American press: US missile defense can not counter Russian nuclear weapons

31
Against the background of recent events taking place in the international arena, the words about the beginning of the new Cold War are increasingly heard. Moreover, some analysts are trying to predict the beginning of a full-scale conflict that risks becoming the Third World War. In this regard, the public and experts are showing increasing interest in the military capabilities of the leading countries, primarily the United States and Russia. Attempts are being made to consider the capabilities of their armed forces, to assess the power and ability in a real conflict.

American press: US missile defense can not counter Russian nuclear weapons


27 January The American edition of The Inquisitr published a curious article entitled World War 3: Our Nuclear Weapons Upgraded, US Missile Defense Can't Stop Them, Claim Russians (“Third World: Russian Nuclear weapon updated, and the US missile defense can not counteract it "). The author of the publication tried to consider the latest events in Russia concerning the renewal of strategic nuclear forces.

According to an employee of the publication The Inquisitr, the United States and Russia continue to add fuel to the fire of fears of the Third World War. So, now the Russian deputy prime minister claims that in the event of a full-scale conflict with the exchange of nuclear missile strikes, the American missile defense system will be powerless and will not be able to prevent the delivery of warheads to targets.

The publication recalls that the United States naval forces, together with several companies, are currently testing a prototype of the so-called rail gun. A few years later, a promising weapons system should receive a new shell, which will bring down cruise missiles during the flight. At the same time, Russia is increasing the pace and volume of construction of new submarines for its fleet. The laying of five submarines is planned for 2015 at a time, while the United States intends to withdraw two submarines from the fleet by the end of the year.

In addition, Russia has some developments in the modernization of strategic nuclear forces. Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, who oversees the defense industry in general and nuclear missile projects in particular, recently spoke about new developments. On the air of the Russia 1 channel, D. Rogozin said that Russian specialists had made a technical breakthrough that would allow overcoming the enemy’s anti-missile defense.

Unfortunately, the aforementioned development is still secret, which is why the Deputy Prime Minister refused to disclose any details. Nevertheless, he noted that the conducted studies show high characteristics of the proposed solution. The existing or prospective US missile defense systems will not be able to effectively counteract Russia's renewable strategic nuclear forces. The publication The Inquisitr believes that new developments can cause changes in the "rules of the game."

However, there is an alternative view. As an example of such views on the situation, the American edition cites the words of the former head of the Main Directorate of International Military Cooperation of the Russian Defense Ministry, Colonel-General Leonid Ivashov, according to whom the probability of the start of the Third World War was rather large. At the same time, the situation allowed an analysis of the current state of Russia's strategic nuclear forces. According to L. Ivashov, the attempt of the Russian armed forces to carry out a preventive nuclear missile strike was to end in failure. An argument in favor of this version is the grouping of American ships equipped with the Aegis BIUS.

L. Ivashov summarizes: the United States intends to destroy Russian missiles in the upper stage of the trajectory. After this, ships with the Aegis system and interceptor missiles must eliminate the missile warheads that managed to pass the upper stage. Americans are doing everything possible to reduce the potential of Russian missiles and reduce the possible damage from their attacks.

The Inquisitr publication also recalls the statements made by D. Rogozin, which he made during his service as the Permanent Representative of Russia to NATO (2008-2011 years). Then the official regularly reminded that the United States missile defense system under construction was a direct threat to the security of Russia. Official Washington has consistently justified its work by saying that the European countries of NATO need a means of protection against Iranian missiles. As a result, the work did not stop. Both land and sea missile defense components developed.

The recent annexation of Crimea to Russia and the current Ukrainian crisis have changed the situation in the international arena. Some US congressmen claim that the Russian armed forces have already deployed nuclear weapons in the Crimea. In addition, the recent actions of the Russian authorities are recommended to be regarded as the “beginning of the invasion”. In response, it is proposed to prepare bases for the deployment of “dual-use” aircraft, as well as to deploy nuclear weapons in advanced areas.

The Inquisitr publication mentions that some representatives of the US authorities are already proposing to the military department to consider the possibility of deploying land-based cruise missiles in Europe.

The World War 3 article we have reviewed: Russia's Nuclear Weapons Upgraded, US Missile Defense Can't Stop Them, Claim Russians is of particular interest in the context of a hypothetical transition of relations between the two countries from political confrontation to real conflict. The United States and Russia have powerful strategic nuclear forces, and also have some anti-missile systems. Thus, both countries pose a serious threat to each other.

Nevertheless, the Russian and American military are trying to maintain the existing parity or to increase their capabilities by asymmetric methods. The United States has high hopes for a missile defense system consisting of several components of different bases, and Russia intends to respond to the appearance of missile defense with the development and introduction of new means to overcome it.

A few days ago, Russian Deputy Prime Minister D. Rogozin spoke about the existence of new developments in the area of ​​overcoming existing and prospective missile defense systems. The details of this project are still secret, but there is every reason to believe that such a development can have a big impact on the existing situation in the field of strategic weapons.

The development of strategic nuclear forces and countermeasures continues against the background of the Ukrainian crisis and international disputes around the Crimea. In particular, all this translates into proposals unfriendly or even aggressive. For example, NATO is already planning to strengthen the grouping of its troops in Eastern Europe through the creation of new rapid reaction forces. In addition, it is proposed to place in European countries new weapons, including nuclear ones.

Thus, the actions of the two sides, undertaken recently and planned for the near future, may have very different consequences. They are quite capable of leading to a new Cold War like the one that was in the second half of the last century. Despite the risks associated with such a development of events, potential participants in the confrontation continue to defend their interests, not being afraid to quarrel with each other. As a result, the United States continues to build missile defense systems in Eastern Europe, NATO is strengthening its forces in this area, and Russia is forced to respond with a reform of the armed forces and the creation of new systems capable of withstanding the latest foreign developments.


Based on:
http://inquisitr.com/1791291/world-war-3-russias-nuclear-weapons-upgraded-cannot-be-stopped-by-u-s-missile-defense-claims-russians/
Our news channels

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

31 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Related
    +17
    3 February 2015 06: 49

    Glory to Russia!
    1. +1
      3 February 2015 11: 46
      Great video compilation
    2. +2
      3 February 2015 12: 47
      And fat too)))
    3. +8
      3 February 2015 15: 58
      For some reason, they often talk about the nuclear conflict between the United States and Russia, but forget about China, Korea, England, France, and so on ... By the way, by and large, nothing is known about the state of China's nuclear potential, and there can be from 200 to 3000 missiles. then the question arises, in the event of a nuclear war, for what purposes will China hit? And all these forecasts about the third world war are just a chatter about what will happen if. But for some reason fewer people say that the very fact of reasoning about the unleashing of nuclear war is already an unhealthy trend.
      1. +1
        4 February 2015 17: 57
        This Ivashov was the head of the Department of International Relations of the Ministry of Defense (this is like Lavrov in the government) and what the hell he always climbs his tongue into weapons, his job was to bow to foreign generals at receptions and banquets, the main thing is everywhere that we are shit, Yes, we can’t stand it and can’t do anything. Stalin would have put it to the wall a long time ago.
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. dsf324rdg
      0
      4 February 2015 06: 24
      I want to give one piece of advice! I quit smoking 100 times, probably to no avail, until I read about this method, after a week I already forgot what a cigarette is, everything is correctly painted here http://dimasmok.blogspot.com
  2. +2
    3 February 2015 06: 59
    They are hinting to their government that money should be allocated for the development of something super-duper. Their generals are not worse than ours, they also know how to cut loot ...
    1. 0
      3 February 2015 12: 52
      Heh. The most "new" nuclear warhead was fired by us in the early 90s, the conclusion suggests itself. Nuclear scientists are almost retired, there are almost no young people
      1. +6
        3 February 2015 15: 09
        Quote: trojan768
        Heh. The most "new" nuclear warhead was fired by us in the early 90s, the conclusion suggests itself. Nuclear scientists are almost retired, there are almost no young people


        Integrated breeding platform, gliding warhead / essentially cruise missiles / - "birds", which are individually separated from the breeding platform according to the principle of "grape brush" They can change the flight trajectory but have the disadvantage of low speed compared to ballistic warheads, this is a problem just at the stage of solution due to just more compact nuclear charges and hypersonic acceleration technologies on the so-called passive UT. even without hypersonic technologies, the prolongation by American missile defense systems is extremely difficult.
      2. 0
        5 February 2015 18: 32
        Quote: trojan768
        Heh. The most "new" nuclear warhead was released in the early 90s

        You’re right, but the funny thing is that the Americans are even worse: if they remember me, they released nuclear warheads for the last time somewhere in the early 80s
  3. +1
    3 February 2015 07: 00
    How much more will the US tolerate?
    I hope not for long. And then, as in a joke: ... Who wiped, the control panel ?.
    1. +1
      3 February 2015 19: 48
      Quote: Hronyaka
      How much more will the US tolerate?

      This is all come in large numbers!
      Indigenous guys are normal there

      Himself in the movie Goiko Mitich saw
  4. +6
    3 February 2015 07: 18
    I think everything will be fine with us, it’s necessary for 2-3 years without a large-scale kipis near our borders and not let the Kudrins, Ulyukaevs and Ayfonchik go to the leadership of the military-industrial complex. Americans, of course, have grown Lilliputians, as Zadornov says, but they did not fool at the end to start a nuclear war without absolute superiority over us.
  5. 0
    3 February 2015 08: 08
    with the Americans, now they have approved an article of income for this matter - to counteract Russia, about 600 million
  6. 0
    3 February 2015 08: 59
    Yes, mind Russia does not understand poplars or yars, and pay attention to 3 panicles. Purely ours. laughing good
    1. tkhonov66
      0
      3 February 2015 14: 10
      and EFFICIENCY and RELIABILITY of panicles - does not change for centuries!
      8-))
      .
      Since an ordinary ballpoint pen does not write under zero gravity conditions, the United States banged DARK bucks to develop (!) A writing pen (cylinder) of a ballpoint pen, which is under constant internal pressure of an inert gas - and therefore is operable under zero gravity conditions.
      .
      https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Pen
      http://www.yakaboo.ua/ru/gallery_page?film_id=346706&first_item_id=&w=800
      .
      .
      At space stations of the USSR - they wrote KA-RAS-DA-SHA-MI ...
      8-)))
      1. -5
        3 February 2015 14: 37
        nonsense, we wrote pens bought in the United States for currency, which, incidentally, were developed by a small American company and sold them very inexpensively, and they beat their money long ago ...
        1. +1
          3 February 2015 19: 59
          Quote: TiRex
          nonsense, ours wrote handles purchased in the USA for currency
          In 1969, Fisher Pen sold 100 space pens and 1000 rods to them in the USSR, these pens were used on Soyuz spacecraft and Mir station
          It’s thick, there were more flights, moreover, more than one took him
          and they repulsed their money a long time ago
          But not on space pens
          Although the deals with space agencies did not bring Paul Fisher superprofits, he received the best advertising, because his pens are written even in space, and this in turn brought him fame and fortune. By the way, anyone can buy a space pen for 40 for years.
  7. +4
    3 February 2015 09: 34
    The main thing is that the missile defense should not be in Turkey and Ukraine. Therefore, Putin is pursuing an active policy towards these two countries; the Russia-Turkey gas pipeline clearly shows this. Meanwhile, America is merging its positions in Turkey, Iraq, Ukraine, and even Greece is starting to get out of the control of the European Union, i.e. US colonies. We are strengthening the alliance with China, and China alone is worth all US allies combined.
    1. +3
      3 February 2015 16: 29
      US missile defense does not solve the problem with Russian nuclear submarines. wink
    2. +2
      3 February 2015 20: 10
      Quote: Nero9119
      The main thing that missile defense was not in Turkey and Ukraine

      Their missiles in Turkey were already somehow
      I had to remove
  8. +1
    3 February 2015 09: 40
    So far, this is just talk for intimidation.
    Question to the author, but where does this information come from:
    In addition, it is proposed to deploy new weapons in European countries, including nuclear.
    ? I would like links. We have already known about quick response groups for a long time, but about the deployment of nuclear weapons ...
  9. 0
    3 February 2015 09: 47
    Yes, they are not afraid of nifig, they want to receive money for development and production.
  10. 0
    3 February 2015 10: 29
    Moreover, some analysts are trying to predict the onset of a full-scale conflict that risks becoming the Third World War ---------- I also try to convey the truth about the 3rd World War, But alas, most citizens are so stupid and do not want to hear anything, I’m not talking about thinking. The work of analysts is useless.
  11. -1
    3 February 2015 10: 34
    L. Ivashov sums up: the United States intends to destroy Russian missiles in the upper part of the trajectory. After that, ships with the Aegis system and interceptor missiles must eliminate the warheads of missiles that managed to pass the acceleration section. The Americans are doing everything possible to reduce the potential of Russian missiles and reduce the possible damage from their attack .-------------- we just need to deliver 300 thermonuclear strikes in response to the Amerian cities, another 200 will be added by China and America will cease to function as a state, but will remain as a center of power, China will also recover even after 1 nuclear strikes and then will deal with amers for another 000 years.
    1. +2
      3 February 2015 14: 40
      nobody will recover, there will be a nuclear winter ...
      1. 0
        3 February 2015 16: 38
        Quote: TiRex
        nobody will recover, there will be a nuclear winter ...

        look how many nuclear tests were in the 50s-60s and there was no climate change
    2. +1
      3 February 2015 20: 14
      Quote: New Communist
      200 will add China

      And they will?
      There is no agreement with them
    3. +2
      3 February 2015 23: 20
      Quote: New Communist
      America will cease to function as a state, but will remain as a center of power,

      This is interesting - how, in the absence of a state, will America remain the center of power?
      Quote: New Communist
      it’s enough for us to deliver 300 thermonuclear strikes in response to Amer’s cities, China will add 200 as well
      Why 300? not 200, or 100? Where is the digit from? From the ceiling, or by inspiration on a full moon puffed out?
      And if China follows the proverb about a monkey that is watching a fight of 2's tigers from a tree branch? Didn’t it occur to you?
      Quote: New Communist
      China will also recover even after 1 000 nuclear strikes and then it will deal with amers for another 10 years.

      Have you seen a map of China? And the distribution of the population throughout the country? And what about the hydroelectric power station, cascading overhanging river valleys, where 75% of the country's population lives? So who will have to deal with the Yankees, after receiving 1000 Java? Caves and bomb shelters will certainly save part of the population. And the infrastructure? fields? water?
      So, it is best to "sit still and not twitch on a branch" ...
      (Sorry, paraphrase: "on the priest exactly", etc.) The balance of fear is still keeping the world on the edge of the abyss. We must not allow parity to break. IMHO.
      1. 0
        3 February 2015 23: 29
        `` It's a pity '' I don't have a place in Altai, they bought everything '' crying
      2. 0
        4 February 2015 10: 44
        This is interesting - how, in the absence of a state, America will remain the center of power? -------------- The center of power is the army of police, military-industrial complex and other things, and the state is acquired, all of America in potential.
        why 300? not 200, or 100? Where is the digit from? From the ceiling, or by inspiration on a full moon puffed out? -This is the minimum, but you do not agree? But in principle, there can be no real numbers, only predictive ones.
        So, it is best to "sit quietly on a branch and not twitch" ... - and who will allow China to sit on a branch, America is destroyed by the perimeter, and China is in chocolate? You are an optimist for amers.
  12. 0
    3 February 2015 11: 06
    The American pro is a funky way for companies like Lockheed Martin and general dynamics to get rich. Well, let them spend billions on this useless crap. With a real massive nuclear strike, the MBR is about a children's toy and is not able to effectively counter it.
    1. +3
      3 February 2015 23: 33
      Quote: smoke break
      With a real massive nuclear strike mbr

      The impression is that you have not heard about the "instant global strike". And the Yankes are working hard to bring that concept to life. If they achieve its implementation in practice, then there will be no massive ICBM nuclear weapons.
      Quote: smoke break
      about a children's toy and is not able to effectively counter.

      After that, the missile defense system (3's echelon!) Will have to intercept the order 500-700 of the remaining ICBMs in Russia. Basically, I think, will remain SLBMs.
      That is the idea of ​​the Yankees.
  13. +2
    3 February 2015 12: 33
    And where did Ivashov find Aegis in the Arctic, through which most missiles would fly?
    And the fact that no missile defense knocks a massive volley of ICBMs was written 200 times! Quantity matters!
  14. +2
    3 February 2015 12: 36
    Recently, there are no special changes in the American missile defense.
    They succeeded with medium-range ballistic missiles (Aegis)
    and saturate the fleet, but they stopped the development of missile defense against ICBMs.
    While the Americans cope (with a 50% chance of defeat)
    with only single launches of ICBMs across the Pacific
    along a high path.
  15. 0
    3 February 2015 14: 13
    The brooms leaning against the rockets, this is our way!
    Simple, cheap and cheerful!
  16. 0
    3 February 2015 14: 20
    Read, for example, here:
    http://www.opoccuu.com/degradaciya.htm
  17. +1
    3 February 2015 14: 22
    "US missile defense will not be able to counter Russian nuclear weapons"

    No missile defense system (neither American nor Russian) can provide the required level of protection against enemy nuclear missile weapons. A certain decrease in the effectiveness of such weapons can, but no more. Therefore, any attempt to start a full-scale war using nuclear missile weapons will put a big cross on all of humanity. POINT
  18. The comment was deleted.
  19. 0
    3 February 2015 14: 39
    Unfortunately, it will not.
    Under the Soviet Union, we and the Americans scared each other with such a prospect.
    And this acted not so much on politicians and the military as on the shirnarmasses.
    Hiroshima and Nagasaki began to recover immediately after the bombing. They have long been living there without problems associated with this fact. Already in this century I heard in the news: In Hiroshima, at the age of 98, another hibakusha died from the effects of a nuclear bombing.
    Nuclear war does not scare politicians and the military. And that's bad. If they were afraid, there would be no chance that she would not be anymore.
    When Sagan made his model of a nuclear winter, he did not show it to anyone. Other wise men counted and came to the conclusion that a nuclear winter is possible only if all the warheads that existed at that time (1991) in Western Europe were undermined. But since the distribution of goals is not so, and the nuclear weapons themselves have become much smaller, there will be no nuclear winter.
    Radiation from bombs falls off faster than from nuclear disasters. More short-lived isotopes.

    Alas! These considerations will not help those who burn out in the flame of explosions, receive large doses or die of hunger and deprivation after the war. In the case of a major war, there may be up to two billion.
  20. 0
    3 February 2015 16: 05
    Ivashov would chat less, it would be better. When will we get rid of talkers?
  21. +1
    3 February 2015 16: 51
    In the event that the Americans withdraw from the SLBM treaty and place the tomahawks in ground-based launchers, nothing bad will happen, they will need to build these launchers, and Russia already has them, Iskander-K, with a 500 kg warhead, the missile flies 500 kilometers if to establish a tactical nuclear one instead of a conventional warhead, the range will increase by 2-2,5 times, and if you also install more fuel tanks (which have probably already been produced and are in military depots), there will be a quick answer. With the Ballistic Iskander, too, in order to increase the flight range of a rocket, you only need to set the second stage, and there will be 900-1000 km range, a modern analogue of the Temp-S missile system
  22. tigrobasilium
    +1
    3 February 2015 22: 32
    traces of nuclear weapons exist in many places on the planet from ancient proto-civilizations that disappeared, leaving behind only traces of stone and artifacts. And our civilization is waiting for a similar future, or such a confrontation helps to cleanse ourselves of the "superfluous" on planet Earth ???
  23. 0
    4 February 2015 03: 46
    It is completely foolish to think that in its right mind Russia will start a nuclear war. Not because it cannot or would not want to crush the United States - on the contrary, it would very much like to. But there is one "But", and against the background of others it does not seem so implausible.
    So that's it. Everybody, of course, perfectly understands (but not many people talk about it) that the “powerful” in Russia have children, wives, often families, do not live in Russia at all. Russia is, as it were, their homeland, and they shout loudly from the stands about a retaliatory strike and about nuclear retaliation (and about much). But this "but" says a lot. Plus, take those funds (and not small ones) that are clearly not in the accounts of Russian banks, and certainly none of these "strong" is going to transfer these funds to Russia.
    Now the question is: what kind of nuclear strike, war, any real threats can Russia speak towards the countries of Europe or the United States, when everything that these "air-shakers" in the Duma have, including their beloved children, is in such hated European countries. Union and the USA, where they actually live, and the "Duma members" themselves spend all their free time ?? !!
    In fact, all these nuclear responses and all these weapons are needed only for a threat from a distance. Its use is possible only in the event of an obvious attack, about which in the healthy head of the leaders of the EU countries and the United States, well, certainly there are no thoughts. So all this looks like squandering money, when with huge infusions there are decent kickbacks and the opportunity to put a "couple" of rubles per million in your own and your friend's pocket.
    Air shock is what talk about the nuclear threat and Russia's superiority in nuclear strike is. There is, of course, another option: the button will be pressed by a mentally ill or unbalanced person, or who already does not need anything in this world and is simply bored. Let's hope that there are no such countries in the government of nuclear weapons countries.
    1. 0
      4 February 2015 04: 10
      In order for the mass use of strategic nuclear weapons between the United States and Russia to make sense (without taking into account families, money in banks, etc.), a long and sharp confrontation is needed, possibly with local direct clashes, which are gradually developing into large-scale ones (throughout the northern hemisphere) military operations, and Russia and the allies must lose very much.

      You understand that in such a situation the families of the "powerful" will have long been in government bunkers (and not only they, but in general everyone will crawl into bunkers / basements, including the southern hemisphere of the Earth, because this tension is incomparably stronger than the Cuban missile crisis), and will the banking system disappear altogether?
      1. 0
        4 February 2015 05: 35
        Everything is correct. The question was not the same, but that there was some justified (so to speak) number of warheads and their very capacity. Further buildup is a waste of money.
        In addition, a massive bombing of any continent will lead to a general environmental catastrophe, even if the application is on one side (for example, even if the entire US is thrown in and there is no answer - this is poisoned water in the oceans, air with radiation dust, poisoned precipitation, etc. .). If we talk about such bombings of the EU countries, the near abroad, then this is practically the same as sprinkling uranium on oneself. Chernobyl showed what would happen in the event of minor disasters, and the use of nuclear weapons in bordering countries would lead to a catastrophe in Russia itself, if for some reason it “had” to use its nuclear weapons.

        I do not see at all the possibility of using strategic nuclear weapons. Tactical - yes. Strategic on a large scale - No, even in the case of full-scale military operations on the territory of Russia itself. In addition, to be honest, I do not see Russia's real allies in the event of real military operations. As time has shown, European countries are not allies for anyone, no matter how much Russia feeds them. Yes, they can talk, shout, lobby, but they can take up arms to help — they are too cowardly and prudent. China? Hardly. China is silent, knows how to wait, is mysterious, on its own mind and is actually very dangerous for Russia, especially if it starts to lose in something. Tell me more serious more or less real allies! They are not here.

        A bunker ..)) This is not an option. None of the "close to the emperor" will understand, but why live in a bunker, for what, and because of what, why it is necessary to change this life to ..?! They won't survive there. Is that the common people - yes, but we will not get there)) - this is not for a month or a year, it is for 20-30 years at least.
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. tigrobasilium
      0
      4 February 2015 11: 57
      unleashing a nuclear war means the mass destruction of all civilization on planet Earth, and all nuclear powers know about this, and there will be no winners or losers. So nuclear weapons are the most extreme measure! Russia will never unleash any war wherever it is, if it does not threaten Russia itself, and the war in the Donbass is the reason for the "rejection" of the people of the new Kiev authorities, who made the stupidest mistake of forcefully subordinating and reconciling their people!
    3. The comment was deleted.

"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"