Fools with missiles
Liberals and even patriots love to repeat the phrase that "Russia has two misfortunes: fools and roads" (and the former are repairing the latter). But, it should be noted, it is unlikely that it becomes less (the Internet clearly shows that the population is growing, and the number of minds is constant), but the roads in the country are improving before our eyes, and not only are we full of fools and problems with roads, and "blessed", according to the liberals, the West has enough of both. But God bless them, with roads, where it is worse when fools, especially vested with powers in elective representative bodies, climb into matters connected with nuclear weapons, missiles and in general - strategic stability.
And here is the first group of fools is the Capitol.
The fact that people are sitting there, to put it mildly, not a damn thing who knows about the situation in the world, is no secret to anyone. And the legendary draws of the work of "full-time agents of the FSB" Vova and Lexus, in particular, about the coup in Limpopo, this is well demonstrated. But fools in parliament usually do well and without prankkers - they have a tribune and the media. What the Capitol does in relation to Russian-American relations is also not indicative of a great mind. For the sake of domestic political clashes, it is becoming more and more annoying to another superpower, besides, it is superior in the most powerful of man-made weapons, while literally pushing with kicks to another superpower, another great power - is that wise?
The other day, US President Donald Trump signed a law on military appropriations for a record (if not to take into account the level of inflation, especially in the military-industrial complex), the amount of 716 billion dollars, finally surpassing Obama in peacekeeping. The sum itself does not interest us, we will not engage in an unnecessary, but sublimation popular with us, comparing the budgets of the two superpowers in dollars at the rate, without taking into account the purchasing power in general and in this particular area. We are about something else.
So, this law prescribes, in particular, the Congress instructing the president to send to Congress “no later than December 31 2018 of the year” a report on whether the Trump administration had discussed in dialogue with Russia questions about the possibility of extending the effect of the heavy ICBM Sarmat, an air-based nuclear cruise missile known as X-3, an uninhabited underwater vehicle known as Status-101 or otherwise identifiable (referring to Poseidon SPA from the Status-6 system), hypersonic controlled o uzheynuyu system of long-range (sic) known as the "Vanguard". Congress demands that the US government find out whether Russia will declare these weapons, as it should be according to the rules of START-6. If, they say, the Trump administration informs the legislators that the position of the Russian Federation does not threaten the viability of START-3, then it’s good, and if not, some kind of response will be required.
And here, to be honest, you are struck by the stupidity of American lawmakers. If you guys are democrats about the Sarmat combat missile system with the heavy 15А28 ICBM, then of course, like the 15А35-71 BRK, it will be officially declared on START-3. In general, everything is simple with Sarmat - data on its dimensions and mass, the appearance of the missile and the TPC, and a number of other very general information have long been communicated to the other side of the Treaty, as it should be. How the system will begin flight tests - will fall into the category of undeployed and tested systems, how to proceed with the deployment, if, of course, in 2020, START-3 is still alive, will be included in it as a deployed system that replaces the “Voevoda” ICBM . And if the contract is extended in 15, of course, there are doubts. With Avangard, it’s not very clear how it’s in the current incarnation (after all, the avant-garde avant-garde equipment will live on Sarmat, and maybe even where), with the deployment on MBR-18NUTTH 2021А100 will be declared, after all, the rocket itself, in fact, did not change, the combat equipment was replaced. But in general, there is no problem, well, ICBMs with one warhead will be credited, and that's all. Perhaps after consulting with the other party.
But questions about the "nuclear" cruise missile X-101 somehow stumped, probably in the General Staff are also surprised. Firstly, the X-101 is considered to be a non-nuclear air-based CD, unlike its sister X-102, equipped with a special thermonuclear warhead. Secondly, being air-based airlift troops, it is generally not considered in START-3, as is its “craft recruitment” of type X-55MS or AGM-86В. The bombers themselves are taken into account in the Treaty, all of which (as carriers of one conventional warhead). This is such a "hole" in the Treaty, which allows the parties with 1550 valid warheads to have 2000-2200 placed in reality, because bombers carry 6, 8, 12, 16 CR on board. If we are talking about normal ones like B-52H, Tu-160 or Tu-95MS / MSM carrying the ALCM on board, and not about the useless freak B-2А carrying only B-61 aerial weapons from nuclear weapons. Why did the questions arise to the non-nuclear CD, even the most long-range in the class? Confused with X-102, which flies even further (it is believed that she has up to 5500 km versus 4500 from her “sister”)? Maybe. But after all, ALCMs are not regulated by the Treaty. Yes, and we do not hide the X-102 from anyone, and the X-101 almost 50 hundred "pogolubili" terrorists in Syria, the whole world saw them. What, in the Congress woke up and woke up all mixed up?
And mixed up, apparently, with the experimental ground-based KR "Burevestnik", equipped with a nuclear rocket engine. Here on it, Americans will certainly have questions. And some diplomatic battles are likely around this rocket, but not now, and later, closer to its deployment. But formally it is under the START-3 does not fall. The superpedoes do not fall there either, they are also the Poseidon SPA: there are no formal definitions for such weapons, and there are no prohibitions on them. These are not submersible platforms in lakes and inland seas, about which there have already been non-deployment agreements in the past, and not much else. Americans, of course, somehow try to limit these weapons, but it is unlikely to turn out so simple. The United States has been trying to negotiate with Russia for years, probably 10-12, but Moscow invariably refuses to start negotiations on the limitation of tactical nuclear weapons, offering to first rally all owners of such arsenals at the common table. But it is not simpler to gather countries such as the DPRK, Israel, India or even Pakistan and even China at the table of unnecessary negotiations on TNW, than to persuade the cockroaches to leave home, threatening with words.
In addition, we have claims on the observance by the Americans of START-3 (albeit formal ones), too. Yes, and according to the ratification documents, the Russian side reserved the right to leave the Treaty if the Americans deploy global anti-missile defense systems. Formally, despite the ephemeral effectiveness (especially against ICBMs and SLBMs, which they do not intercept) of deployed systems, there is a reason. But most likely, if the "partners" do not finish us completely, START-3 will live to the very least before 2021, but what will happen next and whether it will be at all - this is a very big question.
In general, Congress entered into the law an obvious set of nonsense, and the president signed it. But our legislators are also always ready to respond to someone else's stupidity, thank God, not in law, but only in an interview.
Dear member and even deputy chairman of the security committee, it would be better, frankly, instead of talking to a journalist to go eat. At the same time, when food is absorbed and will give additional activity to the brain, I would re-read the text of the Treaty in order to understand that "not everything is so unequivocal", and from 6 systems from "March 1 package", and "Sarmat", and "Avant-garde" The treaty, and no one is hiding it, and to understand this, you do not need to be a senator. And even a deputy. And "Dagger" and "Peresvet" really do not fall under START-3. About the rest of the above mentioned.
In general, this is not the first "strange statement", if not to say "pearl", from the mouths of our legislators on such a delicate topic as strategic stability, and not the last. The difference between ours and the American lawmakers is obviously that they do not adopt stupid laws with the same pearls or requirements to the other side, reminiscent of the memorable from L. Filatov's poem about Fedotr-archer:
Fake me
That-Not-Can-Be!
Write your name,
So as not to forget in a hurry!
Only for the king from the poem such demands ended sadly, but the Americans obviously did not read this work, and sometimes they do not understand with whom and how they are trying to talk.
By the way, the sum for the development of "a nuclear combat unit of particularly low power W76-2" is still spelled out in the same budget of the US Department of Defense. Some time ago, this topic was covered on this resource and analyzed in sufficient detail. The sum, however, is a penny by the standards of the American budget masters, 64 million dollars, and it seems that this is only a preliminary study of how, having disfigured the normal W76-1 BB from the Trident-2 D5 SLBM, get the BB “ersatz-TNW”, which is normally impossible to apply, for the reason that the enemy does not know in what equipment the strategic SLBM is flying.
In general, if the Lord wants to punish someone - he deprives the mind. It seems that in this case He is punishing the military and political leadership of the United States. Only here it is not only unfortunately that can suffer in the event of their irresponsible actions.
And here is the first group of fools is the Capitol.
The fact that people are sitting there, to put it mildly, not a damn thing who knows about the situation in the world, is no secret to anyone. And the legendary draws of the work of "full-time agents of the FSB" Vova and Lexus, in particular, about the coup in Limpopo, this is well demonstrated. But fools in parliament usually do well and without prankkers - they have a tribune and the media. What the Capitol does in relation to Russian-American relations is also not indicative of a great mind. For the sake of domestic political clashes, it is becoming more and more annoying to another superpower, besides, it is superior in the most powerful of man-made weapons, while literally pushing with kicks to another superpower, another great power - is that wise?
The other day, US President Donald Trump signed a law on military appropriations for a record (if not to take into account the level of inflation, especially in the military-industrial complex), the amount of 716 billion dollars, finally surpassing Obama in peacekeeping. The sum itself does not interest us, we will not engage in an unnecessary, but sublimation popular with us, comparing the budgets of the two superpowers in dollars at the rate, without taking into account the purchasing power in general and in this particular area. We are about something else.
So, this law prescribes, in particular, the Congress instructing the president to send to Congress “no later than December 31 2018 of the year” a report on whether the Trump administration had discussed in dialogue with Russia questions about the possibility of extending the effect of the heavy ICBM Sarmat, an air-based nuclear cruise missile known as X-3, an uninhabited underwater vehicle known as Status-101 or otherwise identifiable (referring to Poseidon SPA from the Status-6 system), hypersonic controlled o uzheynuyu system of long-range (sic) known as the "Vanguard". Congress demands that the US government find out whether Russia will declare these weapons, as it should be according to the rules of START-6. If, they say, the Trump administration informs the legislators that the position of the Russian Federation does not threaten the viability of START-3, then it’s good, and if not, some kind of response will be required.
And here, to be honest, you are struck by the stupidity of American lawmakers. If you guys are democrats about the Sarmat combat missile system with the heavy 15А28 ICBM, then of course, like the 15А35-71 BRK, it will be officially declared on START-3. In general, everything is simple with Sarmat - data on its dimensions and mass, the appearance of the missile and the TPC, and a number of other very general information have long been communicated to the other side of the Treaty, as it should be. How the system will begin flight tests - will fall into the category of undeployed and tested systems, how to proceed with the deployment, if, of course, in 2020, START-3 is still alive, will be included in it as a deployed system that replaces the “Voevoda” ICBM . And if the contract is extended in 15, of course, there are doubts. With Avangard, it’s not very clear how it’s in the current incarnation (after all, the avant-garde avant-garde equipment will live on Sarmat, and maybe even where), with the deployment on MBR-18NUTTH 2021А100 will be declared, after all, the rocket itself, in fact, did not change, the combat equipment was replaced. But in general, there is no problem, well, ICBMs with one warhead will be credited, and that's all. Perhaps after consulting with the other party.
But questions about the "nuclear" cruise missile X-101 somehow stumped, probably in the General Staff are also surprised. Firstly, the X-101 is considered to be a non-nuclear air-based CD, unlike its sister X-102, equipped with a special thermonuclear warhead. Secondly, being air-based airlift troops, it is generally not considered in START-3, as is its “craft recruitment” of type X-55MS or AGM-86В. The bombers themselves are taken into account in the Treaty, all of which (as carriers of one conventional warhead). This is such a "hole" in the Treaty, which allows the parties with 1550 valid warheads to have 2000-2200 placed in reality, because bombers carry 6, 8, 12, 16 CR on board. If we are talking about normal ones like B-52H, Tu-160 or Tu-95MS / MSM carrying the ALCM on board, and not about the useless freak B-2А carrying only B-61 aerial weapons from nuclear weapons. Why did the questions arise to the non-nuclear CD, even the most long-range in the class? Confused with X-102, which flies even further (it is believed that she has up to 5500 km versus 4500 from her “sister”)? Maybe. But after all, ALCMs are not regulated by the Treaty. Yes, and we do not hide the X-102 from anyone, and the X-101 almost 50 hundred "pogolubili" terrorists in Syria, the whole world saw them. What, in the Congress woke up and woke up all mixed up?
And mixed up, apparently, with the experimental ground-based KR "Burevestnik", equipped with a nuclear rocket engine. Here on it, Americans will certainly have questions. And some diplomatic battles are likely around this rocket, but not now, and later, closer to its deployment. But formally it is under the START-3 does not fall. The superpedoes do not fall there either, they are also the Poseidon SPA: there are no formal definitions for such weapons, and there are no prohibitions on them. These are not submersible platforms in lakes and inland seas, about which there have already been non-deployment agreements in the past, and not much else. Americans, of course, somehow try to limit these weapons, but it is unlikely to turn out so simple. The United States has been trying to negotiate with Russia for years, probably 10-12, but Moscow invariably refuses to start negotiations on the limitation of tactical nuclear weapons, offering to first rally all owners of such arsenals at the common table. But it is not simpler to gather countries such as the DPRK, Israel, India or even Pakistan and even China at the table of unnecessary negotiations on TNW, than to persuade the cockroaches to leave home, threatening with words.
In addition, we have claims on the observance by the Americans of START-3 (albeit formal ones), too. Yes, and according to the ratification documents, the Russian side reserved the right to leave the Treaty if the Americans deploy global anti-missile defense systems. Formally, despite the ephemeral effectiveness (especially against ICBMs and SLBMs, which they do not intercept) of deployed systems, there is a reason. But most likely, if the "partners" do not finish us completely, START-3 will live to the very least before 2021, but what will happen next and whether it will be at all - this is a very big question.
In general, Congress entered into the law an obvious set of nonsense, and the president signed it. But our legislators are also always ready to respond to someone else's stupidity, thank God, not in law, but only in an interview.
The newest armaments of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation do not fall under the START-3 Treaty - so says the first deputy chairman of the Federation Council Committee on Defense and Security Yevgeny Serebrennikov. Moscow is ready to provide all the necessary evidence to Washington, but overseas are not ready for dialogue, he said in an interview with RIA "News».
“Perhaps the Russian side will provide additional materials, but this already reminds me of the endless conversation of the blind with the deaf,” the senator said.
“Perhaps the Russian side will provide additional materials, but this already reminds me of the endless conversation of the blind with the deaf,” the senator said.
Dear member and even deputy chairman of the security committee, it would be better, frankly, instead of talking to a journalist to go eat. At the same time, when food is absorbed and will give additional activity to the brain, I would re-read the text of the Treaty in order to understand that "not everything is so unequivocal", and from 6 systems from "March 1 package", and "Sarmat", and "Avant-garde" The treaty, and no one is hiding it, and to understand this, you do not need to be a senator. And even a deputy. And "Dagger" and "Peresvet" really do not fall under START-3. About the rest of the above mentioned.
In general, this is not the first "strange statement", if not to say "pearl", from the mouths of our legislators on such a delicate topic as strategic stability, and not the last. The difference between ours and the American lawmakers is obviously that they do not adopt stupid laws with the same pearls or requirements to the other side, reminiscent of the memorable from L. Filatov's poem about Fedotr-archer:
Fake me
That-Not-Can-Be!
Write your name,
So as not to forget in a hurry!
Only for the king from the poem such demands ended sadly, but the Americans obviously did not read this work, and sometimes they do not understand with whom and how they are trying to talk.
By the way, the sum for the development of "a nuclear combat unit of particularly low power W76-2" is still spelled out in the same budget of the US Department of Defense. Some time ago, this topic was covered on this resource and analyzed in sufficient detail. The sum, however, is a penny by the standards of the American budget masters, 64 million dollars, and it seems that this is only a preliminary study of how, having disfigured the normal W76-1 BB from the Trident-2 D5 SLBM, get the BB “ersatz-TNW”, which is normally impossible to apply, for the reason that the enemy does not know in what equipment the strategic SLBM is flying.
In general, if the Lord wants to punish someone - he deprives the mind. It seems that in this case He is punishing the military and political leadership of the United States. Only here it is not only unfortunately that can suffer in the event of their irresponsible actions.
Information