Military Review

New threats - new solutions

59
New threats - new solutionsThere is reason to believe that the Russian leadership will henceforth consider the main strategic threat not US / NATO missile defense, but US offensive non-nuclear offensive precision weapons (“NVO” No. 44, 29.11.13). It is obvious that the system and the program of the aerospace defense of Russia are primarily aimed at repelling an impact using these systems. In June 2013, President Putin said: "An effective aerospace defense is a guarantee of the stability of our strategic deterrent forces, covering the country's territory from aerospace attack weapons."


EXISTING THREATS

As is known, now on submarines, cruisers and destroyers of the USA there are about 3 thousand subsonic sea-based cruise missiles (SLCM) of the “Tomahawk” type of various modifications with a conventional warhead and range to 1800 km, and also about 500 air-based subsonic cruise missiles (ALCM) with a range of 1500 km (AGM-86 C / D).

Not to mention the political and economic realities in which the likelihood of war between the United States and Russia is vanishingly small, even in a purely military sense, a disarming strike using such systems on the Russian strategic nuclear forces is an extremely doubtful concept. His training will take too much time and will be noticeable to the other side, which will give her the opportunity to maximize the combat readiness of their troops and forces.

The attack itself will be extended over time for many hours or even days (unlike 20 – 40 minutes using nuclear ballistic missiles), which will allow the other side to strike back with a nuclear strike.

However, if there is any doubt that a nuclear weaponVKO can be very useful. With proper information and control support, systems like the Pantsir-С1 and С-400 can apparently protect mobile and stationary nuclear deterrence devices from cruise missiles. In any case, the aerospace defense systems will give more time for decision-making and will introduce considerable uncertainty in the plans for disarming strikes.

In addition, in the USA, new systems are being developed at various experimental stages in the framework of the Fast Global Impact (BSU) program. They can be put into service after the 2020 year. Such means include tests of rocket-planning (or aeroballistic) systems with hypersonic vehicles like HTV-2 (Hypersonic Technology Vehicle) with an expected range of up to 17 thousand km (speed up to 20М) and AHW (Advanced Hypersonic Vehicle) with a given range up to 8 thous. km The first can be based in the United States, and the second - on the islands of Guam, Diego Garcia, ships or submarines. Both systems use ballistic acceleration stages and guided maneuvering hypersonic gliding devices. The HTV-2 tests were unsuccessful, allocations for it were cut, but experiments with AHV continue.

An intermediate-range ballistic medium-range ballistic missile (SLIRBM) with planning or maneuvering warheads (range up to 3 km), which can be placed on ships and submarines, is also being designed. In parallel and outside the framework of the BSU program, hypersonic testing aviation X-51A WaveRader cruise missile (range 1800 km, speed 5M).

At the same time, as in the case of missile defense, Washington justifies these weapon systems with the needs of the struggle against extremist regimes (Iran, North Korea) and terrorists. Independent Western experts allow the intention to use them in the event of an armed conflict with China. But in Russia they do not believe this and regard the current and future long-range American means in conventional equipment as a threat to the Russian potential for nuclear deterrence.

Apparently, it was precisely such systems that Putin had in mind when he wrote in his article: “All this, along with nuclear weapons, will allow to obtain qualitatively new tools for achieving political and strategic goals. Such weapons systems will be comparable in terms of use with nuclear weapons, but more “acceptable” politically and militarily. Thus, the role of the strategic balance of nuclear forces in deterring aggression and chaos will gradually decrease. ”

Although the destructive power of the latest conventional means never even remotely close to nuclear weapons, both in delivering a disarming strike at protected targets and for strikes against industrial and populated zones, the concern of the Russian leadership about a whole “bush” of such projects and tests is quite understandable.

True, all these systems cannot be called aerospace, since they go into space at lower altitudes and distances than the current ICBMs and SLBMs. The likelihood of a disarming strike with the use of such systems on a nuclear superpower is as dubious in political and military terms as it is with the current subsonic cruise missiles. However, technically, missile-planning systems pose specific additional problems for the defense of Russia.

PERSPECTIVE SYSTEMS

Modern strategic ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads have a higher speed (21 – 22М) and shorter flight time (15 – 30 min), they are difficult to defend against, but their trajectories are predictable, they attack only programmed targets, their launch is trapped by satellites in the first minutes flight and is confirmed by ground-based radars for 10 – 15 minutes before the fall of the warheads. Accordingly, the possibility of a retaliatory strike remains, and mobile ground and sea rocket means have a chance to survive and strike back.

Rocket planning systems, like ballistic missiles, can be detected from satellites, but after that they enter the stratosphere and fly at hypersonic speed along unpredictable routes. Because of the lower trajectory than the ICBMs and SLBMs, SPRN radars will detect them only in 3 – 4 minutes before approach, and air defense radars due to high speed — in 3 minutes and less.

According to Russian specialists, the US missile planning systems are dangerous because, for most of their trajectories, they fall into the “blind zone” between the missile defense and air defense warning systems.

Compared to current cruise missiles, future hypersonic ALCMs can be detected at a longer range due to a higher flight path, but their speed will make it much more difficult to intercept. It remains unclear and controversial the question of whether the accuracy of these means will be sufficient for destruction of protected objects (ICBM mines, command posts) and whether they will be able to destroy ground-mobile systems. This will require an adjustment from satellites or aircraft in the final segment of the trajectory, which will give the other side the possibility of electronic countermeasures. In addition, it is unclear whether these costly assets will be deployed in sufficient quantities (many hundreds of units) to create a threat to the Russian strategic deterrent forces.

However, military and civilian officials responsible for the defense of Russia are obliged to consider the worst option. It is not excluded that even the possibility of nuclear equipment of rocket-planning systems will be allowed, which will solve the problem of pointing accuracy on the final trajectory, in any case, for hitting stationary objects. (But then the gain will be lost in terms of greater "acceptability" of their use politically and militarily compared to nuclear weapons, which Putin wrote about.) The specificity of the rocket-planning means trajectory may make it difficult to carry out an ICBM retaliatory strike - or they will have to be launched after receiving a signal from satellites without confirming the attack by ground-based radars. This will increase the likelihood of war due to false alarm.

As can be judged, in order to protect the military-political leadership of Russia from ballistic missiles and rocket-planning weapons, the Moscow A-135 missile defense system is being modernized under a non-nuclear intercept system. And to cover the SNF objects from hypersonic cruise missiles, anti-aircraft complexes С-500 are designed, which for this purpose should be integrated into a single information and control system with space-based and ground-based missile systems.

ON THE AGENDA - HYPERSOUND AND ACCURACY

If a political “window of opportunity” opens in the future, the key to breaking the current impasse in strategic negotiations will not be an agreement on missile defense, but agreements on the latest offensive long-range systems in non-nuclear equipment. It seems that the threat of such strike weapons most of all prompts Moscow to negatively react to US proposals to continue reducing strategic nuclear weapons following the new START Treaty and limit non-strategic (tactical) nuclear weapons.

To pose a threat of a disarming strike, new hypersonic non-nuclear means must be deployed in large numbers (at least several hundred units). Their inclusion in strategic ceilings will significantly reduce the scale of their deployment so as not to “restrain” the future US nuclear triad after the 2020 year. There is a precedent in the new START Treaty of 2010 - strategic ballistic missiles are limited to the Treaty ceilings, regardless of the class of their warheads - nuclear or conventional.

It will be much more difficult, but not impossible, to reconcile confidence-building measures and restrictions of this kind in relation to current cruise missiles and promising hypersonic ALCMs. For example, since submarines with SLCM, unlike strategic missile carriers, are not on permanent combat duty at sea, it would be possible to coordinate notification measures about the mass (freelance) launch of multi-purpose SLCM carriers with the explanation of the reasons for such actions. Similar measures should be taken with respect to mass airborne or movement of heavy bombers with non-nuclear ALCM to the forward bases. These confidence-building measures would remove concerns about the threat of clandestine preparation and a sudden disarming strike using thousands of conventional cruise missiles.

Another serious problem is related to the development of AHV hypersonic and medium range ballistic missile (SLIRBM) systems for basing on the islands of Guam, Diego Garcia, ships or multipurpose submarines. If in terms of distance they do not fall under the limitations of the next START treaty (as suggested above), they will be perceived in Russia as a new threat, similar to the American ground-launched cruise missiles and Pershing-2 missiles in the early 1980s. This will finally undermine the most important and historically significant INF Treaty of 1987, against which the campaign is already conducted in Russia. The solution would be to prohibit land-based systems with a range of less than 5500 km (lower range limit for the ICBM offset under the START Treaty) and apply the above measures of confidence to submarines and ships equipped with such percussion systems.

It would also be useful to take control measures designed to eliminate the nuclear equipment of hypersonic systems, which Moscow will most likely worry about.

As for defensive systems, if the above considerations are true, the Russian program and the future system of aerospace defense can be considered quite stabilizing in the context of a basic understanding of strategic stability (as a state of strategic relations between the parties, in which the first disarming strike is impossible). It is a pity that such explanations are not presented at the official level, but instead superficial arguments are repeated that the Russian ASD is better than the US missile defense system, since it is not built abroad and is not supplied to the US borders.

The US missile defense system and its allies are not capable of repelling any large-scale nuclear missile strike, but, being designed to protect the territory and developing as an “open continuation” program, it creates a much greater uncertainty in the long run. It can be removed by agreeing on confidence-building measures and certain quantitative, technical and geographical criteria that would separate the stabilizing system against third countries from the destabilizing missile defense system against each other.

On this basis, Russia and the United States should begin a substantive conversation about new principles of strategic stability. Strengthening strategic stability will become increasingly important as nuclear weapons decline, which implies a steady increase in their survivability through mobility and active defenses.

In the case of a significant limitation of the newest offensive non-nuclear weapons of the United States, the Russian aerospace defense could be to some extent reoriented to other important and realistic tasks: protecting the population and industry from single or group, missile and aviation, nuclear and non-nuclear strikes from third countries, radical regimes and of terrorists. Moreover, for these purposes it is possible to use the same technology of aerospace defense with much greater efficiency, but with a wider geography of deployment. Then there will be conditions for combining some elements of the EWS, and later on missile defense in order to increase the effectiveness of national systems in the fight against new, common missile threats.

With political will and serious strategic and technical expertise, a demarcation line can be drawn between the stability of the central strategic balance and regional military objectives, combining contractual restrictions, confidence-building measures and transparency. Over forty years old stories arms control parties were able to solve problems and more difficult.
Author:
Originator:
http://nvo.ng.ru/
59 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. alone
    alone 7 December 2013 15: 50
    21
    Americans and no one in the world openly climb against Russia, as long as Russia has a strategic missile force. No one has survived. Everyone wants to live. In order to do harm, there will always be those who sell their homeland for a loaf of bread.
    1. Humpty
      Humpty 7 December 2013 16: 03
      +7
      The problem is that they survive quite regularly from the mind. With Yushchenko did not pass, with the Georgian Fuhrer it turned out. There is no guarantee in the sanity of certain heads of state. What is your homegrown elchibei worth?
      1. alone
        alone 7 December 2013 16: 27
        +1
        generally, dead or good, or nothing. well, you can say about him that this person did not want to be president, he was just pushed there by his entourage. I must say the country did not leave, and did not touch it. 2000th the prostate gland died of cancer.
      2. DimychDV
        DimychDV 7 December 2013 22: 06
        +1
        The Kyrgyz will go to war, "for NOT FIG." The Taliban will lead their "Barbarossa" from the south - they say, the waters of the northern rivers - into the Afghan desert! The Uzbeks will join under the green banner. Next on passenger planes will fly: a) Poles, b) Kosovar Albanians, c) Croats, d) from Syria and Libya will transfer all the Mujahideen. e) Georgians, f) zapadEntsi ... Who will miss such a holiday, such a "Feast to the spirit"! It’s in vain, perhaps, America has been heating up the all-Muslim node in our underbelly for the third decade ... And the Polish Catholic, Ukrainian Greek Catholic and pseudo-Muslim terrorist are brothers in faith, and maybe blood ...
    2. The comment was deleted.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Army1
      Army1 7 December 2013 17: 31
      +8
      2:40 Tu-160 work on ground targets with X-55 missiles
      1. SHILO
        SHILO 7 December 2013 20: 01
        -1
        Test video. However, the slide rule was not pleasantly surprised! what
        1. andr327
          andr327 7 December 2013 21: 47
          +2
          Yes, the video is cool, but where did the three TU-160 come from, now it seems we have only two flying.
          and the slide rule has the highest calculation speed: after entering the data, the result is instantly, without any nanoseconds, alas, alas, the input of this data is difficult, but plus absolute noise immunity and independence from any external factors, and who knows what was calculated there.
          1. Vadivak
            Vadivak 8 December 2013 22: 05
            +1
            Quote: andr327
            TU-160, it seems that now only two fly.


            In April, 4. flew, and it was not so much the age of the cars (now much older vehicles fly too), but the lack of maintenance during their life cycle associated with poor financing of the army and the Air Force. The main problem is that the life of NK engines is exhausted on most aircraft -32. In two years, the Samara OAO Kuznetsov repaired only four engines. The manufacture of new NK-32 engines, as well as the development and release of its subsequent series, have not been made for more than 10 years.

            But it’s far from news that the modern air forces of most countries are, in general, half not combat ready. The Americans (as they say) are ready - 70% of the fleet.
        2. Aleksey_K
          Aleksey_K 7 December 2013 23: 17
          -8
          Quote: SHILO
          Test video. However, the slide rule was not pleasantly surprised! what

          I think that you are very mistaken about the slide rule. Since the Tu-160 is not equipped with modern computers, the navigator, measuring the distance, determines the time of approach, fuel consumption, takes into account the headwind, flight altitude and other parameters. It's a shame that stupid Tupolevs for all this time (30-40 years) have not modernized the Tu-160.
          1. Sirocco
            Sirocco 8 December 2013 05: 09
            +7
            Quote: Алексей_К
            . It's a shame that stupid Tupolevites for all this time (30-40 years) have not modernized the Tu-160.

            Tupolevs are WISE, and not like yours, electronics are influenced from outside, and NL-10 is eternal. How many modern navigators and rafts can work with a map on their knees and use a sim device? That is the question.
        3. vlad0
          vlad0 8 December 2013 22: 13
          +2
          This "slide rule" is called the NL-10 navigation ruler. Any self-respecting navigator will double-check the data received from the car.
      2. kind
        kind 8 December 2013 08: 34
        0
        They shot at mine, at the abandoned mining town of Halmer-Yu in the north.
    4. mivmim
      mivmim 7 December 2013 17: 43
      +6
      Quote: lonely
      Americans and no one in the world openly climb against Russia

      Well do not tell. A 08.08.08. There are enough idiots, there’s already a nickname with sukashvili. And God forbid he crawls out to the presidency, and what can this broken inadequate come up with.
      1. Sergh
        Sergh 7 December 2013 19: 08
        +3
        Quote: mivmim
        there’s a nickname with sukashvili already met. And God forbid he crawls out for president

        So I can tell the Ukrainians the topic:
        even the week before the election, the pictures on the shop windows will be stuck, and they will be accompanied by a peculiar text ... and there is no President Klitschka.



        Incidentally, there is a large selection from the magazine MAX.
        1. Sax
          Sax 7 December 2013 22: 46
          0
          Do you think that Ukrainians are dumber than you? No.
        2. AVV
          AVV 7 December 2013 23: 17
          +1
          But propaganda of blueness is forbidden in our country, I don’t know how it’s independent, but everything is clear with hidden text, it even covered blue !!! For the presidential race, a good portfolio for Klitschko !!!
      2. Vasek
        Vasek 7 December 2013 19: 56
        +1
        Quote: mivmim
        there’s a nickname with sukashvili

        Interestingly, does Mishan have the same "cute" pictures as his nickname?
        wassat Or do they "meet" on another occasion? wassat
        People meet
        People fall in love
        Getting married ...
    5. Vadivak
      Vadivak 7 December 2013 21: 23
      +2
      Quote: ....
      Another major problem is the development of hypersonic systems


      This is with them, but what about us?

      In Russia, tests of hypersonic weapons are being conducted, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said at a meeting with students in Irkutsk today. I can say that the tests are underway, they are completely closed to both the Americans and us, ”he said, adding that in this area Russia is not behind the United States.
      Conducting a review of the state of the Russian military-industrial complex, Rogozin replied that Russia to this day remains the undisputed leader in the field of nuclear research. The most problematic sector, in his opinion, can be called the element base. The leadership of the country is determined to restore this gap in the coming years, he assured.
      1. alone
        alone 7 December 2013 22: 26
        0
        laughing you know what you remembered: Cartoon "One peas, two peas" lol
        1. Aleksey_K
          Aleksey_K 7 December 2013 23: 22
          -3
          Yes, Rogozin is rapidly gaining hyper-thickness!
  2. q_556
    q_556 7 December 2013 16: 18
    +4
    Do not forget that nuclear weapons do not last forever. Sooner or later, more effective means of attack and deterrence will appear, and we cannot forever rely on the Strategic Missile Forces.
    1. rrrd
      rrrd 7 December 2013 17: 31
      +4
      we will not live! at least another 50 years. will be an ace up your sleeve. an acquaintance told, was at exercises in Semipalatinsk. Says it's just awful! the earth from under the feet at a safe distance leaves, speaks as if the end of the world is coming.
      1. saxa2103
        saxa2103 8 December 2013 01: 06
        0
        tip to your tongue
    2. Vadivak
      Vadivak 7 December 2013 21: 26
      +4
      Quote: q_556
      Sooner or later, more effective means of attack and deterrence will appear,


      X-90 / GELA (AS-19 "Koala")
      hypersonic experimental aircraft

      . The device is about 12 m long and equipped with a hypersonic jet engine using hydrocarbon fuel. Its launch is carried out from a carrier aircraft Tu-95. After the GEL is reset, a triangular folding wing and vertical tail are opened, a solid-fuel engine is launched, which is located in the scramjet combustion chamber and accelerates the apparatus to supersonic speed. Then, a marching engine is launched, providing cruising hypersonic flight at M = 4-5. The MAKS-99 showed the HLL created at the Raduga Design Bureau, equipped with a kerosene ramjet engine that has no analogues in the world. The device can make a long (3400 sec!) Marching flight with speeds M = 2.3–4.5 at altitudes from 8 to 27 km.
      1. andr327
        andr327 7 December 2013 21: 53
        +2
        Comrades, do not confuse the means of delivery and means of destruction. Here, alas, there is no alternative to nuclear weapons, if it’s already craving, then it will not seem enough. From everything else you can find protection.
  3. AK-47
    AK-47 7 December 2013 16: 40
    +2
    Putin said: "An effective aerospace defense is a guarantee of the sustainability of our strategic deterrence forces and the protection of our country's territory from aerospace attack equipment."

    It is gratifying that the top leadership of Russia sees the existing threats and takes measures to neutralize them.
  4. andrei332809
    andrei332809 7 December 2013 17: 01
    0
    best defense is attack. but this option does not suit us
    1. Jurkovs
      Jurkovs 8 December 2013 08: 16
      0
      There is some kind of inferiority in our national identity. Instead of creating our own threats, we are constantly looking for answers to other people's threats.
  5. avg
    avg 7 December 2013 17: 08
    +4
    Given political will and serious strategic and technical expertise, a dividing line can be drawn between the stability of the central strategic balance and regional military tasks, combining contractual restrictions, confidence-building measures and transparency. For more than forty years of the history of arms control, the parties have been able to solve problems even harder.

    It is strange that such an experienced person like Alexei Arbatov does not understand, or pretends that he does not understand, that the Americans are only negotiating when they see that the neighbor’s club is cooler.
    And in the foreseeable future, nothing portends that their views will change. And therefore, you first need to take care of your weighty club. This will be the political will and the main argument in any negotiations with mattresses. This is what the forty-year history of arms control confirms.
  6. MolGro
    MolGro 7 December 2013 17: 10
    +4
    Is it strange that the author does not take into account the possibility of developing the same hyper missiles in our country?
    The same project "cold" - gel (x90)!, "Needle" and "cold 2" ??
    The maximum that is known is about Bramos 2 and the name of the projects is everything.
    But this is enough to conclude that the work is blown out in this direction.
    The advent of maneuvering warheads also affected the balance of power!
    And much more that we do not know about our harrow, which does not allow us to draw an adequate conclusion, both for us and the enemy)
    1. andrei332809
      andrei332809 7 December 2013 17: 17
      0
      Quote: MolGro
      The maximum that is known is about 2 brahmos

      perhaps in the next year they will experience yes
  7. Andrey57
    Andrey57 7 December 2013 17: 22
    +1
    An intermediate-range ballistic medium-range ballistic missile (SLIRBM) with planning or maneuvering warheads (range up to 3 700 km) is also being designed

    Once again it is confirmed that it is high time to quit the INF Treaty hi
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. colonel77
      colonel77 7 December 2013 20: 15
      +3
      yes ... Pioneer - there was a good car ...
  8. Beck
    Beck 7 December 2013 17: 32
    -3
    Everything is clear here, everything is logical. Not that with missile defense.

    The Americans deployed a missile defense system in Europe, so what was the noise? A missile is a sword, a missile defense is a shield. Missile defense in general may be inactive if missiles do not fly. If there is no desire to launch missiles, then any missile defense on the side, let the Americans bear the costs.

    The answer to the American missile defense system in Europe, in addition to useless noise, is in two versions.
    The first is to build your own missile defense system, better than the American one.
    The second is to build missiles that will overcome missile defense.

    And with this noise it turned out as under Gorbachev. Then there was talk of arms reduction in Europe. The Soviet side had a huge advantage in tanks in Eastern Europe. The West insisted on a significant reduction in tank fleet on both sides. Gorbachev blurted out at some conference - And they have more anti-tank weapons.
    So there will be no tanks and all these TOUs, Milan are useless stuff, you won’t use them for infantry.
    1. Sergh
      Sergh 7 December 2013 18: 45
      +7
      Quote: Beck
      Americans deployed missile defense system in Europe

      However, an old friend wandered ?!
      So after all, he himself answered his own question ... but what have the Americans here (in Europe) forgotten? Actually, probably not only me, but the rest of the majority know that they live on the mainland of North America, and certainly not in Europe. So let them place their missile defense at least in the ass of the Statue of Liberty! Yes, it’s ABM today, and tomorrow it’s not ABM at all.
      But don’t remember about Gorbach, but after all, only after dinner he got out, it would be a pity ...
      1. saxa2103
        saxa2103 8 December 2013 01: 10
        +1
        they worry about the unfortunate Europeans, already their heart shed blood laughing
    2. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 7 December 2013 19: 37
      +3
      Quote: Beck
      The answer to the American missile defense system in Europe, in addition to useless noise, is in two versions.
      The first is to build your own missile defense system, better than the American one.
      The second is to build missiles that will overcome missile defense.

      Why are you modestly silent about the third?
      The third is to strike and destroy the European missile defense system before it is deployed.
      And now let the satellites have a headache: "Why did they agree to the deployment and put themselves under attack?"
      1. saxa2103
        saxa2103 8 December 2013 01: 19
        0
        and also conduct exercises at the border, where, with special cynicism and ecological ecology of morality and ethics, unscramble the missile defense objectives, and put the Euro-media to as close as possible to the center of events
    3. Onyx
      Onyx 7 December 2013 21: 49
      +1
      Quote: Beck
      The Americans deployed a missile defense system in Europe, so what was the noise?

      There is no missile defense, but strike complexes right on our borders. So the host countries run the risk of receiving a nuclear strike on their territory from Russia to destroy this "missile defense". Fortunately, complexes for this business are already being created:
      1. Beck
        Beck 7 December 2013 23: 45
        0
        Quote: Onyx
        There is no missile defense there, but strike complexes right at our borders.


        And that Russian intelligence and technical means cannot distinguish strike systems from missile defense. Yes, if there were shock systems, the world would have long been on the brink of war. Strike systems cannot be deployed under a treaty dated 1988, when American Pershing 1A, Pershing 2, BGM 109G, Russian SS-23, RSD Pioneer, R-12 and R-14 were withdrawn from Europe and destroyed.

        Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
        Why are you modestly silent about the third?
        The third is to strike and destroy the European missile defense system before it is deployed.


        Well, if you want to start a war, strike.

        Quote: Sergh
        and what are the Americans here (in Europe) forgot? Actually, probably not only me, but the rest of the majority know that they live on the mainland of North America, and certainly not in Europe.


        The United States has obligations to NATO partners. Russia had obligations to partners under the Warsaw Pact. When there was the Warsaw Pact, elements of the Russian missile defense were in the GDR, in the NDP, in Czechoslovakia and elsewhere. So who is to blame for the fact that the Warsaw Pact was covered with a basin?
        1. Sergh
          Sergh 8 December 2013 01: 59
          +3
          Quote: Beck
          US has commitments to NATO partners

          Yes, we know how these obligations break through and how they are forced. And the Warsaw Pact put up a barrier already on a fait accompli and the "Caribbean Crisis" did not begin with a balalaika, so at least Nikita after him managed to empty Turkey from the same infection. So remember how much snot and stench there was because of this Cuba, the Americans, along with Kenedy, pissed boiling water, the people dug a bomb shelter on their lawn. Why am I killing myself here, there are all kinds of different movies, well, for example:

          1. Beck
            Beck 8 December 2013 02: 56
            -2
            Quote: Sergh
            Yes, we know how these obligations break through and how they work out.


            And what is mixed. He himself realized that he was heating up?

            What is there to talk about. There were two military units. They put their weapons closer to the borders, on the territory of the allies. Then one block ended, the other continues to function. As part of the operation, obsolete systems are replaced with new ones.

            And the Caribbean crisis would have hit the USSR more. In those days, amers had an overwhelming advantage in warheads and delivery vehicles.
            1. Sergh
              Sergh 8 December 2013 08: 58
              +2
              Quote: Beck
              which is mixed. He himself realized that he was heating up?

              What is there to talk about. There were two military units They set

              Yes, you don’t need to breed and babble here, the fact of the matter is that only America and its military-industrial complex were working for this block, and it means that only the striped flag was put into trusting European suckers, yes, the little English helped . Churchill gave a kick in the ass to Europe on March 5, 1946 in Fulton:
              The security of the world requires a new unity in Europe, from which no side should be repelled forever ...


              So Europe is generally in the tenth row here and nothing depends on it and does not depend on it, and to call it "no way"! To date, nothing has changed, although some have begun to wake up slowly after the famous African events.
              Well, answer the stupid question, why does Poland need missile defense? What the heck is she to him? To "Iskander" or some other fig Russia rolled out to her nose? So, after all, she will be hurt first, yes, so that the spine will fall into panties! And next to it there are still a lot of mischief-makers like Bulgaria and the rest of the small garbage ... Yes, live in peace and no one will touch you, on the contrary, the Americans advised, and even promised money in return every month for snickers, well, how to refuse such a freebie, they will bring it themselves They will supply, build, and give us the work of cooks, they will give us a scrubber (and prostitutes generally have manna from heaven, bucks).
              By itself, nothing happens and the two blocks did not grow like mushrooms after the rain, but Churchill and Truman started it (to the fool), the rest like that; optional.

              But the Caribbean crisis, for whom it is more painful, let’s not talk about it, we weren’t there (although I was already here). And even more so, our SS-4 rocket covered ALL America from Cuba, and there were 60 pieces and more than a hundred warheads, but 8-10 would have been enough for all of America to stand on its ears. And Russia at that time was very big !!!
              1. Beck
                Beck 8 December 2013 15: 07
                0
                Quote: Sergh
                So Europe is generally in the tenth row


                Okay, talked, let's finish on a good note. Each has his own solid opinion. We expressed it. Further conversation may go into bickering, and there, God forbid, to abuse. Do we need this? We come here to listen to others, to express our own.

                All the best.
        2. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 8 December 2013 18: 59
          +3
          Quote: Beck
          Well, if you want to start a war, strike.

          Respected! You are an adult, and if you are also a military man, then you should understand that the launch of ground-based ICBMs of a retaliatory (better, retaliatory-onset) strike will be accompanied by supporting actions, including measures to suppress missile defense. Moreover, not only strategic forces are aimed at this, but also SPETSNAZ groups, aviation, KRBD plARK, etc. Everything is scheduled by the minute, starting from the receipt of the "H" time signal. So, I do not even advise you to doubt about the THIRD option! Supporting actions in the interests of the Strategic Missile Forces in order to fulfill their main task - inflicting a decisive defeat on the enemy by destroying (destroying) his strategic objects - has not been canceled.
          1. Beck
            Beck 9 December 2013 10: 51
            0
            Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
            Respected! You are an adult


            That's why I say that missile defense is a shield, not a sword. And the shield can only reflect blows, and not strike them. There will be no strikes and the shield will be inactive. If there is no desire to strike, then what concern can the size of the shield cause.

            Well, if you want war, strike. I talked about this. Only here who needs a third world war and the last war on the destroyed Earth on the planet.
            1. Boa kaa
              Boa kaa 10 December 2013 15: 17
              +1
              Quote: Beck
              I talked about this.

              If you carefully read what is written in the posts, you probably might have noticed that a blow to missile defense is part of "RESPONSE (better - RESPONSE-COUNTER) strike". For particularly dodgy sophists I explain. This means: a) in response - our ICBMs will start when a blow is struck to us; b) reciprocal-oncoming - the enemy’s ICBMs have not yet reached their goals on our territory, our ICBMs will start. Therefore, in order to guarantee our ICBMs reach enemy territory, it is necessary to destroy Euro-missile defense. For this, a set of supporting actions is carried out. (see above).
              1. Beck
                Beck 10 December 2013 16: 00
                0
                Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
                If you carefully read what is written in the posts,


                Actually, I am for Russia to create the same missile defense system and even better. So that no one would want to launch an ICBM. Compete better in creating shields - missile defense than in rocket launches.

                If the West knows that a concrete-proof, 100% missile defense system has been deployed on the borders of Russia, then the West will never have a desire to launch ICBMs, since it will be useless.
  9. individual
    individual 7 December 2013 17: 37
    -2
    Quote:
    "... will these costly assets be deployed in sufficient numbers (many hundreds) to pose a threat to Russia's strategic containment force."

    Here it must be taken into account that their funds will be aimed at specific goals, and in order to defend themselves against them, it is necessary to cover everything that is vulnerable from outer space with the means of aerospace defense, which means protecting the vast.
    Or they will defend the peace selectively like the offices of Chubais, Dvorkovich, Serdyukov and other "great" people of Russia. fellow
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 7 December 2013 19: 51
      +3
      [quote = individ] their funds will be aimed at specific goals, and in order to defend themselves against them it is necessary to cover everything that is vulnerable from outer space with the means of aerospace defense, which means to protect the immensity. [/ quote]
      You contradict yourself: "their funds will be aimed at specific goals", ie. objects of impact - the essence will be involved in object defense! (Not even zoned!)
      And then write: "in order to defend against them, it is necessary to cover everything that is vulnerable from space with aerospace defense means, which means to protect the immensity. [/ quote] And this is the country's strategic territorial missile defense. I apologize, but this was not even with the great and mighty Union, because the essence is unbearable with economic t.zr. value.
      Therefore, the Moscow A-135 will be supplemented by non-nuclear C-500, which will cover the Shell, well, etc.
      1. SV
        SV 7 December 2013 23: 43
        0
        I don’t think that the enemy will inflict areal attacks on vast Siberia, with the same success it is possible to drive aborigines of the far north across northern expanses with cruise missiles (at the rate of 1 Chukchi - 1 missile) ...
  10. polkownik1
    polkownik1 7 December 2013 17: 39
    +6
    The author inclines our opinion to the fact that stability, i.e. papers signed by the parties, everything can be decided. Such "paper" stability will not solve anything, but will only increase the importance of the surprise factor, which the enemy will sooner or later take advantage of. You cannot slide only to the defense, it is ineffective and ruinous. It is necessary to develop similar striking means that will deprive the enemy of hope for unpunished aggression. This will ensure real stability.
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 7 December 2013 20: 43
      +6
      Dear Colonel, the author has spent his whole life, to put it mildly, the pro-American position as the director of the academic institute of the USA and Canada. He has a special view of the problem of national security and defense of the country. From the filing of politicians such as A. Arbatov, the former political leadership had the illusion of peace in a non-military (diplomatic) way. The truth is that in this case they will have to lie under the States and widely spread their legs (in the sense of disarming and standing in the wake of Uncle Sam), for some reason they were modestly silent. Everyone who pursued an independent foreign policy, all the more so, argued with the United States or posed a threat to the security of the USA - were enemies. Only the Union (RF) could destroy the Yankees, and therefore it was identified as the main enemy. And conversations-talks - to divert eyes.
      Quote: polkownik1
      increase the value of the surprise factor, which the enemy will take advantage of sooner or later.

      Preparation for an attack on the country today is impossible to hide. This is determined by analysts according to all types of intelligence, the state of the armed forces, reactions and behavior of the leaders of the opposing side. The maximum that can be achieved is tactical surprise. But against such a development of events, a system of measures has been developed that includes the introduction of various degrees of BG for the Armed Forces.
      Quote: polkownik1
      Similar striking means must be developed that will deprive the enemy of hope for unpunished aggression.

      What our management does. Meeting of the Supreme Civil Code of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation with the Civil Code of arms and arms in Sochi:
      "In 2014, the Strategic Missile Forces' arsenal should be replenished with 22 ground-based intercontinental ballistic missiles. Moreover, the decision was made to build in Russia not only solid-fuel, but also liquid-propellant heavy missiles, which should replace the systems that have been in service for more than 20 years. V.V. Putin also noted: “They should be not only powerful, but also modern in terms of the possibility of overcoming any missile defense systems today and in the future.” It was also announced that the complex of works on the creation of an air defense system of the fifth the generation of S-500, which will be able to solve missile defense problems. Its complex tests will begin in 2014. And this is a signal to our ill-wishers that Russia is simultaneously forcing the re-equipment of strategic nuclear forces with the latest, more advanced means of delivering nuclear warheads, is rapidly building up its arsenal of high-precision weapons and strengthening Aerospace Defense Troops.http: //nvo.ng.ru/nvo/2013-12-06/2_red.html
      1. Onyx
        Onyx 7 December 2013 21: 58
        +1
        Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
        Moreover, it was said about the decision to build in Russia not only solid fuel, but also liquid heavy rockets

        Did anyone talk about making such a decision?
      2. polkownik1
        polkownik1 7 December 2013 22: 03
        +2
        Thank ! Mr. Arbatov did not doubt the motives and goals. The rest - I really want everything to be that way.
      3. andr327
        andr327 7 December 2013 22: 08
        0
        Meeting of the Supreme Civil Code of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation with the Civil Code of the types and arms of troops in Sochi:
        "in 2014, the arsenal of the Strategic Missile Forces should be replenished with 22 ground-based intercontinental ballistic missiles ..."
        For rocketeers this is a laugh. Even one division of the Strategic Missile Forces is not enough. so there are only two regiments (as far as I remember earlier, for launching 1 regiment, one missile was launched from the series) i.e. already twenty. They probably want to supply YaRSov, but so far everything is in a test-operational cycle. The rocket and ground complex in the complex are a complex thing.
        1. andr327
          andr327 7 December 2013 22: 40
          0
          Unfortunately, the complex approach of the military-industrial complex to the creation of complexes has disappeared.
        2. Sergh
          Sergh 8 December 2013 02: 23
          0
          Quote: andr327
          For rocketeers this is a laugh. Not even one division of the Strategic Missile Forces

          Let me stick with you, I agree with you, but this is if to replace, which are scrapped on time, and if + to those already standing in BG, then it is impossible, because every "kilo" under the contract counts and more than the ceiling, no, no! And after all, from this total amount it is necessary to leave for boats, planes a little, and hide a stash, well, you understand what I mean?
      4. igor.borov775
        igor.borov775 8 December 2013 15: 04
        0
        Gentlemen of Toto, the surname of this leader seemed familiar to me, the Senior Academician Arbatov often traveled on our defenses. I remember. During the years of Gorbaty, he did his best to pour slops on our armed forces with all his might. In the spirit, And the advice that Loudly expressed in Ogonyok so the Yankees were silent afraid to scare luck, And probably there are a lot of them now, Only this year, the military finally got almost everything and immediately got out these types, Vel was explained to everyone to build Pro is expensive not to overpower, but there is a specific project promising and most importantly unique, Who was there about the Yankees missile defense in Europe, Strain your memory and say the AJIS SYSTEM on our border is missile defense, That's why we ran into it, And when they determine in the containers what kind of beast these containers are, the more common the containers are for many systems , Guys it’s time to decide on this missile defense already. On top of it, oddly enough, we decided, especially under Smolensk to be Iran if the Yankov cards do not deceive somehow Mr. Lavrov, our minister said that if everything is okay with Iran, then how to deal with this missile defense against Iran was this sauce for her, We’ll soon find out, These are the pies,
  11. Ivanovich47
    Ivanovich47 7 December 2013 18: 28
    +1
    Nobody is going to sit and rest on their laurels, having modern strategic missile forces as a deterrent weapon. Microelectronics, telecommunication systems, radio navigation and radar systems are developing rapidly. The science of conventional explosives does not stand still. On this basis, new types of weapons are emerging, based on new principles of action. And here you still need to carefully monitor the actions of the enemy (probable). Hence the conclusion: military science does not stand still and there is a lot of work for it!
    1. Rus2012
      Rus2012 7 December 2013 20: 51
      +1
      Quote: Ivanovich47
      Nobody is going to sit and rest on their laurels, having modern strategic missile forces as a deterrent weapon.

      In fact, dear colleague, everything the dear author writes about is
      hypersonic rocket-planning systems

      in Russia is almost at the exit.
      This is the so-called. "maneuvering" and controlled BB "at hypersonic speed and intercontinental range" ...
      This is the author for himself beloved reserves a place, so that in the future without fail to participate in their limitation and elimination ...
      And the Yankees will only do this when they do it by trying to create something workable. And by all means, having worked with the MRKT and PR techniques, they will try to force us to remove "on par" these same "hypersonic missile-gliding systems."
      There is no need to go far for examples - 108PU "mimosa-gentle" Pershing-2 for over 500 workable and efficient Pioneer PGRK. This includes the "work" of such afftors ...
      1. Onyx
        Onyx 7 December 2013 22: 04
        +3
        Quote: Rus2012
        in Russia is almost at the exit.
        This is the so-called. "maneuvering" and controlled BB "at hypersonic speed and intercontinental range" ...

        Aeroballistic warheads, according to the designer's gene Yars, have been on it for a long time: "On Yars, each warhead has an individual guidance system, and its flight path is constantly changing. And American Patriots and their European counterparts cannot shoot down such ammunition. ".
  12. Koronik
    Koronik 7 December 2013 19: 17
    0
    There is still time, you only need the desire and the opportunity to prepare.
    "Over the forty-odd years of arms control history, the parties have been able to tackle tasks even harder."
  13. Mercenary
    Mercenary 7 December 2013 20: 00
    +1
    Really does not teach our leadership that with amers there is no point in negotiating, they subscribe to what is beneficial to them. as soon as you reach your goal, remember the OKU rocket immediately withdraw from the contract or simply ignore its implementation, demanding strict implementation from us.
  14. Rus2012
    Rus2012 7 December 2013 20: 33
    0
    And to cover the strategic nuclear forces from hypersonic cruise missiles, the S-500 anti-aircraft systems are intended, which should be integrated for this purpose in a single information-control system with space and ground-based SPRN means.

    The esteemed author forgets the "near non-nuclear intercept" systems for the protection of silo missile systems. More details here - http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/pub/oborona/oborona.shtml
  15. Rus2012
    Rus2012 7 December 2013 20: 42
    +1
    It will be much more difficult, but not impossible, to coordinate confidence-building measures and restrictions of this kind in relation to current cruise missiles and promising hypersonic ALCMs.

    etc. etc...
    it seems that the author, before writing in kiryatk, wants to participate in the negotiation process on this basis ... Probably abides without an active lesson.

    By the way, when creating the SALT2 treaty, some afftors absolutely wanted to "create confidence-building measures" - "weld the shaft covers" or "remove the key elements of the actuators" of the missile silos and send them to a certain place to periodically monitor the availability.
    Well, who would be this "controller" is not difficult to guess ...
  16. Boa kaa
    Boa kaa 7 December 2013 21: 24
    +5
    if in doubt, nuclear weapons will be used in response to a conventional strike ...

    Then the Americans will think three times: "Is it worth it? And if it is, what will be the answer?" But so that doubts and temptations do not arise, our media spread information about the new Russian ICBMs.
    “The main difference between the new complex and the Yars complex with the RS-24 intercontinental missile is that the missile equipped with new hypersonic warheads, which have the ability to maneuver in height and heading. Previously, this fundamentally new military equipment passed a series of successful flight tests during launches from other missiles, ”which in the contracts for launch insurance was named PC-26. The missile test program with new military equipment provides for several test launches in 2013-2014 years. Earlier, the commander of the Strategic Missile Forces, Colonel General S. Karakaev, told reporters that “the capabilities of such military equipment were demonstrated US technical controls According to him, “in order to solve the missile defense breakthrough problem, new missiles have such characteristics that make it possible to speak of invulnerability in all areas of their flight. The new missile systems of the Strategic Missile Forces will be equipped with highly effective maneuvering and guided warheads and more advanced means of overcoming missile defense. All this allows us to confidently predict the ability of the Russian strategic nuclear forces to ensure the country's security in any development of the international situation, ”S.Karakaev said.
    http://www.arms-expo.ru/049057054050124051051052048049.html
    But some of the author’s conclusions are correct.
    The missile defense system of the United States and its allies is not able to repel any large-scale nuclear missile strike
    Therefore, it is better for Amers to sit and not twitch, not provoke us to a new arms race: it will not work, as the rearmament has already been planned and is proceeding with a creak, but according to plan.
    1. Onyx
      Onyx 7 December 2013 22: 10
      0
      Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
      But so that doubts and temptations do not arise, our media disseminated information about the new Russian ICBMs.
      “The main difference between the new complex and the Yars complex with the RS-24 intercontinental missile is that the missile is equipped with new hypersonic warheads that have the ability to maneuver in height and course.

      Sorry, but the media spread nonsense, for the maneuvering GBSBs are already on Yars
  17. FC SKIF
    FC SKIF 7 December 2013 22: 00
    +1
    The best pro against amers is the 2 ship off the coast of the 2 oceans, stuffed with terrible chemistry and yao with desperate guys who are not afraid to press the red button. The partners are explained that in which case the capital will have to be transferred to a yutu. Let anyone build about, maybe even sink the ships, they are worse. Here is such an asymmetric answer.
    1. saxa2103
      saxa2103 8 December 2013 01: 28
      0
      and what asymmetric answer will be to this asymmetric answer ?? Even a rat should not be driven into a corner, and such a beast should not be teased, it’s necessary to either bring it down or take it to death
  18. FC SKIF
    FC SKIF 7 December 2013 22: 02
    0
    I forgot. Be sure to consult with experts on ocean currents where boats are better to put
  19. VADEL
    VADEL 8 December 2013 08: 04
    0
    Quote: Sergh
    So let them place their missile defense at least in the ass of the Statue of Liberty!

    Good little idea! So we need to cram our missile defense there! I represent the faces of amers and the size of the ass of this "freedom" laughing !
  20. Jurkovs
    Jurkovs 8 December 2013 08: 17
    0
    There is some kind of inferiority in our national identity. Instead of creating our own threats, we are constantly looking for answers to other people's threats.
  21. prophetic
    prophetic 8 December 2013 10: 25
    -2
    Yes, the Americans don’t need to capture us, and so already almost everything was sold to them. And at such a poor pace of development as there are now, Russia will have about one hundred years, and then there will simply be no one to protect the country. Well, unless the imported Tajiks and Uzbeks want to defend a new one homeland
    1. Heccrbq.3
      Heccrbq.3 9 December 2013 09: 25
      0
      Now you local cheers patriots zaminusut!
      1. prophetic
        prophetic 9 December 2013 23: 04
        0
        you are right they are laughing
        without objecting, put a minus, well done, fool