Military Review

Deceive Putin. How the domestic and Western press are used to misinform

160

From the report of the RAND Corporation (USA): “... wear out Russia and throw it off balance ... the expansion of the presence of the US Navy and its allies in the Russian zones of responsibility could force Russia to increase its naval investments, pulling funding from potentially more important directions.



Vyacheslav Molotov is credited with formulating the rule: "If our enemies praise us, then we are doing something wrong."

Alas, this wise rule has been forgotten today. Today it is customary for us to rejoice that our enemies are writing laudatory odes about us, painting in colors our huge successes in military construction.

However, V. Molotov was right. The laudatory materials of the Western press and the statements of Western military leaders and politicians about how great and terrible we are are made not at all because this is so in reality.

In addition, often our press is simply banal, due to the ignorance of the translators and the inability to read between the lines of the editors, it finds in the words of foreign military personnel not at all the meaning that they really put into them. And then he broadcasts this "crooked" translation to the domestic reader.

It is worth separating one from the other, and at the same time figuring out what we are dealing with, who, whom and in what is actually trying to deceive, and what does Putin have to do with it.

Lost in translation and the distorting mirror of the media


First news from the domestic "media" (we put it in quotes, because, in our opinion, they are mass media, but often not information at all, but disinformation).

The Pentagon announced the loss of the "inaccessibility" of the United States due to Russian submarines.

MOSCOW, October 2 - RIA Novosti. The United States has ceased to be "out of reach" due to the modernization of the Russian submarine fleet... This, as reported by Business Insider, said the commander of the submarine forces of the US Navy, Vice Admiral Daryl Caudle.

“Our country is no longer out of reach, so we should be prepared to conduct high-level operations in local waters,” he said.

As the newspaper writes, despite the fact that now the Russian fleet has fewer submarines than during the Soviet era, they are more modern, silent, have greater autonomy and are capable of striking ground targets.

During the conflict in Syria, Moscow has already demonstrated its Kalibr cruise missiles, striking targets on land from submarines. Because of this, the United States needs to prepare for submarine war as soon as possible, said Michael Petersen, director of the Institute for the Study of Russian Naval Forces at the US Naval War College.


Rђ RІRѕS, what Business Insider actually wrote with quotes from Vice Admiral Caudle (Vice Admiral's direct speech is highlighted):

The Decline of the Russian Navy in the Ten Years After the Cold War "Let some guys think that the Motherland is a safe reserve from the Russian forces"Vice Admiral Daryl Caudle, commander of the US Navy's submarine forces, said on September 16.

“But it is well known that the Motherland is not really a safe reserve, and we must be ready to conduct extremely complex operations in the waters nearby [to the US territory],” Caudle added.


It remains to add to this only that Caudle spoke during the Black Widow anti-submarine exercises, which took place from 12 to 18 September, and to a large extent his speech was motivational for the personnel.

As they say, feel the difference. Caudle did not say anything about the superpowers of the Russian Navy, he simply insisted that the personnel not relax and prepare for war in earnest.

For some reason, about these exercises, about the interaction between surface and submarine forces and the base patrol aviationwhich were worked out on them, our press did not write anything. Moreover, she did not write anything about the fact that the recent voyages of American and British ships in the Barents Sea were also exactly the same anti-submarine exercises several hundred kilometers from our bases. The only article where things were called by their proper names was an article by one of the authors in business newspaper "Vzglyad": "The United States is preparing to sink Russian submarines right off the coast".

And here is what Petersen, mentioned to RIA Novosti, said according to the same edition:

"In terms of numbers, the Russian fleet is not the threat it was during the Cold War, but in terms of capabilities, it remains a significant challenge."

Further, Petersen deciphers what exactly the challenge is: "Caliber". He is not worried that Russian submarines can (according to statements by our media) find and track American SSBNs, he is not worried that, having neutralized American multipurpose submarines, our boats will pose a threat to American warships (according to our media). No. This is not considered.

He only cares that they (that is, we) have long-range missiles, everything else is not particularly interesting to him, but phrases describing the fact that Russian submarines have become "more perfect" or "quieter" and in the statements of the Americans , and in the text of the articles written by the journalists are interpreted absolutely unambiguously: they have become quieter IN COMPARISON WITH THE SAME RUSSIAN OLD FRAMES.

Nobody in the US today even stutters that Ash is superior to Virginia, or at least equal to it in any way. It is postulated that for RUSSIA this is a step forward. Well, yes, against the background of Project 949A, to replace which the Ash was created, this is a step forward in terms of stealth. But he will resist completely different submarines ...

It is our journalists who create an extremely blissful unctuous background in the press, convincing readers that everything is so good with us that it simply cannot be bad. We have already defeated almost everyone, there is absolutely nothing to worry about.

And about the search anti-submarine operation of the NATO OVMS near the bases of the Northern Fleet (including the NSNF), one can simply not write, so as not to spoil the blissful picture.

Americans really care about our cruise missiles. But they don't have to worry too much: these missiles have not yet hit the Shchuka-B and Batons, the rearmament of the third-generation domestic submarines on the Caliber KRO has been disrupted (and deliberately), and now the Caliber is ready to use either new "Varshavyanka", which obviously will not be in the Atlantic, or SSGN "Severodvinsk" of project 3. A little later "Kazan" and "Novosibirsk" of project 855M. The rest of "Ash-M" is still far from delivery.

And that's all.

The question arises: why does our press create such a false idea of ​​how a potential enemy sees us? The reason is that, through the efforts of the press itself, chasing a patriotic reader, and the efforts of the Ministry of Defense, instead of a real picture of the combat capability of the domestic Armed Forces with their advantages (and there are many in fact) and shortcomings (of which there are also a lot), a simulacrum was created in the domestic information space, a false idea of ​​an almighty Russia, which can absolutely everything and has already achieved everything that is possible. Where there are not only no problems, but they simply cannot be.

This simulacrum is very pleasant for the layman. It brings joy to the narrow-minded reader and raises the ratings of newspapers and media resources. And those who are especially zealous in servicing the "media" receive various preferences from the Department of Information and Mass Communications of the Ministry of Defense (DIMK MO). As a result, society has become absolutely intolerant of real information if it does not indulge its pride here and now. The picture that the media create in the pursuit of ratings and "buns" from DIMK MO has the same relation to reality as a reflection in a distorted mirror to whoever looks in this mirror.

The problem here is that there are shortcomings in the country's defense capability, but in such an information environment they cannot even be discussed. You cannot discuss it with ordinary people in the street, you cannot discuss it with politicians who get information in the same place as ordinary people. Not to discuss with officials who report to the top what the press writes about, and arouse an enthusiastic smug look at things even in the highest echelons of power. And now a responsible official or officer who is not influenced by the simulacrum, who has information of critical importance regarding the country's defense capability, does not know how to report this: after all, everyone at the top is also sure that everything is insanely good with us and it simply cannot be better.

The question arises: what is the supreme commander in chief? It is understandable that an ordinary person or a low-ranking official is fed from TV with “general welfare” and “unparalleled” superweapons ... And what is reported to the supreme leader in such conditions?

And here we have the main problem: the supreme commander-in-chief is reported the same thing that is told to the layman, just in a slightly different form.

WHAT they report to him, a little less than a year ago, everyone could observe. When at an exhibition in Sevastopol, in the form of a "promising" submarine of the 5th generation, the president was shown a model with an antique propulsion system (low-speed propeller) and obsolete "Physicist-1" torpedoes (GOSs were passed back in 2008).

Deceive Putin. How the domestic and Western press are used to misinform

A mock-up of the allegedly fifth generation submarine, project 585, designed within the Laika R&D project. In reality, this is just a shortened Ash with new components and the ability to carry the Zircon. A boat conceptually outdated in the early nineties

And no one will raise the question: how so - weapons We do not yet have a new generation, and we do not even have an idea of ​​what it will be like, but a submarine "for it" is already being made and a budget is being developed on this?

Obviously, VGKs do not report "inconvenient information". There are a lot of examples. Here is a typical response from the Ministry of Defense to "inconvenient" information:

No. 312/4/4421 dated 15.05.2019/XNUMX/XNUMX
The handling of information on the state of the submarine forces of the Navy and the Northern Fleet, received by the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation, by the Main Operations Directorate of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation has been considered. This situation is not true.
I. Dylevsky, Deputy Head of the General Staff School.


Those. in accordance with the "answer" at the request of the presidential administration, and GOU GSh (!), we allegedly have:
- ice shooting is carried out;
- our submarines have effective anti-torpedo protection and are armed with modern torpedoes;
- our submarines and NSNF are provided with effective anti-submarine and anti-mine defense.

And so on. All this is a lie (which is confirmed, among other things, by photographs of the Boreyev torpedo decks and materials of arbitration courts), and this lie is reported by the General Staff's Main Operations Directorate to the presidential administration!

True, "Military Acceptance" cannot show any of this. Neither telecontrolled torpedo shooting, under the ice, nor the selection of a torpedo from the ice hole, nor the work of anti-torpedoes, nor themselves, nor the new "Physicists" on nuclear submarines older than "Prince Vladimir" (normally in ammunition with modified BIUS boats) - nothing.

Because all this is a lie (which is confirmed, among other things, by photographs of Boreyev torpedo decks with USET-80 "firewood" on the shelves and materials of arbitration courts concerning anti-torpedoes), and this lie, we repeat, is reported by the General Staff's Main Operations Directorate the presidential administration!

The realities, of course, are different.

At the end of the 90th century (in the 1943s), there was actually a new technical revolution in the means of searching for and combating submarines, which raised the question of the survival of submarines in new combat conditions extremely sharply. This has happened before, for example, the defeat of German submarines in the Atlantic in May XNUMX.

However, if the events of 1943 had immediate consequences on the part of submarines in the form of changes in their weapons, appearance and tactics of use, now our valiant Navy is demonstrating virtually complete “ignore” of the new conditions of submarine warfare.

The main tactical property of submarines is stealth. The situation in this matter today in terms of hydroacoustic means is best shown by the following diagram.


Low-frequency hydroacoustic illumination makes even an absolutely silent object a source of secondary long-wave oscillations and reduces its secrecy to zero

Especially creative supporters of submarines propose to "shoot" the carriers of the low-frequency "illumination" LFA "Onyx".

Only now the question arises: will we also shoot "Onyxes" at aviation active low-frequency buoys? By the way, there is nothing close to our naval aviation, despite the fact that they have been used in NATO since the beginning of the 90s.

There are experiments. Chudikov from our "theoretical science". Very successful, but which "for some reason" are absolutely uninteresting to the Navy and the defense industry.

The last deputy chief in shipbuilding and armament of the USSR Navy F. Novoselov spoke about the new "unconventional means" of detection:

“At the meeting, he did not give the floor to the head of the institute, who was eager to talk about experiments to detect the surfaced trace of a submarine using the radar. Much later, at the end of 1989, I asked him why he dismissed this question. Fyodor Ivanovich answered as follows: "I know about this effect, it is impossible to defend against such detection, so why upset our submariners."

(A. Vasiliev, Head of the Advanced Design Department, Krylov Central Research Institute.)

The question arises: does the principle "no need to upset" apply to the country's military-political leadership? The question is very topical given the huge material and financial investments in the submarine.

Today, it is the new submarines that are collectively the largest expenditure item in the military budget. At the same time, their combat services are not provided in any way and they do not have the ability to fight against their own kind because of failures in torpedo weapons, anti-torpedoes and hydroacoustic countermeasures.

The enemy, constantly hanging on the tail of our submarines, including on training grounds, is well aware of this.

This is how, for example, the situation with our capabilities in underwater combat still looks like:

Problematic issues of the appearance of promising submarines of the Russian Navy.

Shooting at sea and bases. The latest submarines of the Russian Navy are armed with outdated weapons and self-defense means.

But in what form the much-praised "Ash" was passed:

"APKR" Severodvinsk "handed over to the fleet with critical shortcomings".

There is an opinion that what is happening today with our submarine forces (and weapons) is not just a grandiose "cut" of budget funds. Everything is much worse: this is actually a deliberately prepared military defeat (a new "Tsushima pogrom"). And this is fraught with complete extermination of the population of the Russian Federation. If the enemy succeeds in inflicting a disarming strike on the strategic nuclear forces and at the same time neutralizing the SSBNs in combat services, then almost all of us will simply die. If this military defeat simply leads to revolutionary chaos, as happened in 1905, then, alas, it will still result in a nuclear attack - just at the peak of "revolutionary" chaos, when our control systems of the Strategic Missile Forces, the Aerospace Forces and the Navy will be disorganized. Nobody will let us rise anymore. The next error will be the last one in our stories, and this must be understood clearly.

A special example is the threat to our submarine posed by the US Navy Basic Patrol Aviation (BPA).

Here is what Admiral V. Vysotsky said, former commander-in-chief of the Navy before V. Chirkov:

"If we do not have an AB in the North, then the combat stability of the PKK SN will be reduced to zero already on the second day, because the main enemy of boats is aviation."

Has anyone re-voiced this to the manual? For example, when you surrender Severodvinsk?

Of course not. Despite the sharply increased capabilities of Western anti-submarine aviation, what the Navy has in this part (naval aviation) can be immediately taken to the museum (including the "newest" "Novella" and "Kasatka"). New anti-submarine warfare technologies are simply ignored by our naval aviation. At the same time, not only is there no interest in Western experience, but it comes to the direct destruction of the most valuable intelligence (with a sledgehammer on a hard disk with data) that does not fit into the "official blissful picture."

Do we have the aircraft carrier about which Vysotsky spoke? We “didn’t have it” even before being put in for repairs, if we call things by their proper names, and it’s good that at least this became apparent in Syria, and not when the country's existence was at stake.

By the way, insufficient preparation of naval aviation, an aircraft carrier and, more broadly, of the entire fleet for the usual and routine operations for other navies was revealed IN WAR.

Before that, we had "everything is fine." The question arises: in what war and in what form will the lack of modern combat-ready torpedoes be revealed? Will it not be such a war when nothing can be fixed? For the real situation with naval underwater weapons is a direct "invitation" to covertly shooting our strategic nuclear-powered ships. And this is the first step towards victory in a nuclear war with acceptable losses or no losses at all.

In the meantime, we continue to report to the top that everything is fine, and the domestic "media" continue to stir up this point of view.

It would be naive to think that the enemy will not use this for different purposes. And he uses it.

Disinformation through the media


Americans have a long tradition of misleading our statesmen, scientists, and military leaders using the press and various kinds of public information, dating back to Soviet times.

However, not only ours. They make a fool of their Congress just as well. For example, we can recall the statements of the famous Norman Polmar that the Soviet submarines of project 971 are supposedly superior to American boats of the Los Angeles type in their stealth.

Only now it was in the middle in 1989, when it was clear that the "cold war" was over and military shipbuilding was awaiting reduction. The information disseminated by Polmar was deliberately unreliable and its purpose was to knock out money from Congress for new submarines, despite the fact that at the time of the events described, we could not do anything with the old submarines of the US Navy.

Later, already in the 90s, when the American submarine building literally held the American submarine building by the throat, the cuts in military spending under Clinton, American admirals picked up the baton from Polmar - and achieved the renewal of the US Navy submarine in conditions when they no longer had an enemy.

Let's take another example from history.

In 2005, the Drofa publishing house published a major work by a team of authors, employees of the State Research Institute of Aviation Systems (GosNII AS) under the leadership of Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences E. A. Fedosov: “Aviation of the Russian Navy and scientific and technological progress. Creation concepts, development paths, research methodology ”. The team of authors: V.M. Alkhovikov, V.M. Denisov, A.V. Zarubin, V.D. Oblyapin, V.V. Orlov, E.A. Fedosov. The reviewer was the commander of the naval aviation of the Russian Navy, Lieutenant General I.D. Fedin.


The voluminous work examines a lot of theoretical issues related to naval aviation, up to the mathematical modeling of the use of "Kuznetsov" in the Falklands "for the British". Historical issues are also considered.

Among them is one interesting example:

“At the stage of working out the draft design of the ANK project 1143.5 on the basis of the experience gained over 10 years, it became possible to study the influence on the decisions made by another factor - information about the work being carried out in the same direction abroad.
A priori, it was clear that our foreign colleagues were not very eager to see a large Soviet aircraft carrier in the ocean accompanied by ships with ship-to-ship missile weapons (of which, we note, they were very, very much afraid of) and effective air defense systems.
It was noticed that when discussions began in our country on the concept of naval aviation, on the choice of the size of the ANC and the national path of development of the aircraft carrier fleet, in the United States, judging by the technical and military literature, a problem arose opposite to ours: the search for the possibility of reducing the size of the ANC when arming them shortened takeoff aircraft. In this regard, in the periodicals in 1971-1980, the issue of vertical / short takeoff and landing (SV / UVP) aircraft (XVF-12, etc.) of small ANK (SCS, VSS, etc.) and technical problems associated with their creation.
Naturally, doubts arose about this: studies conducted by domestic research institutes showed (except for "custom" ones) the inefficiency of small ANCs, and abroad they returned to these studies again and again.
... on the part of the leadership of our research organizations, there were regular accusations that the results of their research did not coincide with foreign ones.
...
To clarify the issue, an analysis was carried out of the reliability of the hypothesis of a deliberate (directed against the opponents of the domestic aircraft carrier fleet) distortion of the relative importance of the problem of small ANC and SV / UVP towards its overestimation in the periods preceding the adoption (or non-adoption) of decisions on the construction of ejection ANC in the USSR.
The analysis showed:
1. The hypothesis that in the periods preceding the consideration in the USSR of the question of the beginning of the construction of ANCs armed with conventional takeoff aircraft, the number of publications concerning the problems of small ANCs and ground forces / UVP does not contradict the statistics. This made it possible to draw a conclusion about possible misinformation ...
2. The most intensive increase in the number of publications began, on average, one to two years before the question of building an ejection ANC in the USSR was considered. This, in turn, could indicate that our foreign colleagues had information about the time of consideration of the issue for at least one or two years.

A few more examples can be added from today's perspective.

In 2014, Rear Admiral of the US Navy Dave Johnson, then the executive director of the US Naval Systems Command, told the media that he was impressed by the Russian submarine Severodvinsk: he even has a scale model in his office. He also said that the United States will face a tough adversary in the form of modified Yasen submarines.


The same model ...

Admiral James Foggo, Commander of the US Navy Europe, also took part in this ash-tree flash mob and expressed his impression of this submarine. “This is a great submarine,” Foggo told The National Interest in 2016.

If you look at the development of the Russian Navy and how resources were spent, it becomes clear that the main research and development efforts were primarily aimed at strengthening the submarine fleet.

However, later, when Foggo no longer needed to lie, he honestly said that in Russian submarines he only cares about "Caliber". Translated into Russian: they will have to be destroyed before reaching the launch line. What the Americans, as we see, are preparing for.

By 2015, a lot of bad questions arose at the top (on the open ignorance of the issues of the Navy's combat effectiveness and the readiness to solve tasks according to their intended purpose) to the then chief of the Navy V.V. Chirkov, and the chair swayed under him.

Suddenly, a series of publications appears in the West, where the "Chirkovsky Navy" underscores to a superlative degree.

Financial Times: Russian navy poses new challenge to US.

The admiral told the Financial Times that the US Navy is reassessing its global doctrine and operational-strategic plans in the face of Russian activism that rages from the Black and Mediterranean Seas to the Pacific Ocean.
“Their submarines and surface ships are showing unprecedented activity in the last 20 years,” Richardson said in an interview. - How do we place our forces and resources in order to maintain the necessary balance and appropriate capabilities?
According to Admiral Richardson, the Navy is currently considering whether or not to increase its presence in Europe and the Pacific. “We are currently having these discussions,” he said.
The increase in this activity is partly due to the actions of the Russians in Syria, but its navy is also increasingly active in other areas, from the east coast of the United States to the Pacific Ocean. Russian Navy Commander-in-Chief Admiral Viktor Chirkov recently announced that patrolling by the Russian submarine fleet has grown by 2013% since 50.

Or another example from the same year.

Il Giornale, Italy: US Secret Services sound the alarm: Russian fleet is intimidating.

Much has changed over the past 15 years that the US Navy's secret services have published a hefty 68-page dossier that, as reported by Difesa Online, speaks of the dangers posed by the Russian fleet: to defend a country with impressive power, limited only by the endless expansion of its borders. In the XNUMXst century, the Russian fleet will be one of the most modern in the world and will be operated by a new generation of professional military personnel. "
The Americans noted that “since 2000, thanks to the stability of the government, the country's economy has stabilized. Purposeful efforts were made and funding was allocated for the restoration of the Russian fleet. Many programs, suspended due to lack of funds, have been restarted. Money was invested in the development of new concepts, thanks to which submarine and surface vessels have already been launched. In 2000, the Russians owned several ships capable of participating in hostilities. Today, the Kremlin has at its disposal 186 vessels (warships and submarines) that carry out operations in the waters from the Atlantic to the Pacific Oceans, from the Black to the Baltic Seas, from the Caspian to the Mediterranean and to the Arctic itself. "

Both the British and the Italians - all were in awe of the great naval commander Chirkov. And the Americans were shocked: a 68-page dossier and Richardson's confusion clearly hints at which titan was at the head of our Navy. It is not at all every day that the "US Navy intelligence report" on the Russian Navy with fresh data (and it is possible to calculate the sources of their receipt from them, if they are real), is published in free access!


This is not a splint from DIMK MO, this is a deliberate "misinformation" from the Americans

After Viktor Viktorovich left, advertising of his legacy continued. For example, at the end of March 2018 The Drive writes an ode to patrol ship 22160. Chirkov was no longer in office, and the Western press called the Navy such epithets as it deserved, but this project was praised, its "design" was called "brilliant".

Here's what I wrote about it funny guy Tyler Rogoway:

“Russia is building half a dozen patrol boats (as in the text. - Ed.) Of Project 22160, which have an innovative compact design, capable of much and have powerful strike capabilities with a small hull. This concept is innovative enough for Western navies to study it as an inspiration for their own future multipurpose vessels. "

Not ships, no. Ships. An amazing admiration from a person, in whose culture one of the pillars of identity is a nuclear aircraft carrier with a displacement of 100 kilotons.

We will not consider this as a hidden advertisement of V. Chirkov, who, as you know, is the father of this wonderful ship. After all, Tyler could have just been joking. We cannot hint at the Americans' interest in V. Chirkov's well-being in the USC.

However, this article was most likely also translated into Russian and entered into a tall office in a neat daddy as a demonstration of how they rate us. In all seriousness.

Not the first time, as they say. For example, we can recall the "active advertising" in the US Navy of our submarine "Severodvinsk" and the signing by Chirkov of the acceptance certificate for it with a huge set of critical shortcomings, in fact, in a state of incapacity.

We can safely state that the Western press is actively used to deceive us. After all, when our sycophants report to the top military-political leadership about how wonderful everything is with us, digests of Western publications of the desired direction are added to such cheap reports.

And the fact that the enemy has learned to use this phenomenon is very dangerous.

At the same time, you need to understand that the enemy is working in different directions, an example of which is the frenzied activity of one Russian-speaking American citizen, who at the turn of 2006-2008 literally spammed a lot of paramilitary Runet forums with brightly and emotionally written articles about the confrontation between the USSR Navy and the US Navy in the 70s. x, "Project 60" by Elmo Zumwalt and the supposed strategies of war at sea (incorrect, but "similar to the real ones"), from which it directly followed that the Russian Federation should not even think about aircraft carriers with normal aircraft, but "verticals" are the very ... The citizen “tore the vest” for Russia, while working (according to him) in the Boeing (not bad for a guy from the subordinates of the KGB of the USSR border troops, right? And he got into the Boeing).

So what? And the fact that since 2018, R&D has been launched on an aircraft with a short takeoff and vertical landing, which is absolutely unnecessary for either the Aerospace Forces or the Navy. Some of the current "second persons" in the highest echelons of power in his youth clearly imbued with the ideas of a distant patriot from America.

A little later, it turned out that the remote patriot of Russia was actively collecting information about the Zircon anti-ship missile system from open sources, trying to obtain closed data on its predicted effectiveness and the type of guidance system, trying to establish contacts with officers of the Navy (including senior officers), and having operational cover (the phone is tied to an address in a house in Seattle, which does not exist in nature, the number itself is issued to another person "without a biography", to "virtual") and in America he writes book after book about what Russia has already laid with its weapons USA on both shoulder blades, and maintains a bunch of thematic blogs, and at a pace that precludes work for Boeing. Then, apparently, the American military carry these books to sessions of knocking money out of Congress.

He's not alone. For example, at one of the military history forums, a similar work (only smarter and more subtle) is carried out (allegedly from Belarus) by another ex-officer-emigrant.

That is, the work is in progress.

Conclusion


The current situation in the Navy is hidden and varnished by the official structures of the Russian Federation. Upstairs (including the President - the Supreme Commander-in-Chief) only "good" information is reported through official channels. Real problems are hushed up.

At the same time, there is an obvious fact of active work of the Western media (and not only American ones, we are talking about NATO as a whole) for the "PR" of openly erroneous and harmful decisions for our country. Taking into account the timing and synchronization of the actions of the Western media in this work, questions about its spontaneity simply cannot arise.

Obviously, the Western press is working to misinform the Russian leadership and, apparently, is not unsuccessful. They are quite successful in deceiving Putin, at least sometimes.

This collective work on disinformation looks especially dangerous against the background of the situation with the domestic submarine fleet, which does not solve a single important problem either with weapons or with the forces and means necessary to ensure combat stability, but on which huge money is spent.

Along the way, the US Congress often becomes the object of misinformation by Western media when it is necessary to knock out money for military spending. For Russia, this, to put it mildly, is not useful, as it increases the level of military threat to our country.

But even more dangerous is the fact that our fleet, which is extremely limited in its combat capability, will pose tasks in a real war as real. With all the ensuing consequences.

And here the only way to turn the tide is the reaction of society and the media. Russian media. Just write the truth. Including on frankly ordered publications of foreign media and officials. With relevant comments. And, of course, there is no need to blindly broadcast the enemy's praise with aspirations and embellishments. We must remember that if the enemies praise us, then we are doing something wrong.

The bitter truth is much more useful than the sweetest lie, especially in matters of life and death.

Unfortunately, in our country, lies are still winning with a devastating score. But maybe we can change it?
Author:
160 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Livonetc
    Livonetc 8 October 2020 10: 18
    -3
    Vyacheslav Molotov is credited with formulating the rule: "If our enemies praise us, then we are doing something wrong."
    This could be limited.
    1. Svarog
      Svarog 8 October 2020 10: 22
      22
      Unfortunately, in our country, lies are still winning with a devastating score. But maybe we can change it?

      It is very unlikely .. If indeed the information he is served only blissful .. Then he is glad to be deceived.
      But this can mean only one thing, his team is terrible, hypocritical and not interested in the development of the state. That is what the objective indicators show.
      1. Livonetc
        Livonetc 8 October 2020 10: 35
        -5
        Yesterday's post of our co-forum.
        “There is a well-known analytical agency Clarkson Research in England, which, among other things, compiles monthly and quarterly ratings of the countries leading in the world shipbuilding. It is Clarkson Research's reports that are usually used when a conversation comes up on who to build and how much 2020 surprises. The first place at the end of the quarter was quite naturally taken by South Korea.What to say, if its share in the third quarter accounted for 45% of the total world shipbuilding! In absolute terms, this is 1,42 million CGT.

        CGT is the register ton. The tonnage of all ships is recalculated into registered tons, so that it is convenient to compare them with each other. The rating takes into account the tonnage.
        But let's see who is there on the list right behind her. Usually, China was the main rival of South Korea. Yes, as you already understood, Russia came in second in the third quarter. Our tonnage for the past three months is 860 thousand CGT. And this is 30 thousand tons more than China, which dropped to the third line. "
        1. Lannan Shi
          Lannan Shi 8 October 2020 11: 15
          14
          Quote: Livonetc
          .Yes, as you already understood, in the third quarter Russia moved up to the second position. Our tonnage for the past three months - 860 thousand C

          Ugums. In 2018 and 2019, both military and civilian ships with a total tonnage of 845 thousand tons were launched. And for July-September 2020, 2% more than in 2 years. lol No, this is certainly not a fake, how can you? lol But I would like to see a reference to the original source. And then the growth from an average 35.000 tons per month to 287.000, that is, 8 times, raises vague doubts. yes
      2. Vadim_888
        Vadim_888 8 October 2020 10: 48
        -4
        I subscribe to every word.
        .
        .
        But this can mean only one thing, his team is terrible, hypocritical and not interested in the development of the state. That is what the objective indicators show.

        Unfortunately, the mentality of the people is such that you don't put anyone in the team, in a year you will have the same result ... Honest people in Russian realities do not live long ... (((((
        1. Svarog
          Svarog 8 October 2020 10: 53
          12
          Quote: Vadim_888
          I subscribe to every word.
          .
          .
          But this can mean only one thing, his team is terrible, hypocritical and not interested in the development of the state. That is what the objective indicators show.

          Unfortunately, the mentality of the people is such that you don't put anyone in the team, in a year you will have the same result ... Honest people in Russian realities do not live long ... (((((

          It all depends on building relationships with subordinates. When there are friends, relatives of friends and, in general, the same people who are not responsible for any failure, then what kind of management can we talk about. The most elementary mistake of the leader is familiarity .. and the principle of our own is not surrendering, it is a street principle, but not a statesman .. a statesman has his own people and the interests of the state.
          But I think that the system there is not arranged the way they are trying to present it to us, I think that the president is just a talking head, and the decisions are made by persons who do not really shine ..
    2. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 8 October 2020 11: 01
      +5
      In contrast to the situation of liberalism, which is now .... Under And In Stalin, intelligent and great phrases came only from the leader, and Molotov was a specialist who brought the truth to the first person. And V Stalin had a very valuable ability, he was able to think objectively in various fields from aviation, to linguistics and the film industry and listen to specialists who did not even have positions, fishing out fruitful ideas from them and implementing them.
    3. Civil
      Civil 8 October 2020 11: 20
      0
      1. All decisions are made by only one official.
      2. Only report what the official wants to hear.
      3. "The king's boyars are deceiving" is the most popular argument. Funny.
      4. What is enough money for that is.
      1. Vladimir1155
        Vladimir1155 8 October 2020 11: 25
        +4
        Quote: Civil
        That is enough money for that.

        Unfortunately, there is enough money for unnecessary super-expensive UDCs and in the plans of Klimov and Timokhin with Andrey even more expensive AB, and cheap minesweepers and BE200 PLO for some reason do not do as much as necessary.
        1. timokhin-aa
          8 October 2020 11: 45
          +3
          The Be-200PLO is not needed.
          1. Vladimir1155
            Vladimir1155 8 October 2020 11: 46
            0
            peremptory and unsubstantiated statement
            1. timokhin-aa
              8 October 2020 12: 19
              0
              substantiated by the experience of using seaplanes.
              1. Vladimir1155
                Vladimir1155 8 October 2020 21: 38
                0
                I see no justification! empty phrases one after another, you have no arguments? By the way, you can formulate this question with an author's article, if you give objective arguments and not empty slogans, I agree with you, because I am not a pilot and cannot deeply judge this question. However, at the moment, you could not give a single argument, except that it is hit by a wave when landing, and it is slightly heavier than analogues not seaplanes, ...... I object, it throws but does not break, and the equipment can be raised higher or protected strong hull, weight ... for military equipment this is not important, it is not the economy that decides, but strength, the tank is heavier than the tractor, but for some reason they fight on tanks ... and in the Far East there are not so many airfields at all. Safety, the ability to get off the radar after splashing down, a wide choice of splashdown sites, all this is in favor of the BE200. The experience of Operation and Be12 is and it is positive.
                1. timokhin-aa
                  9 October 2020 09: 21
                  +2
                  The operating experience of the Be-12 is just negative.
                  Here on splashdowns

                  https://topwar.ru/170069-likbez-bezajerodromnoe-i-rassredotochennoe-bazirovanie-aviacii.html

                  We need an economical aircraft with a long range and internal volumes sufficient for a long-term comfortable stay of the crew on departures for 10-12 hours, an aiming and search system with a powerful computer complex, reconnaissance equipment and weapons.
                  That is, an aircraft such as Tu-204 or MS-21
                  1. Vladimir1155
                    Vladimir1155 9 October 2020 10: 18
                    +1
                    I read it, I agree with you about the weather, but YOU only touched on the basing, I do not argue, the BE200, like any aircraft, will need a runway for permanent basing. There may even be a hangar, fuel and lubricants warehouses, Remzon, a military town, etc., there may be a base not only for BU 200 but also for Su Yak and IL76, C 400, without them, BU 200 is defenseless. But this does not kill the B200PLO idea. he not only needs a base, but also military service and his amphibiousness can be useful on the open sea, not always a storm, in rivers and bays, on lakes, for example, at the Pacific Fleet. Yes, permanent base only on the base, and temporary can be on the lake. Ice, but not all year, there is still summer, and finally there is the Black Sea. Caspian. Japanese, especially since all ships of the first second rank need to be withdrawn from there, and the BE200 is needed there. in other words, although you finally gave objective arguments, they do not kill the idea of ​​BE200 PLO. As for the Tu 204 and MS 21, firstly, you can have an PLO aircraft of two types, for example, the TU204 and Be200, the equipment will be the same and the airframe will be different. But the serial production ... how many MC21s have we released, when will they go into production? and the Be200 is ready and produced serially tested by operation. The Tu204 is a very large, good passenger plane, it is much larger than the Be200 (0.7 billion rubles), it needs a wide long runway, and its cost is not small 1,95 billion rubles, again the plant's capacity. That is, there is either one Tu 204 or three Be200 for the same money, although I admit the operation of both in the Navy. the main thing is to have PLO aircraft.
          2. Bez 310
            Bez 310 8 October 2020 12: 38
            +1
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            The Be-200PLO is not needed.

            Yes, the Be-200 is not needed as a PLO aircraft.
            Takeoff weight, flight range, design
            features of an amphibian are just some
            flaws that will not allow this plane
            become a normal PLO aircraft.
            The vast majority of non-specialists believe
            that "amphibiousness" is exactly what an aircraft needs
            PLO. But this is not at all the case.
            I think that people who are absolutely ignorant of aviation
            PLO, an attempt will be made to push this plane
            in the Navy, otherwise it simply has nowhere to go.
            1. timokhin-aa
              8 October 2020 13: 33
              0
              That same ignorant person from MA goes to the "MMS Radar", so he can and will carry it.
              The Be-200 is, frankly, an unsuccessful aircraft and it is not for nothing that it is not bought anywhere in the world.
              1. evgen1221
                evgen1221 8 October 2020 14: 09
                0
                So there, near foreign lands and airfields, there is a lot of equipment and equipment on them, in principle, so many amphibians can cope with inappropriately conventional means. We have the same BE-200 in the Ministry of Emergency Situations and in the coastal regions, which is useful by the very fact of amphibiousness and the absence of a network of airfields. And in general, the paradigm is that if they do not buy over the hill and in large quantities then the product is flawed by definition, because there are criteria for advertising, the quality and quantity in different areas of this advertising of your product (for example, cinema, we are silent about the quality of this movie) To position the emphasis on the uniqueness of the quality of our aircraft for sales is the quality of the PR personnel in general, and here it is a counter in control.
                1. timokhin-aa
                  8 October 2020 14: 14
                  0
                  So there, near foreign lands and airfields, there is a lot of equipment and equipment on them, in principle, so many amphibians can cope with inappropriately conventional means. We have the same BE-200 in the Ministry of Emergency Situations and in the coastal areas, which is useful by the very fact of amphibiousness and the absence of a network of airfields


                  I have already analyzed this myth in detail.
                  https://topwar.ru/170069-likbez-bezajerodromnoe-i-rassredotochennoe-bazirovanie-aviacii.html

                  Take the time to read.

                  And in general, the paradigm is that if they do not buy an outlet for a hillock and in large quantities, then the product is flawed by definition, because there are criteria for advertising, quality and quantity in different areas of this advertising of your product (for example, a movie, we are silent about the quality of this movie).


                  No, the reason is that the Be-200 has poor seaworthiness and is almost unsuitable as a rescuer; it can also draw water for extinguishing fires only from lakes or with minimal excitement.
                  1. evgen1221
                    evgen1221 8 October 2020 16: 14
                    +1
                    Well then, do not tell me what kind of plane can land in a fierce storm, take off and, if necessary, maneuver on the water and, in general, draw water from any stream? Do not be offended, alaverdy is the case!)
                    1. timokhin-aa
                      8 October 2020 17: 59
                      0
                      All serial seaplanes in the world with a displacement hull (not float ones) are superior to the Be-200 in seaworthiness.

                      Are you happy with this answer?
                      1. Vladimir1155
                        Vladimir1155 8 October 2020 22: 02
                        0
                        Quote: timokhin-aa
                        Are you happy with this answer?

                        does not suit, ..... this is only one factor among a number of factors, by the way, their great seaworthiness probably leads to an increase in their weight, a decrease in payload, fuel consumption, that is, to all that you call the disadvantages of BE200
                  2. Vladimir1155
                    Vladimir1155 8 October 2020 22: 03
                    +2
                    Quote: timokhin-aa
                    water intake for extinguishing fires can also be carried out only from lakes or with minimal excitement.

                    Quote: timokhin-aa
                    water intake for extinguishing fires can also be carried out only from lakes or with minimal excitement.

                    and that we have forest fires in the DMZ?
                2. Alexey RA
                  Alexey RA 8 October 2020 19: 22
                  +1
                  Quote: evgen1221
                  So there, near foreign lands and airfields, there is a lot of equipment and equipment on them, in principle, so many amphibians can cope with inappropriately conventional means.

                  You simply do not know: according to the Ministry of Defense, the hydro aerodrome for the Be-200, in addition to the "sea" part, must have a full-fledged concrete runway and all airfield services of a conventional airfield.
                  That is, the basing of seaplanes will cost 1,5-2 times expensivethan conventional machines. Despite the fact that the weight return of the seaplane is lower than that of an ordinary Pax (of which PLO aircraft are made all over the world).
                  1. Vladimir1155
                    Vladimir1155 8 October 2020 21: 56
                    +1
                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    must have a full-fledged concrete runway and all aerodrome services of a conventional aerodrome.
                    That is, basing seaplanes will cost 1,5-2 times more,
                    I do not see a cause-and-effect relationship, all aircraft need a runway, and why it will become more expensive for him and one and a half times, I ask for numbers and not empty statements
                    1. Alexey RA
                      Alexey RA 9 October 2020 14: 11
                      +1
                      Quote: vladimir1155
                      I do not see a cause-and-effect relationship, all aircraft need a runway, and why for him it will become more expensive and one and a half times

                      Again:
                      Quote: Alexey RA
                      according to TZ MO hydro aerodrome for Be-200 in addition to the "sea" part must have a full-fledged concrete runway and all aerodrome services of a conventional aerodrome.

                      That is, to base the Be-200, you need to build an ordinary air base (and not in the most convenient place, but necessarily on the coast of the bay next to the sea). AND in addition to it - hydraulic escapement with taxiing to hangars, berths, an equipped flight zone on the water plus a set for servicing this flight zone, a means of towing aircraft on the water, etc.
                      A conventional airbase does not have these "water" options - therefore it is cheaper.
                      1. Vladimir1155
                        Vladimir1155 9 October 2020 22: 45
                        -1
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        definitely on the shore

                        where did you get the idea that this is necessary, it just takes off from any runway anywhere, even near Moscow, like a regular plane
                      2. SovAr238A
                        SovAr238A 13 October 2020 20: 05
                        0
                        Quote: vladimir1155
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        definitely on the shore

                        where did you get the idea that this is necessary, it just takes off from any runway anywhere, even near Moscow, like a regular plane


                        Those. you deliberately believe. that a much more durable set of a seaplane fuselage, and, accordingly, much heavier, very heavily weighted compared to a Pax, is not a problem for flight range and efficiency?
                      3. Vladimir1155
                        Vladimir1155 13 October 2020 22: 11
                        0
                        Quote: SovAr238A
                        much more durable seaplane fuselage kit,

                        the range of the aircraft is written in its performance characteristics, its fuel consumption may be more ... but rather less than that of a high-speed Pax ... but this is not as important as the ability to relocate to lakes, as the ability to use this BE200 PLO and as a rescuer , as an opportunity to hide in any bay or on a river, I don't understand what we are arguing about, all the disadvantages of the BE 12 have been eliminated by the BE200, I explain the rejection of the seaplane by the superintendents in epaulets by the fact that they just do not want to serve, pull the strap, want an easy life, the more time peaceful, They have already ceased to justify the need for battleships by reducing the pitching, now they began to find fault with the seaplane for the fact that they will have to deal with but they are not used to ...

                        It's good that other soldiers -
                        Completely different guys.
                        They can stand on guard for a day ...
                        Sail on a boat in the stormy sea ...
                        Any target will hit
                        And they never let you down.

                        Everyone, like him, would be spoiled.
                        To be conquered by us long ago.
          3. Vladimir1155
            Vladimir1155 8 October 2020 21: 43
            +3
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            do not buy anywhere in the world.

            not your truth! exactly they buy, more than half of the aircraft were bought by foreigners, the Americans bought them more than the Russian Federation, Indonesia, China, Chile, Azerbaijan .... despite the pressure of amers against Russian exports. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%B5-200
            1. SovAr238A
              SovAr238A 13 October 2020 20: 29
              +1
              Quote: vladimir1155
              Quote: timokhin-aa
              do not buy anywhere in the world.

              not your truth! exactly they buy, more than half of the aircraft were bought by foreigners, the Americans bought them more than the Russian Federation, Indonesia, China, Chile, Azerbaijan .... despite the pressure of amers against Russian exports. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%B5-200


              no one in fact (except for 1 board by Azerbaijan) - bought nothing ...

              Quote:
              United Aircraft Corporation will begin deliveries of the Be-200 amphibious aircraft to the USA and Chile
              Russian Aviaton June 18, 2019 13:25 PM MSK

              According to Grudinin, the Russian United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) also plans to deliver seven Beriev Be-2020 amphibious aircraft to Chile in 200.

              “Today we signed [a deal] with Chile [to supply] two more aircraft. We had a contract for five aircraft, and now, at their request, we have added two more aircraft ... We will deliver them in 2020, we will definitely deliver them to deliver them next year, "Grudinin told reporters at the International Paris Air Show in the French city of Le Bourget. ...

              Almost 2020 is over - where are the deliveries of at least one aircraft?
        2. ccsr
          ccsr 8 October 2020 18: 47
          0
          Quote: Bez 310
          The vast majority of non-specialists believe
          that "amphibiousness" is exactly what an aircraft needs
          PLO. But this is not at all the case.

          I am not an expert in the field of ASW, but based on the similarity of tasks, the best aircraft for detecting submarines is an aircraft based on the Il-18, and if we manage to create something similar on a new aircraft base, then this will be the best option for a naval reconnaissance aircraft for ASW ... By the way, almost simultaneously with the creation of the "Ural" there was a deep modernization of the Il-20 aircraft, and a new Il-20M reconnaissance technique appeared. I think even now it would be good to remember the experience of the past.
          .
          Quote: Bez 310
          I think that people who are absolutely ignorant of aviation
          PLO, an attempt will be made to push this plane
          in the Navy, otherwise it simply has nowhere to go.

          As for the Be-200 aircraft, in my opinion, its use in the emergency rescue service of the Navy would be reasonable - for two fleets for sure.
          1. Vladimir1155
            Vladimir1155 8 October 2020 21: 58
            +1
            Quote: ccsr
            based on IL-18,

            created long ago, serve in PLO, but their time is running out
            1. ccsr
              ccsr 9 October 2020 11: 24
              +2
              Quote: vladimir1155
              created long ago, serve in PLO, but their time is running out

              I know this, but I was talking about the urgent need to create a new aircraft of the IL-18 type with great reliability and long-term autonomous flight, because such an aircraft is needed for all branches of the armed forces. I don’t know if there is such a development in the plans of our Aerospace Forces, but the need for such an aircraft is enormous. And the Il-18, of course, is morally outdated, although I think that this is the cheapest aircraft of this class in our armed forces.
        3. Vladimir1155
          Vladimir1155 8 October 2020 21: 48
          0
          Quote: Bez 310
          Takeoff weight, flight range,

          all this is not a critical drawback, but a consequence of amphibiousness. Practical range: 3100 km is in good agreement with the range of coast-based front-line aviation, which should cover it, well, should it work under the convoy of the same 160? so you didn’t give a single objective argument other than your personal stereotypes against amphibians
          1. Bez 310
            Bez 310 8 October 2020 22: 24
            0
            I will not argue with you, because you do not understand anything
            in anti-submarine aircraft. And I understand...
            1. Vladimir1155
              Vladimir1155 8 October 2020 22: 34
              -1
              not an argument, but empty words ... you are given a defeat for leaving the field unmotivated,
              Quote: Bez 310
              you don't understand anything
              in anti-submarine aircraft. And I understand
              1. Bez 310
                Bez 310 8 October 2020 22: 39
                +2
                Quote: vladimir1155
                .you are defeated

                Tired of ...
                I'm not competing with anyone, I'm just expressing
                my opinion, and I want to know the opinion of competent people.
                You are not, therefore, it is time to stop the "rally".
          2. timokhin-aa
            9 October 2020 09: 45
            +2
            besides your personal stereotypes against amphibians


            In addition to his experience in anti-submarine aviation. Vladimir, you, like many others, think that he will oppose him like you, only from a different point of view.
            And the opponent, for example, has decades of service in the naval aviation. Practical experience.
            He writes from these positions, and you?
            1. Vladimir1155
              Vladimir1155 9 October 2020 09: 52
              -3
              Quote: timokhin-aa
              He writes from these positions, and you?

              well, he doesn't write anything .... so his experience is of no use to the readers, but it matters to me at the moment in this place, because silence is akin to puffing out your cheeks ... and YOU Alexander could not refrain from the pleasure of opposing me " specialist ", so this is your whole argument ... it is rather weak to win victories by someone else's hands and even fictitious ones. He can be a specialist, but we can invent everything, ... well, he is silent and okay, what to take from the silent.
              1. timokhin-aa
                9 October 2020 09: 59
                0
                So the arguments do not work for you.

                Well, come on, you write, the Be-200 will have enough range, but don't you want to think about the time of patrolling / searching / staying in a given area?

                At least. Or also say that nonsense?
                1. Vladimir1155
                  Vladimir1155 9 October 2020 10: 21
                  +1
                  Can you imagine that a plane can, having splashed down, greatly increase the time of patrolling and being at sea ... and even disappear from the radars .. just what you dreamed of ... and still its range is still limited by the range of front cover aviation.
                  1. Alexey RA
                    Alexey RA 9 October 2020 14: 14
                    +1
                    Quote: vladimir1155
                    Can you imagine that the plane can splash down greatly increase the time of patrolling and being at sea ...

                    Yeah ... ad infinitum. Because landing on the water outside the equipped strip can safely lead to the loss of the aircraft. They simply misjudged the excitement - and that's it, there is no car.
                    Quote: vladimir1155
                    and even disappear from the radar

                    Look at the dimensions of the Be-200. And then on the size of the RCA. And at the detection range of surface targets by aviation radar.
                  2. SovAr238A
                    SovAr238A 13 October 2020 20: 40
                    0
                    Quote: vladimir1155
                    Can you imagine that a plane can, having splashed down, greatly increase the time of patrolling and being at sea ... and even disappear from the radars .. just what you dreamed of ... and still its range is still limited by the range of front cover aviation.


                    This is how to increase it?

                    Fuel consumption for splashdown and even more so for takeoff from water - multiplies fuel consumption ...
                    From which radors to disappear and for what?
                    Well, the point in the area has disappeared.
                    So what?
                    She will hang out on the waves for about 20 hours. until the ships of the enemy order pass by - so as not to be noticed?
                    And if you don't wait, then it disappeared from the radar. it will also appear ...

                    We have a plane, what's this?
                    Scout and PLO fighter - or a cowardly creature?
                    Which can be sunk by one wave ...
    4. ccsr
      ccsr 8 October 2020 13: 08
      -1
      Quote: vladimir1155
      Unfortunately, there is enough money for unnecessary super-expensive UDCs and in the plans of Klimov and Timokhin with Andrey even more expensive AB, and cheap minesweepers and BE200 PLO for some reason do not do as much as necessary.

      When I read the "analytical materials" of Timokhin and Klimov, laughter makes me laugh - these guys seriously think that their management of the problems of the fleet is decisive for understanding what our armed forces need in the coming weapons programs. And their reference to some opinions of American admirals or some other officials in the media makes the professionals just laugh at home - they seriously think that someone from the top military leadership of Russia believes in these statements. Wake up the dreamers, what they really think about in the offices of the current great military leaders, even hide from high-ranking military pensioners - this is a fact, and any acting multi-star admiral or general will confirm this to you.
      As for the message of the entire article that our naval commanders lie to Putin and everything is bad with us, I will note that our fleet and its state worries the American military and politicians much less than the state of our Strategic Missile Forces, because there are no idiots among them, and they are great know what heavy missiles are on alert and the consequences of their use. Therefore, custom-made articles of this kind will certainly excite an unprepared public, and those who understand something in military affairs will immediately see where the wind is blowing from. I simply recommend not to take such opuses seriously, because the authors' conclusions are very superficial, and they are not pursuing concerns about our safety, but the purely mercantile interests of certain groups of people from our military-industrial complex. As you know, there is a division of the "war pie" and people like Klimov and Timokhin dream of contributing their five kopecks so that something will break off their employers. I do not see any other reasons for the appearance of such articles, especially from authors of this level.
      1. timokhin-aa
        8 October 2020 13: 28
        -1
        makes professionals just homeric laughter


        How do you know this? Have you seen such a professional at least once in your life? I can immediately name several admirals who have a completely different opinion about our articles with him.

        And not only admirals. And not only from the fleet.

        But what armored car are you broadcasting from, ensign?
        1. ccsr
          ccsr 8 October 2020 13: 42
          +2
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          How do you know that?

          And because I still go there, where you will not even be allowed to enter, and I have some idea of ​​what is happening in the armed forces.
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          Have you seen such a professional at least once in your life?

          I definitely haven't seen you, but you are not a professional either, so it's not a big loss.
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          I can immediately name several admirals who have a completely different opinion about our articles with him.

          So why don't they subscribe to your article instead of Klimov? Take on a journalistic show-off - we passed it with people like you.

          Quote: timokhin-aa
          But what armored car are you broadcasting from, ensign?

          I broadcast by myself, based on my experience, which you will never have - you swim too shallow for me ...
          1. timokhin-aa
            8 October 2020 13: 44
            +4
            And because I still go there, where you will not even be allowed to enter, and I have some idea of ​​what is happening in the armed forces.


            The floor of what you are carrying here is perfectly visible where you can be.
      2. Silhouette
        Silhouette 8 October 2020 14: 55
        10
        Unfortunately, not a single argument from Timokhin's and Klimov's article has been refuted. No intelligible and substantiated facts or reasoning. None of the issues raised. At one time I had to serve in the same brigade of surface ships together with Chirkov, when he was the commander of a 2nd rank ship ("Sentinel"). Of the ship commanders, he was the quietest and most uninitiated. At operational meetings, he was mostly silent, sitting in the corner. He became commander-in-chief as a result of negative selection, when the commanders of ships, formations, to whom he did not even fit a candle, were erased and expelled from the fleet and were replaced by such colorless and gray personalities like Chirkov.
        1. ccsr
          ccsr 8 October 2020 19: 19
          -1
          Quote: Silhouette
          Unfortunately, not a single argument from Timokhin's and Klimov's article has been refuted. No intelligible and substantiated facts or reasoning.

          You think so, and this is your business. But here I claim that the author of the article is lying, and very primitively, when he says:
          Americans really care about our cruise missiles. But they don't have to worry too much: these missiles have not yet hit the Shchuka-B and Batons, the rearmament of the third-generation domestic submarines on the Caliber KRO has been disrupted (and deliberately), and now the Caliber is ready to use either new "Varshavyanka", which obviously will not be in the Atlantic, or SSGN "Severodvinsk" of project 3. A little later "Kazan" and "Novosibirsk" of project 855M. The rest of "Ash-M" is still far from delivery.
          And that's all.

          The Americans really care about our RCs, but not on submarines, but on strategic aircraft, and when they are on combat patrols off the coast of the United States, which is extremely rare. I am not going to comment on the author's attempts to prove that the Americans will be afraid of our submarine-launched cruise missiles, because I know that they are only afraid of our missiles on SSBNs, and everything else is Timokhin and Klimov's fantasies. So to shed tears that some "Calibers" are not installed on submarines can either people who are far from understanding the strategy of a future war, or complete amateurs in military affairs.
          1. Silhouette
            Silhouette 8 October 2020 19: 42
            +2
            Quote: ccsr
            Because I know,

            Quite a decent argument .... Bravo! ... And there is also from the same series - "I believe".
            1. ccsr
              ccsr 8 October 2020 20: 20
              0
              Quote: Silhouette
              Quite a decent argument .... Bravo!

              Of course, decent, if you find out what I was doing, unlike Timokhin, when he walked under the table on foot.
              Quote: Silhouette
              And there is also from the same series - "I believe."

              Quite the opposite - where I had to work the word "I believe" did not exist, only facts were used. That is why I leave the question of faith to you, Timokhina and Co.
              1. timokhin-aa
                9 October 2020 17: 35
                -1
                This is no longer a security company, this is a grocery warehouse of some kind laughing
                And maybe even a bath and laundry plant!
          2. Vladimir1155
            Vladimir1155 8 October 2020 22: 09
            +3
            Quote: ccsr
            because I know that they are only afraid of our missiles on SSBNs, and everything else is Timokhin and Klimov's fantasies.

            Quote: ccsr
            because I know that they are only afraid of our missiles on SSBNs, and everything else is Timokhin and Klimov's fantasies.

            I fully support, it is SSBNs that are the most important part of the fleet and all other parts of the fleet are only annex and support to it,
      3. nickname7
        nickname7 11 October 2020 12: 04
        0
        But as for the strategy of the media that sing praises to the dress of the king, and the king is actually naked, it is true. Part of the public has already figured it out.
        The efficient cannot enter the economy, but show themselves off, deceiving the population.
    5. Doccor18
      Doccor18 8 October 2020 16: 02
      0
      Unfortunately, there is enough money for unnecessary super-expensive UDCs and in the plans of Klimov and Timokhin with Andrey even more expensive AB, and cheap minesweepers and BE200 PLO for some reason do not do as much as necessary.

      Unfortunately, if there is a desire to live in a Self-Sufficient and Independent country, one cannot do with minesweepers and the Be200, we need aircraft carriers and new factories, and science needs to spend up to 3% of GDP annually .. And many, many, many things are needed. But a strong and independent state needs this.
  • aglet
    aglet 8 October 2020 10: 19
    15
    "ah, it is not difficult to deceive me. I myself am glad to be deceived."
    said long ago, but very suitable for the situation
    1. stas
      stas 8 October 2020 10: 43
      16
      Lies come from the very top. When he promised not to raise the retirement age, and then forgot about his promise. Because of lies, the USSR collapsed, but the current ones continue to move in the same false direction.
      Whoever believes that power in Russia belongs to the people as indicated in the Constitution.
      What power and lies that power comes from this power!
    2. NDR-791
      NDR-791 8 October 2020 10: 51
      +6
      And here we have the main problem: the supreme commander-in-chief is reported the same thing that is told to the layman, just in a slightly different form.
      If so, the authors sent the article to the wrong place. It was necessary to visit Kremlin.ru, and here after checking there. laughing
      1. timokhin-aa
        8 October 2020 11: 46
        +2
        Authors sent what and where to go
        https://topwar.ru/174057-pobeda-zdravogo-smysla-korvety-vozvraschajutsja-poka-dlja-tihookeancev.html

        and exactly there.
        And it turns out as the authors asked - just for a long time.
  • Interlocutor
    Interlocutor 8 October 2020 10: 20
    -23 qualifying.
    A. Another writer. Whatever article, then "it's not right, it's bad, it's worse than the Americans, they did it in vain," and so on in every article.
    Nude nude. Author. Everything will be fine.
    1. Dodikson
      Dodikson 8 October 2020 10: 52
      -13 qualifying.
      this is Klimov, he is a well-known all-pervading man. some of his arguments are entirely correct, but they distort the whole picture
    2. New Year day
      New Year day 8 October 2020 10: 55
      +3
      Quote: Interlocutor
      Nude nude. Author. Everything will be fine.

      but for now ...
      1. Interlocutor
        Interlocutor 8 October 2020 11: 39
        +1
        laughing Oh, these get-togethers. People's investigators ...
    3. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 8 October 2020 11: 18
      +1
      sort of started about the influence of the media on the leaders ... a fruitful topic ... but it turned out to be only a seed, it turns out that the nuclear submarines are perfectly visible to everyone? And here is AB that nobody will notice? he will come and save everyone ... with what? Will he save everyone with the ring of SU? another nonsense, they sing about American tricks, and they themselves arrange a trick for the leadership in the form of a fruitless idea of ​​building one defenseless person drowned by a third missile or sunk on one mine AB for $ 40 billion. PLO, prolong the operation of 1155, do a lot of BE200 PLO and coastal air cover, all more profitable than the only defenseless AB. It seems that the author accuses foreigners of all the sins that are inherent in him, and after all, they achieved the laying of senseless UDC ...
    4. timokhin-aa
      8 October 2020 11: 54
      +2
      Well, yes, in reality, we already have medals "For the capture of Washington" printed, and the badges "Best captain"
  • Woodman
    Woodman 8 October 2020 10: 30
    +1
    The title is valid. Nobody will pass by.
    Today it is customary for us to rejoice that our enemies are writing laudatory odes about us, painting in colors our huge successes in military construction.
    I don’t remember where and when they were "happy". Perhaps the commentators. Well, commentators are different. Someone believes "laudatory odes", and someone believes that "everything is bad, everything is lost."
    Obviously, the Western press is working to misinform the Russian leadership and, apparently, is not unsuccessful. They are quite successful in deceiving Putin, at least sometimes
    And there are examples of this?
    And, of course, it is not necessary to blindly broadcast the enemy's praise with aspirations and embellishments.

    The bitter truth is so much healthier than the sweetest lie

    And we must not forget that the truth is not always bitter. And you shouldn't ignore it either.
    And this is so ... No comment on the "laudatory odes" and other things. https://topwar.ru/154375-vo-vozglavilo-mezhdunarodnyj-rejting-voennyh-sajtov.html
    1. Livonetc
      Livonetc 8 October 2020 10: 43
      -8
      Any cook in our country is capable of running the state.
      And she believes that the fact that she is not the commander-in-chief is a worldwide conspiracy of the Freemasons.
      1. Woodman
        Woodman 8 October 2020 10: 49
        +8
        Quote: Livonetc
        And she believes that the fact that she is not the commander-in-chief is a worldwide conspiracy of the Freemasons.

        Recently, the opinion is increasingly common that this collision is not caused by the "worldwide conspiracy of the Freemasons", but by Putin's banal "cleansing" of all worthy "cooks", in the sense of candidates.
      2. stas
        stas 8 October 2020 11: 00
        +3
        Our head of the club can manage, together with the cooks and stools
      3. military_cat
        military_cat 8 October 2020 11: 14
        -1
        Quote: Livonetc
        Any cook in our country is capable of running the state.
        And she believes that the fact that she is not the commander-in-chief is a worldwide conspiracy of the Freemasons.

        Now the trend is different, they put in command a worldwide conspiracy of cleaners. They do not want to, they resist, but they are chosen because the edrosy got it very much - google "Marina Udgodskaya". By the way, the sky does not fall to earth from this, which, as it were, hints.
      4. Lannan Shi
        Lannan Shi 8 October 2020 11: 25
        +5
        Quote: Livonetc
        Any cook in our country is capable of running the state.

        Well, the Sobchak lackey at the head of Russia doesn't bother you?

        And why is a footman better than a cook ... Personally, it's a mystery to me. yes
        1. Interlocutor
          Interlocutor 8 October 2020 11: 36
          -2
          Well, the Sobchak lackey at the head of Russia doesn't bother you?

          Are you sure that in the status of a lackey? The look at the photo is clearly not ingratiating. And the portfolio is too heavy ...
      5. timokhin-aa
        8 October 2020 11: 53
        0
        As usual, you can only do dirty things in the comments and never have the power to say something in essence.
  • Ross xnumx
    Ross xnumx 8 October 2020 10: 42
    15
    The current situation in the Navy is hidden and varnished by the official structures of the Russian Federation.

    Who would doubt that. Even on the site, in the event of criticism of the latest Russian weapons, and especially in the case of criticism of the state of the Navy, "all of a sudden, out of nowhere" different experts appear who make other visitors believe that "everything is fine."
    Only this situation again boils down to the thesis: "The king is good, the boyars are shit." Sorry. Heard and notified.
    Unfortunately, in our country, lies are still winning with a devastating score. But maybe we can change it?

    Why there? wassat Whip butt? Water stone?
    There was an example in 1917 ... There is no other way ...
    1. timokhin-aa
      8 October 2020 11: 47
      +3
      The article says how the next 1917 will end. Reread.
      1. Ross xnumx
        Ross xnumx 9 October 2020 10: 51
        0
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        The article says how the next 1917 will end.

        And you know, besides:
        If this military defeat simply leads to revolutionary chaos, as it happened in 1905 year, then, alas, the result will still be a nuclear attack - just at the peak of "revolutionary" chaos, when our control systems of the Strategic Missile Forces, the Aerospace Forces and the Navy will be disorganized.

        Found nothing ... request
        By the way, a lover of historical analogies, can I remind you how 1924 began?
        Nobody will let us rise anymore.

        Like, someone with the company DAL Russia is an impetus in development? Or marked the beginning of a breakthrough? I can see directly in reality how he tears and tosses in the bunker ... It is such a clumsy government with an eye on "Marya Alekseevna", "irreplaceable" partners and friends from the Forbes list, does not bring us closer not only to the level of Spain, but also to the progress of Taiwan , South Korea, Cyprus, New Zealand, giving a surplus to Gabon.
        The next mistake will be the last in our history, and this must be understood clearly.

        For your information, you still don't want to understand that it was the 2018 elections that became a mistake, a brake on the development of Russia. And the following “amendments”, “zeroing”, “organizing the fight against coronavirus and its consequences” only exacerbate the situation. Or today, putting your hand "where it is necessary", you with the writer's providence and civic intuition have any objections?
        Then answer, why did the federal media so skillfully "silence" the two self-immolations?
        Something is not visible publications about the fire in the Ryazan region ...
        So far, I see unsubscriptions in the form of articles and essays. I do not observe cases from "solved".
  • Nyrobsky
    Nyrobsky 8 October 2020 10: 43
    +5
    Maybe the author is right about something, because the "tradition" of varnishing the situation and submitting information upstairs in such a way as not to fall "into disgrace" has long roots from the king of "Peas" and to this day, and this is characteristic not only for Russia, but considering the situation exclusively within the framework of the problems of the fleet and on the basis of this to make a verdict that "everything is bad" is also not worth it, because the general strategy and tactics of the war are changing and efforts are being switched to the development of other capabilities that guarantee to keep the enemy "in stall "or inflict a crushing blow on him, are no less important. Poseidon, Dagger and Zircon are examples.
    1. timokhin-aa
      8 October 2020 11: 48
      +7
      Poseidon is just a sawmill, Zircon and Dagger are, of course, successes, but there is still a long way to the series, and such problems are not solved at the expense of one type of weapon, even a good one.
      1. Nyrobsky
        Nyrobsky 8 October 2020 14: 42
        +2
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        Poseidon is just a sawmill

        Who knows, who knows .... Just now, evil tongues were talking about the fact that these are all cartoons, and now they sadly admit the fact that there is something that has nothing to oppose. hi
        1. timokhin-aa
          8 October 2020 14: 48
          +2
          From this Poseidon I even had a catalog of spare parts for the TZA GEM.

          I KNOW this is a sawmill, I don’t assume.
          1. Nyrobsky
            Nyrobsky 8 October 2020 14: 54
            +3
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            From this Poseidon I even had a catalog of spare parts for the TZA GEM.
            I KNOW this is a sawmill, I don’t assume.

            I believe that there are bearings in any mechanism, but the principle of operation of the mechanism largely depends on how what is involved in what interacts.
            The main thing is that in your delusion, you do not become a victim of internal repentance and external contempt hi
            1. timokhin-aa
              8 October 2020 14: 55
              0
              Did you invent the bearings yourself or someone suggested?
              1. Nyrobsky
                Nyrobsky 8 October 2020 15: 08
                +4
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                Did you invent the bearings yourself or someone suggested?

                Yes, completeness to you - about bearings, that's me figuratively. And so yes, I completely "share" your belief that Poseidon does not have any rotating nodes at all and it moves by the power of the inventor's thought, drawing energy from AA / LR6 batteries (6 pieces in a row connected in series). Probably for this reason, the mattress "comrades" propose to nullify this "misunderstanding" while developing their naval attack drones in parallel, because it is easier and calmer for them.
                1. timokhin-aa
                  8 October 2020 15: 20
                  +1
                  Mattress companions worry about something else entirely. By itself, this nuclear torpedo does not bother them.

                  Poseidon as a weapon is useless. The task of destroying a coastal facility is easily solved by existing ballistic missiles.

                  Read:

                  https://topwar.ru/152577-posejdon-bespoleznoe-sverhoruzhie-atomnyj-dron-ne-tak-uzh-i-polezen-dlja-strany.html

                  More

                  https://topwar.ru/155207-statusnyj-tupik.html
                  1. Nyrobsky
                    Nyrobsky 8 October 2020 15: 51
                    +3
                    I definitely read hi
                    Understand Alexander, I do not question your competence in matters of knowledge of the problems of our fleet and the submarine fleet in particular, since in this area I am an absolute layman. In part, I share your view that "shapkozakidstvo" and "uryapatriotism" for the Russian state "it is harmful to be there", but I am just trying to convey my idea in the sense that due to scarce financial resources, we will not be able to develop everything kind of troops to the level "at the level" or "slightly above the level", and therefore priorities are given to those areas that, at a modest cost, can force the adversary, if not abandon their attempts to crush Russia, then at least postpone this time that will be spent so that we could pull up "to the desired level" where we have problems, including in the area of ​​the capabilities of the submarine fleet.
                    1. timokhin-aa
                      8 October 2020 15: 55
                      +1
                      but I'm just trying to convey my thought in the sense that due to scarce financial resources, we will not be able to develop all branches of the military to the level of "at the level" or "slightly above the level", and therefore priorities are given to those areas that costs will be able to force the adversary, if not to abandon their attempts to crush Russia, then at least to postpone this time


                      These areas are called strategic nuclear forces.
                      And I write regularly about the problems our state creates with them.
                  2. ccsr
                    ccsr 8 October 2020 19: 03
                    +3
                    Quote: timokhin-aa
                    The task of destroying a coastal facility is easily solved by existing ballistic missiles.

                    Well, finally, we got the truth from the "strategist". Now explain to everyone why we need a surface fleet, if ballistic missiles are cheaper to deploy on our territory, and not spend huge sums on "irons" that will be sunk at the quay walls. At least there is some hope for the submarine fleet, and how will the surface fleet help us in destroying our strategic opponents, the United States and China, if it is sunk at naval bases?
                    1. Alexey RA
                      Alexey RA 8 October 2020 19: 26
                      +3
                      Quote: ccsr
                      At least there is some hope for the submarine fleet, and how will the surface fleet help us in destroying our strategic opponents, the United States and China, if it is sunk at naval bases?

                      And because without a surface fleet, the submarine fleet will not even leave the base. Not to mention how to reach the positioning area and survive in it.
                      So there are two options:
                      - either build submarine and surface fleets;
                      - either to give up both of that, and the other - because without the NK, the submarines will be just targets.
                      1. ccsr
                        ccsr 8 October 2020 20: 02
                        +2
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        And because without a surface fleet, the submarine fleet will not even leave the base.

                        This is understandable, but this requires much fewer ships than our forum naval commanders dream of. And in fact, in our country only the Northern Fleet can truly carry out strategic tasks, and most likely it will not have to "break through".
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        - either build submarine and surface fleets;

                        It all depends on what kind of surface ships to build - it's time to abandon gigantism, and this will be a completely different concept of building a fleet.




                        Quote: timokhin-aa
                        Turkey, too, will ICBMs nightmare?

                        Why would you personally nightmare Turkey with a fleet - can you explain it sanely if it is a NATO member?
                        Quote: timokhin-aa
                        Japan? Poland?

                        So you immediately start to nightmare the United States, and not their litter. Or will the navy not be strong enough against the United States alone?
                        Quote: timokhin-aa
                        And if there is a blockade of Venezuela, then how will ICBMs help?

                        And this is generally nonsense - what do we care about Venezuela, even if Cuba has been under blockade for sixty years and is not soared.
                        Quote: timokhin-aa
                        You are INSANE and all your writing is INSANITY. One and continuous.

                        You are just a pathetic verbiage who decided to sew on admiral's shoulder straps on your jacket, in the hope that everyone will believe in your military knowledge, which you have is too primitive to take your texts seriously.
                    2. timokhin-aa
                      8 October 2020 19: 36
                      +1
                      Turkey, too, will ICBMs nightmare? Japan? Poland? And if there is a blockade of Venezuela, then how will ICBMs help?

                      You are INSANE and all your writing is INSANITY. One and continuous.
          2. ccsr
            ccsr 8 October 2020 18: 55
            +1
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            I KNOW this is a sawmill, I don’t assume.

            After all, you’re lying - you have never had any relationship with the developers or the customers, and you think that everyone will believe in your fantasies, especially those who cooked in this kitchen. How can you know that - the question will remain unanswered as always.
            By the way, you correctly noticed
            Quote: Nyrobsky
            Before, evil tongues talked about the fact that these are all cartoons, and now they sadly admit the fact of the existence of something that has nothing to oppose.
            Can you explain how many "drank" there, since you are such a know-it-all?
            1. timokhin-aa
              8 October 2020 19: 36
              0
              The budget has been disbursed there since 1984 and a number of programs have not yet been completed.

              When finished, somewhere around 200-300 billion in current prices will be mastered.
              To the first serial product.
              1. ccsr
                ccsr 8 October 2020 20: 14
                +3
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                The budget has been disbursed there since 1984 and a number of programs have not yet been completed.

                Well, don't lie if you don't know how all R&D was cut in the nineties, and many jobs were closed at the stage of 90% completion. There is no that country for a long time, thanks, among other things, to the Soviet naval commanders who made insane spending, and you all try to justify your fantasies with long-closed developments.
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                When finished, somewhere around 200-300 billion in current prices will be mastered.

                This does not mean anything at all, if only because, firstly, it does not indicate how many years it is allocated and what it will be spent on, and secondly, it is not clear how many products will be obtained at the output, and what is the cost of all tests. You do not know anything about this, and you are trying to hang noodles on those who understand better than you that 200-300 billion rubles is only 3-4,5 billion dollars in the current exchange rate, which in itself is a very small amount for the creation of a fundamentally new strategic weapon.
                1. timokhin-aa
                  8 October 2020 20: 42
                  0
                  Well, don't lie if you don't know how all R&D was cut in the nineties, and many jobs were closed at the stage of 90% completion. There is no that country for a long time, thanks, among other things, to the Soviet naval commanders who made insane spending, and you all try to justify your fantasies with long-closed developments.


                  This one was stabbed to death at 89 but then restarted under Yeltsin, as an "asymmetric response" to the missile defense threat.
                  And the first carrier was handed over under Yeltsin, and it was found out that the product would be longer than expected and it was necessary to cut the carrier's body and lengthen, etc.

                  and secondly, it is not clear how many products will be received at the output,


                  This is not clear to you, speak for yourself, please. For others it is not necessary.

                  to create a fundamentally new strategic weapon.


                  Useless.
                  1. ccsr
                    ccsr 8 October 2020 20: 56
                    +1
                    Quote: timokhin-aa
                    This one was stabbed to death at 89 but then restarted under Yeltsin, as an "asymmetric response" to the missile defense threat.

                    You would still remember the Khrushchev times, to prove how important the projects of new battleships were. Well, if the work was closed in 1989 (by the way, you don't even know the reasons), it means that already at that time they realized that the price / quality ratio did not correspond to the budgetary possibilities of those years - this is obvious. "Buran" was closed in the same way - and what follows from this? That the new space rockets will be built according to the Buranovo developments? Oh well...

                    Quote: timokhin-aa
                    but then it was restarted under Yeltsin, as an "asymmetric response" to the missile defense threat.

                    They didn't restart under Yeltsin - you just don't know those times, but I know very well how the 1996-2005 weapons program was cut several times.

                    Quote: timokhin-aa
                    It is not clear to you

                    Well, give the figure, since everything is clear to you and you are admitted to the terms of reference.
                    Quote: timokhin-aa
                    Useless.

                    It is quite possible, but you will not justify it with anything. Only then is this a reproach to the naval in the first place, because it was they who carried out research and development, which means that even before the development work they had to understand how promising the development would be. Or do the naval chiefs already lack the brains to master the results of research work? Then why build a new fleet at all if none of them understands the prospects for new weapons? Money down the drain again?
  • Daniil Konovalenko
    Daniil Konovalenko 8 October 2020 10: 50
    +2
    Yes, everything is fine with us ... just wonderful. The enemies really tremble. smile
  • Poetry
    Poetry 8 October 2020 10: 51
    -8
    The myth of "out of reach" America collapsed on September 11, 2001. I remember their frightened faces: "Oh, May bastard!" If Mohammed Atta could, then we can do it even more. They just die like dogs, and we die like martyrs. And writing scribbles is not about fighting ...
    1. timokhin-aa
      8 October 2020 11: 48
      0
      Which Mohammed? Don't make people laugh!
  • AUL
    AUL 8 October 2020 10: 52
    +8
    Upstairs (including the President - the Supreme Commander-in-Chief) only "good" information is reported through official channels. Real problems are hushed up.
    As the poet said - "It's not difficult for you to deceive me, I myself am glad to be deceived!"
    It seems that the guarantor has long ceased to control the situation, and gave up on everything - where the curve will take!
  • New Year day
    New Year day 8 October 2020 10: 53
    13
    And that's all.

    All! The hangover for fans of the "great strategist" will be terrible. And in the future, the attitude will be like towards Yeltsin ... then
    1. military_cat
      military_cat 8 October 2020 11: 22
      -4
      Rather, on the contrary, as to the years of stagnation: "Oh, there were times, they were preparing to populate the Moon with robotic avatars, they built a ship on Venus, built an atomic tug on Jupiter, kept the whole world in fear. Well, they stole, and who did not steal? then the fifth column destroyed everything. "

      And how will they treat Yeltsin who will get it all.
  • stas
    stas 8 October 2020 11: 03
    +3
    Quote: Poetiszaugla
    They just die like dogs, and we die like martyrs. And writing scribbles is not about fighting ...


    You will not be allowed into Paradise, and you will not be recognized as a martyr. You will go through the first option!
    Places in Paradise are not given out in the Kremlin!
  • iouris
    iouris 8 October 2020 11: 08
    +3
    Is the "Fatherland Press" deceiving Putin? What kind of fatherland is this?
    Are "ours" exactly ours?
    1. Daniil Konovalenko
      Daniil Konovalenko 8 October 2020 11: 18
      +1
      What kind of fatherland is this?
      ... What God gave .. smile
      1. stas
        stas 8 October 2020 11: 47
        +9
        It was not God who gave it, the devils are building thieves' capitalism, and the Eaters of Russia help them with lies and theft!
        1. Daniil Konovalenko
          Daniil Konovalenko 8 October 2020 11: 55
          +6
          God is now spelled out in the Constitution ... And according to it, I write ... smile
          1. stas
            stas 8 October 2020 12: 15
            +4
            So the Constitution did not indicate which God is being discussed.
            There are more than 5 thousand religions and beliefs in their God in the World.
            If the authorities sincerely believed in God, they would not have sinned so much during their lifetime. The authorities simply decided to hide behind God - such as their power from God, through the falsification of elections of power.
            When no more than 2 terms turned into infinity! This is definitely not from God!
            1. Daniil Konovalenko
              Daniil Konovalenko 8 October 2020 12: 18
              +4
              So the Constitution did not indicate which God is being discussed.
              "xs comrade major dog, the trail does not take" .. smile
            2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk 8 October 2020 13: 38
              +2
              Quote: stas
              When no more than 2 terms turned into infinity! This is definitely not from God!

              Now Patriarch Kirill will come, he will quickly enlighten you :))))))))) laughing drinks
              1. stas
                stas 8 October 2020 13: 50
                +4
                am He himself must be admonished and excommunicated!
                1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                  Andrei from Chelyabinsk 8 October 2020 14: 18
                  +6
                  Quote: stas
                  He himself must be admonished and excommunicated!

                  You will excommunicate him, perhaps :)))) Our ROC is making leaps and bounds towards the pre-revolutionary situation, when people believed in God and hated the priests. This, of course, does not apply to everyone, many priests (some I have the honor to know personally) really believe truly and live in accordance with faith, for which they are honored and praised. But they are so real, as I see, they are not high in the church hierarchy, and they are far from the capitals.
                  1. stas
                    stas 8 October 2020 14: 24
                    +1
                    These are the ones that surround him, unfortunately. They will destroy themselves. Lies cannot be eternal, they help liars temporarily!
  • Masha
    Masha 8 October 2020 11: 09
    +2
    It's funny .... Putin "draws" information from the media .... wassat
    No more sources ????
    1. timokhin-aa
      8 October 2020 11: 49
      +1
      You did not understand what you read
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Masha
        Masha 8 October 2020 11: 59
        0
        I realized that the article was called incorrectly ...
        Somehow otherwise ...
        "Magazines and their pearls" - does not sound?
        Or is it just ... write Putin ... and the rating of the article goes off scale?
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 8 October 2020 13: 38
          +1
          I can repeat myself - you did not understand what you read.
          1. Masha
            Masha 8 October 2020 14: 05
            +2
            Yes, for God's sake ... I'm wondering, does anyone else believe what the media are broadcasting? recourse
            1. Vladimir B.
              Vladimir B. 8 October 2020 15: 48
              +4
              Quote: Masha
              does anyone else believe what the media is broadcasting?

              The media are different. A person has a head not only to eat, but also to analyze what is read and viewed. hi
  • Galleon
    Galleon 8 October 2020 11: 17
    18
    A very thoughtful and high-quality article on the level of elaboration of the issue in question. But the name is nowhere at all. Deceive who? Someone who systematically asks ... misses opportunities for high-quality modernization and strengthening, creating catastrophic gaps in the combat capability of the fleet? What is the state of anti-aircraft submarines, sweeping forces and torpedo armament worth .. I'm not even talking about the fact that ships without a radar of the air situation and air defense systems (madness!) Are leaving the stocks, which turns the ship into an object of entertainment for numerous aviation. Who accepts reports that "everything is fine" for the third decade ??? Some of the enemies are tasked with deceiving him ??? Why are you twisting again, interfering and creating false targets? Everyone can clearly see the true purpose and true causative agent of the whole state of affairs.
    As BG sings: "Why the heck are our enemies when we have such friends." Yes, in 20 years, for example, all ships could be equipped with drones for lighting the situation, if the task was set like this.
    And what is the conclusion from the article? And such that the leadership of analysts from the services that prepare reports to the top does not pursue the goal of covering the situation and making recommendations for the benefit of the country, but the goals of their own interests and the interests of their groups, which diverge with the benefit of the state. I have no other explanation. Or decisions are made against the correct recommendations, again out of someone's interests that are at odds with the interests of strengthening defense capability. Only here it is interesting: from whose interests can the first person make such interesting decisions? request
  • stas
    stas 8 October 2020 11: 20
    +8
    Unfortunately, in our country, lies are still winning with a devastating score. But maybe we can change it?

    Until the authorities change, lies will rule in Russia!
    What a pop is such a parish!
  • faterdom
    faterdom 8 October 2020 11: 23
    14
    We also praised Kudrin in the West. And Nabiulin. And this is also very pleasing to the Supreme. And even more dangerous than lying in any other area.
    Otherwise, for example, it is difficult for me to explain to myself how fully erudite and preparing for an interview, Putin made a fatal blunder about the 17-ruble "middle class".
    Is he stuck in 2002 with those prices for food / utilities / transport? Or the average in the village with pensions 12 thousand and pay 19? Who reports to him and what? Why was the FSO reported to him that they had mowed down all the available hospitals by means of a covert interview? No one else? Well, do the oprichnina, since it's more effective - we will understand!
    Why are we with you such (!) Economic and social blocs of the Government, why flattering generals and admirals - look for and put forward "ruffled" - there will be more sense!
    1. Vladimir B.
      Vladimir B. 8 October 2020 15: 44
      +7
      Quote: faterdom
      We also praised Kudrin in the West

      Chubais was praised the same and Gaidar, and other reformers praised the same, and not only in the West, but also in our country, including representatives of the Russian government.
  • huntsman650
    huntsman650 8 October 2020 11: 27
    10
    There was an interesting trend in the 90s. They removed the military commanders from their posts, who reported on the real state of affairs (deplorable). Why do we need such a commander who is doing badly.
    1. timokhin-aa
      8 October 2020 11: 51
      13
      This was after. The officer who substantiated Serdyukov on the erroneousness of the Navy's rate on imported diesel engines was fired from the fleet.
      Then there was 2014.
      1. ccsr
        ccsr 8 October 2020 13: 24
        -3
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        This was after. The officer who substantiated Serdyukov on the erroneousness of the Navy's rate on imported diesel engines was fired from the fleet.

        Well, don't be smart, "professional", because such documents are not signed by officers, but at least by the head of the ordering department of the armed forces, and at least a rear admiral in the navy. An officer with a lower rank does not have the right to report to the minister over the head of his boss, which means that your imagination is only evidence of your incompetence even in naval affairs.
        Yes, you learned to bait bikes - I have to give you credit ...
        1. Gust
          Gust 10 October 2020 21: 45
          0
          Rear Admiral - not an officer? Or has the stake on imported diesels paid off?
          1. ccsr
            ccsr 11 October 2020 09: 56
            +1
            Quote: Rafale
            Rear Admiral - not an officer?

            The Rear Admiral is being dismissed by the Supreme Commander, not the Minister, as far as I know - you should understand this before you ask me a question.
            Quote: Rafale
            Or has the stake on imported diesels paid off?

            I don’t know, but I think that in any case we need to make our own diesel engines for military equipment. By the way, now there is a big scandal in the Ministry of Defense and the chief of communications of the Armed Forces is under investigation, and there, too, import purchases have become the basis for this case. So the story with diesels is not unique, although I honestly don't know exactly how things were at that moment. But even in Soviet times, there were cases when we purchased military equipment produced in the Warsaw Pact countries.
        2. Fizik M
          Fizik M 9 November 2020 15: 02
          -1
          Quote: ccsr
          Well, do not be clever, "professional", because such documents are not signed by officers, but at least by the head of the ordering department of the armed forces, and at least

          fool
          YOU are not in the subject, monsieur ensign
  • maktub
    maktub 8 October 2020 11: 47
    +1
    Do not be offended by the authors, but even here on VO, any mention of Russia in the foreign press, especially in a positive context, is presented as victorious reports IMHO
    You can minus
  • Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 8 October 2020 12: 19
    +6
    And here the only way to turn the tide is the reaction of society and the media. Russian media. Just write the truth.

    Will be working:))))))
  • Bez 310
    Bez 310 8 October 2020 12: 23
    +5
    The article is correct and timely!
  • imobile2008
    imobile2008 8 October 2020 12: 36
    +8
    Author:
    Maxim Klimov, Alexander Timokhin
    Respect for you guys! [/ B I will add on my own, [b] no one inflicts damage on the RF Armed Forces more than urapatriotism, false articles about the superiority of our forces... But nobody is fighting it. On VO - this is 90% of such articles, and more than 99% of ignorant readers
    1. stas
      stas 8 October 2020 12: 52
      +4
      Everything is correct. With enemies everything is clear, with friends too! One must be afraid of flatterers, scoundrels, opportunists and Eaters of Russia! They will sell and betray, and others will be blamed for it!
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Knell wardenheart
    Knell wardenheart 8 October 2020 13: 14
    +2
    Well written, actually. We especially like to quote National Interests in matters of laudatory odes to Russian power or threat - when it thoroughly washed my eyes, I read a little about the publication itself and was not at all surprised that former exits from the USSR are being published there, frankly, not the titular nation. Yes, and Alexei Pushkov himself writes there, which does not prevent him from regularly referring to this publication as a "classical Western information publication" in his programs here, and actually to quote in full.

    Militarism is what the West imposes on us. A sort of crude and primitive militarism, as opposed to the stable and economically developed Western world, for which the militarism of their style is only a support for their well-fed existence, but in no way meaning. In our case, on the way, this becomes exactly the "meaning" - it does not matter that the ruble falls and that oil and gas are getting cheaper, we will cheerfully report about new missiles, underwater drones and nuclear submarines, we will shake the "historical memory" of one single event until we furiously call it is not clear who and it is not clear why.
    So the problem is not that they are imposing some kind of arms race on us - the problem is that they are imposing on us a paradigm of thinking corresponding to this race, in which we will ALWAYS catch up with them in an attempt to prevent a war, which now has several times less preconditions than in the days of the USSR. We will see only this, habitually hammering into other "little things" such as the standard of living and economic development for the sake of this, "Main" and existential.

    The world will continue to reign according to Western patterns, and we will continue to invest in doomsday weapons, as if there are no other problems, as if it is impossible to come up with a plan in which we take three steps back to make five forward. This is the essence of this trap, only it is not for Putin. She is for all of us.
    1. timokhin-aa
      8 October 2020 13: 30
      -1
      This is the essence of this trap, only it is not for Putin. She is for all of us.


      Yes. And it is not Putin who is to blame for this, but all of us in fact.
      1. stas
        stas 8 October 2020 13: 38
        +6
        How is it that he is not guilty, then who reigns in Russia?
        I am guilty, how guilty, and the people are guilty that they believed him!
        Only the degree of responsibility is different.
        He deliberately deceives, the people at first believed out of habit, and now there is a continuous cynical lie, manipulation and deception of the people!
      2. Vladimir B.
        Vladimir B. 8 October 2020 15: 40
        +4
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        Putin is not to blame for this, but all of us

        And what are we to blame? Do we rule the country? Or are we influencing the country's industry? Can we influence Russia's foreign policy?
        1. Karabin
          Karabin 8 October 2020 20: 04
          +6
          Quote: Vladimir B.
          And what are we to blame?

          In that we allow this to be treated with the country.
    2. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 9 October 2020 09: 04
      -3
      Quote: Knell Wardenheart
      Militarism is what the West imposes on us. A sort of crude and primitive militarism, as opposed to a stable and economically developed Western world, for which the militarism of their style is only a support for their well-fed existence, but in no way meaning.
      the world government has chosen the eu and the usa as its location, and is striving to siphon their resources from all countries, from which it lives. Those countries that are small and do not have a powerful army are exploited by them more intensively than those that have an army and a navy. The West has never abandoned the concept of worldly chaos and robbery of everyone and everything, Russia now gives them only half of the income, and according to the plan announced by the West, it should give all the income, be dismembered, let the people eat mushrooms (but the entrance to the forest is paid), and pensions should be canceled , education is paid, medicine is not needed by slaves, .... that's why Russia needs an amia and a fleet. And leave tales about new thinking and universal peace and prosperity to the fools, we have seen, Vietnam, Grenada, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Donbass, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan, Yugoslavia, Libya, Iraq, Syria, Nagorno-Karabakh will tell you everything about the peaceful Danish gifts ...
      1. Knell wardenheart
        Knell wardenheart 9 October 2020 12: 44
        +4
        They mixed boots with eggs into one pile ..

        1) The vast majority of countries on the planet sell resources not only voluntarily, but also with joy. Because dwarf banana-coconut countries can NOT produce the entire range of modern products even close, and far more people are getting education now than 100 years ago. People's requests have stupidly grown, requests have grown among elites - they sell what they have and buy consumer goods (just like us, by the way).

        2) What you designated as "... and strive to siphon their resources from all countries, due to which they live" is a great slyness. Now you sit at home and type on a most likely Chinese keyboard, click with a Chinese mouse, look at a Chinese or Western monitor, etc. - all these are high-tech products developed in the West with everything, including production lines. And mastered in those countries that CAN DO IT. Now the second economy of the planet is China, and these guys are also sucking in resources like a vacuum cleaner to make a bunch of garbage that will delight the eyes of hoarders around the world. In addition to the PRC, this is what you called the "West" and most of Asia. This could be done by us, and Africa, and Iraq - but the elites of these formations at one time decided that it was not worth dirtying their hands with some kind of technical garbage, it’s easier to get something and rivet tanks.

        3) Our country has the second army of the planet - and literally on all fours crawls to the west, almost by force pushing the third or fourth gas pipe into its loins, removes oligarchs from the board of directors of resource companies at the first click from Washington, if only they buy, my dears ! Norilsk Nickel smokes and drains, contaminating the environment - if only to sell more quickly and more. VOLUNTARILY. And with a song!) Here is your thesis about a huge and strong army. They swing so that on the other side of the border the cheeks crack. And they sell unprocessed timber, etc.

        4) "Global chaos" is the last thing the West would like to see. This will disrupt trade chains, complicate shipping, collapse markets - and Western states will suffer from this through the collapse of their economies and the devastation of the middle class.

        5) It's just Dante's hell of some sort) Probably you are not aware that the Russian Federation has a very low external debt, and $$$ are taken out over the hill mainly by private individuals, whom we OURSELVE HERE to profit from the nat. wealth. And this people ITSELF chose in due time the power that ALLOWED all this. Moreover, he himself chose her SECOND TIME. Probably blaming the Americans for all the troubles is much more pleasant than just saying that the fools themselves are pitch?

        6) The way you listed it all - as in a manual, and that's what I'm talking about. Rigid militarism of consciousness. Our picture depicts a world full of small and defenseless countries groaning under the yoke of imperialism, everywhere there is war, everywhere chaos, bloodshed, intestines, etc. And over our country, Sotona himself has raised a pitchfork and shakes them, and only ... (further substitute any patriotic-great-power-authoritarian shiza to enhance the effect). It doesn't matter if Obama is in power or Trump, it doesn't matter if the Germans have a thousand tanks or a hundred, we are waiting for the end of the world with an enviable rapture that would be better directed at developing the economy and eliminating political stagnation in our own country.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Million
    Million 8 October 2020 14: 01
    +4
    "If our enemies praise us, then we are doing something wrong."

    Western partners are increasingly praising Putin ...
    1. stas
      stas 8 October 2020 14: 34
      +5
      Humpback was also praised until the USSR collapsed!
      Everything in history repeats itself, going upward!
  • stas
    stas 8 October 2020 14: 58
    +1
    Who believes that power in Russia belongs to the people, as required by the Constitution of the Russian Federation!
    I am more than sure that the top authorities themselves will laugh at such a statement!
  • Leha667
    Leha667 8 October 2020 15: 09
    +2
    Useful article. Formulated correctly.
    Plus
  • SouzniK
    SouzniK 8 October 2020 17: 48
    -6
    “... to wear down Russia and throw it off balance ...

    The West is now working hard on this ... Belarus has begun to ride, a massacre was unleashed in Karabakh, the bulk of Germany accuses Russia (I hope he will be deprived of his citizenship) ..
    Something else is planned, no less bloody ... Putin's face is clearly worried, the "anaconda" plan is getting more and more surrounding Russia.
    1. Karabin
      Karabin 8 October 2020 19: 59
      +5
      Quote: SouzniK
      This is now the West and is intensively engaged

      He's the damned blame for everything. Here, for example, behind the village, a freshly built dam was washed away. The project alone cost 14 million. And how many construction and repair attempts, only God knows. And all to nothing. That's exactly a sabotage!
    2. stas
      stas 8 October 2020 20: 36
      +1
      What training manual do you use. If the power itself creates all the conditions.
      What prevents our government from establishing order in the country. Consumers of Russia in general have lost their edges and conscience. You are an ally to whom you are an ally, Eaters of Russia are definitely not allies of Russia and its people.
  • xomaNN
    xomaNN 8 October 2020 21: 13
    0
    "Varnishing" in the defense industry and the army / navy has existed before. And under Stalin they tried to shove through the "wunderwaffe", who later turned out to be a zilch. BUT! ... Then these people risked getting at least in the camps.
    And now ... I hope that VVP has a circle of close literate, non-committed analysts and specialists who report a situation with our weapons that is close to the REAL. And the GDP itself, due to education, experience and character, critically perceives "possible bullshit" .. I would like to believe in it lol
  • Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 8 October 2020 22: 16
    +1
    Quote: Doccor18
    And a lot, a lot, a lot more. But a strong and independent state needs this.

    at least he needs political and economic independence, which does not exist, becoming poorer, systematically destroying industry at the behest of the IMF (USA), we send them a tribute in the form of half of the budget revenues ... spending interest on science is stupid, academics with doctors of science who have bought positions and scientific titles, it is just as stupid to build AB, while there are no minesweepers and BE200, AB will not be able to go anywhere. Now on the Northern Fleet there are a pair of 1155, a pair of frigates and a pair of cruisers in the role of a BOD, a total of 6 pennants for the protection of the water area, who will lead Kuzyu? and on the Pacific Fleet there are three 1155, and a pair of corvettes with one ancient cruiser and a smoky destroyer ...
  • Alien From
    Alien From 8 October 2020 22: 36
    0
    Letting dust in your eyes is a relic of the past. And they, and we, such figures are still a dime a dozen.
  • vel1163
    vel1163 9 October 2020 00: 04
    +3
    Yes! That's for sure! The situation is like in that movie "If tomorrow is war ..." And even worse is Russia before the revolution. All those close to them settled down somewhere. And they are deep in the drum of the real situation - the main thing is to cut money. And what to tell them, what to do we have nowhere and no one? What a formation in a hole. What engineers get as salespeople and waiters. The prestige of the working profession is zero. The technical specialties are not the best and talented, etc. I think Putin understands everything, but they cannot do anything. It is necessary to break the whole system. Okay, the people can tighten their belts and work like during the war. But officials and oligarchs do not want to infringe on themselves in anything.
  • yehat2
    yehat2 9 October 2020 14: 49
    -2
    Putin doesn't read the media. This is stupid and he has absolutely no reason to do it. This function is performed by the president's office of many thousands.
    And what submarines are in the fleet and how to evaluate them, he easily and objectively learns from a whole range of people who are involved in the fleet. Unlike many members of the forum, Putin studied at the KGB academy, and there they teach conscientiously how to get and work with information
    1. Fizik M
      Fizik M 9 November 2020 15: 01
      -1
      Quote: yehat2
      Putin doesn't read the media.

      is reading
      Quote: yehat2
      And what submarines are in the fleet and how to evaluate them, it is easy and objectively

      fool
      we saw this in Sevastopol, in December, when he was PUSHED "Redoubts" for "Caliber"
  • K298rtm
    K298rtm 9 October 2020 23: 09
    +1
    It is possible (and even necessary) to lie to the enemy, the enemy.
    Lying to yourself is unacceptable.
    Total lies was one of the reasons for the collapse of the USSR (this is my value judgment).
    This all concerns not only the problems of the Navy.
  • flicker
    flicker 10 October 2020 01: 17
    -1
    Hmm, swung so swung.
    ---
    It would be nice to read the theory of games for a start. Yes, relations of the first order are distinguished from relations of the second order. And, of course, to know what reflection is: reflection of the first rank, reflection of the second rank, etc.
    ---
    I really liked this:
    Just write the truth.

    Here they break their heads in order to find out at least a little of the truth in the stream of information.
    Just write the truth. recourse No. belay bully
    1. flicker
      flicker 10 October 2020 23: 43
      0
      Just write the truth.

      laughing
      The problem is learning to distinguish between truth and lies.
      For the lie is always presented in the guise of truth. And no one will ever say that they are writing lies, they will always assure that they are writing "just the truth." laughing
  • Dzungar
    Dzungar 12 October 2020 12: 34
    +1
    And here we have the main problem: the supreme commander-in-chief is reported the same thing that is told to the layman, just in a slightly different form.
    And what, the author is reading analytical notes to the President of Russia ...? Or did he also think in the same way, about which he himself writes ...? How he needs ...
    1. Fizik M
      Fizik M 9 November 2020 14: 59
      -1
      Quote: Dzungar
      And what, the author reads analytical notes to the President

      by the fact that I report GDP and put certain information on the table
  • Fizik M
    Fizik M 9 November 2020 15: 04
    -1
    Quote: ccsr
    Not a fig under Yeltsin was restarted -

    YOU JUST LIE
    and stupid and childish
    because on purchases of govs, a lot of DOCUMENTS on this topic were lit up, with details and dates