"Will be destroyed within 20 minutes." Americans consider Russia to be equal only at the level of nuclear weapons.

334
Russia's nuclear arsenal allows it to position itself as a superpower, but in the field of conventional weapons, it is not included in this category. This was stated by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States Armed Forces, Martin Dempsey. Experts recognize that now there is no parity in the field of conventional weapons, and Russia compensates for its reliance on nuclear weapon, but in the coming years the situation will change.

On Wednesday evening, the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee supported the resolution authorizing the military operation in Syria. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States Armed Forces, who participated in the hearings, said that an assessment of Russia's possible response would be presented to congressmen in closed hearings. “I don’t think that I can now go into such hypothetical discussions. We will give these assessments in closed hearings, ”said Dempsey.

According to him, Russia still has elements that allow it to position itself as a superpower. “For example, a continuing nuclear arsenal. But in the field of conventional weapons, I would not include Russia in this category, ”the general said.

Recall that before the summit G20, which opens Thursday in St. Petersburg, Russian President Vladimir Putin gave a detailed interview to Channel One and the American news agency Associated Press. Putin was asked how Russia could respond to the use of force, whether it is on the side of Syria or interrupt a relationship with her.

Putin made it clear that Russia has "its plans, but for now it is too early to talk about it." “These are the plans of Russia in the case of the development of the situation in one, the second or the third scenario. We have our own ideas about what and how we will do if the situation develops, either with the use of weapons or without them. We have our own plans, but for now it’s too early to talk about it, ”Putin answered.

Konstantin Sivkov, the first vice-president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, does not consider Dempsey’s statement on Russia's military potential in the field of conventional weapons far removed from reality. “I would say that Russia is not part of the“ middle-aged ”powers, if we take the ratio of military potential and area. Russia is at the level of Belgium, ”Sivkov told the VIEW newspaper.

According to him, with the current composition of the armed forces, Russia is capable of solving problems in no more than two armed conflicts on a Chechen scale. For local war, he is sure, a group of half a million people will be needed. “Local war is what was called“ Storm in the Desert ”, these are ordinary operations that the Americans repeatedly conducted. In the Vietnam War, the American military group numbered 1,5 million people. Today, Russia with the full mobilization of troops can create a grouping of no more than 250 thousand people, ”the expert believes.

As for the comparison of the Russian Navy with the American fleet, then Sivkov noted that, for example, the Northern Fleet is able to effectively solve the problem against one carrier strike group. “Americans will have at least four such groups in the event of a conflict,” Sivkov believes, adding that the Pacific Fleet can successfully solve problems against one or two aircraft carrier groups, “and there will be up to six of them.”

The Black Sea Fleet, according to Sivkov, in its composition corresponds to one ship-strike group, which in the Sixth US Fleet can be up to 10. “Only in the Turkish Navy there are about 30 submarines, and the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Federation has only one,” the expert said, stressing that Russia is now “only holding nuclear weapons”.

As for the Russian cruiser sent to the shores of Syria, accompanied by two cover ships, if the Americans decide to strike at them, “they will be destroyed within 20 minutes”. "The fifth operational squadron, the Soviet, had there in the ordinary conditions of the order of 30 warships, and such force could withstand aggression," said Sivkov.

However, the chief editor of the National Defense magazine Igor Korotchenko notes that Russia does not create an army like the United States, and "we have other tasks." “In the field of equipment with equipment, all four Russian military districts will be sufficiently equipped in the near future, so that each of them can repel threats that they may fall within the area of ​​responsibility of,” said Korotchenko to VIEW.

He recalled that in recent years Russia has paid considerable attention to the development of its capabilities in the field of conventional weapons. According to him, the state program of armaments laid the figures for financial expenditures, which will allow 2020 to reach the level of manning the troops with new equipment up to 70%. “It will be a good indicator. Today, to a large extent, we use outdated Soviet weapons, but the progress that is taking place is obvious, ”said Korotchenko, pointing out that Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu attaches paramount importance to the flow of new weapons into the troops.

According to the expert, the troops recently adopted a brigade set of the Iskander-M operational-tactical missile system. Attention is also paid to admission drones, serial purchases of S-400 anti-aircraft missile systems began. “In the field of conventional weapons, it should be noted the supply of new armored personnel carriers and automotive equipment. In 2015, the first tank of the fifth generation "Armata" is expected. 2200 of these will be purchased tanks. On aviation serial purchases of new front-line Su-34 bombers and Su-35 fighters are in progress. It is expected that more than 1200 helicopters of various types will be delivered to the troops. All this suggests that priority is given to the issues of increasing combat readiness and equipment, ”the expert said.

At the same time, he also stressed that in the field of nuclear weapons, Russia remains a superpower, and “even the temporary inequality in the field of conventional weapons is compensated by the country for reliance on nuclear weapons. “Any potential aggressor imagines that if he unleashes military operations against Russia, she will be able to respond with strategic and tactical nuclear weapons, and this in any case equalizes the chances and makes the global military-political situation around the Russian borders stable,” Igor Korotchenko is convinced.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

334 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Valery Neonov
    +18
    7 September 2013 06: 41
    A statement by Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the US Armed Forces, in my opinion, is an American auto-training. hi
    1. +24
      7 September 2013 07: 18
      But still it is necessary to improve the fleet. In addition, in modern warfare, it is necessary to build air defense and missile defense, during the Soviet Union there were many, but then everything was disbanded.
      1. +19
        7 September 2013 07: 35
        depressing as it looks: ..recourse The Black Sea fleet, according to Sivkov, in its composition corresponds to one ship-strike group, which can be up to 10 in the US Sixth Fleet. “Only in the Turkish Navy there are about 30 submarines, and the Black Sea Fleet - only one,” noted expert,
        1. +35
          7 September 2013 08: 08
          Quote: Andrey Yurievich
          depressing as it looks: ..

          And don’t say. We have everything else, and the Bulava didn’t fly again yesterday. Again, the tests of the submarines are stopped ... We really need to bring the strategic nuclear forces to mind. This is our hope and support.
          1. +9
            7 September 2013 13: 35
            According to him, with the current composition of the armed forces, Russia is capable of solving tasks in no more than two armed conflicts on a Chechen scale.

            At one time, Napoleon, Hitler also underestimated Russia. So we all know. As you can see, Dempsey did not teach history.
            1. +30
              7 September 2013 15: 48
              Quote: elmi
              At one time, Napoleon, Hitler also underestimated Russia. So we all know. As you can see, Dempsey did not teach history.

              Then the time was different. And the weapons, especially during the time of Napoleon, were practically the same. Now the technical equipment of the troops solves a lot. In the best conditions it turns out to be the one who has more modern equipment.
              1. +4
                7 September 2013 23: 10
                Quote: baltika-18
                Then the time was different. And the weapons, especially during the time of Napoleon, were practically the same. Now the technical equipment of the troops solves a lot. In the best conditions it turns out to be the one who has more modern equipment.

                Not always the best technical equipment of one of the armies decides victory, victory decides spirit. If you recall the history of wars, some poor armies defeated the stronger ones. In Vietnam, the Amers had an army many times stronger and more equipped, one skin lost. She didn’t conquer the world and she won completely. There are many examples where the weak armies, but the strong in spirit defeated the stronger. As Bodrov said from the movie Brother 2:
                Money rules the world, and he is stronger, who has more. - Well, here you have a lot of money, and what will you do? -I will buy everyone! -And me? ... So the brother says that in money. You have a lot of money, and why? I think that power is in truth. Whoever is true is stronger.
                1. +6
                  8 September 2013 09: 47
                  Quote: elmi
                  .In Vietnam, the Amers had an army many times stronger and more equipped, one skin lost

                  You forget that our anti-aircraft gunners and pilots fought in Vietnam, and the equipment was also Soviet and weapons. If it were not for the Union, the States would have torn Vietnam like a "hot water bottle".
                  Quote: elmi
                  .Aganistan has not yet won an army in the world and completely won

                  But such a task was apparently not posed. In the days of the USSR, the main thing was the promotion of the idea, we not only fought there, but also built and helped.
                  The United States now has a clearly different goal: to take control of drug trafficking, it is billions. The task has been completed, Afghanistan is tightly planted on the heroin needle, and after the amers leave, they will also continue to produce drugs intensively, because they haven’t been given anything else. In addition to everything ardent Islamists on the border with the former Soviet Central Asia, where the borders have already become like a sieve.
                  If desired, given the power of modern powers and spit on the opinion of the world community, Afghanistan can be eliminated in a couple of months if the principle of total war is applied.
                  1. +4
                    8 September 2013 13: 12
                    Quote: baltika-18
                    .If it were not for the Union, the States would have torn Vietnam like a "hot water bottle".

                    I do not think that the amers tore the Vietnamese so easily even without the support of the USSR. Remember how the Japanese in 1945 more or less successfully opposed America, I mean ground operations. American experts themselves predicted the protracted war on 3-4 of the year. Only Soviet intervention accelerated the defeat of the Kwantung army.
                    Quote: baltika-18
                    But such a task was apparently not posed. In the days of the USSR, the main thing was the promotion of the idea, we not only fought there, but also built and helped.
                    The United States now has a clearly different goal: to take control of drug trafficking, it is billions. The task has been completed, Afghanistan is tightly planted on the heroin needle, and after the amers leave, they will also continue to produce drugs intensively, because they haven’t been given anything else. In addition to everything ardent Islamists on the border with the former Soviet Central Asia, where the borders have already become like a sieve.

                    Yes, the amers turned Afghanistan into a worldwide drug transplantation and probably with an eye to the flow of drugs to Russia. I’m sure if we took control of the border with Afghanistan, the amers would start a war through dushmans in order to drive out our border guards.
                    Quote: baltika-18
                    If desired, given the power of modern powers and spit on the opinion of the world community, Afghanistan can be eliminated in a couple of months if the principle of total war is applied.

                    I don’t think that America would be able to achieve a complete victory in Afghanistan, as the terrain and relief of Afghanistan contributes to guerrilla warfare. You won’t lose any technique there. Of course, if you really want to destroy Afghanistan, it’s quite possible, for example, using tactical nuclear weapons, vacuum bombs and etc. But this will not happen, since it is not profitable for America, there is no oil, gas, there is no particularly strategic significance. So there is no point in destroying Afghanistan, it will cost more.
                2. +3
                  9 September 2013 13: 48
                  This is all a talking shop ... The spirit is of course wonderful, but I would like to see how with this very spirit you will save the country's life support facilities from tomahawks, for example ... Or how to crush enemy air armada with a mighty spirit ... Nobody with Afghanistan in full force did not fight, and Vietnam, without outside help, would have been ground into powder in a year. Spirit by spirit, but the modern war will be waged by the latest technologies, a powerful economy, trained headquarters and a motivated population, are you sure that the modern population of Russia will be sufficiently motivated? (to the question of "spirit")
                  1. +3
                    9 September 2013 22: 19
                    And how throughout history, Russia got up from its knees, first losing the war, then winning. I believe in an invincible Russian spirit, we cannot be defeated. Of course, we still need to reinforce with modern weapons, this is by itself.
                3. 0
                  25 March 2020 17: 41
                  The Americans did not set a goal at all costs to occupy the territory: they helped one of the parties. The Viet Cong were often disguised as Southerners. If the methods of colonial warfare were applied, everything would be decided quickly. Is that the population of Vietnam has decreased by 10 times ...
              2. Tatar
                0
                9 September 2013 06: 49
                and there’s also a military strategy and Russian ingenuity, it’s enough to detonate a neutron bomb somewhere in space, thereby drowning out satellites and ships can be boarded and there is nothing worse than an angry Russian marine!
            2. alex popov
              +15
              7 September 2013 19: 25
              Quote: elmi
              At one time, Napoleon, Hitler also underestimated Russia. So we all know. As you can see, Dempsey did not teach history.


              And there was Tsushima ...
              you still need to really look at things, only nuclear weapons stop these star-striped scum from direct aggression.
              1. +1
                7 September 2013 22: 07
                Quote: alex popov
                Quote: elmi
                At one time, Napoleon, Hitler also underestimated Russia. So we all know. As you can see, Dempsey did not teach history.


                And there was Tsushima ...
                you still need to really look at things, only nuclear weapons stop these star-striped scum from direct aggression.


                I do not believe. If only nuclear weapons they were still the first ship to attack, without aircraft carriers.
              2. +2
                7 September 2013 23: 18
                Quote: alex popov
                And there was Tsushima ...
                you still need to really look at things, only nuclear weapons stop these star-striped scum from direct aggression.

                And then there was the Vietnam War ... where the amers, despite their technical superiority, screwed up and got rid of America. I don’t believe that Russia would lose the war to America without the mutual use of nuclear weapons. Remember, during wars, Russia at first lost the war, then won. It is evident that the Russians are sleeping in us great strength and manifests itself when we become very ill. Only the Tatar-Mongols conquered us and more no one has completely conquered us. So the strong one is not the one who has a lot of modern technology, but who has a stronger fighting spirit.
                1. +3
                  8 September 2013 16: 26
                  Quote: elmi
                  Only Tatar-Mongols conquered us

                  Yes Yes)). Four years later, some of our experts will write: only the USSR conquered Russia)).
                  Do you think they won’t write?
                  1. 0
                    12 May 2020 14: 32
                    By your logic, it turns out that later experts will write that Russia conquered the USSR
                    1. 0
                      12 May 2020 19: 02
                      Quote: elmi
                      they will write that Russia conquered the USSR

                      No. The logic of the "Tatar-Mongol yoke": The terrible USSR brutally attacked the Tribalts, Ukraine and Belarus, and especially for a long time - more than 70 years its yoke stretched over Russia! fellow
                2. 0
                  31 January 2014 16: 24
                  The Tatar-Mongols did not conquer Novgorod Land - they came close, but they were afraid and scrambled south. So even the Tatar-Mongols did not conquer Russia. Yes, the territories were temporarily occupied, but Russia was not completely conquered.
              3. 0
                31 January 2014 16: 21
                It’s time to show these arachnids what the real is! As the Japanese, without declaring war, we’ll drown their vaunted navy fleet in the raid and there will be no one to defend the States! On their land they will not be able to withstand even theoretically, since their entire history was fought exclusively on someone else’s.
            3. +4
              7 September 2013 21: 20
              Quote: elmi
              At one time, Napoleon, Hitler also underestimated Russia. So we all know. As you can see, Dempsey did not teach history.


              Napoleon even appreciated Russia. Therefore, he put up the largest army that Europe has ever seen against the Russian Empire.

              Now only nuclear weapons protect the country from a full partition.
              1. +2
                7 September 2013 22: 12
                Quote: Blackgrifon
                Quote: elmi
                At one time, Napoleon, Hitler also underestimated Russia. So we all know. As you can see, Dempsey did not teach history.


                Napoleon even appreciated Russia. Therefore, he put up the largest army that Europe has ever seen against the Russian Empire.

                Now only nuclear weapons protect the country from a full partition.

                I agree. Without nuclear weapons we would have problems now, although with nuclear weapons we are, so fewer, but they are climbing.
              2. +10
                7 September 2013 23: 33
                Quote: Blackgrifon
                Now only nuclear weapons protect the country from a full partition.

                What kind of defeated thoughts? Russia will never be conquered by anyone, even without the use of nuclear weapons. After all, look lately, many say that young people are no longer the same; if there is a war, they will run. But in reality the exact opposite: 1 and 2 Chechen there are a lot of cases of heroism, I know because he fought in 1 Chechen. 5 day war when our soldiers did not flinch under the Georgian cities, there are many examples. But Westerners, if they do not have complete superiority, will run, they will not even get involved in a battle. I think their strength of mind is weaker. So the West will never have us we don’t understand what we have strength when the trouble presses us. Yes, and we ourselves are inclined to belittle our abilities not believing in ourselves, and when the trouble comes, we ourselves wonder where the courage came from.
                1. +2
                  8 September 2013 01: 54
                  Quote: elmi
                  Yes, and we ourselves are inclined to belittle our abilities not believing in ourselves, and when the trouble comes, we ourselves are surprised where the courage came from.


                  Here you are right, but the qualitative technical and quantitative superiority of the enemy can easily outweigh the moral superiority. A striking example - the Tatar-Mongol invasion - the heroic death of well-trained and equipped warriors of the Russian principalities could not stop the numerically superior invading forces. Therefore, now it is necessary to strengthen the army.
                  1. rolik
                    0
                    9 September 2013 01: 07
                    Quote: Blackgrifon
                    A striking example - the Tatar-Mongol invasion - the heroic death of well-trained and equipped warriors of the Russian principalities could not stop the numerically superior invading forces.

                    In the descriptions of the military campaigns, Haji Rahim (the chronicler of Batu Khan) says that there are 10 Mongols per Russian, which is why they win. But Batu himself said that if the Russian princes unite, then his power over Russia will come to an end. Therefore, Alexander Nevsky was poisoned, because in the eyes of the Mongols he was a dangerous man, because he was trying to unite Russia. Although according to new (last) interpretations, its poisoning is usually called a disease.
                  2. 0
                    12 May 2020 14: 40
                    A striking example - the Tatar-Mongol invasion - the heroic death of well-trained and equipped warriors of the Russian principalities could not stop the numerically superior invading forces.
                    In addition to the numerical superiority, the Tatar-Mongolian troops also had high moral-volitional qualities, together with the most severe discipline
              3. kavkaz8888
                +2
                8 September 2013 09: 19
                Here it is, the coveted word-SEPARATE. Why seize us, it's problematic. But divide and rule, that’s it. White and Small (outskirts) Russia already torn off.
            4. +1
              7 September 2013 22: 32
              According to the CIA, the city of Grozny cannot be taken by anyone. Even the army of the SGA.We took it.
              1. 0
                8 September 2013 22: 25
                Quote: Patriot.ru.
                According to the CIA, the city of Grozny cannot be taken by anyone. Even the army of the SGA.We took it.

                But why take it? It was possible to demolish completely, then I still had to build
            5. +5
              7 September 2013 23: 05
              Quote: elmi
              At one time Napoleon, Hitler also underestimated Russia

              At that time, the traitors were not in power ...
              1. +5
                7 September 2013 23: 43
                Quote: nycsson
                At that time, the traitors were not in power ...

                It’s hard to argue. Although Stalin cleaned up many traitors. There wasn’t such a person in the 1904-1905 during the Russian-Japanese war, the soldiers were heroic, and many generals were not professionals, but actually traitors to Russia. Here I say that they are afraid of us in wars not enemies, but their traitors.
            6. +1
              8 September 2013 06: 34
              it is possible that it is possible to destroy Russia, but to conquer, never ... soldier
              1. goldfinger
                +4
                8 September 2013 20: 52
                Look neighbor on the vehicle. I know little about the modern Russian army, but what I drew from the media and WWW are not optimistic. I remember very well the time of the end of the Vietnam War. I believe that the States are simply tired of throwing billions in order to stop the Soviet expansion in Southeast Asia. In addition to Vietnam, there were Cambodia and Laos. No matter what they say, but the President of the United States and his cabinet are elected, this is not the USSR and probably not Russia (rigged 2nd EBN elections). Tired of the people of the United States, protests around the world. And then, the States fought there for almost 10 years. It is difficult to compare, but the mountain jungles of Vietnam, malaria, heat, insects, tropical diseases are not more favorable than the Chechen mountains. Draftees fought there, almost all field officers are former university students. After Vietnam, the restructuring of the US Army began. Transition to a contract, huge army preferences, powerful advertising, etc. Vietnam - a revolution in the US military doctrine, went to them, and their armed forces benefited. And what did the Soviet Union forget there? Wiped US Nose? Is the price too high? Did the CA use the lessons of the war in the jungle? Are they jungles that grow near Smolensk? All these local wars pushed the USSR by 1991. Money box.
                I served in the SA for two years (two-year period) and then I think that two years of urgent work is not enough. Now we have 1,5 years, you have 1. This is a profanity. Or you need a full contract army. But there won't be enough petrodollars. Moreover, half of the budget is being stolen. And it will not be possible to sit on two recruiting chairs, even though the minister was a furniture maker. Until the leapfrog stops at the top, until the modern open-minded "pros" come to the very top of the army, until it becomes clear what the people actually want from their army, the painful conclusions of the article cannot be refuted.
            7. kavkaz8888
              +2
              8 September 2013 08: 59
              Yes, we know the results, and we also know at what cost the Victory comes. Therefore: "rearmament, rearmament and again rearmament" as comrade Putin said.
            8. 0
              9 September 2013 13: 43
              Dear, there is no need to compare present-day Russia with the mighty empire of Alexander, or with the even more powerful Stalin Union. This, as they say, is two big differences. It’s not sad to realize this, but the author is right. The Russian army is currently not capable of a serious war. Hope only for nuclear weapons.
        2. vaddag1
          +9
          7 September 2013 08: 18
          "corresponds to one ship-strike group, of which there can be up to 10 in the US Sixth Fleet" - "Varangian" and "Korean" do not agree with you. Cruiser and can. boat against 6 cruisers and 6 destroyers - we have our own mathematics.
          1. +20
            7 September 2013 08: 44
            Although it’s a little sad about "my own math", no one has canceled the fortitude yet!
            1. vaddag1
              +2
              7 September 2013 09: 20
              "a little sad" - with dry mathematics - they emerged victorious, knocking out several cruisers during the war. and the moral damage inflicted on the enemy is not measurable at all.
              1. Pamir210
                -2
                7 September 2013 12: 28
                here is the problem ...
                they did not disable a single cruiser.
                moral damage is not measurable .. because it was not
                1. vaddag1
                  +15
                  7 September 2013 13: 09
                  when you look for information on the Internet, except for the "wiki" see other links, analyze.
                  I understand your statement "they did not take out a single cruiser" is a phrase in the "wiki" - Japanese historical and archival sources do not confirm hitting the ships of the Japanese squadron, as well as any damage and loss.
                  if you believe so, "wiki" dig deeper and when you ask "Asama (armored cruiser)" you will see the information - "During the battle, Chemulpo was the flagship of the squadron. Having received a 152-mm projectile hit in the aft bridge, which was broken and caught fire, he left In the Tsushima battle he received 12-14 hits, temporarily withdrew from the battle, there were three killed, 12 wounded. "
                  ps on your own, if you're interested. and if you stumbled into the "wiki", read not even everything, but a couple of paragraphs, and wrote a comment like "I'm in the know," then you do not paint. read on "wiki" and analyze, otherwise your attacks - there is an unreasonable insult to the heroes' deeds.
                  1. Pamir210
                    -4
                    7 September 2013 13: 27
                    the flagship of the Japanese squadron in this battle was not Asama))
                    about the wiki ... let's not draw conclusions from where other people get information (all the more without giving their sources)
                    1. vaddag1
                      +5
                      7 September 2013 13: 49
                      "the flagship of the Japanese squadron in this battle was not the asama))" - this is not for me, for Wikipedia.

                      documents of the historical commission of 1911 on the description of the actions of the fleet in the war of 1904-1905 at the Naval General Staff. Rudnev’s report (or do you believe uriu anymore? moreover, we have not seen his REPORT). Wikipedia, but a versatile approach. and also a book from youth (I don’t remember the name). no propaganda, memoirs of the participants (in the flesh before the priests), an analysis of the military experts of those. the details.
                      1. Pamir210
                        +8
                        7 September 2013 13: 53
                        Quote: vaddag1
                        or do you believe uriu more?

                        I believe the facts.
                        the fate of ALL Japanese cruisers participating in that battle can be traced.
                        and not one of them is dead in that battle.
                        the same can be said of destroyers.
                      2. vaddag1
                        0
                        7 September 2013 14: 12
                        "and not one of them is listed as dead in that battle" - the fact that IN THE BATTLE the Japanese cruiser was killed by nobody and was not announced.
                        "I believe the facts." fact - "Varangian" drowned. fact - it was raised and put into operation by the Japanese.

                        your first comment was generally: "here's the problem ...
                        they did not disable a single cruiser.
                        moral damage is not measurable ... because it was not. "
                      3. Pamir210
                        0
                        7 September 2013 14: 30
                        therefore, it was not voiced that there was nothing to voice
                        I see no contradiction in my first comment
                      4. +4
                        7 September 2013 17: 29
                        Quote: vaddag1
                        "and not one of them is listed as dead in that battle" - the fact that IN THE BATTLE the Japanese cruiser was killed by nobody and was not announced.
                        "I believe the facts." fact - "Varangian" drowned. fact - it was raised and put into operation by the Japanese.

                        your first comment was generally: "here's the problem ...
                        they did not disable a single cruiser.
                        moral damage is not measurable ... because it was not. "


                        Sorry, it’s completely not clear what is the point of your position. You want to say that the Varangian caused great damage to the Japanese squadron? Then why do you agree that the Japanese have not lost a single cruiser?
                      5. vaddag1
                        0
                        7 September 2013 18: 04
                        directly in battle - not lost. but, after the battle, during the transition, one cruiser sank due to damage.
                      6. Pamir210
                        +4
                        7 September 2013 20: 51
                        which one sank? where exactly?
                        and how did Rudnev know this at the time of writing the report
                      7. 0
                        8 September 2013 16: 47
                        Quote: Pamir210
                        they did not disable a single cruiser.

                        Quote: Pamir210
                        not one of them is dead in that battle.

                        Agree, there is a fundamental semantic difference between these two statements)).
                        Disabled - forced to stop the battle, the performance of a combat mission.
                        Killed in battle - sank to the bottom.
                      8. Pamir210
                        +1
                        8 September 2013 18: 40
                        there is a difference, but they do not contradict each other.
                        not a single Japanese cruiser was incapacitated and, moreover, was not drowned.
                    2. kavkaz8888
                      +1
                      8 September 2013 10: 00
                      But I found such data: the enemy squadron included the cruiser Asama, Naniva, Taka-heho, Hioda, Akasha and Nitaka.

                      11.45. “The first shot came from the Asama cruiser ... after which the entire Japanese squadron opened fire.” The "Varangian" fired a fodder gun, then fired a volley on the starboard side with armor-piercing shells. The third wing of the enemy destroyed the right wing of the front bridge, a fire broke out in the navigational cabin, and the fock-wat was broken. The youngest navigator, midshipman Count Alexei Nirod and rangefinder were the first to die, several people were injured. The rangefinder station No. I failed, which determined the distance to the enemy for firing. The cruiser answered with armor-piercing, the Japanese ships with shimoses. The Japanese squadron covered the cruiser: gun number 6 was shot down and all the commandos were killed. Midshipman Gubonin was seriously injured, but continued to command shooting until he fell. Charging cartridges with smokeless powder started to burn, but the commandants put out the fire. Two guns of the main caliber and three of the mine defense were shot down. The subsequent Japanese salvo destroyed the battle mainsail Mars, destroyed the rangefinder station No. 2, and knocked out two small-caliber guns. From the explosion that penetrated the deck hatch, the sailor's living rooms lit up, but they were quickly put out. "Varangian" lived and continued to move forward. He led an artillery duel with the Japanese flagship Asama, trying to incapacitate him. Meanwhile, the Japanese destroyer launched an attack on the cruiser, but the very first salvo from the Varyag launched it to the bottom. Soon, Asama turned away, and Takashiko took the place of the matelot, but literally in a matter of minutes, three main-caliber shells hit the Japanese cruiser. Thick black smoke enveloped the Nitaka cruiser.
                      1. Pamir210
                        -2
                        8 September 2013 12: 42
                        Quote: kavkaz8888
                        But I found such data: the enemy squadron included the cruiser Asama, Naniva, Taka-heho, Hioda, Akasha and Nitaka

                        and now deal with at least the generally accepted rules for writing the names of Japanese ships.
            2. +15
              7 September 2013 13: 18
              Quote: Mole
              Although it’s a little sad about "my own math", no one has canceled the fortitude yet!

              Not bad, along with fortitude, in the Mediterranean Sea would look modernized nuclear submarine pr.941 "Akula", carrying about 500 pieces of cruise missiles on their sides. In this case, such statements from the Americans would hardly have sounded, and there would be less confidence in their impunity.
            3. Raven
              +8
              7 September 2013 19: 24
              fortitude will not help if the battle goes on distant. in "ten" km
              who has better technology will win
          2. +4
            7 September 2013 08: 45
            Quote: vaddag1
            Cruiser and Can. boat against 6 cruisers and 6 destroyers - we have our own math.

            So what? Cruiser and Can. drowned everyone's boat? Young man, do not talk nonsense.
            1. vaddag1
              +21
              7 September 2013 09: 14
              the destroyer is sunk, the cruiser sank from damage upon return, 2 cruisers went to dry docks, taking into account the damage caused to other Japanese ships - the Japanese squadron was halved for a certain period of hostilities. so beware about nonsense - analyze the information that you receive
              1. +5
                7 September 2013 17: 31
                Quote: vaddag1
                the destroyer is sunk, the cruiser sank from damage upon return, 2 cruisers went to dry docks, taking into account the damage caused to other Japanese ships - the Japanese squadron was halved for a certain period of hostilities. so beware about nonsense - analyze the information that you receive


                Give sources, for starters, where such losses of the Japanese would be confirmed.
                1. vaddag1
                  0
                  7 September 2013 18: 10
                  google I’ve dived so many times on this topic today that it’s just not hunting anymore. let's do it yourself. the same wiki with the right approach gives interesting options. look at the commission of 1911 on the results of the operations of the fleet in the Japanese war.
              2. +7
                8 September 2013 01: 20
                Quote: vaddag1
                destroyer sunk, cruiser sank from damage upon return, 2 cruisers went to dry docks

                Blah blah blah...
                What you wrote here is, well, practically word for word, Rudnev’s report to the higher authorities. One misfortune - this report is not confirmed, in any way.
                Rudnev himself can hardly be blamed for the postscripts - in battle everything is seen quite differently from what it really is, which is why among professional historians the phrase "lies like an eyewitness" is already a proverb. Rudnev believed in what he wrote.
                If the Japanese cruisers received any damage, they would be repaired somewhere. There would be records of repairs, estimates, paper for the supply of materials for repairs, etc. etc. There was none of this.
                For example, the cruiser Takachikho allegedly "sunk" after the battle with the Varyag (according to Rudnev's report) survived until World War I and died during the siege of Qingdao, having caught a torpedo from a German torpedo boat. And the "damaged" "Asama" almost immediately joined the cruisers of Kamimura and acted together with them
                Sad as it may seem, most likely they did not hit anyone from the Varyag. Theoretically, it can be assumed that the destroyer was sunk, but it is unlikely.
                Against "Varyag" in this battle played what
                1) shortly before the REV, a demobilization happened and half of the most experienced commandants left the cruiser shortly before his departure in Chemulpo
                2) One of the first hits was killed by Midshipman Nirod - in fact, the only rangefinder officer on the cruiser. After his death, there was no one to measure the distance to the enemy
                3) The Russian fleet, unlike the Japanese, assumed that naval battles would be fought at a distance of no more than 10-15 cables, while the Japanese were preparing for battles with 45 cables or more. By the time the Varyag approached the Japanese cruisers by at least 20 kilobytes, a significant part of its gunners had been disabled by fragments of Japanese land mines.
                Nobody denies the heroism of the Varyag and Koreyets crews. The Japanese themselves were shocked that the Russian sailors did it in FULL CONFORMITY with the canons of bushido. After all, what did the cruiser Varyag do? I went out to an unequal battle. Fought one against all. Gone undefeated. And, in front of the enemy's eyes, he contemptuously made seppuku (flooded) thereby depriving the Japanese squadron of victory ...
            2. +5
              7 September 2013 09: 17
              chehywed RU "So what? The cruiser and the canal boat sank everyone? ...
              ---------------------------------------------------------
              Nonsense is just "chatting" you, by the way, at least have learned to write correctly, here is your last phrase: Young man, do not talk nonsense? I would like to note here, but nobody sank the Varyag and Koreyets either! And Mole correctly noted, "but no one has canceled the fortitude yet!"
              1. +22
                7 September 2013 09: 33
                Quote: alexdol
                By the way, if only you learned to write correctly, here is your last phrase: Young man, do not talk Nonsense?

                Sasha, teach the Russian language to your children. I wrote what I WANT TO WRITE. In no case do I consider the battle at Chemulpo to be a defeat of the Russian fleet, but with such a math you won’t win the war. The fleet needs a strong one. Under Tsushima, Russian sailors showed a lot of heroism, and so what? Everyone knows the result.The fleet must win, not die heroically.
                Sincerely.
              2. +6
                7 September 2013 15: 16
                Quote: alexdol
                don't chat Nonsense

                The person who wrote this is right. This phrase is as old as the Internet in Russia. wassat
              3. Mature naturalist
                +6
                7 September 2013 19: 38
                Quote: alexdol
                By the way, if only you learned to write correctly, here is your last phrase: Young man, do not talk Nonsense

                Young man, you need to know the classic of army humor!
              4. 0
                9 September 2013 01: 23
                Quote: alexdol
                after all, no one sank the Varyag and Koreyets either!

                In my opinion, it’s much worse that they couldn’t destroy it normally, and the ship became part of the Japanese fleet. We started for health, so to speak and ended in repose. Not for nothing, the officers of the fleet Rudnev silently condemned. However, it was not he who sank the ships in shallow water ...
                As for the sunken and disabled ships, they safely took part in the blockade of Port Arthur
            3. kavkaz8888
              0
              8 September 2013 11: 07
              In an hour of battle, the cruiser fired 1 thousand 105 shells, sank the destroyer and disabled three enemy cruisers, but received such damage that it completely ruled out the possibility of continuing the battle, despite the fact that the fire was fired by shells with a pyrox humidity of 30% (know how - that asshole from the Admiralty (norm 10-12%)) who exploded every third time, and the Japs smacked with "shimoza".
              This is you comrade Colonel do not wave your bullshit. VARYAG is a legend. And why not wave around him, after another 100 years they will remember with pride.
              That's it.
              1. Pamir210
                +3
                8 September 2013 12: 40
                Quote: kavkaz8888
                the destroyer sank and disabled three enemy cruisers,

                well what nonsense .. just discussed already that NO Varangian did not drown.
                no one cites the name of the "drowned" destroyer, the nature of its damage is the same.
                ALL the Japanese cruisers (battle participants) survived it safely.
                so what can stop retelling fairy tales? no matter how warm they are
          3. +1
            7 September 2013 10: 47
            Quote: vaddag1
            Varangian "and" Korean "do not agree with you

            They may disagree until they turn blue, but the result will be the same.
            1. vaddag1
              +3
              7 September 2013 11: 44
              "but the result will be the same" - that's it. our Kuril Islands, the Kwantung Army is defeated, and also hasan and khalkingol. and the defense of Port Arthur is a worthy story. this is the TOTAL.
              1. +12
                7 September 2013 13: 43
                Quote: vaddag1
                "but the result will be the same" - that's it. our Kuril Islands, the Kwantung Army is defeated, and also hasan and khalkingol. and the defense of Port Arthur is a worthy story. this is the TOTAL.

                You don’t confuse an egg with fried eggs. A powerful army that went through World War 2 would have broken America and England. What can’t you say about the Navy. And now it's all in the past. Now they’re fighting not in quantity
                1. vaddag1
                  -3
                  7 September 2013 14: 31
                  I don’t confuse anything. it was about the outcome. The results begin from such heroic moments as unequal battle. and the death of our ships off the coast of Syria will lead to one RESULT - the amers of the khan (and nuclear weapons have nothing to do with it).
                  1. 0
                    7 September 2013 21: 31
                    Quote: vaddag1
                    and the death of our ships off the coast of Syria will lead to one RESULT - the amers of the khan (and nuclear weapons have nothing to do with it).


                    Rave:
                    1. The USA will immediately launch a series of nuclear weapons attacks (mostly tactical) on the country's key facilities - command posts, government, military unit, fleet bases and Strategic Missile Forces. After that, the land phase will be more like stripping.
                    2. Hope for nuclear weapons is permissible only in a peaceful period, when neither side is mentally prepared for war, but when casus belli appears, there will be no ceremony.

                    PS: Even if we manage to respond with at least something and destroy the US military potential with a WMD strike, then this will not make the weather for our country - with the destruction of the government and command structure, the disintegration of the state will begin. At the same time, the "good neighbors" will invade.
                    1. +2
                      7 September 2013 21: 43
                      Quote: Blackgrifon
                      At the same time, the "good neighbors" will invade.

                      what neighbors? !!!
                      Europe will not have time for this there will be "whites" stupidly cut Muslims and establish Sharia, China will think where to bury and most importantly how millions of their corpses, as in a nuclear strike no one will breed curtsies and other politeses, everyone will kill all Pakistani Indians and the Chinese, the Pakistanis of the Hindus, the Jew of the Arabs, those, in turn, the Jews, the Australians will more or less sit out if they forget about the citizenship of the crown and the South Americans
                      and our neighbors will definitely not be up to us
                    2. +4
                      8 September 2013 00: 41
                      Quote: Blackgrifon
                      Quote: vaddag1
                      and the death of our ships off the coast of Syria will lead to one RESULT - the amers of the khan (and nuclear weapons have nothing to do with it).


                      Rave:
                      1. The USA will immediately launch a series of nuclear weapons attacks (mostly tactical) on the country's key facilities - command posts, government, military unit, fleet bases and Strategic Missile Forces. After that, the land phase will be more like stripping.


                      really nonsense and above and below
                  2. +6
                    8 September 2013 01: 46
                    Quote: vaddag1
                    and the death of our ships off the coast of Syria will lead to one RESULT - amers Khan

                    The logic is strange. Are you sane at all? How will the death of the Russian squadron and several thousand Russian sailors destroy the United States? Ugh damn it, shkolota. Living people scatter like garbage.
              2. +5
                7 September 2013 17: 37
                Quote: vaddag1
                "but the result will be the same" - that's it. our Kuril Islands, the Kwantung Army is defeated, and also hasan and khalkingol. and the defense of Port Arthur is a worthy story. this is the TOTAL.


                Ohhh, well, the chatter started! Well, you would have a conscience, there’s nothing to say, what have the events of the 30-40s to do with it? You might think that the Kwantung army was defeated by the Pacific squadrons of Tsarist Russia.
                1. vaddag1
                  -5
                  7 September 2013 18: 13
                  see comment above
              3. Raven
                +3
                7 September 2013 19: 27
                Sorry, but the Kuril Islands in the Russian-Japanese captured, recaptured. Or in the year 45?
                Think first
          4. +19
            7 September 2013 11: 04
            You are right, of course, but as far as possible with the unprecedented heroism and courage of our guys, plug holes from the miscalculations of the political leadership. That was 18,19,20 in the century. at 21 this trend seems to continue.
            1. stroporez
              +2
              7 September 2013 11: 59
              skoko "nuna", stock and "mona" ......... fortunately, not everything is considered a calculator .......
            2. vaddag1
              0
              7 September 2013 12: 07
              "It was like this in the century 18,19,20. At 21" - this is our leadership (kings, general seki, now presidents and their retinues), it is appointed to us by fate, God, elections and it is cooked with us. This is our story, to smear the leadership is to smear ourselves. And since we exist with you, then it is not so bad. The "good" leadership of European countries was unable to mobilize their peoples to fight the aggressor in WW2 (France had a more powerful army, defensive installations, industry, etc., and all this was in a heap, and not scattered across the expanses of Mother Russia). Russian 1812 - a similar story
          5. +1
            7 September 2013 11: 55
            Quote: vaddag1
            "Varangian" and "Korean" do not agree with you
            Not only they, they are uncountable, I would like to be remembered "Grand Duke Constantine" and then still lieutenant S.O. Makarov, it was a converted from a civilian steamer
            http://www.koshkindom.com.ua/html/see/makarov2.htm
            http://navycollection.narod.ru/ships/Russia/Auxillaries/Velikiy_Knyaz_Konstantin
            /history1.html
          6. +11
            7 September 2013 16: 44
            Quote: vaddag1
            "corresponds to one ship-strike group, of which there may be up to 10 in the US Sixth Fleet" - "Varangian" and "Korean" do not agree with you.

            The comparison is not correct. It’s one thing to fight in direct visibility, you maneuver, shoot, shoot at you. Another thing is when you don’t see the enemy, and missiles come at you from all sides and you can’t dodge them, you can only shoot them down if you have time.
            Modern technology is everything.
            1. vaddag1
              -2
              7 September 2013 18: 20
              here is another matter. that you all rested in iron. then superiority did not die and now we shall not die. we also have electronics as well as countermeasures. we have more curious rockets and satellites are there for guidance.
              1. +2
                7 September 2013 21: 33
                Quote: vaddag1
                as if

                It’s what it’s like, but it’s not so much. The article clearly states that without nuclear weapons we are as if nothing. And to use nuclear weapons in a local conflict is to litter the territory. And here even the UN will not save
                1. +1
                  8 September 2013 01: 17
                  Quote: Pilat2009
                  Quote: vaddag1
                  as if

                  It’s exactly what would be, but not so much. The article clearly states that without nuclear weapons we are as if niochem.


                  As if singing experts now climbed into the western unison. And all the directors of some institutions of some kind of development and some kind of politics. One here on TV tells how he got acquainted with the arguments of the United States about Assad’s chemical attack, the arguments are iron - he punches himself in the chest with his fist, these are the hunch on the belly. Another director in the choir with Dempsey sings about an insignificant Russian army, forgetting that Russia was not going to fight with anyone, who knew that in the modern world they would be rude to the brazen.

                  I have only one question for you - but what if we don’t use it, then it's time to surrender.
                  For reference: Kennedy was going to use nuclear weapons when the USSR refused to remove the missiles from Cuba.
                  1. +1
                    8 September 2013 12: 42
                    Quote: poquello
                    For reference: Kennedy was going to use nuclear weapons when the USSR refused to remove the missiles from Cuba.

                    However, sanity prevailed. Think whether Cuba is worth it. Not a single local conflict is worth it. Theoretically, Syria can respond using chemical weapons but in practice it will not, like in Iraq. As you recall, Saddam threatened to use chemical weapons against Israel that he was firmly told of retaliatory measures
                    1. +1
                      10 September 2013 00: 09
                      Quote: Pilat2009
                      Quote: poquello
                      For reference: Kennedy was going to use nuclear weapons when the USSR refused to remove the missiles from Cuba.

                      However, sanity prevailed. Think whether Cuba is worth it. Not a single local conflict is worth it. Theoretically, Syria can respond using chemical weapons but in practice it will not, like in Iraq. As you recall, Saddam threatened to use chemical weapons against Israel that he was firmly told of retaliatory measures

                      Common sense prevailed, and Cuba is not worth it or not.
                      And where is Saddam now?
                      1. 0
                        10 September 2013 13: 08
                        Quote: poquello
                        Common sense prevailed, and Cuba is not worth it or not.
                        And where is Saddam now?

                        I tell you about Thomas; you tell me about Yerema.
                        Sanity prevailed because Cuba wasn’t worth a nuclear conflict. Nobody needs it now, it’s boiled in its own juice.
                        Neither Hitler used chemical weapons nor Saddam, although they understood that the end was possible. Saddam could become a hero in the Arab world by applying chemistry to Israel. Hitler too. But not everyone in their circle supported the idea of ​​total destruction. Both Germany and Iraq survived the war and remained independent. The same applies to Japan with its bacteriological weapons and fanatical readiness for self-restraint .. Everyone is well aware that the use of prohibited weapons will lead to a retaliatory strike and the announcement of those involved in international criminals. Although de facto nuclear weapons are not prohibited. However, our rulers are reluctant to sit in The Hague tribunal
        3. MG42
          +2
          7 September 2013 18: 25
          Quote: Andrey Yurievich
          “Only in the Turkish Navy there are about 30 submarines, while the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Federation has only one,” said the expert,

          B-871 "Alrosa" diesel electric, torpedo armament 18 + mines, air defense = anti-aircraft missile system.
          1. MG42
            +2
            7 September 2013 21: 40
            For anonymous minus B-871 "Alrosa" As of August 2013, is it the only submarine of the Russian Black Sea Fleet? Is there another one? <Zaporozhye> is Ukrainian ..
        4. +3
          8 September 2013 07: 57
          In principle, he is right, in quantitative terms, the example of "Varyag" is not bad in this case, but the wrong time, and we have fewer people, and the ships are not the same.
          It means only to arm.
          The situation is now as in the year 41, before the war, 3-4 years were not enough for weapons.
        5. +4
          8 September 2013 10: 30
          the truth must be looked into the eyes. Everything is destroyed and plundered, and we are talking about world domination. It is necessary to restore order in the country, and not to anyone ... everyone was waiting for someone to come and do everything for us ... Not having scammed a thief, he was punished
        6. 0
          24 March 2020 21: 25
          For this, we have a huge aircraft carrier and a non-sinking cruiser under the name Crimea, which is not comparable with any US fleet and Turkish submarines.
      2. 0
        7 September 2013 09: 12
        We need to develop nuclear weapons !!! This is the same as if you are a soccer player, you need to play soccer and not train to play baseball!
      3. Veles25
        +1
        7 September 2013 11: 34
        ....................
        1. +2
          7 September 2013 12: 03
          And how many of them cost under your mattress flag?
    2. ka5280
      +7
      7 September 2013 07: 24
      I think that the amers are bluffing, they would have been weak for a long time already under America. And if the game is not fussing, then it’s afraid. The Pentagon only loves to fight with weaknesses and with impunity. And where you can get by ear, they don’t climb there.
      1. +17
        7 September 2013 08: 39
        I’m all thinking how they humped so humpbacked, not having drank all our nuclear weapons. Scared now crying
      2. +1
        7 September 2013 13: 51
        So nuclear weapons do not give, didn’t try to think?
    3. redwolf_13
      +2
      7 September 2013 07: 38
      And in what he is wrong. Only arguments and not "foam"
      1. vaddag1
        +1
        7 September 2013 08: 37
        without "foam" - the battle of Sinop. 3 ships against 16 Turkish and 6 coastal batteries. later another 5 of ours came, one of the Turks 3. multiple superiority. result: 1 Turk survived because he fled, we have no losses in our ships.
        1. +8
          7 September 2013 09: 20
          vaddag1, you really have "own math":
          The Russian squadron consisted of 6 battleships, two frigates and three steamship units, i.e. - 11 ships
          Turkish - 7 frigates, 3 corvettes, steamer frigate and steamer. Total 12. And given that the ship had only 2 guns, then 11,5
          1. vaddag1
            0
            7 September 2013 09: 32
            On November 11 (23), the squadron discovered the Turkish squadron under the command of Osman Pasha. The rising storm did not allow Nakhimov to immediately attack the enemy, especially since two ships and one frigate were badly damaged by the storm, they had to be sent to Sevastopol for repair. Three Russian ships Empress Maria, Chesma and Rostislav blocked the Sinop Bay and began to hold in it an entire enemy squadron of 16 ships under the protection of 6 coastal batteries. The history of the West European fleets does not know such examples.
            On November 16 (28), the squadron of Rear Admiral F.M. joined Nakhimov’s detachment Novosilsky (ships "Paris", "Grand Duke Constantine" and "Three Saints", frigates "Cahul" and "Kulevchi"). Nakhimov had 6 battleships and 2 frigates at his disposal.
          2. +6
            7 September 2013 10: 51
            Quote: chehywed
            vaddag1, you really have "your own math"

            The frigate does not pull against the battleship, especially since we had bombing guns. It was essentially the beating of babies
            1. vaddag1
              +1
              7 September 2013 12: 28
              Turkish 22-gun steamer “Taif” (“Tayf”), armament 2-10 dm bombing, 4-42 fn., 16-24 fn. guns, under the command of Yahya-bey (Yahya-bey)

              key point - Three Russian ships blocked the Sinop Bay and began to hold in it an entire enemy squadron of 16 ships under the protection of 6 coastal batteries.
        2. +3
          7 September 2013 09: 24
          the question is what happened after the Sinop battle. What happened to the winning squadron? after all, this was the last battle of the era of the sailing fleet.
          1. vaddag1
            +1
            7 September 2013 10: 03
            How does the end of the sailing era stand sideways to the assertion that Russian ships have no chance when meeting US ships?
            1. +3
              7 September 2013 13: 55
              Quote: vaddag1
              to the statement about "no chance" for Russian ships when meeting with US ships?

              You even count the number, not to mention the composition
              1. vaddag1
                0
                7 September 2013 14: 44
                for quantity - look at other sources besides the "wiki".
                The decision to accept the battle was made when only 3 ships were available.
                and while still waiting for the approach of the Anglo-French squadron, located in the bay of Besik Curtez.
              2. vaddag1
                -1
                7 September 2013 15: 39
                I apologize did not understand what it was about.
                "You at least count the number, not to mention the composition" - well, again, as an example, the TFR is "selfless" (the actions of the Soviet sailors were NON-STANDARD, UNEXPECTED and had the desired effect).
                do you have information about non-participation of submarines and YES?
          2. +2
            7 September 2013 13: 10
            Quote: MyVrach
            What happened to the winning squadron?
            What, that, flooded in Sevastopol. Only not the Turks, the world gay community stood up for the offended
    4. +6
      7 September 2013 08: 52
      “Any potential aggressor imagines that if he unleashes the hostilities against Russia, she will be able to respond with strategic and tactical nuclear weapons, and this in any case will equalize the chances and make the world’s military-political situation stable along the perimeter of Russian borders,” Igor Korotchenko is sure.

      I think this will stop the hot Ameran cowboys.
      1. +4
        7 September 2013 14: 29
        And let's call these dear fellows in Russian not "cowboys" but directly translated by the SHEPHERDS! By the way, in our country, the least skilled workers were trusted to graze cattle, but among the Americans, ethnic heroes are straight from the epic epic! Which, as it were, hints .. what heroes such a country is ..
    5. +2
      7 September 2013 17: 04
      Quote: Valery Neon
      A statement by Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the US Armed Forces, in my opinion, is an American auto-training. hi


      Like "I don't fart - it's not me" ?? Works for the public. Purely my opinion: 20 minutes is the flight time of the rocket, here he of course told the truth, except that no one will stand and watch the rocket fly towards him. A massive volley of 10-20 missiles per ship will be needed. During the approach, he will have time to hit back. So there will be a Mexican Inchia, 1 cruiser for all destroyers. If such a booze goes to aircraft carriers in the Mediterranean sea kirdyk and indeed to all American steamships near our borders ...
    6. +10
      7 September 2013 17: 22
      The first vice-president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems Konstantin Sivkov does not consider Dempsey's statement about Russia's military potential in the field of conventional weapons far from reality. “I would say that Russia is not part of the“ middle-power ”powers, if we take the ratio of military potential and area. Russia is at the level of Belgium "


      Oh, and this, what kind of technique is this ?? Those. The author wants to tell us that if the territory of Russia decreases, then its military potential will automatically increase?)) Well, how so ?? Ok, next:

      According to him, with the current composition of the armed forces, Russia is capable of solving tasks in no more than two armed conflicts on a Chechen scale. For a local war, he is sure, it will require a grouping of half a million people.


      How much, how much ?? Khara flood, comrade, the entire group of federal troops in the North Caucasus totaled 80-100 thousand. We had the same amount in Afghanistan.

      “Local war - this is what was called the“ Desert Storm ”, these are ordinary operations that the Americans repeatedly carried out. In the Vietnam War, the American military group numbered 1,5 million.



      This was apparently counted together by the armies of South Vietnam and all the regional allies, who could hypothetically participate in the war. Actually, the number of American soldiers in Vietnam by the year 68 totaled just 550 thousand. And this is a regional war, not a local war.
      And, remembering "Desert Storm", the expert could also remember 2003, when the American coalition (with all the rear and so on) had up to 280 thousand. Then, during the occupation, it was even less.

      Well, in general, why give examples of the participation of American wars? We have our own theater, our own conditions. Who should Russia fight with now to exhibit 500 thousand? What, with Turkey, or what? With Georgia, we have very successfully dealt with using just about 15-20 thousand. How much will the hypothetical wars in the South Caucasus and Central Asia require? Vryatli, more than one order more.

      And he still didn’t understand: the expert says that now, with full mobilization, Russia will expose no more than 250 thousand. But, sorry, it’s enough to keep the demobilization and get +300 thousand to the millionth aircraft.
    7. +5
      7 September 2013 21: 18
      Quote: Valery Neonov
      A statement by Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the US Armed Forces, in my opinion, is an American auto-training.


      Why? Do you think that we can oppose them with something other than nuclear weapons? Compare official data on the number of equipment and heavy weapons on the western border of Russia and similar information about NATO. In addition, our army is now virtually knocked out and when it can restore its power after the latest reforms, few people know.
      1. Arabist
        +2
        7 September 2013 21: 22
        If you understand by "official" data a comparison called we will cope with the Russian spirit, then it has nothing to do with reality.
    8. +2
      8 September 2013 18: 13
      You are too optimistic or do not know what modern naval combat is. If we compare the American and Russian ships in terms of armament level, purpose, and class, then, to our great regret, all our ships will be destroyed in twenty minutes. What can landing ships do against a missile destroyer, for example? Nothing! And the Undaunted will not withstand a salvo of three destroyers. When I served, very often exercises were conducted with firing from artillery guns and missile launches, both at shield targets and at ships that were written off, and cooked on pins and needles. The results of these firing were evident, but this is just an exercise. Although they fired blanks without missile combat equipment, what will happen from a combat missile ... Our fleet has not fought since the Great Patriotic War, and I must admit it has no combat experience, target shooting is not a war. And the Americans have been fighting all seventy years after the war, and this is an important factor, and in addition, the numerical strength of the fleets of the United States and Russia is like comparing a cat and a tiger, both from the feline family, but in fact animals of different sizes. Their fleet was not ruined by Nobel laureates and drunks, nor was it plundered by thieving admirals. He is intact, and ours is defeated. In practice, this applies to the entire army and navy. Our Armed Forces are in the process of reorganization. Started by Serdyukov (who stole more than reorganized), and Shoigu continues this business. As always, a couple or three years may not be enough for us. God forbid, of course!
      1. -1
        8 September 2013 22: 09
        Quote: starshina78
        Our fleet has not fought since World War II , and we must admit that he has no combat experience; target shooting is not a war. And Americans fight all seventy years after the war

        and with whom did the American navy fight after 1945, do not explain? with Vietnamese torpedo boats in the Gulf of Tonkin? Or with Iraqi boats in the Pesidian zadiv in the late 90's?
    9. +2
      8 September 2013 18: 16
      Moderator! Turn off censorship! This is already annoying! What is so criminal in my comments if you poke them, already, yesterday? Nobody canceled the freedom of expression!
  2. serge-68-68
    +26
    7 September 2013 06: 41
    Even in Soviet times, even the Soviet Navy was not planned for a "to the bitter end" war with the US Navy. Covering nuclear submarines with nuclear weapons on board, drawing off forces and means and perishing heroically, knowing that nuclear mushrooms are rising in full swing on US territory, is the main task. In the context of a non-nuclear conflict, and even the Russian fleet, and even the "Syrian group" - twenty or twenty minutes, but there is no chance of even equalizing at least in losses.
    1. +15
      7 September 2013 07: 04
      Sorry, Sergey, I do not quite agree with you.
      The Soviet Navy was really created with the main goal to ensure the deployment of submarines. But I could break the Merikos even before Mama Do not Cry. The number of ships in the 70-80-x of the USSR was the first. And modern ships of the first class (or as they say?) Enough. And they had better missile weapons than the first tomahawks. For a very long time on this subject, a former tanker, I was enlightened by a submariner over a glass of tea and in general terms. Then I also believed that we have ten submarines and five cruisers. And the main thing is T-62 and Strategic Rocket Forces.

      Sailors! Your opinion?

      All with the coming day tanker!
      1. serge-68-68
        +2
        7 September 2013 09: 23
        My address: everyone told differently. Representatives of TF, for example, in relation to the ratio of illusions did not harbor.
      2. +18
        7 September 2013 11: 20
        Quote: My address
        Sailors! Your opinion?

        Alexander! Thank you for inviting me to the discussion on the essence of the problem. And then I ran through the branch, and there again about gays ...
        Sivkov’s estimates (hereinafter - CS) cannot be trusted: a worthy husband, with brains and a balanced approach, work experience in the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces, is involved in the doctrinal provisions of aircraft construction. Everything is so, BUT!
        About the fleet. All sailors know: the Northern Fleet is the country's strongest fleet, both in terms of strategic nuclear forces and general forces. However, the Constitutional Court believes that the Pacific Fleet will be half weaker than the North, the Pacific Fleet will destroy the 2 AUG, while the Northern Fleet will only destroy one (?), While the composition of the AUG is typical: AVU + 5-6 security ships. He is a sailor, and therefore should know that European airfields will be suppressed for the most part by supporting actions of other types and branches of the Armed Forces. The enemy’s AB influence will not be calculated, therefore, the losses of NKs that ensure submarine actions will be less.
        Secondly, the ratio of the Black Sea Fleet / Turkey submarine is not correct: Turkey also has an SR sea. Yes, they can steal all 2 units in the World Cup, but then they will receive lullies from NATO for disrupting actions in the theater of operations. The truth is that 30 (according to other sources - 3) aerated Ladas are being built for the Black Sea Fleet. So the threat level is obvious. There will also go (for replacement) 6 skr pr.6. Aviation has the ability to quickly build up, so no problem. But large NKs have nothing to do in the World Cup: it is under the control of the AV, so our large NKs leave for SR to build up forces 11356 OpEsk. It is also incorrect to compare the forces of the 5th Fleet with the Black Sea Fleet. The Black Sea Fleet can deploy 6 units, 6 TGs with 10 NK = 6 ships! But even in its best years, the 60th Fleet had 6 ships! And it is not a fact that they will break through the Northern Fleet submarine into Gibraltar and will be able to build up forces if the "shooting" begins.
        About 20 minutes of battle NK against AUG has nothing to comment on: this is the truth, calculated mathematically. But the fight of OUR AUG with theirs is at least 2 hours, plus crutches in the ass to the ships of the warrant and damage to the aircraft carrier. Though there will be moral satisfaction, and not a reflection of the EOS coming at you from different heights and directions! This is what concerns the fleet. I will try to tell about other "LA-LA" below.
        1. +1
          7 September 2013 11: 46
          Boa kaa , Uff .. While I figured out almost all the abbreviations ... already sweating. I did not understand what other "LA" are and why twice. laughing But in general it is intelligible and understandable. Thank.
          1. +12
            7 September 2013 13: 25
            Quote: chehywed
            I did not understand what other "LA" are and why twice.

            Vladimir, because "blah blah" is beaten, a colleague Experienced took the "bugaga" into service. Well, so "LA-LA" is abbreviated as "bloopers".
            I respect K. Sivkov both as a military man and as a scientist. I can not afford the incorrectness in relation to my colleague - a sailor. Arguing (reasoning, expressing one’s opinion) is essentially a problem, which I tried to do.
            1. +2
              7 September 2013 13: 35
              Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
              Arguing (reasoning, expressing one’s opinion) is essentially a problem, which I tried to do.

              Alexander, did not mean to offend you. The comment is really interesting. And about "LA", well ... a share of humor,where would it be without him ...
        2. stroporez
          +1
          7 September 2013 12: 05
          no one disputes the technical component. but don’t say it, people are more important in battle than PEOPLE, and how would it be to insult anyone, despite the titanic efforts of democrats, liberals and other heretics, we have better people ....... .........
        3. +1
          7 September 2013 13: 55
          Quote: My address
          Sailors! Your opinion?

          Along with the commentary of the respected Boa KAA, I would like, with great interest, to read the comment andreitk20.
        4. +1
          7 September 2013 17: 42
          Boa KAA.
          And what in these 20 minutes will be able to create 16 Volcanoes of Moscow with the USA AUG?
    2. vaddag1
      -1
      7 September 2013 08: 54
      "and even the Russian fleet, and even the" Syrian group "- twenty or twenty minutes, but there is no chance of even equalizing at least in losses" - you have already lost this battle. In 1988, an incident occurred in the Black Sea: two US Navy ships (a cruiser and a destroyer) violated the border of the territorial waters of the Soviet Union. The actions of Soviet sailors (2 TFR) were non-standard, unexpected and had the desired effect on the provocateurs. SKR "Selfless" rammed the cruiser URO "Yorktown" - feel the difference. read about the consequences of the incident (financial, political and moral)
      1. serge-68-68
        +7
        7 September 2013 09: 16
        Do not confuse different things. We are talking about fire contact in international waters, and not the ousting of the Yankees from our tervod. Under combat conditions, these TFRs would be destroyed on the way.
        1. vaddag1
          +3
          7 September 2013 09: 40
          a guard by ramming the cruiser - much better than fire contact?
          and it’s about a non-standard, unexpected and having the necessary impact on the provocateurs. and so the whole history of Russia
      2. +2
        7 September 2013 10: 55
        Quote: vaddag1
        "Selfless" rammed the cruiser URO "Yorktown" - feel the difference

        The Yorktown commander just laughed
        1. +7
          7 September 2013 14: 40
          Well, as always! Not our fellows, but the enemy of the suckers, it’s true that they’re fighting with suckers, and they always say that when they get from our lyuli (though all the rest from these suckers completely raked) that the French. that German memoirs, and others offended ..
          1. +1
            7 September 2013 20: 14
            Yes, if we win, they say that we fought incorrectly.
      3. Pamir210
        +5
        7 September 2013 12: 43
        Quote: vaddag1
        SKR "Selfless" rammed the cruiser URO "Yorktown" - feel the difference

        yes, feel ..
        Our ship first rots for repair for 9 years, and then it starts jumping into the Ukrainian fleet and there it finally dies ... they didn’t even bother to dismantle it for metal (recycle), but simply flooded it in the Black Sea in 2005.
        The American, on the other hand, repaired his injuries (dents to the field board, ruptures of rails and other trifles from the shaking of the hull), participated in several wars, and was withdrawn from the fleet in the usual manner in 2004. Now in reserve.
        1. vaddag1
          +9
          7 September 2013 14: 59
          the consequences of the actions of the "selfless":
          According to foreign sources, after the incident, Yorktown was repaired at a shipyard for several months. The cruiser commander was removed from his post for passive actions and the initiative given to the Soviet ship, thereby causing moral damage to the prestige of the American Navy. The US Congress froze the budget for the naval department for almost half a year.

          "he took part in several wars" - he launched tamogavs from the maximum distance along the ground infrastructure and at the same time did not meet with any enemy in battle. he lost his only battle at sea and it was a battle with the "selfless"
          1. Pamir210
            -1
            7 September 2013 15: 11
            Quote: vaddag1
            let tomahawks from the maximum distance on ground infrastructure

            it’s not his fault that the methods of warfare have changed. and he had a chance to swim
            they didn’t let him at least for scrapping ..
            although, as we know, the selfless were not allowed to do the same (but the picture is completely different)
          2. +1
            8 September 2013 12: 51
            Quote: vaddag1
            The cruiser commander was removed from his post for passive actions and the initiative given to the Soviet ship

            not only I think that he laughed
        2. +2
          7 September 2013 22: 04
          Quote: Pamir210
          yes, feel ..
          Our ship first rots for repair for 9 years, and then it starts jumping into the Ukrainian fleet and there it finally dies ... they didn’t even bother to dismantle it for metal (recycle), but simply flooded it in the Black Sea in 2005.


          How does this relate to the Yorktown incident? And then, in general, the US Navy? There are already to z s have tried. am
      4. +7
        7 September 2013 16: 23
        Quote: vaddag1
        In 1988, an incident occurred in the Black Sea: two US Navy ships (cruiser and destroyer) violated the territorial waters border

        What are you comparing?
        It's like fucking with a finger, sorry for the expression.
        But your statements are "chapkozakidone".
        Modern warfare is not a remote bayonet battle, where morale is really in the foreground.
        Morale is wonderful, we are strong with that. But I would like that together with him there would also be a lot of super-modern technology, so that the lives of young guys would not be in vain.
        1. vaddag1
          -1
          7 September 2013 18: 26
          you pulled out the wrong part of the quote and began to answer. the meaning of the post further - "The actions of the Soviet sailors were non-standard, unexpected and had the desired impact."
    3. +1
      7 September 2013 15: 48
      Quote: serge-68-68
      Even in Soviet times, even the Soviet navy was not planned to fight "to the bitter end" with the US Navy. Covering nuclear submarines with nuclear weapons on board, drawing off forces and means and perishing heroically, knowing that nuclear mushrooms are rising in full swing on US territory, is the main task.

      Dying heroically? Yes, this is complete nonsense, who else would die, and the Soviet, now Russian nuclear submarines ply not only near their waters.
      1. 0
        7 September 2013 22: 12
        Anyway, you cannot win - if you do not believe in victory! Not a single calculator will calculate.
  3. +18
    7 September 2013 06: 45
    I have no doubt that if they take us for an ass, then we will build an aircraft carrier in a week and there will be combat generals, and together with Dempsey we will put in a hole in Vietnam angry
    1. Hardware
      +14
      7 September 2013 07: 19
      in a week mosquitoes breed, and the army and navy are created and maintained over the years for good! Everything is sad with us))) My comrade served in tank units — 80 officer and 1 guard soldiers for 28 vehicles, but it was listed as a warhead!
      1. +10
        7 September 2013 07: 39
        Nothing wrong. Normal cropped part. And under the Union there were such.
      2. -1
        7 September 2013 11: 01
        in the liberty war for three days I was launched into the water, I think if you take the experience .....)
    2. +9
      7 September 2013 09: 39
      Quote: vasiliysxx
      I have no doubt that if they take us for an ass, then we will build an aircraft carrier in a week and there will be combat generals, and together with Dempsey we will put in a hole in Vietnam


      If they try to take us for this, I don’t know about how to build an aircraft carrier in a week, but we can sink them in a dozen, and much faster than in 20 minutes, we can do it like nefig. And not only in the Mediterranean, but also in Norfolk, and further on the list.
      If Dempsey is so smart, why doesn't he go down the line? With drones and child prodigies against the Papuans, fighting is one thing. But if this and similar tombs will one day decide on a ground operation, then they will not only be pissed off in the jungle and in the desert, not only in Russia, but in the desert.
  4. Peaceful military
    +8
    7 September 2013 06: 50
    Sad ...
    There was an Army, albeit at a cost, but fear was directed at the "most probable enemy", and now ... sad
    1. vaddag1
      +6
      7 September 2013 08: 59
      "and now ..." - and now she is reborn
      1. Peaceful military
        +4
        7 September 2013 15: 30
        "and now ..." - and now she is reborn

        As the saying goes, give GOD.
        soldier
  5. Belogor
    +4
    7 September 2013 06: 54
    As the saying goes, "God will not give, the pig will not eat" it for now, and then we will tighten the level of equipping our armed forces with modern weapons. Moreover, this has been observed in recent years.
    1. +7
      7 September 2013 08: 00
      In recent years, unfortunately, our missiles have been regularly falling ... and today again there is "news" about the "mace" ... and this is a year .... but it still does not fly, and new nuclear submarines are sharpened for it .. ...
  6. Lech from ZATULINKI
    +21
    7 September 2013 07: 07
    Someone recently believed that the GREAT LILIPUT SAAKASHVILI and his valiant army armed with the efforts of the USA, ISRAEL and UKRAINE in the person of Yushchenko will crush rusty Russian tanks and Russian soldiers.
    It turned out with accuracy on the contrary.
    All sorts of experts and forecasters have repeatedly buried the Russian army and you as well.
    So what’s next will see when it comes to fighting.
    1. Hardware
      +10
      7 September 2013 07: 21
      Only experienced pilots scattered across the country to break the Georgians
    2. redwolf_13
      +12
      7 September 2013 08: 10
      Well, first of all, a Georgian soldier is like an eagle from a sparrow.
      Secondly, the Georgians were not trained for military operations against the active forces, but for the fight against militias, which they did with success. Well, they did not believe in the west that Russia would move troops. Before my eyes were examples of Yugoslavia and Serbia. And here bad luck again unpredictability of the Russian soul wink
      1. +2
        8 September 2013 03: 05
        Quote: redwolf_13
        Well, first of all, a Georgian soldier is like an eagle from a sparrow.
        Secondly, the Georgians were not trained for military operations against the active forces, but for the fight against militias, which they did with success. Well, they did not believe in the west that Russia would move troops. Before my eyes were examples of Yugoslavia and Serbia. And here bad luck again unpredictability of the Russian soul wink

        They would not believe - they did not prepare sabotage for undermining the tunnel, wiretapping, etc. The calculator has now sung songs about a non-military operation.
  7. +3
    7 September 2013 07: 13
    Yes, I completely agree, there is a beginning, and there, as they say, "they count chickens in the fall." Wait and see.
    1. +2
      7 September 2013 09: 38
      Quote: Koronik
      as the saying goes "chickens are counted in the fall." Wait and see.

      In the United States, they often forget that Russians took part in Vietnam in a minimal number.
      Not Russian whitewashed and Vietnamese!
  8. Alikovo
    +6
    7 September 2013 07: 14
    Amer. High officials are thinking about what they are talking about:
    Kerry al Qaeda is not in Syria,
    dempsey Russia's nuclear arsenal allows it to position itself as a superpower, but in the field of conventional weapons it does not fall into this category,
    heigel Russia put the chemical weapons of Syria.
    1. +5
      7 September 2013 07: 38
      And they also write that we live in the Cold War, hehe. Americans are, mmm, Americans)
  9. +5
    7 September 2013 07: 20
    The mere fact of the presence of the Russian Armed Forces in the alleged theater of operations is in itself unexpected for American gopniks, who are accustomed to the fact that their opponents cannot have real and strong allies by definition, (who will poke their heads at the main gopnik) so the United States soothes its snares : "Yes, everything is fine, guys, we are kind of real and in twenty minutes we will kill anyone, but cho ...)
    Such is our politics on Earth today. Good day to all.
    1. +12
      7 September 2013 07: 30
      any "outrageous" greyhounds until they get to the butt ... angry
    2. +3
      7 September 2013 10: 59
      Quote: arkady149
      One fact of the presence of Russian aircraft at the proposed theater is itself unexpected

      Well, if there were 3-5 air defense ships, then maybe they would collapse
      1. 0
        7 September 2013 19: 43
        But what are air defense ships do not tell me?
        1. +1
          8 September 2013 22: 22
          Quote: kotvov
          and what are air defense ships do not tell

          These are those with 100 pieces of s-300 type missiles
          e.g. Peter the Great
          20 × PKR P-700 "Granite"
          SAM S-300F "Fort" (48 missiles)
          SAM S-300FM "Fort-M" (46 missiles)
          16 × PU SAM "Dagger" (128 missiles) 6 × 16 ZRAK "Dagger" (144 missiles)
  10. +16
    7 September 2013 07: 23
    the American adversary has no spirit! IT IS ABSOLUTELY AVAILABLE! Yes, all because he is fighting not for his homeland, but for money, and if there is a mess, the Americans will run even faster than the Georgians in 2008!
    Russian man is fighting for motherland, and spit on their missiles, SPIRIT is above all !!
    I agree with the previous speaker that there will be a commander and there are enough people who want to clean the American pug!
    1. redwolf_13
      +12
      7 September 2013 08: 16
      Yeah, right every 2 years, I cry when I see how our guys are eager to learn how to fight for the Motherland. There is a commander, but that’s what he will do with untrained meat. There are very few literate people, and even more so who know how to fight in the army. With stools, many were reduced or retired.
    2. +2
      7 September 2013 09: 01
      006 Feliks

      Since Vietnam, amers on the wort have not received. It's time to remind you how nice it is.

      Amer’s generals have lost their minds if they want to unleash a world carnage.
      1. +2
        7 September 2013 11: 01
        Quote: Sandov
        Amer’s generals have lost their minds if they want to unleash a world carnage.

        let there be no world carnage - our mosquito fleet will not affect
        1. 77bor1973
          0
          7 September 2013 11: 52
          There will not be a world carnage, but our fleet will be able to influence American strikes - for example, as advanced radars for air and surface conditions - it is more effective than radars in Syria that will be immediately destroyed.
          1. +5
            7 September 2013 13: 38
            77bor1973

            Frigate is a family of Soviet and Russian three-coordinate ship-based radars with a lightweight unstabilized antenna post and an electronic beam stabilization system. The chief designer is Leonid Alekseevich Rodionov, winner of the Lenin Prize of the 1977 of the year.

            The range of radio wavelengths is 12-15 cm, the maximum viewing range is 145-150 km, the minimum viewing distance is 2 km, the viewing height is 30 km. Frigate radar can detect surface targets at a range of the radio horizon: a flying rocket at a distance of 27-30 km, an airplane - 125-130 km. The number of antenna revolutions per minute is 15, the viewing rate is 4 s, the radar power consumed is 30 kW. Alert time - 5 minutes.

            The radar was installed on the BOD of the 1155 project and the destroyers of the 956 project, as well as other ships.

            The radar had a number of modifications, including "Fregat-M" and "Fregat-MA". "
            (CPSU)
  11. pinecone
    +4
    7 September 2013 07: 27
    And none of these experts speaks of the need to strengthen the protection of the state border. Not a border, but DECISION, which is what the enemies of Russia use, accumulating forces and means for conducting subversive activities directly on the territory of the country.
  12. +45
    7 September 2013 07: 35
    Yes, in some ways we are worse than proud
    Here is a photo
    1. +14
      7 September 2013 07: 57
      Well, even though you can congratulate this, mind you, quite sincerely. And our Obama, it seems, if not in orientation, then in life 3.14dor.
      I hope your fagots do not rush to us for political asylum - after all, Geyropa is closer to them, and in geography too.
      1. 0
        7 September 2013 08: 53
        Quote: Nagan
        And our Obama, it seems, if not in orientation, then in life 3.14dor.
        I bet that their next prezk will be definitely from non-traditional
        1. +1
          7 September 2013 09: 35
          Quote: Denis
          I bet that their next prezk will be definitely from non-traditional

          I don’t think so. The Republicans are not yet so "modern". And the shitcrats are likely to nominate either Clintons or Biden.
      2. +2
        7 September 2013 09: 03
        Revolver.
        Passed infa that already rushed. Queue at mcfol.
        1. 0
          7 September 2013 10: 56
          Quote: Sandov
          Revolver.
          Passed infa that already rushed. Queue at mcfol.
          negative angry am
      3. mogus
        0
        7 September 2013 09: 06
        Germany, almost political asylum, gathered for them.
    2. +4
      7 September 2013 10: 56
      Quote: Denis
      Yes, in some ways we are worse than proud
      Here is a photo

      After such pictures, I am even more proud of my homeland!)))
    3. +3
      7 September 2013 11: 28
      Here is how ?! Then all the gays of the whole Earth - forward, to Saudi Arabia, to the parade!
    4. 0
      7 September 2013 14: 25
      Quote: Denis
      Yes, in some respects we are worse than the proud photo

      I’m going to cry from this news! A tragedy of universal scale!
    5. +6
      7 September 2013 14: 44
      Russia declared the worst gay country in Europe.And it pleases, Comrades!
    6. Peaceful military
      +3
      7 September 2013 16: 00
      BRAVO!
      HOORAY! HOORAY! HOORAY!
      soldier
    7. Mature naturalist
      +4
      7 September 2013 19: 50
      Quote: Denis
      Yes, in some ways we are worse than proud
      Here is a photo

      A bit wrong. Old Man outdid us, as always: he is going to plant them ...
  13. +13
    7 September 2013 07: 37
    Hello to all.
    on the one hand, the military, according to the logic of the service, are obliged to plan and predict. Therefore, Dempsey only plans with forecasts and tells.
    On the other hand - we have been convinced many times - that plans ..this is good. But the reality is different. Unforgettable V. Chernomyrdin convincingly stated this.
    Another thing infuriates me!
    And our leadership ... - how it feels when some American general talks with disdain about Russia's military potential. Like - ... oh well, nah, it’s a dead bitch with a gun and doesn’t roll against our Tyson.
    The ability to exhibit 250 thousand ..... that’s the whole indicator ..... the tireless, fruitful work of the MO, starting with the 1991 of the year.
    Someone has to answer, no?
    Especially the former NSSH who now rushed into journalism.
    ...
    Americans do not doubt a single gram that they are fully capable of opening a database against Russia. And open - if that. Because they are strong.
    And we?
    How are the virgin girls? We convince the rapists - well, don’t, well, please, I'm still small!
    So yes?
    ...
    Of course, we will master and defeat all.
    But so reluctant to do it with a shovel. Or with Saiga in his hands.
    1. +5
      7 September 2013 08: 44
      When it comes to the fate of the motherland, all means are good - including repression. We ate yak at Yak on Gilyak, we have to - LIBERALS ON BIT
      1. 0
        7 September 2013 09: 09
        On the count then traitors.
        1. +1
          7 September 2013 22: 02
          Quote: Sandov
          On the count then traitors.

          The poster says modestly:
          - Yankees go home.
          About a single word.
          1. +1
            8 September 2013 09: 02
            Quote: saturn.mmm
            The poster says modestly: -Yanks go home. About a single word.


            So everything is mixed up now. At the stake of our corrupt officials, and Amers home overseas.
        2. 0
          8 September 2013 00: 33
          - since the Yankees do not have their own home. Impudent-Britto-Saxons are locusts who considered their entire planet their home! quietly parasites and robbers need to crush without sparing!
      2. +2
        7 September 2013 21: 41
        Quote: avia12005
        When it comes to the fate of the motherland, all means are good - repressions, including

        Why is the best defense minister of all time not yet on the bench?
        Some kind of strange approach from the father of the nation - for a hundred rubles you will be imprisoned and for a million not
    2. +7
      7 September 2013 10: 06
      Quote: Igarr
      Americans do not doubt a single gram that they are fully capable of opening a database against Russia. And open - if that. Because they are strong.
      And we?

      The Americans will not open a database against us until they are sure that the damage will be acceptable, because they are not in a hurry to DIE and die.
      And the acceptable damage for them is the loss of l / s on the battlefield, preferably "contactless", and not nuclear mushrooms over their cities, with millions of victims and radioactive contamination for decades. AND IT IS TRUE!
      1. +5
        7 September 2013 10: 30
        Well, Boa KAA, a little bit left.
        All mines are known.
        Ajis deployed.
        Today, another moon box was dragged into space.
        We have ... again fuss with BZHDK only begins.
        Acceptable damage?
        Well, yes, "Indian Axes" are pricey. For the USA. But the Arabs from Kuwait are ready to pay. More pieces for 5 "axes".
        At the same time, the whole gang-fraternity is deployed from the Middle East to us. And here we have - ..lafah, the gang-brethren from Central Asia graze - do not grieve my mother.
        ..
        It remains only to hope that at least the rocket launchers will not fail.
        Ascetic, ay-oo-oo
        Fail, no?
        1. +2
          7 September 2013 13: 45
          Quote: Igarr
          Well, Boa KAA, a little bit left.
          All mines are known. Ajis deployed.

          Igor, have all the Freight One MBR and RPKSN been tracked? And what will happen if a high-altitude JV? How exactly will Axes fly only on TERKOM? without GPS? Well, a bunch of other "smart" questions can be asked.
          I agree with one thing: amers feel that time is running out, influence is melting, the PRC is stepping on its heels, Russia is rising, Iran is growing and will soon become too tough for Israel. Sashka correctly noted that they need a small victorious war in the BV, and we do not allow Assad to be eaten, together with the PRC we do not allow the Armory Lobby to write off debts and earn extra money. They will not turn against us until the conditions of "impunity" emerge. And here is the bummer: Pu does not wag his tail, strengthens the defense, makes friends with the Khintsy, enjoys authority in the mn arena.
          Poor Barack was between a rock and a hard place. It seems to me that Pu is trying to help him out of this situation without losing face. Let's see what happens.
      2. sashka
        +1
        7 September 2013 11: 37
        Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
        And the acceptable damage for them is the loss of l / s on the battlefield, preferably "contactless",

        The damage to them is not in their lives .. In the number of loans and (but everything else is not important). In order to boost the economy, a small victorious war is always needed. Alphabetical Truths ..
        1. +3
          7 September 2013 13: 07
          Quote: Sasha
          In order to boost the economy, we always need a small victorious war. Alphabetical Truths ..

          Do you think this can be done with a nuclear power? And offer primers to those who only know how to gossip about gays. They teach political economy.

          Quote: Sasha
          Damage to them is not in their lives.

          Oh oh They do not consider other people's dead bodies, but they are very sensitive to their own. American politicians too. The backstage is strong, but they are not particularly in a hurry to die either.
  14. +1
    7 September 2013 07: 37
    To reach this, 2020. I’m constantly monitoring the weapons development program until 2020. I agree with the expert about the field of conventional weapons, while there is hope for pro / air defense and strategic nuclear forces.
    But what about the 250 army? Comparison with Belgium - is it taking into account the territory and our army, or how did he compare it?
    1. +7
      7 September 2013 12: 52
      Quote: Nick888
      But what about the 250 army? Comparison with Belgium - is it taking into account the territory and our army, or how did he compare it?

      What do the Amerov begs say? Oksh - this is their business and PR. But what our experts say, I personally do not care.
      So. Sivkov (Constitutional Court) opened the veil from the question of which war we are preparing for. One global, 1 local, 2 armed conflict of low intensity ... That's it, maybe even a local war needs 500 people, and we, according to the Constitutional Court, can only expose 250 people. What to say? It seems to me that the COP thinks in terms of the Vietnam War, and not the Anglo-Argentine conflict (1982), when 1 is English. the paratrooper in terms of equipment and combat potential was equal to 8 to Argentinean soldiers. Therefore, a direct comparison is sometimes inappropriate. The combat power of a single soldier is growing, the adversary is faster, and this is sad, especially in real-time database management on the battlefield.
      BUT we are protected from the "bearers of democracy" by a nuclear umbrella. This invention is not ours, but British. It allows you to save and redistribute funds for science-intensive and strategically important areas of the construction of the Armed Forces: fleet, aviation, Strategic Missile Forces, air defense-missile defense, armored and engineer troops, communications, etc.
      Dempsey did not rank us in the category of superior powers in conventional weapons. The COP confirmed that this is so. But our Supreme Commander looks calm, moreover, he says openly "there are options for an answer." And so it is. Then the question is: why do we need an army during the Vietnam War? let's build a new, 21st century.
      Comparison with Belgium is incorrect, since we are able to pile on the entire Euro-NATE (without the USA, of course) and they know about it. And the calculation of the number of soldiers and tanks per sq km ??? Then it’s better to compare with Costa Rica!
      And further. Korotchenko has a more methodically competent approach, although I personally am not particularly ... So. Forces are built for tasks. It is preferable to repulse aggression in an engineered position (territory) at least 3 times. This means that less energy is needed, more funds will be used to boost the economy and social sphere.
      PS. For those who think independently: There has been an infa about the deployment of Voronezh-DM type radars every 1000 km along the border. Maybe that's why GDP is so calm?
      1. +2
        7 September 2013 16: 11
        Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
        There was an info on the deployment of Voronezh-DM type radars every 1000 km along the border. Maybe that's why GDP is so calm

        I heard something like that .....
        Plus, now the last years as 1.5-2 are just a boom in microelectronics ... and the customer is everywhere MO ... but it all started after Georgia ......

        And on the topic ... maybe our hardware is old ..... but fire control systems are not very bad and often simply exceed foreign capabilities ....

        PS
        Countries that possess the latest technologies and are able to implement them can always provide worthy resistance to the aggressor
      2. +2
        7 September 2013 22: 50
        Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
        Then it’s better to compare with Costa Rica!

        I think it’s better with Cuba, those in a dangerous period can pile on all of South America (they look very much like us) ...
    2. +4
      7 September 2013 13: 52
      Nick888

      "I would like to reach this 2020."

      And in 2020, they will come up with a program until 2040.
  15. poccinin
    +3
    7 September 2013 07: 38
    Well, we'll see. What will be the score. By the teeth. The Russian fleet can give. Unambiguously.
    1. +7
      7 September 2013 10: 14
      Quote: poccinin
      . on the teeth. THE FLOT OF RUSSIA can give. unequivocally.

      Undoubtedly! Many people see the surface of the "iceberg" of our fleet, forgetting about its underwater part. And there there are excellent cars, no worse than amerovsky, and in many respects even better (starting with 971 and 949 projects)
      One misfortune: there are not enough of them yet, since the EBN and K * have stolen from us 20 years of progressive development in all areas, including and strengthening the armed forces.
  16. +4
    7 September 2013 07: 38
    After the "pearl" of theirs MO about Russia's arming the "bloody regime" in Syria with chemical weapons, I think the contacts of the Pentagon with the sane population of planet Earth can be considered over.
  17. +3
    7 September 2013 07: 42
    how many comments! Well, let’s try! speak, and I can! let them think so! hi
  18. -4
    7 September 2013 07: 51
    I do not agree with Sivkov.
    Moscow and the region can exhibit a million staunch, seasoned, politically literate fighters in personal jeeps and equipped at their own expense.
    What can be opposed to two hundred and fifty thousand jeeps with machine guns and grenade launchers?
    It will be a big trophy.
    1. +3
      7 September 2013 16: 09
      shurup

      "What can be opposed to two hundred and fifty thousand jeeps with machine guns and grenade launchers?"


      The same number of gays on "Harleys" and "Hummers" carrying "love and democracy."

      This will be a bitch!
      1. +1
        8 September 2013 03: 32
        Quote: aviamed90
        shurup

        "What can be opposed to two hundred and fifty thousand jeeps with machine guns and grenade launchers?"


        The same number of gays on "Harleys" and "Hummers" carrying "love and democracy."

        This will be a bitch!

        It didn’t. Those who are in Harley with hammers will step up their asses, and with the Georgians we will not be you.
    2. 0
      8 September 2013 11: 17
      Quote: shurup
      Moscow and the region can exhibit a million staunch, seasoned, politically literate fighters in personal jeeps and equipped at their own expense.

      This is pearl. laughing
      Are you joking?
      1. +3
        8 September 2013 11: 34
        Quote: baltika-18
        Quote: shurup
        Moscow and the region can exhibit a million staunch, seasoned, politically literate fighters in personal jeeps and equipped at their own expense.
        This is pearl.
        Are you joking?

        So everything is logical.
        If there are Black Waters and other private armies on the other side, why shouldn't all these "masters of life" prove that it is possible not only in Russia to drive jeepars and shoot in the air. There is a chance to excel in the patriotic field. laughing
  19. +1
    7 September 2013 07: 53
    The American clearly wants to fight with us, and win, and get the laurels of the first and only winner of the Russian army. But with one condition - that we do not have nuclear weapons.
  20. +4
    7 September 2013 08: 01
    Russia's nuclear arsenal allows it to position itself as a superpower, but in the field of conventional weapons it does not fall into this category

    Let her better remember how recently their diligent students with their own weapons and instructors in Georgia were driven.
    1. +1
      7 September 2013 20: 22
      Now, until the end of the century, we will boast of these victories over the Georgians.
      How tired of that already. Just as tired of all these hat-thinking moods.
      At 41, they also believed that we would fight with little blood on a foreign land. And they got it so that until 42 they could not come to their senses. But if then the Germans got rid of and hit the hat, now I don’t think that we can repeat this with the Americans. With blood we wash them well. But there will be no assault on Washington and the tricolor over Congress. For nothing!
      1. +1
        7 September 2013 21: 32
        Quote: DimOK
        But there will be no assault on Washington and the tricolor over Congress. For nothing!

        in what sense is there nothing?
        It’s unlikely that they will unleash a war against Russia, well, if there are any brains, this is the surest and most effective way to restore the Empire and unite everything that has collapsed.
        for them, the best option is to poison little bites little by little
  21. Troy
    +10
    7 September 2013 08: 02
    Most importantly, men, so that they do not appoint a new Serdyukov, and so you look and we will extend the defense to the desired level.
    ps Serdyukov on an aspen and knotty stake with a twist am
    1. +4
      7 September 2013 15: 13
      Her, all charges were dropped from him and the flasher was donated by the non-current Minister of Defense, wait, the time will come and they will say that under the guise of theft of Serdyukov he was withdrawing funds for the development of the country's defense capability, such that the Western controllers would not suspect anything. but we didn’t even know about the exploit’s exploit .. and I almost forgot to bring Chubais and others to that category as well .. well, those on the Forbes list ...
      1. +7
        7 September 2013 15: 36
        Quote: max702
        Chubais and others will also fall into this category .. well, those on the Forbes list ...
        Yes, even in the Velvet book, textbooks and portraits on each wall
        BUT FIRST HANG!
        1. 0
          8 September 2013 00: 25
          Yes, for such a "miscarriage of justice" I am in favor of both! good
          1. +3
            8 September 2013 16: 23
            Quote: max702
            Yes, for such a "miscarriage of justice" I am in favor of both!

            Paint your nails with a rainbow and send it to the Dutch Liberals.
            Cruel, of course, but not to death. wassat
  22. Cpa
    +5
    7 September 2013 08: 05
    As far as I remember from history, the tiny Belgian army lasted several days against the Nazi forces, several times superior in number, while the largest European countries were broken by the onslaught.
    So not everything is so simple in comparisons.
  23. +4
    7 September 2013 08: 08
    Quote: shurup
    I do not agree with Sivkov.
    Moscow and the region can exhibit a million staunch, seasoned, politically literate fighters in personal jeeps and equipped at their own expense.
    What can be opposed to two hundred and fifty thousand jeeps with machine guns and grenade launchers?
    It will be a big trophy.

    "Send urgently five motorcycles with machine guns ..." (C) "Master and Margarita"
  24. +5
    7 September 2013 08: 11
    This report was made to reassure themselves: "So they counted the weapons, we have more of them, so the ships, too, are more, they will not use nuclear weapons. Victory is ours!" But they forget that Hitler also calculated everything, that our army and equipment are worse and everyone remembers how it ended up. To all this there is one wonderful answer from the poet Fyodor Tyutchev:
    Mind does not understand Russia,
    No yardstick to measure:
    She has a special feature -
    You can only believe in Russia.
  25. +10
    7 September 2013 08: 24
    There is no point in arguing about what is not, in principle, it will not, and by and large it is not necessary, it is about parity with a likely adversary in conventional means. One must live according to financial capabilities in accordance with this and have an army, in addition, in the age of missiles and nuclear weapons it is stupid to send people to hell. But the asymmetric answer in the form of tactical nuclear weapons fits perfectly. I am sure, at 100%, that in the event of a retaliatory measure, the use of such means, even against ordinary forces, will not cause them to engage strategic potential. Therefore, we must often openly talk about it, so that there is no surprise.
  26. +12
    7 September 2013 08: 36
    “I would say that Russia is not part of the“ middle-power ”powers, if we take the ratio of military potential and area. Russia is at the level of Belgium, ”Sivkov told the VZGLYAD newspaper.
    Today, with full mobilization of troops, Russia can create a group of no more than 250 thousand people, ”the expert said.
    The expert catches up horror. For local conflicts, those forces that are there are enough, and for a big war there is a mob. reserve. About our ships off the coast of Syria, they are not there to fight the Americans, but to deliver weapons, the possible evacuation of our citizens and, possibly, to strengthen Syrian air defense. And the Americans will not sink our ships. Striking our ship is tantamount to declaring war, and if this happens, the country's leadership has the right to use any forces and means, including nuclear ones.
  27. +3
    7 September 2013 08: 36
    Well, do not roll bags, as they say. The only question is, that the Americans won at least one war? It seems fashionable to talk about 250 thousand now. Yesterday I read at Mokrushin's, what the hell wrote on facebook that 250 thousand soldiers were also brought to Moscow for voting, this is not by chance the same 'expert'. Of course, I understand that not everything is perfect with us, but nevertheless we are still moving forward. Well, I'll also add, Hitler, Napoleon, etc., etc. also talked a lot and wanted a lot. So at least they really had Armies that knew how to fight, to fight, and these are warriors, they don't know how to do anything, but they want to get in everywhere.
  28. +5
    7 September 2013 08: 39
    from Don

    Normal article. Let him down from heaven to earth! We still have a lot of work to do, prisychut variegated: bacon:, deal with the financing of the military-industrial complex ......... Delov above the roof!
  29. +9
    7 September 2013 08: 51
    We must assume that it was written about the Moscow millionth army with humor, as it will explode in its jeeps across Europe to its household members. But to deal with your inner crap before it leaks to the amers there will be a chance.
  30. The comment was deleted.
  31. +5
    7 September 2013 09: 12
    I wonder how much will remain of the American group after these 20 minutes, or do they think that our sailors will stand like a firing squad? I do not argue that they will be able to quickly destroy our naval group. But I wonder if this Napoleon counted from SyShyA, how much will remain of their fleet? Or did he forget about such a concept as unacceptable losses? And how events will develop further.
  32. Zero fact
    +3
    7 September 2013 09: 14
    If we compare only the quantitative component, not counting the quality of weapons and soldiers, we must bear in mind that the American zone of responsibility is the whole world: you must have fleets (at least 1) in the Pacific, Indian, Atlantic oceans, and be able to insure US interests even in 1 one local war on the other side of the earth (Latin America, for example). It’s unlikely that you can pull everyone into 1 fist.
  33. andruha70
    +11
    7 September 2013 09: 19
    Russian cruiser, accompanied by two cover ships, in case the Americans decide to strike at them, “they will be destroyed within 20 minutes”
    Of course, I’m not tactig and not stratek smile but some kind of strange logic. a machine-gun pillbox, with a calculation of 2-3 people, can also be destroyed in ... eleven minutes, fitting, for example, a tank, but how many infantry will fly before it. on a cruiser, these 20 minutes aren’t only after all, gulls will be considered on the cabin next to a floating atomic ship laughing and there’s no reason to chew and cry snot, but you need to quietly, calmly, intently update and build up the military component of the country. Which has been observed in recent years. Yes, I agree, slowly, but not yet evening wink Russian man harnesses for a long time, but he goes fast.
  34. +6
    7 September 2013 09: 31
    In order for the Shtatovites to have no illusions of superiority in the military field and not to have the adventurous idea of ​​conquering Russia by military means, it is necessary to increase the arsenal of nuclear ammunition by ten times (for each aircraft carrier two missiles, even an explosion a few kilometers from it will produce 100% destruction) and immediately state generals will diminish optimism to fight. No wonder the United States surrounds Russia with missile defense and puts pressure on it to reduce nuclear arsenals.
    1. Cat
      +3
      7 September 2013 13: 47
      Quote: Semyon Albertovich
      a tenfold increase in the arsenal of nuclear weapons

      belay
      Calculate how many orders of magnitude your family budget will decrease in this case.
      1. Mature naturalist
        +4
        7 September 2013 19: 58
        Quote: Gato
        Calculate how many orders of magnitude your family budget will decrease in this case.

        Not at all. The money allocated for the production of additional weapons will eventually come as a salary to employees of the main enterprises and related enterprises. Then, through the stores, the purchases will go to the rest. If only they stayed in the country.
  35. +8
    7 September 2013 09: 39
    I put the article +. Although, in my opinion, there are controversial points. Not so long ago, NATO conducted command exercises on a massive attack on the Russian Federation and immediately announced that it had suppressed all life on our territory in three days. Then, after a while, the so-called independent experts from Europe suddenly admitted , which was initially taken for granted, that our air defense will oversleep the attack. Even so, 80% of NATO attacking equipment will be burned in the air by our air defense systems on the first day. What will they be fighting for another two days? This is about protecting your territory. But "on the road," it seems to me, we are still weak. Thank you for that Yeltsin and Gorbachev. This, of course, is not a reason to leave Syria, but “it’s too early to drown AUGs.
  36. Docklishin
    +10
    7 September 2013 09: 50
    angry Offer - to clone Comrade Stalin in the nth number and put 1 in each region as the head of municipalities .... After one, two five-year plans, everything will work out. Well, if it’s serious, then it’s not x .... not funny. How much you can steal. Democracy, democracy ... Ugh mother ...
  37. Ruslan_F38
    0
    7 September 2013 10: 03
    As for the Russian cruiser sent to the coast of Syria, accompanied by two cover ships, if the Americans decide to strike at them, "they will be destroyed within 20 minutes."

    Twenty minutes is unlikely. But even so, if so, I think the Cruiser will take with him more than one American ship, and maybe the aircraft carrier will sink.
  38. +5
    7 September 2013 10: 05
    Quote: DocKlishin
    angry Offer - to clone Comrade Stalin in the nth number and put 1 in each region as the head of municipalities .... After one, two five-year plans, everything will work out. Well, if it’s serious, then it’s not x .... not funny. How much you can steal. Democracy, democracy ... Ugh mother ...

    I am always surprised by such comments - like Stalin, everything will work out here, and no one wonders how he appeared, as a result, and under what conditions, before he had an idea, they started to implement this idea and only then he appeared, so I recommend that all nostalgic people think about the formulation of the basis - the idea.
    1. Docklishin
      +4
      7 September 2013 11: 48
      You are right, of course - you can't argue. There is no nostalgia, and Stalin's persona is historically ambiguous. However, the POLITICAL situation in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century and at the turn of the 90-20s was not very different. History repeats itself in a spiral. And the basis ... we cannot walk along the democratic path that way. "The Tsar needs a father" - it's an authoritarian way of government. Yes, and some idea. And so confusion and vacillation. My hut is on the edge, I don't know anyone. hi
  39. Radoslav
    +2
    7 September 2013 10: 12
    Hitler also wanted to destroy Soviet Russia in one month, but as it turned out everyone knows, I am also an expert and declare that the American fleet will be destroyed by the Russian fleet in 10 minutes.
  40. +1
    7 September 2013 10: 19
    I am more interested in this: if the Americans arrange a provocation against the Russian fleet, and not with their own hands as usual, well, look at how Russia will lead in such a situation, what will be the answer or the order will be given as in 41 "Don't give in to provocations"?
    1. dmitry_den
      0
      7 September 2013 12: 20
      "if the Americans arrange a provocation against the Russian fleet"

      Destruction Cole destroyer: US Navy power and vulnerability

      http://topwar.ru/32711-podryv-esminca-koul-mosch-i-uyazvimost-vms-ssha.html
  41. +5
    7 September 2013 10: 24
    As long as there are RUSSIAN we can defeat all, and maybe not right away, Our memory of the deeds of grandfathers is alive.
  42. +3
    7 September 2013 10: 37
    Article Trundezh and provocation.
    Who will start to drown whom first, then these 20 minutes.

    Georgia in 2008 also bought fashionable gadgets and considered itself equipped with the latest technology, but only could not buy an "iron point". We know the result.

    Americans always fight for a grandmother, And Russians "For Faith, For Tsar"

    Our history is filled with glorious victories - we are a victorious people, even with a rocket, even with a shovel.
    But the Americans themselves did not win a single war.

    etc. etc. everything has already been said before .. Only Chuck Noris will save the Americans, but he is already old.
    1. ork
      ork
      +4
      7 September 2013 11: 53
      Article Trundezh and provocation.
      Who will start to drown whom first, then these 20 minutes.
      Georgia in 2008 also bought fashionable gadgets and considered itself equipped with the latest technology, but only could not buy an "iron point". We know the result.
      Americans always fight for a grandmother, And Russians "For Faith, For Tsar"


      URA-PATRIOTISM - an expression of love for the fatherland is not in fact, but in words in the form of persistent, noisy demonstrative assurances. The diagnosis, my friend.
      1. Troy
        +1
        7 September 2013 12: 03
        I’m not my friend, this is first. Secondly, where did this definition come from? And what do you know about my affairs to give out such characteristics?
      2. +3
        7 September 2013 14: 03
        Patriotism is not a diagnosis. But total sclerosis of a national scale - yes. I understand that the story was stolen from the Ukrainians, or rather slipped a lie. But anyway, we are one people and our common victories. But they are.

        Regarding patriotism-- In war, there is only one weapon - this is the belief in victory backed by skill.

        Amer, yes manned, but they also know that Russians without a head in the event of a real confrontation, the Russians will not flinch. and the USA? She never waged a war on an equal footing, especially with a superior opponent. rockets run out and start to drape.

        About 20 minutes is far from a fact! Unless you take a massive missile strike and so that we already have something to fight back. With the same success, we can say that our 1 Northwind in 10 minutes is able to sink their entire group. After all, maybe .. but will they give it ???

        The article is clearly in the furnace.
    2. Cat
      +3
      7 September 2013 13: 50
      Quote: Muadipus
      Americans always fight for a grandmother, And Russians "For Faith, For Tsar"

      laughing Pleased, dear ..
  43. +3
    7 September 2013 10: 41
    There are no ships, so you need to think about ballistic anti-ship missiles. And this is the withdrawal from the agreement on medium-range missiles, the deployment of a satellite target designation system. And yes, even if we put dofig amers on the sea, they can still recover sooner than we do. But the spirit without glands does not solve much, and besides, do many have this spirit? Because they developed technologies for building the fleet, while we developed technologies for cutting. And yes, the Mace did not fly, but a bummer ...
    1. +1
      8 September 2013 03: 54
      Quote: Zomanus
      There are no ships, so you need to think about ballistic anti-ship missiles. And this is the withdrawal from the agreement on medium-range missiles, the deployment of a satellite target designation system. And yes, even if we put dofig amers on the sea, they can still recover sooner than we do. But the spirit without glands does not solve much, and besides, do many have this spirit? Because they developed technologies for building the fleet, while we developed technologies for cutting. And yes, the Mace did not fly, but a bummer ...

      The ballistic Chinese did, they are not bound by a treaty. Speak with the help of our specialists
  44. HERMAJOR4IK
    +3
    7 September 2013 10: 41
    this Sivkov is just a really puffing dummy = a serious specialist can’t carry such rubbish and drive such a frank sack = the Northern Fleet is the most powerful in the Russian Navy in terms of combat capabilities, it is approximately equal to the British fleet, even a little stronger (well, it’s clear that the British fleet is now not very powerful but quite serious force) and to say that he can counteract only one strike carrier group of the American Navi (usually consisting of one aircraft carrier and a couple of UO destroyers as the main surface forces) can only outright hollow shell) amers have six fleets (of which there are only 10 aircraft carriers) each individually approximately equal in strength to the Northern Fleet = the Baltic Fleet is really weak much weaker, for example, the Turkish Fleet = the Black Sea Fleet is approximately equal in strength to the Turkish Fleet but from the combat power of the Northern Fleet it is about a third that is three times weaker than the Northern Fleet and the Pacific Fleet Russian Navy is slightly inferior to the Northern Fleet but overall let's face it = what do we have in the bottom line against six US Navy fleets? and the fact that the modern Russian Navy is three times weaker than the American Navy and the main problem in the possible confrontation with the American Navy is the fragmentation of our naval forces and the inability to concentrate them in real time for most effective use
  45. +2
    7 September 2013 10: 54
    Quote: "if the Americans decide to strike at them," they will be destroyed within 20 minutes. " Primitive reasoning. Ships in the Mediterranean have global nuclear missile weapons in their rear. One can imagine how many minutes an aggressor will be destroyed, who dares to attack Russian ships. Elementary arithmetic does not work here. It is impossible to compare the combat capabilities of fleets with a formal comparison of the number of ships. In any case, the whole complex of the Russian nuclear triad must be taken into account.
  46. EGORKA
    +3
    7 September 2013 10: 58
    God forbid, by 2020 we will carry out rearmament and we will have enough army to solve our problems. Yes, in the field of conventional weapons America is stronger, but there is a moment that we have no plans how they have to bring democracy to everyone and be aggressors, but to protect our army should have enough land for us, moreover, it seems to me that the West does not have enough forces for a ground operation against us, this is not to bomb the "Papuans".
  47. KononAV
    0
    7 September 2013 11: 03
    The article did not give answers.
  48. +1
    7 September 2013 11: 14
    Amers can make forecasts, make calculations, count the number of tanks and helicopters as much as they like. They don’t take into account one of our people. They will turn up, we will cut them like sheep at the same hatred. I’m ready to tear them up even if they’re also for me come home-tear.
    1. +2
      7 September 2013 12: 08
      shark

      What exactly do you offer?
  49. +4
    7 September 2013 11: 16
    Dear forum users, this is what I’m thinking about.
    1) It is necessary to compare the military potential of Russia not only with the Amerovian one, but with the entire aggregate natiform. Because in the case of kipish we don’t have allies at all, we are alone. (China’s position is rather muddy). On the same Black Sea, our fleet is not even comparable with Turkish, not that with Amerovsky. Only for aircraft carriers. We don’t have them (Kuznetsov is a pre-aircraft carrier compared to Amer’s percussion forces of 100 thousand tons). Amers have TEN + Frances de Gol + shaving. On missile cruisers. We have three or four; only amers have 22 ticonderogi. Well, etc. etc.
    2) What would be necessary to catch them up for a hundred years and FIG knows how much money. We have neither one nor the other.
    3) From here the conclusion is to hold on to nuclear weapons. It will be developed and modernized.
    4) God forbid to get involved in the race of conventional weapons. We can’t stand it and get December 7, 1991 only with an amendment to the name of the country not of the USSR but of the Russian Federation.
    And so Putin is handsome. It’s very hard for him now. It is even visible in his face.
  50. +1
    7 September 2013 11: 16
    We should not be equal with the United States in the armament of the army, nor in the size and armament of the Navy ... why on earth ?! What for? We must achieve such a situation that in a collision with their army and navy we achieve victory. These tasks are not close to one another. Why do we need American gadgets? Most of them are high-tech sling cutters, which are discussed in detail in some article here. Beautiful, expensive, technological ... nobody cares for anyone, burdening the fighter completely useless stupid otreblenki.
    Well, here's the same Navy. What is a battleship? It is a means of delivering weapons and surveillance equipment by sea. Hence the question - why so big? It used to take thousands of people to service weapons. And now? The USSR took a couple of steps in this, of course, the right direction. No one will cancel the naval inverse proportion - the combat effectiveness of a ship is inversely proportional to its size. Why do we need Nimitz in packs? We need containers with autonomous missile systems! In terms of price and efficiency, this is exactly what will fully cover the "American superiority". Yes, all this beauty type: "bim-bom-brahmsel!" "alignment with the flag!" "to whistle all where the realties" these non-dressy things will not do, sadness. And the admiral's position at the park of dead toys is difficult to knock out ...
    But if we want to win, there is no way out ...
    1. Cat
      +3
      7 September 2013 13: 59
      Quote: Mikhail3
      No one will cancel the naval inverse proportion - the combat effectiveness of the ship is inversely proportional to its size.

      belay
      Well, what academies teach this? It’s even somehow scary to imagine the combat effectiveness of the motor boat "Progress"
      1. 0
        7 September 2013 17: 45
        And you look at the statistics.
  51. +1
    7 September 2013 11: 17
    The Yankees can make all kinds of forecasts - the main thing is morale
    1. 0
      7 September 2013 15: 14
      Quote: deman73
      the main thing is morale

      To the point! The factor of Spirit and unpredictability, the Yankees cannot calculate."... The Russians again adopted that crazy idea... although tempting, I admit... that a person is not a monkey, but something higher. And when normal human behavior, based on the basic instincts of an animal... nothing can be done, we really came from an animal!.. when, I repeat, its normal behavior is superimposed with such abstract concepts as honor, pride, loyalty to one’s word... have you seen such properties in a monkey or American?.. then human behavior becomes unpredictable. And therefore threatening. There is nothing more terrible than unpredictability. In our stable world, civilization can crawl forward only if there is stability.
      Professor Asgate, head of the corps of psychoanalysts, listened in silence to the reports of his team.
      “I dare say,” Asgate said sadly, “the condition of the Russians is such that they will willingly enter into battle.” Even with joy!
      Stone asked incredulously:
      – Are they tired of life? We will grind them into powder. And we'll send the powder to the sharks.
      The psychiatrist spread his hands:
      – Do you think they don’t know? But they will take half of our fleet with them. After all, the Soviet fleet... well, even if it is Russian, is still a terrible force. And they will accept the fight, they will accept it. One might say that their courage comes from the fact that nothing is precious because of a dog’s life, but does that make it easier for us? We are in different conditions. This is the eternal confrontation between barbarians and civilization. For barbarians, war is a matter of honor and glory, and civilized countries only weakly fought back, they had something to lose, you know?
      “Everyone has something to lose,” Stone snapped. - Of course, our ships are more expensive...
      – They know this. And for Russians, in fact... it’s not that life is not dear, it is dear to everyone, but the thirst to knock us on the horns can outweigh... already outweighs!.. the instinct of self-preservation. Then this is their stupid, uncivilized “maybe”... In a word, they will almost certainly enter into battle. Barbarians,” the psychoanalyst confirmed. - Die with a sword in your hand! If you want, here are phrases that have almost never existed in Russia over the past thirty years, but which are now being heard more and more often: “There are no women’s graves in the fields,” “Men don’t die in bed,” “Where there is a Cossack, there is glory.” “,” “Either the chest is covered in crosses, or the head is in the bushes,” “Our chance didn’t come out of the woodwork”... Their mentality is not fully clarified." Y. NIKITIN "Evil Empire".
      1. +2
        7 September 2013 15: 40
        Quote: Be proud.
        The Yankees cannot calculate the factor of Spirit and unpredictability.
        They are not the only ones; in the entire history of the Country, such mistakes cannot be rearranged along the equator in several rows
  52. +1
    7 September 2013 11: 25
    Quote from the article:
    The Black Sea Fleet, according to Sivkov, in its composition corresponds to one ship-strike group, which in the Sixth US Fleet can be up to 10. “Only in the Turkish Navy there are about 30 submarines, and the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Federation has only one,” the expert said, stressing that Russia is now “only holding nuclear weapons”.

    "Name" list of warships of the Russian Black Sea Fleet indicating hull numbers:

    11 I brigade of anti-submarine ships
    GRKR "Moscow" 121
    BOD "Kerch" 713
    TFR "Smart" 810
    TFR "Ladny" 801
    TFR "Inquisitive"808

    197-I crew of landing ships
    BDK "Nikolai Filchenkov" 152
    BDK "Orsk"148
    BDK "Saratov"150
    BDK "Azov"151
    BDK "Novocherkassk" 142
    BDK "Caesar Kunikov"158
    BDK "Yamal" 156

    68-I crew of ships of the protection of the water area
    149th Tactical Group of Anti-Submarine Ships
    MPK "Alexandrovets"059
    MPK "Vladimirets"060
    MPK "Muromets"064
    MPK "Suzdalets"071

    150th tactical group of mine-sweeping ships
    MTSH "Kovrovets913"
    MTSH "Ivan Golubets"911
    MTSH "Turbinist" 912
    MTSH "Vice Admiral Zhukov" 909


    247th Submarine Division
    Submarine "Alrosa" 554
    Submarine "B-380"572

    41-I crew of missile boats
    166th Novorossiysk Division of Small Missile Ships
    RKVP "Bora" 615
    RKVP "Samum"616
    MRK "Shtil" 620
    MRK "Mirage" 617

    295th Sulina Missile Boat Division
    RKA "R-60"955
    RKA "R-71"962
    RKA "R-109"952
    RKA "R-239"953
    RKA "Ivanovets"954

    184th Water District Protection Brigade (Novorossiysk)
    181th Division of Anti-Submarine Ships
    MPK "Povorino"053
    MPK "Eysk"054
    MPK "Kasimov055"

    170 Minesweeper Division
    MTSH "Zheleznyakov"901
    MTSH "Valentin Pikul"770
    MTSH "Vice Admiral Zakharyin"908

    BTSH "Mineralnye Vody" 426
    BTSH "Lieutenant Ilyin" 438
    RTSH "RT-46"201
    RT-278219
    D-144575
    D-106570

    © Sevastopol.info, 2000-2013 - e-mail
    1. +4
      7 September 2013 12: 44
      Corsair

      “The nature of the activities of the Black Sea Fleet (based on open materials) suggests that the number of combat-ready ships in the distant sea and ocean zones includes the missile cruiser “Moskva” and 1-2 patrol ships of Project 1135M.
      Among the ships in the near sea zone, up to 2 small missile ships, 3-4 small anti-submarine ships, 6-7 minesweepers, 3-5 large landing ships and 3-4 missile boats are probably combat-ready."

      (website "akademiagp.ru", article "What is the Russian Black Sea Fleet capable of?" dated 21.02.2013/XNUMX/XNUMX, author: First Vice-President of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, Doctor of Military Sciences Konstantin Valentinovich SIVKOV).

      Do not confuse the payroll of the fleet with combat-ready ships. It's not the same thing.
      1. +3
        7 September 2013 13: 11
        Here is some more information.

        “Currently, the Black Sea Fleet includes only about 50 warships and boats, as well as several dozen auxiliary vessels. The number of coastal aviation and coastal defense forces has also decreased many times. The Black Sea Fleet, which previously dominated the Black Sea and competed in the Mediterranean Sea with the joint forces of NATO, is now inferior in size to the Turkish Navy in the Black Sea theater of operations.At the same time, it is superior to the fleets of the other Black Sea countries combined, and the combat power of its main units allows one to count on success in confrontation with a stronger enemy.

        At the same time, the ships of the Black Sea Fleet are rapidly aging. Over the next 10-15 years, the vast majority of them will fail due to physical wear and tear. Major repairs and upgrades can extend the life of some units, but not all and not forever. In addition, some units can be used more productively - for example, the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet, the guards missile cruiser "Moskva", according to some experts, would be much more appropriate in the Pacific Fleet, as part of a detachment with the same type "Varyag".

        (website "e-news.com.ua", article "Will Russia be able to renew the Black Sea Fleet", published on May 13.05.2010, XNUMX)

        As you understand, it is impossible to find the true state of affairs in the open press.
        But there is no doubt that the problem is acute.
  53. sashka
    +1
    7 September 2013 11: 40
    Wow, how the plot twists... It's been a long time since the Americans found themselves in such a situation...
  54. ork
    ork
    +4
    7 September 2013 11: 47
    Quote: vaddag1
    "corresponds to one ship-strike group, of which there can be up to 10 in the US Sixth Fleet" - "Varangian" and "Korean" do not agree with you. Cruiser and can. boat against 6 cruisers and 6 destroyers - we have our own mathematics.

    In 1904, in the area of ​​Chemulpo, Russian sailors showed unparalleled heroism. Eternal Glory!!!
    But this happened more than 100 years ago. It was a DUEL of ships. In the current conditions, attacks are carried out “from beyond the horizon.” The tactics have changed somewhat. Just don’t offer boarding. People need to be protected. By the way, "VARYAG" and "KOREAN" are proper names. Have respect.
    It is unfortunate to admit that the state of the Russian fleet (so far) does not fully meet modern threats.
  55. +1
    7 September 2013 11: 53
    This Dempsey “rolled out” the group of Russian hero ships - now let him remember the “brilliant” victory over the dwarf state of Grenada and tell everyone about it. It will be interesting to listen...
  56. Docklishin
    +2
    7 September 2013 11: 55
    An amateurish question for discussion... Please do not downvote too much hi So, if our military industry, in particular shipyards, cannot cope with the assigned tasks on time + we need to increase the potential of the Navy's surface ships... So why not place orders in other countries. For example, in China (everything was copied from us), from comrades from Europe (for example, Germany), etc. At the same time, improving the capacity of our own enterprises.
  57. ork
    ork
    0
    7 September 2013 12: 16
    Quote: Valery Neonov
    A statement by Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the US Armed Forces, in my opinion, is an American auto-training.

    In my opinion too. However, it is not possible to answer adequately (yet).
    My opinion is that war is the price for the mistakes of politicians and diplomats. Therefore, God grant wisdom to one and the other.
  58. Pamir210
    +3
    7 September 2013 12: 25
    Quote: vaddag1
    Cruiser and Can. boat against 6 cruisers and 6 destroyers - we have our own math.

    and what have you achieved with such mathematics?
    the Korean was blown up, but the Varangian was in the Japanese fleet longer than in his native fleet.
    1. Cat
      +1
      7 September 2013 14: 11
      Quote: Pamir210
      and what have you achieved with such mathematics?

      In this case, the question is even more interesting - how was such mathematics allowed in the first place?
      What the gunboat "Koreets" was doing in Chemulpo is clear, but why did the "Varyag" end up there and not on Japanese communications?
  59. +3
    7 September 2013 12: 28
    The US debt exceeds 100% of GDP, our debt hovers around 5%.
    What can be built for 100% of annual income:
    (I take approximate numbers to estimate orders)
    400 dollars are:
    Airplanes: 40 * 000 = 000
    EM AUG fleet: 800 * 000 = 000 (I took US data, our unit prices are somehow suspiciously low)
    Boreas: 700 * 000 = 000
    tank: 400 * 000 = 5
    c400: 120 * 000 = 000
    = 130 We spent a quarter to buy more of this
    Maybe I made a mistake somewhere, please correct me. But I would do so, Japan lives with 300% of the debt and nothing, because in the brewing mess, most likely, all the debts will be written off again, for the survivors!
    1. Docklishin
      +2
      7 September 2013 12: 33
      A small note. As a rule, during mass production of any product (including military purposes), the price can be reduced significantly smile And this is good. I would support your endeavors
  60. Pamir210
    +1
    7 September 2013 12: 29
    Quote: vaddag1
    destroyer sunk, cruiser sank from damage upon return, 2 cruisers went to dry docks

    what nonsense ..
    Give the name of the sunken cruiser? destroyer? cruisers at the docks and the length of their stay there?
    and, most importantly, the source
    1. 0
      7 September 2013 12: 53
      Quote: Pamir210
      Give the name of the sunken cruiser?


      Wiki: According to the report of the commander of the Varyag, one destroyer was sunk by the cruiser’s fire and the cruiser Asama was damaged, and the cruiser Takachiho sank after the battle. Official Japanese sources and archival documents do not confirm hits on Japanese ships and the presence of any losses. ..

      I believe Rudnev.
      1. Pamir210
        +2
        7 September 2013 13: 29
        that’s the problem... Takachiho will only get killed in the First World War))
        and the name of the sunken destroyer is not given))
  61. 0
    7 September 2013 12: 35
    Before June 22, 1941, I also thought that the USSR was a colossus with feet of clay.
    1. 0
      8 September 2013 00: 29
      And they also helped us resist the purges of ’37-’39.
      All unreliable peoples were deported and resettled from their places of permanent residence.
      What now ? Payments of reparations to Chechnya, replacement of the indigenous Russian population with migrants.
  62. 0
    7 September 2013 13: 47
    I agree that in battle the most important thing is people! And so-called high-precision weapons are good only in greenhouse conditions
  63. goats denis
    -15
    7 September 2013 13: 56
    Where should we go against America, you are your warriors, or rather, you surrendered us. The entire top elite is there in the USA and Europe. And will I force Russia to fight? Children of deputies, senators, oligarchs and governors will not and I will not and I do not advise you
    1. +4
      7 September 2013 14: 46
      Quote: Denis Kozlov
      And will I force Russia to fight?

      and you need to fight for ANY RUSSIA, because it is Russia, I don’t care what the children of deputies or oligarchs do or will do, although if they were raised correctly, and not because you will also defend the country
      1. goats denis
        -6
        7 September 2013 15: 44
        You surrendered the USSR without a fight, but how much ambition we have for Russia, I bet tomorrow, a little more seriously, everyone who screams about our army at the sight of Abrams tanks, Apache helicopters, etc. will run away. And God is always on the side of a strong army and not those who live in the Crimea...
        1. +4
          7 September 2013 18: 39
          Quote: Denis Kozlov
          You surrendered the USSR without a fight, but how much ambition we have for Russia, I bet tomorrow, a little more seriously, everyone who screams about our army at the sight of Abrams tanks, Apache helicopters, etc. will run away. And God is always on the side of a strong army and not those who live in the Crimea...

          boy, judging by your post, you don’t know what happened in 91
          Nobody gave up the Union; we (I lived in the Kazakh SSR at the time) were very cleverly scammed.
          I remember well where I was when I heard about the dissolution of the USSR and the formation of the CIS, the majority then thought that nothing had changed, they just changed the name
          and let the rest be left to you to mix
          1. Arabist
            +4
            7 September 2013 19: 00
            Dear Vladimir, do not waste your strength and emotions on such insignificance. Anyone would be happy to gain intelligence, but if you are as stupid as a gander, you will not become smarter this way or that (this is about Kozlov). Sincerely.
        2. +2
          7 September 2013 18: 43
          Quote: Denis Kozlov
          And God is always on the side of a strong army and not those who live in the Crimea...

          if we talk about God as something higher, then whether you are strong or not, all that matters to him is what kind of soul you have
        3. +1
          7 September 2013 19: 14
          Quote: Denis Kozlov
          the army will scatter at the sight of Abrams tanks, Apache helicopters and others.

          It’s stupid to bet in anticipation of events that may not happen. It’s dishonest to accuse people you know nothing about of cowardice. It’s vile to accuse those who were deceived of betrayal (I fully support this Vasilenko Vladimir).And God is where the truth is.
        4. 0
          8 September 2013 14: 02
          goats denis
          Sit down - fail. To retake in the fall. Amrams tanks are shitty and cheap, our turntables are no worse than yours. Our fortitude is higher than yours, it would be better if we kept silent, brother Amer.
    2. +3
      7 September 2013 18: 04
      And I will fight! For my mother, sister, wife, children (I don’t have my own, so for strangers), and for you, and for you, DAMAGED, I will fight, rest assured!!!
    3. +3
      7 September 2013 22: 36
      Quote: Denis Kozlov
      . And will I force Russia to fight? Children of deputies, senators, oligarchs and governors will not and I will not and I do not advise you

      Strange. Where are our wives, children, parents? I don’t care about the aligarchs, they are where there is more money, but my relatives and my Motherland are here and I have something to fight for, be it in the army, or in the partisans, or with a shovel, or even on the Yars. A country is not a territory, it is you and me.
  64. Politician
    +2
    7 September 2013 14: 00
    Sivkov, adding that the Pacific Fleet is capable of successfully solving problems against one or two aircraft carrier groups, “and there will be up to six of them there.”

    To solve this problem, there are bombers with anti-ship cruise missiles.

    I’m wondering, is it really impossible to equip intercontinental ballistic missiles with non-nuclear homing heads that could hit aircraft carrier groups in any area of ​​the world? It seems to me that at the current level of development of science, this will happen in the very near future. 4-5 missiles, 10 maneuvering warheads - no Aegis will help.
  65. Crang
    +2
    7 September 2013 14: 10
    We must admit that the Americans are right. “We don’t need an army like the USSR... We have other interests....”. As if the USSR maintained a huge army and navy just for fun. If they don’t understand, then the Americans will very soon not take their “interests” into account.
  66. true love
    0
    7 September 2013 14: 10
    The entire history of Rus' and Russia confirms that the fighting spirit of the Russian soldier is such that interventionists of all stripes agreed to fight only with an overwhelming number of soldiers and weapons. And such “warriors” as the Turks, in all the wars of Russia and the Ottoman Empire, lost battles being two, five, ten, and sometimes forty (!) times stronger. Therefore, let us remember Suvorov’s statement: “The Russian soldier wins not with numbers, but with skill...”. And also the words of Bismarck: - “The Russians will respond to any European cunning with unpredictable stupidity.”
  67. +4
    7 September 2013 14: 28
    You're amazed! Our fathers and grandfathers, through incredible efforts in the post-war period, achieved military parity with the enemy, and here we are again with “empty” hands. These are not the times when heroism can defeat the devil. And then some Gorby and Eltzman came and everything was ashes. They are awarded the highest orders of Russia and erected monuments. It’s some kind of absurdity and we will believe that everything is being done for defense. It seems to me that as soon as the dollar came to Russian soil, the sale of Russia and the great heritage of our ancestors took place. What open spaces with untold riches our ancestors staked out, what battles they withstood and won! And now these riches are in private, cunning and resourceful hands belonging to people predominantly of one nation...
  68. 0
    7 September 2013 14: 39
    and this chief of staff can say in which conflicts their army REALLY won, did not buy generals, but actually defeated the enemy
  69. 0
    7 September 2013 14: 43
    So we sold vouchers over drunk Borusik, oh...well. at this time we drank everything away recourse
  70. 89507555912
    0
    7 September 2013 14: 53
    It is necessary to develop a clear program for the development of the Navy and a program for the operation of the fleet in the world's oceans.
  71. Alex 241
    +10
    7 September 2013 15: 00
    But in the field of conventional weapons, I would not include Russia in this category,” the general said. We have a secret weapon: the POWER OF SPIRIT. We are the descendants of those who reached Berlin. If you want to try, well, as they say, welcome, we will show royal honors !
    1. 0
      8 September 2013 13: 35
      The video is not bad. But there is no need to feel sorry for this work of nature (amers).
  72. +2
    7 September 2013 15: 15
    At all times we prepared for war, it always came unexpectedly, we always won only at the cost of an incredible mobilization of forces and means, as well as incredible losses.

    Apparently Russia needs a modern oprichnina company. A guaranteed trip to Kolyma for members of closed clubs such as “Serdyukovites”, “Osipovites” (ex-president of the Russian Academy of Sciences) and others who made public service the key to personal enrichment, it is necessary to restore the status of the sword and shield of the FSB (it didn’t hurt to return the old name - albeit to some genetic memory will return), it is possible to cancel the “game” of one-year-old soldiers.

    *I was amazed to learn that all information and technical publications of the Russian Academy of Sciences belong to a US citizen. In fact, any scientific work, projects and their authors are accessible and controllable from the very beginning - put a “sieve” and catch it.
  73. +3
    7 September 2013 15: 21
    A new chief of naval aviation of the Russian Black Sea Fleet has been appointed.
    blackseanews.net/read/70006

    That's interesting.
  74. 0
    7 September 2013 15: 44
    Quote: shark
    Today, 11:04 You are of course right, but how much can the unparalleled heroism and courage of our guys plug the holes from the miscalculations of the political leadership. This was the case in the 18,19,20th, 21th, XNUMXth centuries. at XNUMX, this trend seems to continue.

    Good afternoon dear "Nick"!
    You are absolutely right. good Yes, the Russians had, have, and will have fighting qualities, but at what price QUITE often must victories be paid for with so much PEOPLE’s, not boyar’s, blood?

    I have a suggestion:
    - It may cost just TO THE FRONT according to the future amended Military Regulations, simply NOMOTE the President, Prime Minister, all Ministers with their women's battalionsand with the weapon of an ORDINARY FIGHTER!? (I would leave the General Staff in the safe rear for now).

    I am sure that with such PERSONAL participation (from the top) directly in the database, The sabotage and deceitful policy of the authorities would immediately change to YOUR Armed Forces!
  75. coserg 2012
    +3
    7 September 2013 15: 47
    I don’t know what the chiefs of staff are planning, but when I served (76-79) in the Northern Fleet, the Pr1134 ships with the then armament were designed for 45 minutes of active combat. At the same time, from 4 to 6 air targets could be brought down with one salvo. Kiev, our flagship could have ten of the most at once dangerous. Now I look at MOSCOW, it only has a main complex four times more powerful. Do they really think that if planes take off, no one will drown the dovecote. Well, well...
  76. 0
    7 September 2013 15: 54
    Great efforts are now being invested in the non-nuclear component, but still there is still a lot that needs to be done, for me, the phot will now have a very big responsibility, and we have rook patrol boats and corvettes, ships of the coastal zone are churning out ..... it’s a good deed, but you must agree not we need these ships...Yuri Dolnorukiy and Vladimir Monomakh have been rushing around with this mace for a long time...now the northern route is becoming attractive, the North Pole...there will be flies flocking there like shit, and we have nothing special to fly with
  77. Bashkaus
    0
    7 September 2013 16: 10
    The Japanese also thought so when “Varyak” and “Koreets” entered the outer roadstead.
    1. IRON_MAN
      +1
      7 September 2013 16: 55
      Eternal memory to the heroes! But in military affairs one hopes for heroism, this is the hope for the famous “maybe” and as Shark noted, with this heroism and with their lives our soldiers throughout history have paid for the miscalculations of the command!

      The article is adequate, sobering, everything is said to the point. +
  78. Arabist
    0
    7 September 2013 16: 32
    Is Russia an ear of clay with feet of clay? How many times have we already heard this, everyone who thought so lost to us. 250 thousand? And this despite the fact that we have an army of almost a million? Interesting.
  79. D_L
    D_L
    +2
    7 September 2013 16: 33
    America is already at war with Syria!!!!
    US President Barack Obama leaked classified information on September 2, 2013. Namely, he told everyone that mercenaries trained by the CIA were fighting on the side of Assad’s opponents.
    Trained by the CIA and armed with American weapons, the unit consists of 50 fighters who were trained in Jordan. Currently, in small groups, they have already begun to penetrate into the conflict zone across the Jordanian-Syrian border.
    Earlier, British special forces arrived in Syria to locate and neutralize anti-aircraft missile systems. US President Barack Obama announced this information at a meeting on Monday with influential senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham.
    1. IRON_MAN
      +1
      7 September 2013 22: 09
      Our specialists also work there and have been for quite a long time... it’s just that the “taciturn” guy doesn’t like to show off on such topics) in Ossetia, the GRU special forces have been waiting for the start for a month (Rostov, others maybe earlier...)
  80. Druid
    +5
    7 September 2013 17: 04
    Quote: Corsair
    "Name" list of warships of the Russian Black Sea Fleet indicating hull numbers:

    Provide a list of names next to only the composition of the Turkish Navy in the Black Sea (displacement, armament, year of construction), and this is only one NATO country, then the picture will not be entirely rosy, only the Turkish Navy is superior to the Russian Black Sea Fleet:
    - for URO frigates - 5 times;
    - for missile boats - 3 times;
    - for submarines - 14 times;
    - for minesweepers - 5 times;
    - for landing boats - 25 times.
    For example, the submarine "Alrosa" is 1989, that is, the boat is 23 full years old, if I'm not mistaken with the arithmetic, the second submarine "St. Prince George", if it is still in service at all, is 1982, that is, it is 31 years old (http://topwar. ru/8103-podvodnye-lodki-chernomorskogo-flota.html). Here we must also add the ships of other Black Sea countries that are now part of NATO, plus those ships of non-Black Sea NATO countries that constantly enter the Black Sea for 21 days in accordance with the Montreux Convention (on average, there are about 4 ships of NATO countries in the World Cup), the total tonnage of which is limited 30 thousand tons (this is several frigates AT THE SAME TIME. Who remembers the Russian Federation tried to appeal to the restrictions of the Montreux Convention during the attack on Georgia and the appearance of US Navy ships on its shores).

    By the way, about the Montreux Convention, according to its text, Turkey has the right to prohibit the passage of any military vessels through the straits if it participates in a war or if it considers that it is directly threatened by war.
    During a war in which Turkey is not participating, the straits must be closed to the passage of military vessels of any belligerent power.
    Let’s say Turkey is drawn into a war with Syria or considers that it is threatened by war, where then will the Russian Black Sea Fleet be...

    So this list of World Cup ships, especially those that are quite outdated, is unlikely to impress anyone except the brainless jingoists who have flooded the forum.

    The American gives a real and pragmatic assessment of the military potential and capabilities of Russia, if you don’t like it, it’s another question, but there’s no point in engaging in mischief, conclusions must be drawn - the funds that are being stolen in the Russian Federation by a gang led by Commanders-in-Chief Yeltsin-Putin-Medvedev-Putin would be more than enough and for the modernization of the fleet and army, and for the construction of a normal strong state, ships, if we also add what is being stolen now when fulfilling defense orders, stolen from generals and admirals to ensign, the sums will be fantastic.
    In a conflict with conventional weapons, Russia will not be able to withstand NATO, and strategic nuclear forces are not a fact that they will be used, it is not a fact that the lion’s share will not be destroyed in the first phase, everything on the ground including strategic aviation is an easy target, the submarines are minuscule (compared to USSR) and they almost constantly hang around in bases where they are vulnerable.
    1. Arabist
      +2
      7 September 2013 17: 13
      Captain Obvious directly points out that it is incorrect to compare the 1st Black Sea Fleet with the entire Turkish fleet. Do you seriously think that our ships will be sunk?
    2. 0
      7 September 2013 18: 01
      I agree that our fleet is not going through its best days, but in fairness, indicate the years of creation of the Turkish fleet and the fact that most of these ships were purchased from third countries (not even the USA, standard practice when it is better to sell obsolete weapons than to dispose of them). There is no need to exaggerate. Comparing our fleet with others (unfortunately, I rely only on textual information; neither the French nor the English fleet can be touched), I think that we are not inferior to anyone except the United States.
  81. GREAT RUSSIA
    -6
    7 September 2013 17: 21
    Russia is at the level of Belgium,” Sivkov told the VZGLYAD newspaper.
    It’s his brains that are at the level of a cobblestone, damn it. He should be quartered. How dare he talk about RUSSIA like that. RUSSIA is worth more than 70 Belgium in its potential, military power and territory. Damn it. I sincerely apologize, I lost my temper, I apologize in advance if I violated the rules of the site, don’t judge strictly, I just lose my temper if such things are said about our HOMELAND.
    According to him, with the current composition of the armed forces, Russia is capable of solving tasks in no more than two armed conflicts on a Chechen scale.
    It’s his brains that can barely solve two children’s equations for 5th grade. Let this Western liberal remain silent, they should shoot him.
    1. Conepatus
      +5
      7 September 2013 17: 39
      Maybe we can justify it, or is there nothing else that comes to mind other than patriotism?
    2. GREAT RUSSIA
      0
      7 September 2013 19: 28
      COMRADES downvoted me for telling the truth, does anyone think that RUSSIA is equal in potential to Belgium, or did I understand something wrong?
  82. -2
    7 September 2013 17: 24
    "Will be destroyed within 20 minutes"

    Think. that they are lying when they say so. If everything were so simple, then we, the survivors, would have been living on reservations for a long time, and the most active ones would have been in Guantanamo. But apparently the Yankees have little guts, they only have enough enthusiasm for the ritual dances “oh, what cool warriors”, maybe the enemies will get scared and run away. Yes, and the Yankee nation, sewn like a patchwork quilt from emigrants and refugees from all over the world, is brave where there is an opportunity to rob without the risk of paying with life, but no one is going to risk life for the values ​​of the nation consisting of baseball and hamburger.
    So there is no need to bury us, we will still live, and God willing, we will admire the wreckage of the “Yellow Devil Empire”
    As one song says:
    Planes fly, ships sail,
    The wreckage of New York in the dust of the sky.
    My whole life floats by as if in a dream,
    And you look at the sky - there are stars on fire.

    And in the open field the Grad system,
    Putin and Stalingrad are behind us.
  83. +9
    7 September 2013 17: 37
    My mother is a senior midshipman in the reserve. She is 73 years old. Then, the other day, I saw on TV on the news how our ships are passing through the Turkish straits." Yes, for such rust on board (about the Minsk), in our time the captain would have been punished blackboard!"
    What I mean is that we really, except for the nuclear baton, have no more arguments to be considered a superpower. I say this without gloating, with sadness. Due to the nature of my specialty, I have to visit “defense” factories throughout Russia. I have not only been to Sarov (Arzamas-16). The general impression can be described in one word - TROUBLE! No one cares, hard workers are paid light wages for hard work, hence the attitude towards the results of their work.
    The new technology that all the media are buzzing about exists in a maximum of 10 copies of each item.
    I’m afraid that Russia has already reached the stage when, due to the catastrophic failure of the 90s, an industrial breakthrough no less than the breakthrough of the 30s is needed.
    Here are just two questions:
    1. How much will this cost the country and the ordinary people inhabiting it?
    2. Will we have time?
  84. +2
    7 September 2013 17: 47
    The article doesn’t add any optimism, however, what did we want? For so many years the Armed Forces have been stubbornly ending, downsizing, “optimizing.” Everything is sad with the fleet, aviation is just beginning to revive, but the ground forces are still at the level of fun, may the participants in the discussion of the article forgive me .Every day...I look at this. So there remains hope for the rocket scientists. At this stage, of course, because 2020 is still far away, and America is already reaching out with its sweaty little hands to someone else’s and clicking its teeth. Well, never mind, Russia has always won. As a tanker, I congratulate all tankers on our holiday!
  85. +1
    7 September 2013 17: 58
    According to him, Russia still has elements that allow it to position itself as a superpower. “For example, a continuing nuclear arsenal. But in the field of conventional weapons, I would not include Russia in this category, ”the general said.
    Konstantin Sivkov, the first vice-president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, does not consider Dempsey’s statement on Russia's military potential in the field of conventional weapons far removed from reality. “I would say that Russia is not part of the“ middle-aged ”powers, if we take the ratio of military potential and area. Russia is at the level of Belgium, ”Sivkov told the VIEW newspaper.

    There was so much scum in the Academy.
    There have never been so many donkeys in the Academy as under the liberals. It’s clear why Dempsey is lying; he needs to get permission to feed the American symbol, the corpse-eating eagle. But how many bucks does Sivkov lie for?
    Like there at Pushkin:
    Prince Dunduk sits at the Academy of Sciences
    They say that it is not according to Dunduk's rank that he has such an honor
    Why is he sitting? Because there is a wife.
    In 1944, on the Western Front, the Americans had a 15-fold superiority over the Germans in aviation, an overwhelming superiority in armored vehicles and manpower, but their successes were negligible. The Germans beat them.
  86. +1
    7 September 2013 18: 19
    Well, 20 or 20, but that’s for sure that they will destroy it. But the outpost should not stand for more than 15 minutes. How long did the border guards stand? and WWII and on the Tajik border. Not a single calculation takes into account the human factor. In 80, 2 small ships intimidated an American cruiser.
  87. Druid
    0
    7 September 2013 18: 23
    Quote: ksv1973
    1. How much will this cost the country and the ordinary people inhabiting it?
    It will be expensive, you quote the 30s yourself, so the answer is in history.
    The question is, why bring the country to the brink every time, why does the population, even out of a sense of self-preservation, behave like a passenger and surrender to the power of boors?...
  88. +1
    7 September 2013 18: 41
    Quote: ksv1973
    Will we have time?

    No, as history shows, Russia faces the war unprepared, suffers losses, learns to fight as it should, learns, and then the war ends
    1. 0
      22 February 2014 19: 15
      Russia is learning, but the population is decreasing...
  89. phase 711
    +1
    7 September 2013 18: 41
    This general is very confident in his American superiority. This is the manner of behavior of the arrogant Saxons - before a fight, their eyes sparkle and their teeth grind at press conferences. They make loud statements - they are testing the strength of their diapers.
    1. 0
      7 September 2013 20: 46
      phase 711 This general is very confident in his American superiority. This is the manner of behavior of the arrogant Saxons - before a fight, their eyes sparkle and their teeth grind at press conferences. They make loud statements - they are testing the strength of their diapers.
      I completely agree with you. He probably forgot that in Vietnam the US army numbered 1,5 million with the most modern equipment and means at that time against a poorly armed, unprepared army of the Vietnamese (practically partisans). Only then did the USSR begin to help them. And the Yankees fled, abandoning their vaunted equipment. They tried to hold out by using prohibited chemical weapons and something more serious, but in the end they left “without a sip” in defeat. There is a good saying: “not all that glitters is gold” and not everything can be judged from the point of view of a “huckster” or an armchair general!
  90. +3
    7 September 2013 18: 42
    All this is so (probably), but for THEM....., and for US..... A small question, why then did the USA screw up all the military conflicts (they made a mess, but “on horseback to Triumphalnaya to the sounds of fanfare " never entered anywhere. And the fact that they are going to reduce the AUG (it is too expensive to feed such an armada) speaks volumes. The fact that rumors about super modern weapons of the US Army are rumors also speaks volumes. Basically for their mass, their equipment is also not new, modernized - yes, but not new. Even in the first Iraqi company, the famous Raptors were used only when all Iraqi air defenses were disabled. It is understandable, this aircraft costs a lot , it’s a pity. And all of their DARPA developments exist only in the form of prototypes, mass deliveries to the army - with pitchforks on the water. All these lasers, railguns - where is it all? And knowledgeable people understand perfectly well that DARPA is in its purest form SAW. Our Serdyukov is resting. There are guys in a compartment with warriors with big stars on their shoulder straps - they are not sawing like a child. So........there are more questions than answers here.
    1. Arabist
      0
      7 September 2013 18: 53
      The Raptor was never used at all.
    2. +3
      7 September 2013 20: 40
      Quote: Averias
      The fact that rumors about super modern weapons of the US Army are just rumors also says a lot. For the most part, their equipment is not new either, modernized - yes, but not new.

      So it is, the US Army is armed with mostly equipment from the 70s and 80s, only attack aircraft have been modernized, and even then there are not many new aircraft models.
      The US Army numbers about half a million soldiers and officers, including the National Guard. Tanks are complete bullshit infantry weapons too, but there are a lot of them.
      They dealt with Iraq and Serbia due to their overwhelming technical and numerical superiority.
      Neither Iraq nor Serbia had an industry capable of producing modern weapons, and to buy enough ammunition for long-term defense, too much money was needed.
      In the war with Syria, the Yankees calculated how long the purchased missiles and ammunition for air defense systems would last Assad if Syria was constantly bombarded with cruise missiles.
      And then it will be possible to calmly bomb Syria with conventional bombs from outdated aircraft without risking anything.
      1. 0
        8 September 2013 12: 51
        They forgot to add one more important point, namely, corruption and subjugation in the same Iraq, 1 million dollars were spent on bribing the generals at the prices of that time.
  91. 0
    7 September 2013 18: 49
    Quote: Deniska999
    But still it is necessary to improve the fleet. In addition, in modern warfare, it is necessary to build air defense and missile defense, during the Soviet Union there were many, but then everything was disbanded.

    I completely agree! No one doubts that the fortitude of the Russian/Russian soldier is one of the highest on the planet (most likely the highest), but unfortunately, the specifics of modern war are such that personal heroism decides little. What can a unit/ship of soldiers/sailors (even the most heroic ones) do if it is bombarded with shells/bombs from a height of several kilometers or from a distance of several tens of kilometers? He can only die heroically... What is needed is modern equipment and weapons, powerful and massive cover by aviation, armored vehicles and artillery (single units do not count), satellite support, tactical missiles without weapons of mass destruction in huge quantities. And here, unfortunately, we are very far behind the states - 20 years of collapse will remind of themselves for a long time. You can, of course, remember about nuclear weapons, but their use is only possible in the event of direct aggression against Russia (GOD forbid!). In the case of Syria, you can’t count on it. The answer will follow immediately, do not forget that games with nuclear weapons have two directions - NATO (especially the USA) also has an abundance of nuclear weapons.
    They’ll probably give me a bunch of downsides, but I’ll still say - we need to be realistic, you can’t win a modern war with heroism alone. In the event of a direct clash with the Americans (without weapons of mass destruction), we will most likely lose. At the moment this is the case... Unfortunately...
  92. -3
    7 September 2013 18: 52
    3,141596here - not carry bags.
    Still, we need to give the United States a knee in the ass. Well, we must!
  93. Druid
    +3
    7 September 2013 18: 54
    Quote: HollyGremlin
    I think that we are not inferior to anyone except the USA.
    You are right, but with one caveat, this was the situation in the late 80s and early 90s with the USSR Navy. If you notice that it is now 2013, that means almost a quarter of a century has passed.
    The Turks raised their military-industrial complex and followed the Western path, which involves cooperation, rather than the creation of an autonomous and self-sufficient military-industrial complex, which is both expensive and ineffective. Russia is inferior to the USSR, does not have strong allies with a developed economy and industry and is an outcast in the West, and it is simply impossible to develop all types of weapons in modern conditions; even if there are enough “brains”, it is very expensive and unaffordable. Although, of course, it is possible to again drive the people into communal apartments into a semi-impoverished state and direct all resources to the military-industrial complex, the only BUT is that then these people from communal apartments will not be able to cope with the operation of even the simplest modern weapons systems.
    The Turkish military-industrial complex is part of the Western military-industrial complex and has gradually moved in a number of areas and is still moving in others from procurement, licensed production to its own developments, but again saturated with components, units and production systems of partner countries. In short, the Turks grew a SCHOOL, while in the Russian Federation it was ruined due to well-known events and reasons. What the Turkish Navy already has now, plus plans for 2015 and 2020, suggests that the Russian Federation simply will not have time to catch up with Turkey at this stage, for example, the latest submarine was launched at the end of the last decade, and it is just in the World Cup.
    This is not an ode to the Turks, just reality.
    1. 0
      7 September 2013 20: 33
      Ayay, more specifically. We have plans, but for now:
      1. Half of Turkey’s submarines are from the 80s (30 years), all submarines were created according to designs from the 70s
      2. Most of the frigates are also from the 80s, there are also from the 70s and XNUMXs
      3. Corvettes are also from the 80s
      Perhaps my data is outdated, then please let me know.
  94. geto123
    0
    7 September 2013 19: 05
    20 years lost(
  95. 0
    7 September 2013 19: 11
    Hello! Feel this word. And it doesn’t matter when, who and where they repeatedly talked about such “20” minutes. I am proud of my country, I live in it, I am proud of its history: with victories and defeats, achievements and mistakes - this is my country. Our country has been repeatedly tortured for its strength at all times, but we live, raise children and grandchildren, and I really hope that our children will continue our work. The topic SYRIA raised a tsunami, this suggests that prudence is still beginning to prevail, despite the borders of countries and other differences. Everyone understands perfectly well the consequences of the unleashed (God forbid) war. This war will have NO borders! This is the worst thing. And at the posts: whether we have time or not, who has more. No, people, today the fate of the world will be decided by wisdom, prudence, conviction of rightness, the will of the people themselves who now need to decide which world to live in - in bloom or in radioactive debris? And we need to decide this now if we want our children to have a future. Hello people!
  96. 0
    7 September 2013 19: 15
    "WASHINGTON, September 7. The author of the idea of ​​a missile strike on Syria, American President Barack Obama, may abandon his plans, reports the Washington political publication The Daily Caller. In an interview with reporters, the president said that he does not seek armed intervention.

    Moreover, he hinted that he might cancel the vote in Congress altogether, Vesti reports. “Some members of Congress proposed giving the Syrian regime 45 days to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention and destroy stockpiles of toxic substances. In general, Syria must do everything to ensure that the international community is convinced of the responsibility of this country and renounces military action,” he said Obama.
    More details: http://www.rosbalt.ru/main/2013/09/07/1173045.html "

    Obama seems to have found a loophole to avoid getting involved in this matter; if you really go down this path and give Assad weapons of mass destruction, then the country can be saved
  97. -3
    7 September 2013 19: 36
    These are, in fact, the consequences of a thoughtless policy in equipping our naval forces and army. Submarines and surface ships sold to fucking India, China and others like them are not good food for a horse. And in our fleet they were so useful. Arms dealers are traitors number 1!!
  98. ork
    ork
    +2
    7 September 2013 19: 50
    Quote: Muadipus
    Georgia in 2008 also bought fashionable gadgets and considered itself equipped with the latest technology, but only could not buy an "iron point". We know the result.

    This is not a war - this is a tragedy. The fraternal people were part of the RUSSIAN EMPIRE for more than 200 years. How did politicians on both sides allow tanks to become the final argument????? And who will guarantee that this will not happen again??!!
  99. 0
    7 September 2013 20: 01
    Well, their military has their own plans, ours have theirs. Something tells me the plans of our military will unpleasantly surprise the Americans.
  100. +1
    7 September 2013 20: 17
    Quote: Gato
    Quote: Mikhail3
    No one will cancel the naval inverse proportion - the combat effectiveness of the ship is inversely proportional to its size.

    belay
    Well, what academies teach this? It’s even somehow scary to imagine the combat effectiveness of the motor boat "Progress"

    Actually the boat was a little larger than the Progress. hi

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"