraine and Georgia. With joy. Yes, and Romanians can bend

    Quote: igorka357
    Nuclear weapons on the territory of Ukraine? Are you serious ... Amertsy are not such stupid people, that’s all ... or rather the whole world will understand what it smells like!

    And what prevents the deployment of a missile base for 10 launchers and the introduction of a couple of brigades of troops for its protection?

    Quote: Borders
    "... They, the striped-eared ones, hope to" stick "rockets in Europe to have the advantage of a" preemptive strike "..."

    they ALREADY did it ...

    Where?

    Quote: RUS33
    SShPind ... and they are non-negotiable. They want to sign, they want to break the contracts.
    No one will soon sign anything with them.

    Which of the strategic agreements with the Soviet Union / Russia did he sign and break. Examples, plz.

    Quote: Vadim237
    Additional air defense missile defense divisions, including the C 500, will have to be countered.

    What will the S-500 be capable of so far no one knows. And in order to fend off the threat to each combat unit, we need at least 2-3 interceptors. So consider how many S-500 you need to deploy. And the military budget is not rubber. if before the age of 26 they covered Barguzin, Rubezh, PAK YES - that says a lot

    Quote: impostor
    Mgm ... gracefully ...
    "With a flick of the wrist, the pants turn ... the pants turn ... the pants turn ... In elegant shorts!"
    This is about ABM launch containers, which are poked where the perings were

    Score TWO by history. Where Pershing was poked, that is, in the western part of Germany missile defense containers are not observed from the word TOTALLY. They are not observed even where the Griffons were bumped
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 12 May 2018 22: 40
      0
      They covered up Barguzin and Rubezh because they weren’t needed. I think that I’ll make 30 divisions of the S 20 with the 500 divisions, they will create a new anti-attack for the S 400, by then they will be in the United States and will create a new infantry fighting system.
    2. Fedor egoist
      Fedor egoist 13 May 2018 12: 12
      +1
      Extensive parsing. Plusanul)
      In some moments, I still express my IMHO)
      Quote: Old26
      Is Russia ready for the fact that under our nose, in the same Baltic region, the Pershing reincarnations will be deployed, which will fly to Moscow not in 7-10 minutes, as in the 80s, but only 3-4? And to Leningrad in general 2-3 minutes? Are we ready for this?

      I think that here is a bit superficial look on the topic. There is no need to put an equal sign between hypersonic Raman and RRS. The first can really meet in 2-3 minutes to St. Petersburg, starting from Lithuania, for example. But no one has them yet. The S-500 is just created to counter such threats. The ballistic missile systems follow a ballistic trajectory, they have their own "dead zone", less than the ICBMs, but they do. And for objective reasons, they simply will not have time to fly in 2-3-4 minutes. Such means are needed for a disarming strike. The reserve KP systems, the Perimeter and other methods “widely known in narrow circles” significantly stop the threat.
      Quote: Old26
      But what prevents the same Americans from using the BGs they have in operational and long-term storage from other products, in particular those that should be used, if necessary, for the return potential of Minutmen-3

      I was also interested in this question at one time - is it possible to use warheads from the strategic nuclear weapons for nuclear weapons or vice versa? I did not find the answer. I had to consult with Vyatkin. He thought and said that it is impossible (confirming my opinion):
      Quote: Yar_Vyatkin
      No, I do not think that B-61 can be easily converted into a charge for an ICBM. That is, to disassemble and use fissile materials, say - yes. But the question arises, where to get a number of important components that need to be produced, and not produced. And since the physical package is never interchangeable with the packages in the BB ICBM or SLBM.

      If you have other sources of competent information, share, I will study with pleasure)
      Quote: Old26
      The factory for the production of BR, EMNIP it is called "Hercules", they simply mothballed. They developed several types of target missiles, which by their nature are almost ready to launch ballistic missiles.

      Well, I didn’t say that the States, in principle, cannot create a ballistic missile defense system. I said that "the United States does not currently have the ability to produce an SLBM." And that is a fact. The Russian Federation has such an opportunity. In any case, a non-nuclear ballistic missile defense is a little useful thing in a global conflict.
      Quote: Old26
      One and only question: WHERE. Our only plant that produces solid fuel rockets and so works with overload. As a result, about half a hundred ICBMs and SLBMs a year and 2 Iskander regiment kits

      You yourself answered your question) The rocket from Iskander is our main infantry ballistic missile in the event of the termination of the RMDS agreement. I am sure that the possibility of installing nuclear warheads with a significant increase in range was originally provided for in the project. They will slightly change the index, re-equip it (the nuclear warheads have probably already been made in sufficient quantities) and put them on combat duty.
      In the Russian Federation with TNW everything is in order, both in number (5-8 thousand warheads) and in terms of nomenclature. If the contract ceases to exist, even Msta and Tulip will have the BCH in the BC. Just in case )
      Quote: Old26
      especially considering the range of ranges and heights we can intercept ballistic missiles with these complexes. It would be interesting to see how you will intercept a ballistic missile going at an altitude of, for example, 60 km, when the reach in height of interception of missiles of the S-400 complex (for ballistic missiles) is 30 kilometers, no more ...

      You are right, the BR is not intercepted in this way, and in the final section of the trajectory it is only with a low probability. But it seems to me that Vadim237 meant interception in the active section of the trajectory (the first 120-160 seconds of flight). That is, the same tactics that the States are going to use with their missile defense in Europe. This makes some sense.
      Quote: Old26
      Which of the strategic agreements with the Soviet Union / Russia did he sign and break. Examples, plz.

      ABM Treaty of 1972, CFE Treaty of 1990 Although in fairness, I note that they withdrew from the ABM treaty in accordance with the provisions laid down in the text, that is, nothing was violated de jure, the treaty simply terminated. As for the CFE Treaty, it was not the States that violated, but NATO as a whole, more precisely, its new members. Although in any case I think the CFE Treaty is stillborn initially.
  22. albert
    albert 12 May 2018 21: 18
    0
    We must withdraw from the treaty banning biological weapons. Combat viruses can do more damage to the US than our nuclear warheads. Most importantly, make them incurable and especially deadly.
    1. Nyrobsky
      Nyrobsky 12 May 2018 21: 55
      +1
      Quote: albert
      We must withdraw from the treaty banning biological weapons. Combat viruses can do more damage to the US than our nuclear warheads. Most importantly, make them incurable and especially deadly.

      We do not have such an agreement with them. There is an international convention on biological and toxic weapons with a separate protocol prohibiting the use of deadly and poisonous microorganisms for research purposes. Since 2001, the United States has refused to follow the protocol. Most American tank laboratories are located outside the United States, including in countries along the borders with Russia, such as Georgia and Urkain.
      1. albert
        albert 12 May 2018 22: 02
        0
        Well, especially since there is nothing to ping around with pindosami. Thank you for the additional info. hi
  23. d1975
    d1975 12 May 2018 22: 20
    +1
    Quote: Morosha
    And Pershing 2 will return, but does Russia need this? We must comply with the agreement, especially since it is in the interests of Russia.

    I put you +. But still
  24. izja
    izja 13 May 2018 00: 10
    +1
    Quote: Alex777
    Their exit from the INF Treaty is our exit from the OSV-3. For 3 times or 10 times to destroy the world - does not matter. And they will be afraid. hi


    The main thing is that the last pants do not sleep :) such things are not worth a penny, and the budget has only begun to be cut, withdrawal from the contract will begin a new round of injections from both sides, the States have something to pour in.
  25. izja
    izja 13 May 2018 00: 14
    +1
    Quote: Vadim237
    Enough for that - there are no ground-based nuclear warheads on the Tomahawks. There are only ordinary warheads.


    You personally reported that no? ) how can life be so naive and in missile defense in Europe say only missiles for protection.
  26. Tor 801
    Tor 801 13 May 2018 00: 20
    0
    no one is negotiating with anyone, everyone is taking advantageous positions in front of the big mochilov!
  27. Sergey Averchenkov
    Sergey Averchenkov 13 May 2018 00: 46
    0
    Military Review, please do not show Gorbachev’s photographs, otherwise I spat on the entire monitor ... don’t feel sorry for me, take pity on the monitor. :(
  28. shinobi
    shinobi 13 May 2018 01: 53
    +2
    In the event of an exit, the United States will face a lot of unpleasant surprises. I’m thinking of further cries and attempts to blackmail things will not work.
  29. Zomanus
    Zomanus 13 May 2018 08: 13
    0
    Oh, now China has been pulled up as an excuse for an arms race.
    Still, I’m eager to get them lyuley.
    Although yes, there is already no one to rob, but more and more money is needed.
  30. keeper03
    keeper03 13 May 2018 08: 41
    0
    Let go out! It is not profitable for the Americans, and we, too, will not sit idle! yes The days of the humpbacked and drunk are gone, now we will do what is beneficial to us and in our interests !!! bully
  31. Old26
    Old26 13 May 2018 13: 15
    0
    Quote: hrych
    And the deployment of a BR for the Russian Federation, and with the experience of mobile ICBMs, is not a problem. The border is ready, but so far we are not letting it into the series.

    The problem is very big. We have made solid fuel exclusively at the Votkinsk plant, which is now already loaded to capacity. Moreover, the issue of the chassis has not yet been resolved. We don’t seem to be buying Minsk, our own KAMAZ version is still being tested and it is not clear how they go. In fact, because of this, they stopped talking about setting up the Rubezha database, because didn’t decide which chassis it would be on. Therefore, we can say that the Rubezh complex is not ready for deployment ...

    Quote: just EXPL
    no . presenting them to a non-iskander. and iskander-k.
    and these are different missiles .1i this is a ballistic 2nd winged.
    here they are trying to prove that 2nd violates the contract.

    Not even the second, but the third. They also have no particular complaints about the 9M728 missile (although we ourselves give an occasion by drawing schemes on the Internet with a radius of 2500 km). Presenting them to the 9M729 missile. And it is precisely on this rocket that they are trying to prove our violation of the INF Treaty
  32. mvg
    mvg 14 May 2018 09: 50
    0
    hrych,
    Neither Cuba nor Venezuela will deploy missiles. Unlike Ukrainians, Poland and the Baltic states. Not that situation in the world. They tried it once. The USA over the puddle feels relatively safe. SS-20 Pioneer was 650 pieces, 3 BB each with 150 kT. Plus Oka, Spider is more than 200 rockets of 10-50 kt. Agree, a little more than 64 launchers with one BB, and not all are vigorous.
    Grenades, it seems, were only in the marine version and with a bch. Now there are none. Dates.
    A dagger can and flies for 2000, a carrier can climb 30 km and launch at Mach 2.5. But there are, like, a dozen carriers. Not an option. Like Kaliningrad. There is no MiG-31, he has nothing to do there.
    Remaining ICBMs and nuclear submarines, at best 3-4 carriers on the database. Mine are destroyed, mobile Yars and Poplar remain.
    PS: With a great desire, at the cost of Europe, they may very well try. But rather they will press economically.
    1. hrych
      hrych 14 May 2018 13: 13
      0
      Quote: mvg
      Mine are destroyed, mobile Yars and Poplar remain.

      Mine is not destroyed, SPRN gives time to answer. MSD BRs are effective at a distance of less than 3000 km relative to ICBMs, but we have the depth of the territory and the difference is that the SD Rocket, that there is no ICBM, the SPRN, which sees at 3000, will fix and give a command to respond. Also starts ZGRLS Container will start. A separate topic of the Kyrgyz Republic, but this is also resolved. The ICBM mines are located taking into account the depth and the Voivods are in Orenburg and Krasnoyarsk. Even the SMD BRs are easier to retire with air defense / missile defense systems, in particular the S-400 takes missiles with a range of 3500 km, i.e. on ICBMs is weak, on the SS-20 is weak, but Pershing-2 with a range of 1770 km is its topic, and with a margin of two. The S-400 was actually created taking into account the possible creeps of a partner. Another reason why the Turks clung to the S-400 so much, it’s for them an anti-missile defense against existing missiles in Israel (Jericho-3), Iran (Shahab-3) and Saudi Arabia (Chinese Dongfeng-3).
      The IRGC unit operating abroad - Quds, with all its secrets, does not exceed the number of 50 thousand, but actually even less. We do not forget that in addition to Syria, they work in Lebanon, Iraq, and now there is a big cripple in Yemen. They are rather operatives and advisers, i.e. MTR, and directly cannon fodder provide local formations. It is for the Quds that the Israelis hunt. But Shiite volunteers from Iraq and Lebanon in Syria are really many, but not so much. At least there are no hundreds of thousands for sure. They are essentially mercenaries, albeit motivated.
      1. mvg
        mvg 14 May 2018 15: 22
        0
        At least there aren’t hundreds of thousands

        Greetings. This is the 100 thousand Shiite group that was promised from Iraq when they break through the corridor. It’s clear that they’ve overestimated, but with Hamas, Hezbola and the IRGC, I fully admit that 100 will run. There are too many fronts, the forces are scattered, and only the Tigers are fighting. Chasing them from place to place. Mercenaries so-so fight, take care. Moreover, these are former opponents who have flipped over.
        By the way, very little coverage in our press of the success of the Iranians, not a word. Even more about Turks and Kurds.
        Jerekhon-3 is an ICBM, it has a range of 11, Shahab and DF-000, as I understand it, the Skad R-3, can be modernized. They should go astray, but I don’t think with a high percentage.
        I somehow do not particularly believe in air defense / missile defense. How many were shot down in 1982, in 1991, in 2003 .. in Yugoslavia .. a penny. And now, out of 103, it’s declared either 77 or 37. And one lost plane. S-200, vaunted, along the way, can only bring down Boeing. A friend in the air defense, in the part that safely collapsed, leaving the barracks, pools, giant caponiers, was not too high a view. And here they consider the S-300 a panacea for everything .. forgetting that there are regular exercises with Greece and Cyprus.
        Aviation ALWAYS defeated air defense.
        1. hrych
          hrych 14 May 2018 15: 58
          0
          Quote: mvg
          Welcome.

          Hi hi
          Quote: mvg
          Jerechon 3

          So declared 2000-4800 km, range, and the level of ICBMs is of course doubtful. From Tel Aviv to Istanbul and Ankara, the distance is 900-1100 km (the border of short and medium range), i.e. even if the missile’s range is greater, it’s still necessary to let it go to this range, or to abandon the third stage, and from the second it was tested only at medium range.
          The S-300, unlike the S-200, has mobility, the latter stationary. Even the latest S-300 missiles can work on overseas targets, i.e. can shoot the entire territory of Israel. Do not require illumination of the target, etc. The Golan Heights and the Antilivan chain close Syria from Israel and if you do not jump out from behind the mountains, then the aircraft was invulnerable. Even long-range air defense missiles can carry a nuclear warhead and can be used to strike ground targets and naval targets. A very perfect weapon. Aviation has a drawback - it is necessary to run to the plane, climb, accelerate, etc. Depending on weather conditions, highly qualified pilot training is required. S-300/400 complexes are mobile, instantly put into a combat position, etc. The S-200 is far from this. Of course, if there is no layered defense, then it is hard to fight back, unfortunately in Syria there is still an object system. And that can afford to repel attacks. And the results of the attacks of the Americans and Israelis are not impressive, and the merit of the air defense system is all the same.