“Dropshot” 2.0: nuclear provocations at Russian borders

38
“Dropshot” 2.0: nuclear provocations at Russian borders


They are preparing to destroy Russia


For the first time, Americans seriously thought about the destruction of the Soviet Union at the end of 1945, when Eisenhower developed the Totality plan. At least 30 atomic mushrooms were supposed to soar over the largest cities of the Union, destroying several million people and paralyzing the military-industrial complex.



The irony is that Washington, in principle, did not have such a large number of atomic weapons. The Americans did not dare to attack with the existing arsenal.

The main question is: would Totality have started if the required number of atomic bombs had been available?

The White House considered a disarming blow to such hated communism as the only correct one. But there weren’t enough bombs and carriers, and when the arsenals finally grew, the Russians had their own weapon in addition to the best air defense in the world.

In total, the Pentagon prepared at least eleven attacks with nuclear weapons on the Soviet Union. The Dropshot plan, signed at the end of 1949, is considered one of the most ambitious and well-developed. But it was planned to fight in accordance with it no earlier than 1957, when the Americans had the required supply of bombs. It was planned to destroy the Soviet Union with three hundred atomic munitions and tens of thousands of high-explosive bombs.


History repeats itself. Of course, now no one is making public plans for an attack on Russia by NATO, but even by indirect evidence they are impressive. And they mean another round of tension around the Ukrainian crisis. The head of the FSB Border Service, Army General Vladimir Kulishov, said on his professional holiday:

“Near the Russian border, NATO reconnaissance activity is increasing, the intensity of operational and combat training activities for the alliance’s troops is increasing, during which scenarios for conducting combat operations against the Russian Federation are being worked out, including launching nuclear strikes on our territory.”

To inflict a real defeat on Russia, it will take not three hundred atomic bombs, but the entire atomic potential of the United States and NATO allies. A number of experts claim to be preparing predominantly tactical nuclear weapons, but this is complacency.

Ukrainian strikes drones on early warning radar for a nuclear strike from this series. They are trying to warn the Kremlin about the possibilities and consequences. It’s just not clear what the Americans want to say. The ground echelon of the warning system is only part of the defense contour. Even if it is completely destroyed, a space component will remain, detecting ICBM flares immediately after launch.

With such demonstrative actions, Americans put themselves in an awkward position. Russia will be able to deliver a retaliatory strike in any case, but it will no longer be able to respond correctly to a failure - the additional ground echelon will be out of play. Exaggerating, we can say that Russia will have the right to send Biden (or whoever will be there instead) his entire missile stockpile only on the basis of a few sunbeams that hit the sensors of the Oko satellites.

In general, the Americans brought their own end, albeit a little, closer with attacks by Ukrainian drones in Orenburg and Armavir.

Glass House


In addition to attacks on strategic defense facilities, the NATO bloc took several more provocative steps.

Exercises using tactical nuclear weapons near the Russian border are one of the main events in this series. The training of tactical nuclear weapons strikes on the territory of our country in the West seems to be a completely adequate response to similar exercises of the Russian Army. But this is only at first glance.

Firstly, the Kremlin made the decision on the maneuvers to cool the ardor of NATO generals, who were ready to send troops into Ukraine and give the green light for attacks on the Crimean Bridge. On the eve or even on the day of the presidential inauguration. This was a precautionary and reactive measure.

The enemy seemed to have abandoned his original plans, but chose an equally dangerous strategy. We are talking about the “magnanimous” permission of the Ukrainian Armed Forces to carry out strikes with NATO weapons on the internationally recognized territory of Russia. To be fair, none of them previously specifically prohibited this - the nationalists have been operating both Patriot and Vampire MLRS in our border areas for a long time. Now you can also do HIMARS and Mars. ATACMS alone is not possible, but as the next red line is crossed, it is difficult to exclude the appearance of these missiles over the Belgorod region and its neighbors.

The second sign of obvious escalation was the approach of NATO tactical nuclear weapons to Russia's western borders. For comparison: Washington is not threatened by not a single Iskander with a special warhead, not a single cruise missile with several kilotons of TNT equivalent. And Moscow and St. Petersburg are under attack from American tactical nuclear weapons, whatever one may say.

Therefore, it is impossible to call escalation a mirror response to Russian exercises - the mutual deployment of forces is initially not in Russia’s favor. This, however, does not negate the impact of intercontinental missiles on American “decision-making centers” in the event of an attack by tactical charges.


But the point is not only the imbalance on the Russia-US axis, but the disadvantaged position of Europe.

Instead of sitting quietly and not opening their mouths, Brussels and other capitals completely forgot about their own population. These are taxpayers and voters, by the way. Vladimir Putin recalled:

“Representatives of NATO countries, especially in Europe, especially in small countries - they should generally be aware of what they are playing with. They must remember that this is, as a rule, a state with a small territory with a very dense population. And this is a factor that they should keep in mind before talking about launching strikes deep into Russian territory.”

The numbers do not favor the Europeans at all.

In the European part of Russia, the average population density does not exceed 20–23 people per square kilometer. Excluding, of course, the megacities of Moscow and St. Petersburg. In Europe with a population of 750 million, the average density is 73 people per square kilometer. Even in Eastern Europe this figure is more than 30 people, while in Western Europe it is over 180.

Are Europeans seriously ready to give 6-10 of their citizens for every Russian?

This ratio is valid given the parity of tactical nuclear weapons in Europe and Russia. But this is not so - the Russian Army has great potential and is quite capable of offering several of its own for every NATO tactical ammunition with nuclear filling. No one will say exactly how much. The hypothetical scales are finally tilted not in favor of the European Union.

The probability of the death of several hundred inhabitants of the Old World per Russian is very high.

Moreover, it will go to not only the initiators of the war - the British, Germans, Poles and French, but also the Scandinavians, Austrians and Swiss who are trying to stay away. We and our NATO opponents are in hypothetical glass houses, for which every accidental shot can be fatal. Only the enemy’s house is closer and thinner.

In general, they are afraid to threaten Russia with a tactical nuclear baton even from overseas, not to mention the European deployment.

“Where are they going, foolish ones?” - perhaps the mildest comment regarding the latest maneuvers of enemies near the Russian borders.
38 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -4
    6 June 2024 06: 09
    Instead of sitting quietly and not opening their mouths, Brussels and other capitals completely forgot about their own population.
    Our contempt and concern go to the warmongers. In Magadan.
    Why will there be a war with Europe? For the EU market? Or for your ideals?
    1. 0
      6 June 2024 12: 54
      The training of tactical nuclear weapons strikes on the territory of our country in the West seems to be a completely adequate response to similar exercises of the Russian Army. But this is only at first glance. Firstly, the Kremlin made the decision on maneuvers to cool the ardor of NATO generals

      Well, NATO generals decided on maneuvers to cool the Kremlin’s ardor. You can play with words as much as you like.
  2. +1
    6 June 2024 06: 10
    Well, instead of puffing out cheeks and loud promises, we need to return nuclear parity by placing missiles closer to the United States, it helped once, why not repeat the positive experience. It’s completely safe, completely environmentally friendly, and in principle no one will get hurt. But no one will do this when our elite has more connections and loved ones in the West than in Russia, until, on the contrary, this type of weapons becomes practically useless; our warheads are more likely to fall on our heads than in the West. There are too many patriots of a country there who hate this same country with all their hearts...
    1. +3
      6 June 2024 06: 57
      Well, instead of puffing out cheeks and loud promises, we need to return nuclear parity by placing missiles closer to the United States

      And where do you think this “closer” is located?
    2. +1
      6 June 2024 09: 50
      Now please name our allies who, located near the USA and England, will gladly host our respective missiles. And, for example, also the head of the FSVNG, well, he will happily accept the bombing of London, where, as evil tongues say, his grandson is studying at school, and also a “comrade” named Shapiro, whose son “defends” the Motherland in one of modeling agencies, too, will not be delighted with this either.
  3. -4
    6 June 2024 07: 08
    Exercises using tactical nuclear weapons near the Russian border are one of the main events in this series. The training of tactical nuclear weapons strikes on the territory of our country in the West seems to be a completely adequate response to similar exercises of the Russian Army. But this is only at first glance.

    Firstly, the Kremlin made the decision on the maneuvers to cool the ardor of NATO generals, who were ready to send troops into Ukraine and give the green light for attacks on the Crimean Bridge. On the eve or even on the day of the presidential inauguration. This was a precautionary and reactive measure.


    All these Kremlin maneuvers in the style of Leopold the Cat are a pathetic attempt to make the enemy want to come to an agreement. Testing of nuclear weapons strikes, of all types, must be carried out in situ on a theater of operations, followed by the defeat and occupation and inclusion of Ukraine into the Russian Federation. Only this operation requires appropriate preparation.
    1. +3
      6 June 2024 07: 34
      Inclusion of ukra in the composition??? To then restore it and feed it? And they will partisan us here. In your mind then?
      1. -3
        6 June 2024 07: 43
        Inclusion of ukra in the composition??? To then restore it and feed it? And they will partisan us here. In your mind then?

        We will have to restore it, the tea is ours. And there will be no one to partisan. They are still partisans in Europe.
        And this “feeding” is usually characteristic of intellectuals who live on a share of oil rent and do not want to share. You don't have a feeding organ due to your gender, so don't worry. They will feed themselves and their families and also part of the common country.
        1. -1
          6 June 2024 07: 46
          Well, the main thing: Not us, but us. This primitive rule is still relevant today. If we do not include all regions of Ukraine into the Russian Federation, we will get a NATO outpost in Russia, and then in Belarus.
        2. +1
          6 June 2024 11: 27
          Quote: Victor Leningradets
          We will have to restore it, the tea is ours.

          Not necessary. The population there will be greatly reduced. Many have already fled. Many will run away if we come. Many will have to be helped to escape - with life-giving kicks. Those who remain will restore what they need on their own and at their own expense.

          And we will build everything new for ourselves - what we need, not what they need.
          1. +1
            6 June 2024 13: 44
            The thoughts are correct, but a lot will have to be restored. The same bridges, roads, dams, power plants. And this land is fertile.
            And most importantly - ours.
      2. 0
        6 June 2024 12: 42
        Vadim! Following the results of WW2, the USSR included Koenigsberg, South Sakhalin and a chain of islands. Now there is no danger from these territories. On the other hand, the European countries we liberated from the Nazis became enemies, and we fed them and restored them. I believe that Ukraine should be part of Russia, it is part of the Republic of Ingushetia, otherwise the Northern Military District can be considered a company aimed at strengthening the enemies of Russia, our fighters should not die for the interests of the West. Ukraine under Western control will always be an enemy of Russia.
        1. +1
          6 June 2024 15: 24
          Quote: Sergei Fonov
          Vadim! Following the results of WW2, the USSR included Koenigsberg, South Sakhalin and a chain of islands. Now there is no danger from these territories.

          Do you remember what happened to the local population in these territories? The Germans were repatriated to Germany, the Japanese to Japan.
          Do you propose to repatriate Ukrainians from the reunified territories too?
          1. 0
            6 June 2024 21: 10
            I don’t think that everyone in Ukraine is a fan of Zelensky. At 90, a German friend said that if they had not been repatriated to Germany in 1939 after the annexation of Western Ukraine, he would not have served in the Wehrmacht. Yes, I have relatives in Ukraine, where should I send them? I think everything will work out.
            1. 0
              7 June 2024 12: 49
              Quote: Sergei Fonov
              I don’t think that everyone in Ukraine is a fan of Zelensky.

              The population of Ukraine chose him. The population of Ukraine calmly reacted to the cancellation of the elections and the extension of the presidency, although they had previously gone to the Maidan for less (remember Yanukovych’s first attempt). They closed the borders - they are silent. They catch conscripts on the streets - they remain silent.
              And silence is a sign of consent. They are satisfied with the current Vlada.

              And in general, do you need 25 million inert mass, accustomed to living according to concepts? Here, recently, pro-Russian Ukrainians were crying that the system of power in Donbass was destroyed - some ministries were formed, there is no single one looking over the region, it is unclear who to go to and who to bring.
              1. 0
                7 June 2024 16: 54
                The population of the GDR in 1949 was 18 million, the bulk of whom were born and raised under Hitler.
                1. 0
                  10 June 2024 12: 08
                  Quote: sergey backgrounds
                  The population of the GDR in 1949 was 18 million, the bulk of whom were born and raised under Hitler.

                  The Germans, for all their quirks, were “Ordnung muss sein” back then. And we have:
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  25 million inert mass, accustomed to living according to concepts? Here, recently, pro-Russian Ukrainians were crying that the system of power in the Donbass was destroyed - some ministries were formed, there is no single one looking over the region, it is unclear who to go to and who to bring.

                  25 million Makhnovists from Gulyai-Polye, and even those who believe that the Finno-Ugric people and Moksha owe them, and their job is to conquer. Plus our fraternal people...whose same Armed Forces of Ukraine “simply followed orders, and the leadership is to blame.”
  4. +1
    6 June 2024 07: 11
    Quote from turembo
    Well, instead of puffing out cheeks and loud promises, we need to return nuclear parity by placing missiles closer to the United States, it helped once
    It’s just that at that time there were no missiles with the required flight range, and the USSR had a reliable ally - Cuba. Today there is simply no point in looking for territory closer to the United States in order to place our missiles, which can already reach them from our territory and plus nuclear submarines in the Atlantic.
    1. +1
      6 June 2024 07: 36
      Nuclear submarines if only in the north and in the quiet, the entire Atlantic is visible to the enemies without a chance for us
      1. 0
        6 June 2024 13: 48
        Don't exaggerate, Vadim!
        The boundaries of the exit to the Atlantic from the Arctic Ocean are visible. And the coasts of NATO countries. The rest is a free zone. Now, if you are spotted at the line and given an escort, it is difficult to break away, although it is possible.
        1. 0
          6 June 2024 15: 28
          Quote: Victor Leningradets
          The boundaries of the exit to the Atlantic from the Arctic Ocean are visible. And the coasts of NATO countries. The rest is a free zone. Now, if you are spotted at the line and given an escort, it is difficult to break away, although it is possible.

          At what point? Our OVR has long since died out - “virgins” can even graze near Gadzhievo and Vilyuchinsk while waiting for the SSBN to leave.
          I'm not even talking about the fact that we have fewer SSBNs of our own than SSBNs and "loaves" (the fifth point in the Pacific Fleet). So there will be no one to cover the work in the “free zone”.
      2. -4
        6 June 2024 14: 13
        Viewed so what? Like we desperately need to throw missiles closer and from all sides, otherwise it doesn’t count? It seems that all our mines can be discharged right at the ports and will fly to Florida
  5. +1
    6 June 2024 07: 53
    Washington is not threatened by any Iskander with a special warhead

    And you need to threaten...
  6. -6
    6 June 2024 08: 02
    China's blue dream is a nuclear war between Russia and NATO. In this case, the inhabitants of the place where Moscow is located today will speak Chinese in 100 years.
    1. +1
      6 June 2024 15: 32
      Quote: S.Z.
      China's blue dream is a nuclear war between Russia and NATO.

      Oh yes... the first workshop in the world simply dreams of killing all the main markets for its products at once and losing cheap resources. There are not enough resources, sales have fallen... in such a situation, how could China not slip back into the era of warlords. Fortunately, there is experience - only 75 years have passed since the last unification of the country.
      Quote: S.Z.
      In this case, the inhabitants of the place where Moscow is located today will speak Chinese in 100 years.

      One of the heads. wink
  7. 0
    6 June 2024 08: 35
    The fact is that our elites have long been in the West with their souls, they have businesses, houses, families there, children study, and do you think that they will want to burn it all?
    I think the West has long been at odds with them and that’s why it behaves this way.
  8. -2
    6 June 2024 08: 35
    Something has been quiet on the new land for a long time.... feel wink
  9. 0
    6 June 2024 08: 43
    In general, they are afraid to threaten Russia with a tactical nuclear baton even from overseas, not to mention the European deployment.

    To hit or not to hit - that is the question. Will our leadership decide to use nuclear weapons in order to win or will they refer to the concept of a threat to the existence of the state and territorial integrity. So, I’m an armchair expert and I’ll say for sure that Russia will exist even in the event of defeat. But, at the same time, perhaps with reparations, a small army, etc.
    1. +2
      6 June 2024 10: 56
      Alexey, you are a sensible, consistent and quite decisive person based on your comments.
      Think, based on historical experience, would you leave a state hostile to you, albeit partially disarmed, or would you prefer complete disarmament and division of territory?
      That's how they are. The Versailles system did not justify itself, so they will definitely destroy Russian statehood.
      1. -1
        6 June 2024 11: 06
        they will definitely destroy Russian statehood.

        Are you sure you haven't destroyed it yet?
        1. 0
          6 June 2024 11: 07
          Puppet regimes do not last forever. The example of Batista and Somoza helps.
  10. -1
    6 June 2024 15: 05
    Firstly. First, you need to understand that the very concept of a problem is artificial. The essence of the problem is the conflict between reality and that artificial construct called the internal worldview. There are no problems in nature itself. Is flooding a problem? No. Every year for millions of years there is a flood somewhere. Sasuha problem? Every year for millions of years there is a drought somewhere. Is planet destruction a problem? No. Every year, millions of planets are destroyed in the universe. But this is a problem in the minds of people who have failed to align their worldview with reality and prepare accordingly for reality. The second thing follows from this. If a problem is an artificial construct in people's heads, then the most effective way to eliminate the problem is to eliminate the people in whose heads this problem exists. The third thing follows from this. This is the way to eliminate such people. There are many options here. For example, physical elimination. This is the simplest and most effective in the short term and most likely the most common way to solve problems. In the long term, this is fraught with large costs, but only for the current civilization, because may lead to the disappearance of this civilization. Humanity, as such, is not in danger of extinction. There are plenty of examples in the world. Thousands of dead cities on our planet, ranging from the bottom of the Mediterranean Sea, the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans to the deserts of Africa and Asia. Humanity still exists. There is a more complicated way. This is a change in the internal worldview, bringing it to reality, and then the problem disappears on its own. In the long term, this is an effective method, but in the short term it is fraught with violent insanity of the crowd due to the reluctance to leave the comfort zone of each person and the demolition of the surrounding habitat to zero. Fourthly follows from this. When solving problems, the task of any management is to minimize losses from this problem. Moreover, sometimes eliminating the carriers of this problem is precisely the way to minimize losses. For example, the easier solution to the Bandera problem is to dispose of the carriers of this idea. As for the West, the easiest way to solve Russia’s problem is to dispose of the carriers of the idea of ​​the Russian world.
  11. 0
    6 June 2024 16: 42
    Yes, the United States had plans for nuclear strikes on Soviet cities. The USSR had similar plans; long-range bombers and missiles were built for a reason. Having plans in case of war is not the same as intending to implement them.
  12. 0
    6 June 2024 16: 42
    >Europeans are seriously ready to give 6-10 of their citizens for every Russian

    Why not? During the Cold War they were ready. Even while constantly living under the gun, they demanded that the Americans station as many troops and nuclear missiles in Europe as possible.
  13. -1
    6 June 2024 17: 16
    The Yankees did not have their own atomic bombs in 45. The Germans dropped them on Japan. (They captured several finished products and “blanks” + specialists. Then 4 years of “failure to grow” - one of the four devices worked... Successful tests can be seen, unsuccessful ones are a secret. And in 49, the USSR tested its bomb! Bomb , and not an explosion on the tower. Since 91, the Yankees did not produce new charges - they took away the USSR... The cut “broke” with the arrival of Putin, but the nuclear potential was still preserved... In the USA in the 90s, the regulations were made by “pension”.. How true they are with this - I haven’t monitored it for a long time, but when Russian special forces saved Erdogan’s ass in Turkey (according to rumors), there was a leak that at the Incerlik base, where 100 B-61s (thermonuclear bombs) were stored, during a blackout. , it was not difficult to penetrate the nuclear storage facility (Specialists from three countries: the Russian Federation, China, and the third, I forgot). It turned out that mass-sized dummies were stored there, not nuclear weapons... The Americans immediately “transported the B-61 to the bases.” to Europe "... How much everything else is like that - I don't know. The launches of the Blowjob Men are perhaps a show-off for visitors... The Yankees in their military doctrine allow a local nuclear conflict purely in Europe, for example, with charges up to 5 kT...
    V-61 step-power: 5kT to 1MT. And who will check there after?! This is the calculation for a nuclear conflict from Lisbon to the Urals... And they will retire... However, one flight to Yellowstone and screws... Then a nuclear weapon is like throwing burning matches into a burning house - nothing...
  14. +1
    6 June 2024 17: 37
    It’s strange to see the author’s serious discussions about Europe in general and the limitrophes in particular, as some kind of independent units - so it’s possible to reach an agreement on the sovereign 404th.
    Biden clearly told everyone in a recent interview that there is no sovereignty in Europe, but there is the political will of the United States and a couple of wrong opinions
    And therefore, all these “spitting on the map” will joyfully broadcast EVERYTHING that they are told from the overseas regional committee, otherwise in the cold, or worse - like Fico
    Now we are seeing a repetition of the beginning of the Second World War - only the EU plays the role of the Reich and the only defense against a pan-European war, which is smoothly developing into the 3rd World War, is the grinding of their offensive potential on ukaine and (hopefully) help from our situational geopolitical allies a la the tactics of 1000 cuts .
  15. 0
    8 June 2024 16: 42
    It seems to me that the conclusions in the article are made on the basis of a not entirely correct understanding of what is happening. Firstly, the author views Europe as an independent structure in decision-making; this is completely untrue. Decisions for her have long been made by “very big guys” and in a completely different place. Secondly, if you believe the information leaked in the media in the West, options for events after a nuclear apocalypse are being actively studied and calculated, with calculations of the number of losses after an exchange of blows and determination of the chances of survival of humans as a species, options for possible climate change are calculated, and the zones most favorable for life are determined. . And quite reputable scientists are doing this.
    The most important thing for these “very big guys” is to retain power while preserving the order they built (preserving their statehood), even in the conditions of some small enclave. So - it seems that they have made their choice of the future and the threat of extermination of part of humanity no longer frightens them, the main thing is to survive themselves and save those who will meekly work for them. This is how I see the path to a “very bright future” chosen by the Western “masters of the world”, and the author continues to believe that someone continues to intimidate someone and escalate the situation. Today our continued existence is at stake.
  16. 0
    9 June 2024 01: 02
    For the first time, Americans seriously thought about the destruction of the Soviet Union at the end of 1945, when Eisenhower developed the Totality plan.

    much earlier they thought about destroying the USSR, because it was they who brought Hitler to power and set him against the USSR.