Military Review

There is an answer to American tricks.

58
In order to effectively address the tasks of strategic deterrence, it is necessary to tighten the provisions in the basic documents on the possibility of Russia's use of nuclear weapons. weapons


Implementing strategic deterrence, the military-political leadership of the Russian Federation pays close attention to strengthening the country's security by maintaining the military organization of the state, including the Armed Forces, in a high degree of combat readiness, preparing the country to repel military threats of any scale and from any direction. At the same time, nuclear weapons are considered to be the main deterrent factor for a potential adversary. However, the issue of a new strategy of organizing the armed defense of the Fatherland is on the agenda.

The United States military-political elite has recently been purposefully seeking means that strengthen their national security and allow them to rely less on nuclear weapons. As such a tool, they consider a new operational-strategic concept - a quick global strike (BSU), the use of which in interstate confrontation can allow to defeat the enemy using only existing and prospective samples of conventional long-range high-precision weapons. At the same time, anti-satellite systems and air defense systems, ballistic missiles and objects containing WMD, and other important objects can be the main targets. According to American experts, strategic means in non-nuclear equipment can be hit from 10 to 30 percent of such targets. In other words, in non-nuclear equipment, strategic carriers will have counterforce potential.

There is an answer to American tricks.

In this regard, the following questions should be asked: Does the concept of a quick global strike fit into a single large-scale range of threats to the military security of the Russian Federation and should the entire system of armed defense of the Fatherland be rebuilt or re-organized to counter this military threat? To get answers, it is necessary to understand the essence of the operational-strategic concept of BSU and to identify the tasks that are set.

Key Points

Despite the loud name of this concept, the main goal of its implementation is to give the US armed forces the ability to inflict limited-scale high-precision strikes on important targets in the shortest possible time and at long range both with nuclear and non-nuclear weapons. The key points in this target installation are:

  • limited precision shots;
  • short and long range strikes;
  • strikes with both nuclear and non-nuclear weapons.


    Are these targets suitable for confrontation with Russia? Let's see.

    First, a limited scale and time strike on the territory of our country is unlikely to be effective from a military-strategic point of view. If the enemy unleashes aggression against the Russian Federation, then it will pursue decisive goals. And, undoubtedly, the aggressor is not limited to conducting only BSU.

    Secondly, the application of BSU in Russia will in fact be the beginning of a large-scale war with the use of nuclear weapons, with all the ensuing consequences.

    Thirdly, today the United States is not enough conventional high-precision long-range ammunition to solve this problem. The BSU forces can only be directed at solving a limited range of tasks in peacetime related to the struggle for the nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction, against drug trafficking and terrorism, as well as the fight, or rather the destruction of unsuitable for the United States heads of state, as was the case in Iraq and Libya, and leaders of terrorist organizations.

    Based on this, it can be stated that in the coming 10 – 15 years, the threat of BSU from the US using both non-strategic nuclear and conventional weapons is unlikely.

    And BSU, and MSU

    However, with the increasing potential of a quick global strike, this target can be changed. The most promising direction for solving this problem in the United States is considering the possibility of creating conditions for inflicting non-nuclear instantaneous global strikes (MGU) in order to destroy the most important and hard-to-reach targets anywhere in the world within one hour after the decision was taken by the military and political leadership of the United States .

    The capacity building of Moscow State University is planned by reducing the time parameters for its implementation by using advanced hypersonic weapon systems capable of developing speeds of 8 – 21 thousand kilometers per hour, as well as retrofitting the Trident-2 SLBM with non-nuclear equipment.


    In the near future (up to 2015), maneuvering and guided warheads mounted on ballistic missiles will be created.

    In the medium term (2015 – 2020), unmanned transonic (2 – 4 M) and hypersonic missiles (≥ 5 M) with a range of up to 1500 kilometers, as well as planning heads with a range of up to 5000 kilometers are expected to be commissioned.

    In the future (2020 – 2035), it is planned to produce a manned strategic bomber with ultra-long range up to 17 000 kilometers, and after 2030 – 2035, aerospace systems (VCS) capable of outputting payload to low-altitude orbits.

    Colonel Warden's Five Rings

    However, even after the accumulation of the potential of Moscow State University by conventional high-precision hypersonic means of destruction, one should hardly hope to win the war with Russia only with a short global strike. Understanding this, the US military-political leadership, in order to achieve victory in the war with any adversary, including Russia, relies on the integration of the concepts of instant global strike and network-centric war with the deployment of a missile defense system in Europe. Victory in the war with any adversary, according to the views of the Americans, will be achieved by solving problems during the two phases of hostilities.

    The main content of the first phase of the aerospace phase of hostilities will be an instant global strike. Critical targets of the victim state are selected as targets for destruction. Their lists are compiled in peacetime on the basis of the concept of the so-called five rings of Colonel Warden, who considers the enemy as a system consisting of five radial rings. In the center - the political leadership, followed by a life support system, infrastructure, population, and only last of all - the armed forces. A similar scheme was already used during the NATO aggression against Yugoslavia in 1999.

    The goal of the first stage of aggression is complete disorganization of the state, economic, military control system, “blinding” the intelligence, missile defense and air defense systems of the country, demoralization of the population, panic and shock, and disorganization of military activities of the victim state. The main tasks will be the strategic offensive forces delivering a preventive massive combined strike with the use of nuclear and conventional (non-nuclear) means, intercepting the survivors of the preventive strike and successfully launching nuclear weapons carriers of Russia with US anti-aircraft defenses, delivering the subsequent strike with a retained part of the US SNS. At the first stage of military operations, the main role will be played by Moscow State University and the missile defense system in Europe.

    The possibility of practical implementation of the Moscow State University’s concept is evidenced by the functioning since August 2009 of the US Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC), which is responsible for the use of 1 ground-based intercontinental missiles since December 2009, 450 and strategic parts aviation.

    At the second stage of aggression, after reaching the goal of the first stage and if deemed necessary, the ground phase of military operations can begin, which are planned to be conducted in accordance with the concept of network-centric war, the main content of which will be strikes with precision weapons on the newly identified important enemy targets and mastering it territory.

    It can be assumed that Moscow State University in aggression against Russia will not have an independent character, but will become the main component of its aerospace phase. Consequently, the problem of combating the means of defeating an instantaneous global strike must be considered in conjunction with all the problems of repelling an enemy's aerospace attack.

    It follows from the above that in the long term (after 2030 – 2035), in order to defend their vital interests, the United States can unleash aggression against Russia using the forces and means of Moscow State University. Is our country ready to repel such aggression?

    Need new approaches

    Analysis of the characteristics of promising hypersonic aircraft (GZLA) and the capabilities of the existing RKO and air defense systems shows that the aerospace defense facilities of Russia have limited ability to detect and destroy GZLA, and in some cases are not able to do so. The radar and missile defense systems and SPRN theoretically have the ability to detect GZLA, but their software and algorithmic software does not allow to process information about targets that are not moving along ballistic trajectories. The radar equipment in service with the RTVs has limited capabilities for detecting GSPA and does not allow solving the tasks set in the entire possible range of their heights and flight speeds. Active air defense systems are also significantly limited in the shelling and destruction of the GZLA. The existing and developed prospective air defense systems are limited in height by the targets being fired to 35 kilometers, in flight speeds of targets to 5 – 6 M, and the missile armament of air defense fighters does not allow hitting targets at altitudes of their flight more than 30 kilometers and speed than 3 M. Existing automation systems command posts of all control links are not designed to process information from targets that have flight speeds greater than 4 M.

    Not to mention the capabilities of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation as a whole, it should be noted that to ensure the military security of our country, new approaches are needed in addressing the tasks of strategic deterrence, preventing and localizing the outbreak of aggression.

    First of all, in order to more effectively solve the tasks of strategic deterrence of a potential adversary from unleashing large-scale aggression against Russia or causing Moscow State University to tighten the provisions in the basic documents (National Security Strategy, Military Doctrine, etc.) on the possibility of using nuclear weapons in response to aggressive ones against the Russian Federation actions.

    So, in the National Security Strategy and Military Doctrine it is advisable to make the following paragraphs:

  • “The Russian Federation reserves the right to use all means of warfare (strategic and non-strategic nuclear weapons, conventional high-precision weapons, weapons on new physical principles) in response to the use of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction against it and (or) its allies also in the case of aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons, when the very existence of the state is threatened. At the same time, the use of any means of destruction by the aggressor at the highest levels of command, nuclear forces, combat control systems, missile attack warnings, outer space control, antimissile defense, and important administrative and economic centers of the Russian Federation will be regarded as the beginning of nuclear aggression giving the right to use nuclear weapons in retaliatory or counter action. "

  • "In case of establishing reliable information about the upcoming disarming global strike against objects in Russia or its allies, the Russian Federation reserves the right to launch a preventive or counter-oncoming missile / air strike against the deployment areas (deployment) of the aggressor’s forces and means , on whose territory (the aggressor or his ally) they are ".

    The inclusion of these points in the basic documents will significantly affect the efficiency of solving tasks not only of strategic deterrence against unleashing large-scale aggression against Russia, but also of preventing it. The military-political leadership of the states - potential adversaries will make them think about the expediency of deploying forces and means in their countries that threaten the military security of the Russian Federation.

    To ensure that these provisions of strategic deterrence and prevent aggression against the Russian Federation are feasible, parity with the United States on strategic nuclear forces is acceptable to Russia, preventing the United States from launching a full-scale missile defense system in Europe, sufficient numbers of general-purpose forces, strategic reserves and prepared for them, mobilization resources and material reserves, a highly efficient rocket and space system harrows, an adequate response of the military and political leadership of the Russian Federation on the threat of military security and high resolution to use military force.

    Armed defense strategy

    If the Russian Federation fails to contain and prevent aggression, it will be forced to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity by conducting military actions. Moreover, if the very existence of the state is threatened or the aggressor unleashes a war with the use of nuclear weapons, the RF Armed Forces are obliged to begin a strategic operation of nuclear forces. In the case of a nuclear-free war against Russia, which may be unleashed after 2030, a new strategy for organizing the armed defense of the Fatherland is needed.

    The essence of such a strategy should consist in a systematic approach to the organization of armed defense of the state, in building both adequate and asymmetrical groups of troops (forces) of the enemy functional combat systems of the RF Armed Forces.

    Considering that MSU is an integral part of an aerospace campaign or operation, countering this blow should be carried out as part of a strategic aerospace operation, and the main defensive executive system, its core, should be asymmetric with respect to the enemy’s actions Russian Federation. It needs to be deployed in peacetime, and by 2030, unlike today, it is obliged to detect and hit hypersonic aircraft. It is important to figure out which objects: carriers (hypersonic missiles, airplanes, unmanned aerial vehicles, ballistic missiles) or maneuvering and guided warheads mounted on them, head and planning units, and how to fight on them. To solve this problem, it is necessary to develop a new concept of organization of the aerospace defense of Russia and promising, capable of confrontation with hypersonic means of attacking the enemy weapons and military equipment.

    At the same time, it should be realized that conducting only defensive actions is unlikely to lead to a breakdown and abandonment of further enemy aggression. It is necessary to actively counteract the actions of the enemy. In this regard, it seems expedient to accelerate work on the creation of a domestic hypersonic weapon and use it as an active way of dealing with the aerospace means of attacking the enemy in a preemptive or counter-counter strike.

    Planning and repelling an aerospace attack of an adversary in the framework of a strategic operation should be carried out under the direct supervision of the strategic command of aerospace defense that was created in peacetime. Considering the defense orientation of our military policy and the fact that with the beginning of enemy aggression, the actions of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation will be directed only at disrupting the enemy’s aerospace attack, call this operation a strategic operation to repel the enemy’s aerospace attack.

    At the same time, given the exceptional difficulty of actively opposing an aerospace adversary, it is important to provide for measures of passive opposition to the means of attack, including hypersonic ones. First of all, it is the protection of objects and their disguise, the dispersal of troops (forces), their timely withdrawal from attack, the rise of aircraft in the air and the launch of ships at sea, electronic, aerosol, dipole and other countermeasures of enemy reconnaissance, target designation and guidance. For the effective solution of these problems, it is advisable to clarify the requirements for the combat readiness systems of the RF Armed Forces, cantonment troops, and air and naval bases fleetand also to develop the latest means of protection, camouflage, passive and active opposition to reconnaissance and guidance of the enemy.

    Thus, to counter BSU in the general idea of ​​organizing a missile defense system of Russia, it is necessary to deploy percussion functional groups of troops (forces) that are adequate to the enemy, and to take active and passive measures to counter its reconnaissance and guidance assets. At the same time, it is important not to allow the US to again draw Russia into the conventional arms race, namely, expensive high-precision weapons and hypersonic means of delivery.
  • Author:
    58 comments
    Information
    Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

    I have an account? Sign in

    1. Vladimirets
      Vladimirets 14 August 2013 16: 05 New
      19
      The article is interesting. Only the development of their means of attack, adequate to the states being developed, can cool hotheads. Protective equipment alone will not cope with such a task.
      1. Sakhalininsk
        Sakhalininsk 14 August 2013 17: 55 New
        +9
        Quote: Vladimirets
        The article is interesting. Only the development of their means of attack, adequate to the states being developed, can cool hotheads. Protective equipment alone will not cope with such a task.


        The most important thing in any contact with arrogant Saxons is an ancient principle, if you want peace, be ready for war. The essence of impudent Saxons was and is piracy, as they were robbers and remained, and with the robbers, the only acceptable language, is the language of power.
        1. S_mirnov
          S_mirnov 14 August 2013 20: 16 New
          +3
          The article tells in great detail what you NEED to do - this is good.
          But somehow they don’t tell at all who and why it WILL DO or already DO!
          And who will come up with asymmetric answers? Think military and scientists?
          If you look at the statistics, only the number of shopping centers and religious centers is actively growing in the Russian Federation. But the number of institutes, schools, military educational institutions is decreasing every year.
          It turns out that the asymmetric answer should come up with priests and traders!
          Oh yes! still the number of dollar millionaires in the Russian Federation is actively multiplying, maybe they will come up with?
          1. phantom359
            phantom359 14 August 2013 21: 41 New
            +2
            Quote: S_mirnov
            The article tells in great detail what you NEED to do - this is good.
            But somehow they don’t tell at all who and why it WILL DO or already DO!
            And who will come up with asymmetric answers? Think military and scientists?
            If you look at the statistics, only the number of shopping centers and religious centers is actively growing in the Russian Federation. But the number of institutes, schools, military educational institutions is decreasing every year.
            It turns out that the asymmetric answer should come up with priests and traders!
            Oh yes! still the number of dollar millionaires in the Russian Federation is actively multiplying, maybe they will come up with?

            Such a good start and such an ugly end. I agree, you need not only to say but also to do something, but churches and shopping centers have absolutely nothing to do with it. The root of the problems must be sought in parliament, how many parasites there are.
            1. S_mirnov
              S_mirnov 15 August 2013 00: 26 New
              +2
              Quote: phantom359
              The root of the problems must be sought in parliament, how many parasites there are.

              I agree, religious and shopping centers, fertile banks, this is just a consequence, the reason is in power.
          2. Nitup
            Nitup 14 August 2013 23: 21 New
            0
            We think the military and scientists.
      2. Cheloveck
        Cheloveck 14 August 2013 22: 39 New
        -2
        Quote: Vladimirets
        The article is interesting. Only the development of their means of attack, adequate to the states being developed, can cool hotheads. Protective equipment alone will not cope with such a task.

        Someone reminds me of this famous SOI. what
        As for any nuclear power, in which the "guardians of democracy" have the imprudence to fool their BSU, they definitely get a nuclear lulu from it even before the "precision" weapons reach the target.
        And how the A_merovskaya advertised, but still not wanting to work, missile defense system will work, this question is very interesting.

        In general, at this stage, this whole concept is intended to intimidate the townsfolk, nothing more.
      3. Siberian German
        Siberian German 15 August 2013 05: 41 New
        0
        and when someone stopped the protective equipment - that's when they know that in response to your child prodigy they can apply a super-mega-child prodigy - then yes, they think
    2. My address
      My address 14 August 2013 16: 09 New
      0
      And interestingly, there are responsibilities from the commander of the Strategic Missile Forces / Fleet to the President to make decisions about launching missiles. It is in the duties. And to what extent, under what circumstances? I have no doubt that before the 91 year was. Or is it a state secret?
      1. Ascetic
        Ascetic 14 August 2013 23: 51 New
        +1
        Quote: My address
        And interestingly, there are responsibilities from the commander of the Strategic Missile Forces / Fleet to the President to make decisions about launching missiles. It is in the duties. And to what extent, under what circumstances? I have no doubt that before the 91 year was. Or is it a state secret?


        There is. In some cases indicated in the Combat Charter of the Strategic Missile Forces which has a signature stamp.
    3. a52333
      a52333 14 August 2013 16: 14 New
      +2
      Or maybe it is necessary to carry out a preemptive strike? A group of hackers attack this financial bubble called the USA? angry What if it bursts right now?
      1. alex86
        alex86 14 August 2013 19: 10 New
        +4
        Replacing the offer, but you need to think: the financial bubble burst, the dollar practically ceases to exist, half of the financial resources of the Russian central bank turn into dust, the second (euro) almost into dust, China can not sell anything to the United States, it stops buying from us oil, which at the same time falls in price to an incomprehensible level (there is nothing to measure, there is no dollar), our budget is locked into the domestic market, i.e. it falls (conditionally) twice (yes more, I think), state employees have nothing to pay, Chechnya (conditionally) ceases to receive tribute from Russia and the Caucasus lights up, but there is nothing to put out (no money), all the separatists start yelling that they will live better, if they become independent and introduce their money - and the general kirdyk, the States burst, and Russia burst. "Be careful with desires, they can come true ..."
        1. GELEZNII_KAPUT
          GELEZNII_KAPUT 15 August 2013 06: 28 New
          0
          DUK they will come true! 1. Option dollar to dust, etc. etc .. 2. Option to start a war, and the whole world in ruin!
        2. Gur
          Gur 15 August 2013 08: 22 New
          0
          MILLION, well, how did we live up to the dollar? And nothing, and the muzzle was wide, and then look at how we all tied, and for a long time, everything came to everyone, and everyone understands, and they don’t put eggs in a basket. And the concept of development if the dollar disappears (Amen), each country provides. And in your opinion, should we uncle Sam wash his feet and drink this water for the fact that he created these dollars and filled up the whole world with plain paper? Survive do not hesitate ..
    4. Krsk
      Krsk 14 August 2013 16: 15 New
      +1
      Victory in a war with any enemy, according to the views of the Americans, will be achieved by solving problems during two stages of hostilities ...

      Only they are unlikely to have the luxury of a second chance. Of course, subject to an adequate choice of the opponent.
      1. Aryan
        Aryan 14 August 2013 23: 31 New
        0
        asymmetric measures hesitated ... maybe immediately into the lobeshnik? angry
    5. vitek1233
      vitek1233 14 August 2013 16: 19 New
      +7
      It looks like the countries of Europe, NATO members need to constantly inspire for whom their friends from Washington are holding if they are the first to burn in the atomic fire
      1. eplewke
        eplewke 14 August 2013 16: 57 New
        +4
        Is it really impossible to live just calmly. Something is being prepared, they are working through preemptive strikes, and they are creating ever new weapons systems to destroy entire countries! It would be better if we took up the problem of pederacia, the problem of hungry blacks in Africa, you are great humanists in our country! She ... by golly so zae * ali these mattress covers! They do not sit ass on their land! It was necessary for the USSR to destroy them in the Caribbean crisis. As Sakharov said: we will make the strait between Canada and Mexico ...
        1. skeptic
          skeptic 14 August 2013 18: 55 New
          +2
          Quote: eplewke
          Is it really impossible to live just calmly. Something is being prepared, they are working through preemptive strikes, and they are creating ever new weapons systems to destroy entire countries!


          It is impossible. This is a business - nothing personal. And all the political markups are for an uninterrupted wave of orders, more and more new weapons.

          This is fraught with the fact that suddenly there is one who thinks of launching the apocalypse. In reality, the USA can fall on Russia only if a nuclear response is impossible. Why do they need raw materials affected by radiation?

          If scientists bring them on a saucer, weapons capable (painlessly for them) to destroy the population of Russia, there is no doubt that they will want to make new Indians out of us. Therefore, our task is to support the express delivery of nuclear retaliation, without the slightest alternative to delay it and the world can sleep peacefully.
        2. Gur
          Gur 15 August 2013 08: 55 New
          0
          NEXTLINE God bless you like a child, what hungry blacks we are well fed and what they need on this earth except for fertilizer, and hungry blacks in Africa are also their work, of course, first the countries of Europe were ahead of the planet in this matter, and then to this day amers. And it is beneficial for them that Africa be poor and hungry, this is another item of income from the so-called "humanitarian aid". The world can calm down between itself only if the earth is threatened from outside, or if it breaks the amers forever, but there are no other holy places, China, for example, began to grow its ambitions.
      2. IRBIS
        IRBIS 14 August 2013 17: 24 New
        +5
        Quote: vitek1233
        It looks like the countries of Europe, NATO members need to constantly inspire for whom their friends from Washington are holding if they are the first to burn in the atomic fire

        More often organize exercises and invite to them representatives of those countries who decided to host elements of missile defense. On these exercises, show the defeat of objects (very similar to missile defense elements) by tactical missile systems, followed by measuring the diameter and depth of the funnel. At the same time, do not forget to mention that you can put "such garbage" on "this crap" and that then the funnel will be "wider and deeper". Clearly and intelligibly ...
        1. vadson
          vadson 14 August 2013 19: 09 New
          +7
          do you think everything is just like an orange? I hasten to disappoint you, as soldiers and the population will usually suffer, and the world elite clap their hands in a secluded place and watch how half of civilization destroys each other. we need one “good” terrorist act, so that from the next bilderberg assembly only a glass funnel of a couple of kilometers remains. you look instantly a lot of problems in the world will resolve itself
          1. vladimirZ
            vladimirZ 15 August 2013 10: 43 New
            0
            "... we need one" good "terrorist act, so that from the next bilderberg assembly only a glass funnel remains a couple of kilometers away. You look in a moment a bunch of problems in the world will resolve itself" vadson (1)  Yesterday, 19:09 ↑

            Yes, perhaps this is a good offer. This event must be prepared for all freedom-loving people and states to preserve the world community of peoples.
    6. shinobi
      shinobi 14 August 2013 16: 23 New
      +6
      All these plans were Yankee's next routine type SOI. Well and fodder for smithiks. They’re terrifying. One of the generals from the Yankee missile defense system, I don’t remember his baht, the expert, in short, said in the press: Any launch of a non-nuclear ballistic missile on the territory of the Russian Federation right there It will cause a full-fledged retaliatory strike, since at this stage it is impossible to find out which warhead of the missile when it is in flight. They will not be able to completely neutralize our strategic missile forces, they themselves will acknowledge. In short, it’s bred and inside American consumption. But it’s useful for us. but in tone and on guard keeps. And it is useful.
      1. Igor39
        Igor39 14 August 2013 21: 20 New
        +1
        In, we have already heard for the conquest of Russia, for the blitzkrieg, now here is a quick blow, history gives an answer to how it all ended.
        1. Gur
          Gur 15 August 2013 08: 59 New
          0
          But this should not be calmed down (by the past), peace and progress does not stand still, and our scientists and the military must be quick in order to have a bolt for every cunning ass. Yes, so it would be cheap and cheerful, let the amers spend inventing tricky things, and we must make a simple answer so that their costs are in the pipe.
    7. AK-47
      AK-47 14 August 2013 16: 33 New
      +1
      At the same time, it is important not to allow the United States to again drag Russia into the conventional arms race, namely, expensive high-precision weapons and hypersonic delivery vehicles.

      Is this how to crash at them and BSU and MSU at the same time first?
      1. Dilshat
        Dilshat 14 August 2013 19: 28 New
        +1
        As I understand it, the American missile defense does not set the goal of intercepting a retaliatory nuclear strike. It’s the very weapon of attack. Fast weapons to destroy a preemptive strike. And this means we will have to create our own real defensive one. And it’s more difficult to develop and create a missile, a priori more expensive and longer. .There is still an education system undergoing an incomprehensible “reform.” After the Gorbach-Reagan, Bush party, Russia had few trump cards. The winner took everything they could reach. They also got the right to print money for themselves. Accordingly, the dollars are spent on weapons until they turned into candy wrappers. What can we do? Nationalize
        oil industry (and not privatize as is now being done) and most of the income spent on missile defense and space.
        1. Dilshat
          Dilshat 14 August 2013 19: 35 New
          +2
          Someone will say that we fell for the American SOI. We broke into the arms race economically and are now on the missile defense. But I don’t think so. It was not in the arms race but in the cockpit as they say. Then there was a bluff and now there is no better. Who knows, the situation may soon turn out to be worse than June 41.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 14 August 2013 20: 01 New
        +3
        Quote: AK-47
        Is this how to crash at them and BSU and MSU at the same time first?

        The article is interesting. The author worked wonderfully: he tried to look beyond the horizon, to catch the trend in the development of weapons of war and how to use them. Next went the strategic and political level, so there are certain contradictions. Briefly about them.
        VK BUT by the forces of the NAC (ICBM and CA) - this is good. But I would like to remind you that more than 50% of nuclear weapons are located on SSBNs, which are still the first echelon of delivering a disarming s / a strike. There is not a word about this in the analysis. And there is something to think about: the accuracy of the Trident-2 is higher than the stationary Minutemans;
        The flight time (hence the reaction time of the missile defense system) of SLBMs is 2-3 times less than that of stationary ICBMs. In addition, the SSB can launch missiles from any azimuth, and not just from the missile-dangerous direction (like stationary ICBMs), limited by known bearings.
        The Ohio are partially re-equipped with Tomahawk strategic cruise missiles in both nuclear and conventional equipment. It remains to execute them using the "stealth" technology, and why you don’t have a first strike weapon: cheap and cheerful, and no need to spend money on hypersonic systems. This is the first.
    8. knn54
      knn54 14 August 2013 16: 54 New
      +6
      Oh, it’s not in vain that ALL of the fifth column is ready to lie with its bones on the way to build a fleet.
    9. Kowalsky
      Kowalsky 14 August 2013 17: 03 New
      +1
      All these high-precision missile attacks are not designed to war with Russia. The Americans will always be able to turn Russia into a nuclear ashes, and it is impossible to defend themselves from such an attack in principle. But they themselves are in exactly the same situation. Even the most sudden, most precise strike will not prevent a retaliatory nuclear attack, and own losses will make the continuation of the war pointless. as they say, the game is not worth the candle. What will they then occupy? Radioactive ruins of Moscow?
      But against all sorts of Libya there with Iraq and Iran will work "with a bang." Well, and this is also a great way to keep the defense industry enterprises afloat and cut the headstock of the defense budget.
    10. Yuri Y.
      Yuri Y. 14 August 2013 17: 22 New
      0
      If hypersonic with nuclear warheads is a difficult case, you need to develop your own anyway.
    11. srha
      srha 14 August 2013 17: 45 New
      0
      “If reliable information is established ... reserves the right to apply preventive measures,” I will tell you right away that the states are preparing such a blow, and so what? The author will rub off and again reserve the right to apply?

      And in the article, the fact of almost twenty-fold excess of the US military financial potential is missed, which inevitably leads to the same ratio of military potential.
      And the fact of the predominance of the shock potential over the defensive one, i.e. cost-effective shock to protective. It seems that the strategists of the USSR with its strategy of the threat of mutual guaranteed destruction were completely recorded as fools.
    12. Lech from ZATULINKI
      Lech from ZATULINKI 14 August 2013 18: 05 New
      0
      so dream in the US STATE DEPARTMENT - A BLOW ON RUSSIA
    13. Double major
      Double major 14 August 2013 18: 41 New
      +5
      Well, the article, in general terms, correctly depicts a possible military opposition between Russia and the United States. But times are changing. Using the example of several recent companies, we can say that they are working out Woren’s Five Rings theory from the point of view of influencing the enemy’s population by means of information influence, including through social networks created using budget funds through the CIA, such as for example Facebook. A "fifth column" is being formed, which provokes the authorities, up to shooting at peaceful demonstrators behind them, and at the same time, a precedent is created, the government is declared not legitimate, the "opposition" receives "humanitarian" weapons, mercenaries from all over are introduced to help it of light ... Does it resemble anything? It was no longer worked out in one “regime”, it was slowed down in Syria, but they also learn from mistakes. We are waiting for new options. But they cannot pull the war with their aircraft with us. Even if NATO rushes to help. To drive a Russian peasant into the forest - he from there has already planted more than one army of the enemy on the pitchfork ...
    14. Homo
      Homo 14 August 2013 18: 44 New
      +1
      ... In the event of a nuclear-free war against Russia, which can be unleashed after 2030, it is necessary to develop a new strategy for organizing armed defense of the Fatherland ...
      I did not quite understand this statement. And what prevents Russia from responding with all its nuclear potential if its existence is threatened (even if not nuclear). Or what if they destroy us with conventional weapons, we have no right to respond with nuclear weapons? In my opinion, when there is a threat to the existence of the state, there’s already something to beat back on the drum !!!
    15. sad33
      sad33 14 August 2013 18: 49 New
      0
      Lord! don’t wave the flag and blow the pipes. Have many of you been to the USA? Have you seen this country? did you talk with the Americans? The overwhelming majority of Americans do not know where it is RUSSIA ... They don’t care about our country ... and they don’t want to know. They have their own problems above the roof. But in Russia everyone knows where the USA is !!!! And they are very worried about their safety ... What do they need here? 80% permafrost? oil Gas? and so they get it for PAPER !!! on which our elite builds cottages for them ... What do they need? WHO WILL ANSWER ????
      1. SPBOBL
        SPBOBL 14 August 2013 21: 48 New
        +3
        that ordinary Yankees did not know where on the map of Libya, the State Department did not stop lynching Muammar ...
        PS In my opinion, the Yankees are asking Satan, in different ways, asking ...
      2. yurii p
        yurii p 14 August 2013 22: 46 New
        0
        Russia is the only opponent that can oppose the United States, Russia collapsed and there will be one superpower in the world, there is no talk of open war, the war is for spheres of influence, for natural resources. Medvedev has already given Libya, which since the times of the USSR, was an ally of Russia , like Syria. On the example of Syria
        now the possibilities of our state are being revealed, Russia will be able to resist NATO in the future, if the West wins in Syria, it will be difficult for Russia to find allies who will openly support Russia.
        1. Nitup
          Nitup 14 August 2013 23: 34 New
          0
          Libya has never been an ally of either the USSR or Russia.
    16. Avenger711
      Avenger711 14 August 2013 18: 51 New
      0
      BSU involves the use of the very same ICBMs that carry nuclear warheads, that is, all this is just bullshit, instead of a powerful nuclear charge, they threaten us with a tiny meteorite, while it can hit a KVO with 250 meters, that's a big question. That is, the renunciation of nuclear weapons implies that the problem will be solved by airplanes and cruise missiles, and they should be somehow concentrated for an attack, which in itself is such a long process that it is possible to present ultimatums 10 times and deliver a preventive nuclear strike to end of concentration. US forces in Europe are now almost gone.
      1. Nitup
        Nitup 14 August 2013 23: 36 New
        +1
        Quote: Avenger711
        US forces in Europe are now almost gone.

        What are you? But is NATO, with all its arsenal and infrastructure, not a US force in Europe?
    17. Corsair5912
      Corsair5912 14 August 2013 19: 09 New
      +2
      The United States is considering the possibility of creating the conditions for delivering non-nuclear instant global strikes (MSU) in order to destroy the most important and hard-to-reach targets anywhere in the world within one hour of the decision by the military-political leadership of the United States.

      These lousy pimple-pimpled, arrogant macaque caines do not want to calm down. During their existence, out of mercenary motives, they killed hundreds of millions of people, hiding under the squeal of "freedom and democracy", which they never had.
      If they are not stopped, they will destroy life on the planet and take a break themselves, but they will not be able to understand it, they are as dumb as Bush Jr.
      1. Yura
        Yura 14 August 2013 19: 39 New
        0
        Quote: Corsair5912
        meager as bush jr.

        If they have such presidents, then what are the rest? What I will not say, because the insult is so big that I myself am uncomfortable.
    18. 12345
      12345 14 August 2013 19: 37 New
      0
      ... The goal of the first stage of aggression is to completely disorganize the system of state, economic, military administration ...


      It is "treated" quite simply. The command serving the strategic nuclear forces (up to each launcher) must be ready to deliver a nuclear strike EVERY HALF HOURS, if, during this period of time, there is no order to transfer the strike to the next half hour.

      Then, in case of defeat of the command and the onset of "disorganization" - the missiles will go to the target within half an hour.

      And, the enemy, let him think - does he need such a "disorganization"? Will not we, someone's thread, and not accidentally flail the "finger on the trigger"?
    19. JIaIIoTb
      JIaIIoTb 14 August 2013 19: 40 New
      +2
      Hmm, it's time again to deploy missiles in Cuba.
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 14 August 2013 20: 08 New
        +2
        Quote: JIaIIoTb
        Hmm, it's time again to deploy missiles in Cuba.

        The desire is understandable ... Only then again the Caribbean crisis ... Tell me, only honestly: are we ready for it today? That's it.
        And dreaming is not harmful: it is harmful DO NOT DREAM!
        1. phantom359
          phantom359 14 August 2013 21: 44 New
          0
          Quote: BoA KAA
          Quote: JIaIIoTb
          Hmm, it's time again to deploy missiles in Cuba.

          The desire is understandable ... Only then again the Caribbean crisis ... Tell me, only honestly: are we ready for it today? That's it.
          And dreaming is not harmful: it is harmful DO NOT DREAM!

          Then, too, were not ready, but showed determination and everything went. The Americans really do not like their large losses. You can safely post, then the stench in the media and the Foreign Ministry will not work.
    20. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 14 August 2013 19: 55 New
      +2
      Interesting article. +++! The author worked wonderfully: he tried to look beyond the horizon, to catch the trend in the development of weapons of war and how to use them. Next went the strategic and political level. Therefore, in my opinion, there are certain contradictions. Briefly about them.
      - VK BUT by the forces of the NAO (ICBM and the SA) - this is good. But I would like to remind you that more than 50% of nuclear weapons are located on SSBNs, which are still the first echelon of delivering a disarming s / a strike. There is not a word about this in the analysis. And there is something to think about: the accuracy of the Trident-2 is higher than the stationary Minutemans;
      - The flight time (hence the reaction time of the missile defense system) of SLBMs in 2-3 times less than that of stationary ICBMs. In addition, SSBNs can launch missiles from any azimuth, and not just from a missile-dangerous direction (like stationary ICBMs), limited by known bearings.
      - The Ohio are partially re-equipped with Tomahawk strategic cruise missiles in both nuclear and conventional equipment. It remains to execute them using the "stealth" technology, and why you don’t have a first strike weapon: cheap and cheerful, and no need to spend money on hypersonic systems. This is the first.
    21. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 14 August 2013 19: 55 New
      +4
      Read more.
      Second. I consider controversial a number of provisions in the political sphere. Somehow:
      1. To include in the fundamental documents relating to the country's defense, the provision on a “preventive strike” is the same as giving a trump ace to the enemy in his information war against the Putin regime. I won’t develop further thought, I think it’s clear.
      2. No sane politician, if he is not an aggressor, can be at 100% sure (before the outbreak of the hot phase of the conflict) that the moment of the attack is precisely determined. And if this is a false positive after a hacker attack? And if this is a provocation? (Incidents in the Far East during the Second World War). And if there is a chance to "resolve" the situation (the Caribbean crisis) and not put civilization on the brink of existence.
      3. We persistently “hammer” into world public opinion that after the dissolution of the ATS there is no need for NATO to exist. And here: we will tear apart the shtatovskih troops in your territory with a “preventive strike”. Naturally, “ordinary” NATO members will be afraid of a big Russian bear and hope for an elder overseas brother.
      4. I would like to note that with the "beginning of aggression", it is too late to "disrupt." You can only weaken the damage from the blow, because 100% protection is not with us, nor they. But to reduce the time and decision-making procedure for Response actions is necessary. And how the strike will turn out: in return or in return (when the amers’ BB is still in flight) depends on a lot of factors, including and on the political will of the country's leadership.
      Regarding technical issues.
      1. There will be GZLA, there will be new software for radars of the SPRN system and firing radars. There will be new missile defense systems. In the meantime, it is necessary to protect the country from the means of the VKN, which are in the arsenal of the enemy.
      2. Asymmetric means of warfare, using other physical principles. Type: space and time curvature generator. This is when the BB attacking you can be sent to another reality or deep into the past, and so on.
      Or: you are ICBMs for us, and we will move mainland plates (North American, for example) with seismic weapons and drown your America in the ocean. Or wake up the Yellowstone volcano sleeping in the corner of a piece. Wyoming, and fall asleep half the country, well, etc.
      But it seems to me hard to come up with an “asymmetric” aerospace defense system. All the same, you need to destroy the GZLA and BB ICBMs.
      3. Hypersonic damaging elements (warheads or kinetic blanks) will be primarily used for stationary strategic facilities: large military administrative centers, nuclear power plants, other nuclear power plants, strategically important industrial facilities, launchers, missile defense, warehouses and bases of nuclear weapons, communication centers, etc. They are difficult to disguise, as well as to put an impact interference BB. All that remains is to destroy, knock off the trajectory, introduce errors into the enemy’s positioning systems, and “neutrolize” the nuclear charge ...
      And the last. Obama bluntly declares that he will make every effort "to reduce, together with Russia, the tactical nuclear weapons of the battlefield." If this happens, we will be removed from our pants in the arms race, as happened in 80 under Gorbi. This is where our Thermosaws run today. Plus BRRDR. What will make the States also settle on the content of parity forces.
      Of course, I could be wrong, but I do it sincerely, by virtue of my knowledge and experience of service.
    22. The comment was deleted.
      1. Misantrop
        Misantrop 14 August 2013 20: 04 New
        +6
        Quote: BoA KAA
        In addition, the SSB can launch missiles from any azimuth
        Do not confuse with the Soviet. The permitted latitude for launching ICBMs of the USA is not higher than 82 degrees. Otherwise, the complex is buggy. This 941 and 667 could hit from the point of the geographic pole with the defeat of the target. It is for this reason that among Americans, strategist patrol zones are cut in the Atlantic and the Pacific (without entering high latitudes, although there is higher stealth and less flight time)
    23. The comment was deleted.
    24. Jet blackbird
      Jet blackbird 14 August 2013 22: 14 New
      0
      “Defense strategy” - must be offensive)) We must launch “strike complexes” of all types of troops, “defense” is both more expensive and ineffective, and if the “enemy” begins real preparation “for the strike” - immediately attack all its goals and communications, without warning. But this must be officially announced, let them fear))
    25. crambol
      crambol 14 August 2013 22: 43 New
      0
      I completely agree with the article. But reading is creepy.
    26. gladysheff2010
      gladysheff2010 14 August 2013 22: 52 New
      0
      The best victory is a bloodless victory, i.e. held not on the battlefield, but in the political arena. Therefore, I express my full approval to the supporters of deterrence, not confrontation! We need not only new weapons or a new concept, we need exactly what our political leadership is doing now, in particular, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, creating in the heads of Western inhabitants the image of an attractive, cultured and educated Russia. our partners should not forget about the sinus stone.
    27. SPACE
      SPACE 14 August 2013 22: 55 New
      0
      The main problem of all these hypersonic supersonic percussion toys is guidance systems. To create a megawatt class mobile electronic warfare systems, jamming everything within the earth’s atmosphere tied to the SPRN.
      Well, the old "good" and tested weapons such as SS-18 will dot all the "and".
      1. Nitup
        Nitup 14 August 2013 23: 48 New
        0
        Quote: SPACE
        The main problem of all these hypersonic supersonic percussion toys is guidance systems. To create a megawatt class mobile electronic warfare systems, jamming everything within the earth’s atmosphere tied to the SPRN.

        And if in a few years the inertial guidance systems develop to such an extent that they can provide accuracy comparable to that when using guidance from signals from a satellite system?
        1. SPACE
          SPACE 15 August 2013 19: 11 New
          0
          Quote: Nitup
          And if in a few years the inertial guidance systems develop to such an extent that they can provide accuracy comparable to that when using guidance from signals from a satellite system?

          It seems to me that inertial guidance systems have reached their limit, they will no longer squeeze out. These notorious 300 meters is already the limit of the statistical error that arises, but not from the technical properties of gyroscopes, but from overcoming the BB of the atmosphere, a medium that cannot be predicted by calculating on computers. And even for those planning GZBB even more so.
          But problems can be aggravated by spraying passive or highly active chemicals in the atmosphere on possibly proposed GZLA flight paths that will either slow down the unit, reduce accuracy or cause erosion, followed by destruction.
          1. SPACE
            SPACE 15 August 2013 19: 52 New
            0
            But the main emphasis must be placed on the doctrine of "counter-strike"; on the means of detecting and warning SPRN as part of ZGRLS and tracking satellites, as well as on automation of decision making and on a massive launch of strategic nuclear forces. And to carry it, to probable opponents. The only way.
    28. user
      user 15 August 2013 00: 28 New
      0
      It is necessary to transfer the areas of nuclear submarine patrols to the central and eastern parts of the Pacific Ocean, i.e. Nuclear submarine withdrawal to the Pacific basing region, allowing direct access to the ocean without bottlenecks like in the North Atlantic.
    29. kavkaz8888
      kavkaz8888 15 August 2013 01: 07 New
      0
      “Blitzkrieg” reminiscent of these BSU and MSU. Then they took it out and now it will be ours.
    30. kartalovkolya
      kartalovkolya 15 August 2013 08: 17 New
      0
      Well, there’s no need for an overseas moron! An asymmetric answer is needed, but it would be nice to revive the Dead Hand to cool hot (but stupid) heads, or rather put them back into operation. That will stink ...
    31. Nitarius
      Nitarius 15 August 2013 08: 19 New
      -1
      Quote: Nitup
      Quote: SPACE
      The main problem of all these hypersonic supersonic percussion toys is guidance systems.

      And if in a few years the inertial guidance systems develop to such an extent that they can provide accuracy comparable to that when using guidance from signals from a satellite system?

      Already developed on the new physical principles of amers! for a long time they reasoned and came to the conclusion that the amers have
      1) Hypersonic missiles - about 20 thousand km / h
      2) On new physical principles --- rockets on unsupported engines, in Russian, anti-gravity or the UFO principle. they are not rocket engines and they have no tail.
      With these missiles they demolished the TWIN TOWER, shot down our SU-27

      1. Black Colonel
        Black Colonel 15 August 2013 12: 38 New
        +1
        "With these missiles, they demolished the TOWER TWINS, shot down our SU-27"
        And when did the Boeings become rockets? And the Su-27 crashed in Belarus.
        "...- rockets on unsupported engines"
        If such missiles were in the striped arsenal, we would not have talked on the site on these topics. They didn’t communicate at all.