Military Review

US vs. Russia: What the war between the two most formidable armies in the world will look like ("Military Times", USA)

79
US vs. Russia: What the war between the two most formidable armies in the world will look like ("Military Times", USA)Vladimir Putin’s brazen actions in Syria and Ukraine raise new questions about American contingency plans.


Russia has big ambitions and growing opportunities

Early in the morning of September 30, a Russian three-star general approached the American embassy in Baghdad and passed by well-armed security marines to personally present an ultimatum to the US representatives, which became a diplomatic demarche. His statement was sharp and direct: after an hour, Russian troops begin air strikes in neighboring Syria — and the US military must immediately clear the area.

It was a fight from the level of balancing on the brink of war between two nuclear giants, which the world has not seen for decades. She revived the suspicions, antagonisms and intrigues characteristic of the Cold War era.

Starting air strikes in Syria, President Vladimir Putin inspired an indirect war with the United States. As a result, the powerful armies of the two countries found themselves in the role of assistants to opposite sides in a multipolar conflict. For Moscow, this is a very risky adventure, experts say. “It will be very difficult for them. This is difficult in terms of logistics. Russians don’t have so many forces, means and capabilities to project power over long distances, ”said Mark Galeotti, an expert on Russian security from New York University.

Russians in their military campaign in Syria are very dependent on supply routes that require air corridors that pass through Iranian and Iraqi airspace. The only alternative is maritime communications coming from the Crimea. For such sea transportation at two ends, it takes up to 10 days. It is not clear how long Russia will be able to withstand such tensions.

This and other questions about Russian combat potential and goals come to the center of the stage at a time when Putin is showing unshakable readiness to use military force in his clumsy foreign policy aimed at reviving Russia's status as a world power. Speaking in this crusade, he gave new life to the ghosts of the resurgent military power of Russia - from Ukraine to the Baltic states, and from Syria to the Middle East as a whole.

Russia's increasingly aggressive operational-strategic plans have caused a flurry of assessments and feedback from US military strategists on the topic of US military policy and action plans in the event of a conflict with the former Soviet state. The high-ranking Pentagon leadership begins to ask questions that for more than 20 years lay under the cover:

- What are the real combat capabilities of the Russians?
- Where exactly can a conflict with Russia occur?
- What will the war with Russia look like today?

The following should be extremely clear. Experts agree that the US forces capable of operating on a global scale in a war using conventional means will utterly crush the Russian army. But modern wars are unusual, and geography, politics, and terrain conditions inevitably give advantages to one side or another.

Today, the United States spends almost 10 times more money on national defense than Russia. The United States has 10 aircraft carriers in the ranks, while Russia has only one. In addition, the US military has great technical advantages, and they far surpass Russia in its ability to transfer forces and assets to one or another point in the world.

Russia is still weak by many traditional criteria. But at present, it is developing some extremely important technologies and models of technology, a new tactic of combat operations and an arrogant geopolitical strategy that undermines the US claims to be the only truly superpower in the world. As a result of all these actions, Russia unexpectedly again became the main military opponent of America.

Watching what is happening, American leaders “are clearly concerned that Russia is at least able to create superior forces at the regional level,” says former Pentagon employee David Ochmanek, currently a military analyst at RAND Corp. And Russian-American relations gloomily hang over their nuclear arsenals. Russia has maintained and even modernized its “triad” of intercontinental ballistic missiles in nuclear equipment, a large fleet of long-range bombers and fleet nuclear submarines, which are becoming more modern and advanced.

“The Russian military industry has risen from the ruins,” said Vadim Kozyulin, a military expert from the Moscow PIR Analytical Center. “The military balance can be ensured only by Russian nuclear power, which is not as expensive to maintain as it seems to many”.

But although Russian conventional forces do not produce the impression of nuclear forces, there are some areas in which Russia is superior to the rest. Among them - aviation, air defense, submarines and electronic warfare.

Weapons Soviet-era design bureaus are still well known throughout the world. The Russian aviation industry, for example, benefits greatly from exporting its products to non-Western countries, which buy efficient fighters from it cheaper than Western models. China today spends more on defense than Russia, but still buys equipment and modern weapons from it.

According to many experts, attempts to compare the US and Russian armed forces are similar to the comparison of apples and oranges. The Russians have completely different strategic goals, and the structure of the Russian armed forces is being built accordingly. Russia considers itself a land power, affecting vast territories stretching from the interior of Eurasia to Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and possibly to the Middle East and Asia-Pacific. It has good opportunities for the implementation of the military concept, known as “blocking access / blocking the zone”.

“The United States and Russia are striving for different things,” says Galeotti. “Russians do not intend to compete with us on equal terms.” The main thing for them is prohibition. ” For example, he continues, “if you look at the US Navy, they are in many ways superior to the Russian navy. In Russian, the majority of ships - the Soviet legacy. But in a certain sense it does not matter, because Russia is not going to send them to different parts of the world’s ocean. ”

This fact is reflected in the fact that Russia has only one aircraft carrier, and the US has 10, and they are constantly located in different parts of the world. Instead of aircraft carriers, which are offensive means of projecting force at sea, Russians invest in expanding their submarine forces that make up the nuclear triad and are capable of creating a threat to the enemy’s surface fleet in nearby waters, say in the Black, Baltic or Mediterranean seas.

Russia's airspace is also well secured. In quality, Russian stealth aircraft are much worse than American ones, but Russia has the most advanced systems for detecting and destroying such unobtrusive aircraft, and it is investing heavily in creating reliable anti-aircraft missile systems, deploying them so that they cover their border regions well. . “The static picture of the air force is clearly in favor of the Russians, because they have a serious air defense potential and a diverse arsenal of tactical, cruise and ballistic missiles,” says military analyst and Russian expert Paul Schwartz, who works in the center Strategic and international studies (Center for Strategic and International Studies).

Russia's ability to conduct electronic warfare also poses considerable threats to the Pentagon’s military planners because it is unclear to what extent Russia can interfere with American radars and electronic intelligence assets that form the basis of American air power. It will not be easy for Americans and their allies to penetrate Russian airspace, Schwartz says. “They will be seriously opposed there. But I think that in time we will be able to weaken these systems. The problem is that when there are nuclear forces, full-scale hostilities must be avoided. ”

Meanwhile, Russian ground forces, consisting mainly of draftees, are increasingly becoming a professional force, similar to the American one. In fact, Russia has two armies: about two-thirds of the 800th ground forces are non-motivated and poorly trained draftees, but one third are subunits and units equipped with the most modern equipment, including Tanks T-14 Armata.

By and large, the Russian military is no match for the US. But the distance between them in recent years has been reduced.

Syrian forward operational base

How quickly the Russians created the forward operational base in Syria impressed many American leaders. In just a few weeks, the Russian military erected a capable base to become a permanent base in Latakia on the Mediterranean coast. They transferred dozens of combat aircraft there, reinforced their object with tanks and assembled houses for several hundred servicemen.

Russia recently announced plans to hold naval exercises in the eastern part of the Mediterranean this fall, but did not specify when its ships would be transferred to this region. The flagship of the Black Sea Fleet, the missile cruiser "Moscow", as well as several patrol and large landing ships, as reported by the Russian news agency TASS, will take part in the exercises. Some military people ask themselves: will these exercises become a cover for the transfer of additional troops and equipment to the coast of Syria?

The new advanced base will give Russia the opportunity to make combat missions, conduct surveillance and reconnaissance, as well as launch unmanned aerial vehicles throughout the Middle East, including Iraq, whose leadership asked the Russians to help it in the fight against the "Islamic state" in its territory.

This base will help ensure the security of the logistics center of the Russian Navy, which has long been located in the Syrian port city of Tartus and is of great importance for the transfer of Russian forces and assets to the Mediterranean. According to incoming reports, Russia is expanding its presence in Tartus.

On the whole, Moscow is signaling its long-term interest in opening an umbrella of access / blocking of the zone in the Middle East. The Russians are allegedly transferring their most modern air defense systems to Latakia, which causes concern at the Pentagon, since these actions contradict Russia's assertions that it will limit its combat activities to strikes against Syrian rebel groups such as Islamic State or ISIL.

“We see very modern air defense systems being transferred to these airfields; “We see very modern airplanes being deployed at these airfields to conduct air combat,” commander Gen. Phillip Breedlov told NATO 28 on September 10 in Europe. - I have not seen a single aircraft from ISIS, for the destruction of which you would need SA-15 or SA-22 anti-aircraft systems ("Thor" and "Armor"). These modern air defense systems are not for fighting ISIS ... they are for fighting something else. ”

In fact, Russians can challenge the superiority in the air that the 20 has been supporting (and taking for granted) the United States for more than 10 years by controlling large areas of the Middle East. The most important factor in this equation is the Russian alliance with Iran - another key Syrian ally. Russia needs Iran’s airspace to secure flights of its aircraft to Syria, and it is ready to support the Iranian ground forces, acting in concert with the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

Russian experts believe that the invasion of Syria, coupled with Putin’s aggressive speech at the UN 28 September, signal that he intends to become a key player in the region for a long time.

“It became clear that Russia intends to pursue a more ambitious policy in the Middle East. “The Russian president has clearly said that the Western model of democracy and Western methods of conflict resolution in the region are not working,” said Yury Barmin, a Moscow expert on Middle Eastern politics and on Russian foreign policy. “It is doubtful that Russia will soon be able to become the leading power in the Middle East, since its presence in the region is limited compared with the United States.”

But some people see a larger geopolitical gambit in the Syrian maneuvers of Putin, the purpose of which is to conclude a deal on Ukraine. Russia is currently occupying some areas of Ukraine, but the United States still considers the March 2014 invasion of the year illegal, and Moscow’s power over these areas is illegitimate. “The US is more important here than Syria and Assad,” says Galeotti. “Let's be honest: if Washington made it clear that it was possible to achieve some kind of deal, in which he would tacitly recognize the positions of the Russians in Crimea and in some areas of Dobrunsk, they would not fight for Asad” .

New type of "hybrid war" in Ukraine

The conflict in Ukraine and the American mission to train the Ukrainian military gives the Pentagon new opportunities to assess the enemy, which it may encounter in battle in other places in the not too distant future. However, critics say that America’s shy reaction to Russian aggression — in the Crimea, in the Donetsk and Lugansk regions — did nothing to deter and intimidate Moscow. In Ukraine, Moscow demonstrated a new type of “hybrid war”, in which non-state forces of its henchmen, heavy military equipment, artillery, drones, EW tools, and aggressive information operations are conducted to ensure victory on the battlefield.

“It’s good that we know how they are fighting,” US Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia Evelyn Farkas told 10 in an interview with Military Times on September 9. “We do not conduct wars as they lead them in the conditions of urban and rural areas with the use of UAVs and active radio-electronic suppression measures.”

At the end of October, Farkas left his post after working for five years in the Ministry of Defense. It is not clear who will take its place and become the key creator of politics on issues relating to Russia.

According to the few military professionals who work with the Ukrainian armed forces, the fight against Moscow-supported rebels is very different from the experience they have gained recently in Iraq and Afghanistan. “We got a great experience of conducting low-intensity warfare, counter-guerrilla warfare, but in Ukraine we are dealing with an almost equal opponent from the 21 of the 20th century,” said the lieutenant colonel of the 2 battalion of the 503 battalion of the 173 airborne brigade Michael Kloepper. This brigade has recently begun the third stage of training the Ukrainian armed forces.

Such work is part of the American military strategy of providing security assurances to NATO allies, alarmed by Russia's actions. However, the Obama administration does not want to provide Ukraine with more effective support, and it seems determined to avoid an indirect war against Russia.

The Russians advanced thousands of troops to the Ukrainian border, as well as large tank and artillery units and units. These troops are constantly shelling the border cities and towns, as well as raiding the Ukraine, where they fight together with the rebels. So far, the administration has promised Ukraine only “non-lethal assistance” in the form of training and supplies of equipment like “Hummers”, small UAVs and radar stations.

Washington imposed economic sanctions against Russia, sent troops to train the Ukrainian forces and intensified military exercises throughout Eastern Europe. But he does not supply offensive weapons and ammunition there, and does not threaten Russia with military actions. Since March, 2014, when Russia annexed the Crimean peninsula in southern Ukraine, the United States allocated 244 million dollars to Kiev in the form of non-lethal military aid and training. For comparison, this is the amount spent for three weeks of fighting in Iraq and Syria.

The Ukrainian leadership in Kiev constantly asks for more help. "We need Javelin anti-tank systems, reconnaissance and combat drones ... fighters, helicopters, electronic, radio and radio intelligence systems, radar stations and reliable intelligence systems" to counter Russian military equipment used by pro-Russian separatists on the eastern front, said the commander-in-chief armed forces of Ukraine, Colonel-General Victor Muzhenko. Ukraine also asked for anti-aircraft guns and additional equipment to neutralize enemy snipers, he told the Military Times.

In eastern Ukraine, fighting from 30 000 to 35 000 Russian-supported militants. Muzhenko estimates that 9 is about 000 of them from the Russian side. They use modern military electronic equipment, with the help of which they interfere with Ukrainian communication systems, radars, GPS systems and early detection equipment, said Ukrainian Deputy Minister of Defense for European Integration Igor Dolgov.

This is a unique fighting space, and the Americans, who are training the Ukrainian military, are eager to collect intelligence information about new methods of warfare by the Russians. “It’s interesting to hear what they have learned,” Lieutenant-General Ben Hodges, commander of US land forces in Europe, told Defense News. “None of the Americans came under fire from the Russian artillery and volley fire systems, not a single one experienced the effects of the Russian EW facilities, electronic suppression, at least at the tactical level.”

The outlook for the Ukrainian conflict is unclear. In late September, the parties agreed to withdraw tanks and heavy artillery from the front line in the east. It seems that the ceasefire conditions in the eastern regions are respected, although the parties behave cautiously, and pro-Russian separatists, intent on holding their own elections, may not recognize the elections to the Ukrainian parliament, which must pass October 25.

So far, Obama does not show willingness to give Russia control over the regions that have belonged to Ukraine for decades. “We cannot be indifferent when the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a country is grossly violated,” Obama said speaking at the UN General Assembly. - This is the basis of the sanctions that the United States and its partners have imposed against Russia. And this is not a desire to return to the cold war. ”

Predicting new hot spots

For over a year, the United States and its European allies have re-assessed the military balance on the eastern borders of NATO, where the former satellite countries of the Soviet Union are located. The result was Operation Atlantic Resolve, in which the United States rotates its troops into Eastern NATO countries, such as Poland, the Baltic states, Romania and Bulgaria.

Putin and his military threaten the Baltic countries, which only recently became part of the North Atlantic Alliance and are its weakest members. Russia has repeatedly sent its combat aircraft to the airspace of the Baltic States, allegedly carried out cyber attacks, and its submarines patrol the Baltic Sea. And Russian officials are expressing support for Russian-speaking minorities, which is even more alarming.

The aggression in the Baltics, especially in Estonia, where a large Russian-speaking minority lives, is carried out by Moscow in greater secrecy than its blatant actions in Ukraine and Syria. It is argued that Putin is using methods of hybrid warfare practiced in Ukraine to rally the Russian population in the Baltic to support the Russian special forces, or the so-called "little green men."

This raises concerns in the West that Putin’s ultimate goal is a power split of NATO in the event of failure of the methods of threat and intimidation. NATO is trying to figure out how to respond to this without much success, and its member countries put forward different opinions about the case in which Russia crosses the red line with its actions. “We must decide at what point the correct answer will be a military response,” said London-based analyst Nick de Larrinaga, who works at the IHS Jane's Defense and Security Group. “A hybrid war raises questions about when there should be a military response, and whether this is a civilian problem that local law enforcement officers should solve.”

Of course, Russia has another option - go to the usual hostilities. An analysis of the balance of military forces in the Baltic theater points to Russia's initial advantages in the case of an air campaign against NATO, if the political goal of Moscow is to drive the North Atlantic alliance from the Baltic states.

According to a recent report from the Chatham House Royal Institute of International Relations, in the Western Military District Russia has a land force of 65 000 people, 850 artillery shells of various calibers, 750 tanks and 320 combat aircraft. There are other assessments that give much larger numbers, but in general there is a great uncertainty about the question of how much of these forces exist only on paper, and which one is really ready for combat operations.

Another aspect of the Russian military power, which is overestimated too much, is the Baltic Fleet - the smallest of the main fleets of Russia and the pale shadow of its Soviet past. After the collapse of the USSR, its coastal infrastructure, stretching from Kaliningrad to Leningrad, became the property of the Baltic states that gained independence.

Today, this fleet is divided between Kaliningrad and St. Petersburg, which is why it is difficult to maintain in its composition large forces. The Baltic Fleet today consists of only two small diesel submarines of the 877 “Halibus” project, one of which is used mainly for training, as well as several destroyers of the “Modern” type, a patrol ship, four corvettes and several support vessels.

For the conduct of hostilities in the Baltic, Russia can also attract the naval personnel of the Northern Fleet, since its ships are often in combat service in the North Atlantic and are able to come to the rescue if large-scale operations are deployed at sea.

Such a threat can become quite serious if the true goal of Russia in the Baltic States is to show that NATO does not comply with Article 5 of its statute, which is a key element of the North Atlantic Treaty and states that an attack on one member country is considered an attack on everyone and will be met with a collective and immediate response total alliance.

Matthew Bodner contributed to the article.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/2015/10/04/us-russia-vladimir-putin-syria-ukraine-american-military-plans/73147344/
79 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. major071
    major071 7 October 2015 05: 41 New
    +44
    This "work" from the category "I heard a jingle, but I don’t know where it is," entirely aimed at a stupid western man who believes in the media in everything. "Ikspertov" and "article" - in the furnace!
    1. venaya
      venaya 7 October 2015 05: 47 New
      +20
      Quote: major071
      ... Ikspertov "and" article "- in the furnace!

      Well, why so, right into the firebox. First, let's figure out which cockroaches run in their head there. This will be useful to us, nevertheless: "warned - means armed."
      1. iConst
        iConst 7 October 2015 11: 36 New
        +2
        Quote: venaya
        Well, why so, right into the firebox. First, let's figure out which cockroaches run in their head there. This will be useful to us, nevertheless: "warned - means armed."

        It is they who persuade themselves not to be very scared.
        All is well with pendocs and "this music will be eternal if ...".

        So in the conflict the task is simple - not to let the batteries fit. And then it will be like in Vietnam - the Air Force generals and ground will fight over blaming each other for failures.
      2. Reserve officer
        Reserve officer 7 October 2015 13: 01 New
        +2
        After the first line about the "impudent actions" of the president of Russia did not read further.
        1. Vladimir 23rus
          Vladimir 23rus 9 October 2015 07: 36 New
          0
          Personally, I read to
          Russian three-star general
          laughing
          1. Evil Elf
            Evil Elf 10 October 2015 20: 16 New
            0
            Well, the author of the rank of Colonel General does not know
      3. stavr550
        stavr550 7 October 2015 13: 52 New
        +1
        and most importantly, this nonsense the whole world takes for granted
    2. Siberia55
      Siberia55 7 October 2015 07: 10 New
      +15
      With DR karoch !!!
      1. inkass_98
        inkass_98 7 October 2015 07: 41 New
        +11
        Quote: Siberia55
        "work" from the category "I heard a jingle, but I don’t know where it is"

        I agree. A whole flock of authors rushing from one corner to another, trying to guess whether they are smart or beautiful, but I want to be both those and others ...
        The whole article comes down solely to trying to add the word "happiness" from the four letters available:
        1. Baikal
          Baikal 7 October 2015 11: 47 New
          +4
          ... US forces in a war using conventional means utterly defeat the Russian army ...

          ... about two-thirds of the 800-thousandth ground forces are non-motivated and poorly trained conscripts ...

          The Russians advanced thousands of troops to the Ukrainian border, as well as large tank and artillery units and units. These troops constantly bombard border cities and towns, as well as raiding Ukraine, where they fight together with the rebels ...

          The authors of the article, I really hope that one day life will bring me together with at least one of you.
          1. Rus2012
            Rus2012 7 October 2015 13: 09 New
            +2
            Quote: Baikal
            life will drive me

            ... the article consists entirely of templates and horror stories that Westerners have come up with and constantly operate on:
            - the Yankees are much stronger in conventional weapons (and try to figure out how many of the 10 times budget are “sawed” by the generals and their civilian colleagues?)
            - there will be no nuclear collision (and if so?)
            - 800tys. conscripts on 150tys proffi (and to think that the most suitable pros for today are selected from conscripts, and the rest are mobreserve?)

            The last paragraph is generally from the category of "mantra" ...

            No effort is visible to try to see the world in dynamics. And imagine what happens next ...
            Western plane-parallel world: they said the wall is black, and it will be considered black, even if it is actually white ...
            A lot of water must flow away before they begin to doubt and think, especially voluminously ...
            1. Evil Elf
              Evil Elf 10 October 2015 20: 18 New
              0
              Well, well, the laser gun, the "stink bomb", the "love bomb" are super development
    3. Kent0001
      Kent0001 7 October 2015 10: 49 New
      +2
      I agree, especially they already got it with their aircraft carriers. It’s just that we haven’t tried to drown them yet, otherwise their number can be sharply leveled to ours.
      1. sharp-lad
        sharp-lad 7 October 2015 22: 15 New
        0
        Yeah! Only one will remain, with the name "Japan".
    4. Altona
      Altona 7 October 2015 11: 29 New
      0
      Quote: major071
      This "work" from the category

      --------------------
      Absolutely propagandistic. There, the accents are correctly placed and the theses are outlined in accordance with the latest training manual from the State Department ... Yesterday I read that nonsense on the "Russian Spring" ...
      1. Dembel77
        Dembel77 7 October 2015 12: 15 New
        +3
        “We see how very modern air defense systems are being transferred to these airfields; we see very modern airplanes being flown to these airfields, ”said General Phillip Breedlov, commander of the NATO Armed Forces in Europe and commander of the US European Armed Forces, on these airfields. - I did not see a single aircraft at ISIS, for the destruction of which the SA-28 or SA-15 anti-aircraft systems (“Tor” and “Carapace”) would be required. These modern air defense systems are not for the fight against ISIS ... they are for the fight against something else».
        No, Mr. General, this is not to fight with someone else, just in case, so that the "others" would not be tempted to fly closer!
    5. goncharov.62
      goncharov.62 7 October 2015 12: 36 New
      0
      Well what to say! Let them continue to be alone with their "experts",
      do not bother them.
    6. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 7 October 2015 13: 30 New
      0
      Insolent actions of Vladimir Putin in Syria
      laughing laughing laughing rzhunimaga !!! no matter what the American experts fantasize, everything will be as always according to ours!
      1. Evil Elf
        Evil Elf 10 October 2015 20: 21 New
        0
        Something inspired me in 1999 when tanks entered Belgrade. Bill Clinton was then woken up at 04.30 in the morning, but he only turned the countersinks. Probably Monica Lewinsky got tired that night
  2. Rattenfanger
    Rattenfanger 7 October 2015 05: 47 New
    +20
    Experts agree that the US armed forces capable of acting on a global scale in a war using conventional means will rout the Russian army.

    Hmm ... last year hares were more modest ...
    1. Rav075
      Rav075 7 October 2015 08: 09 New
      +32
      Anecdote:
      The United States decided to go to war with Russia. Obama came to the Pentagon, gathered the generals and let's decide when to attack. Thought, thought, can not decide over time.
      They called a German attache and asked: when is it better to attack the Russians? The German says: whenever, not in the summer.
      They called the Frenchman with the same question. He replies: whenever, not in the fall.
      We decided to call the nearest neighbor of Russia - the Chinese representative. He flies: right now and attack!
      The Americans are in shock - as they say, right now? Why?
      The Chinese man says: the Russians are building the Vostochny Cosmodrome, the bridge to the Crimea, the Turkish Stream, the power of Siberia, the oil pipeline to China - they really need prisoners now! laughing
      1. VL33
        VL33 7 October 2015 10: 23 New
        +1
        the whole office cheered from the heart))) good
  3. aszzz888
    aszzz888 7 October 2015 05: 51 New
    +3
    Two-way shipping by sea requires up to 10 days. It is not clear how long Russia will be able to withstand such a strain of forces.


    Presumably, this question was calculated in the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.
    1. 412
      412 7 October 2015 12: 22 New
      +1
      Large-scale land operations will be conducted by Iranians under the command of Brigadier General Suleymani in Russia air defense and air support, Russia must deal with this.
  4. Yak-3P
    Yak-3P 7 October 2015 05: 52 New
    +6
    I read this nonsense in Rusvesna ... we have a 10th grader who will write more literate and if she lies a little bit ..
    1. onega67
      onega67 7 October 2015 11: 21 New
      +1
      such material is just for americos!
  5. B- 3ACADE
    B- 3ACADE 7 October 2015 05: 59 New
    +31
    In my opinion, the authors have seen enough of Rimbaud or some other kind.
    Felling the states is stupidly simple: we put out the light, and we begin to grab
    for all sorts of places. They will finish the rest themselves. About how I see
    these 13-14 year old dummies jumping from the rooftops just because
    there are no Internet iPhones and androids are not working. Black will go to rob
    and the rest to rob and shoot. And unnecessary bonbs, buns, buns, tanks and masaletics.
    It is only necessary to turn off the light.
    1. Kent0001
      Kent0001 7 October 2015 10: 51 New
      +1
      And we can, if that ....))))
      1. Kunar
        Kunar 12 October 2015 12: 22 New
        0
        Yes, how not ...)))
  6. Clutch
    Clutch 7 October 2015 06: 00 New
    +1
    complete nonsense..
    1. B- 3ACADE
      B- 3ACADE 7 October 2015 06: 50 New
      +2
      Jung, I live here for almost twenty years and I have the right to say so. And as for your complete nonsense, I'm sorry
      I don’t know him personally. But I know Brad Pete.
      1. dali
        dali 7 October 2015 07: 36 New
        0
        Quote: B- 3ACADE
        Jung, I live here for almost twenty years and I have the right to say so. And as for your complete nonsense, I'm sorry
        I don’t know him personally. But I know Brad Pete.


        Well - well ... especially about the combat effectiveness of only contract soldiers ... they don’t judge people by themselves ...
        Have you ever served any army ... I’m not talking about the Russian one ... fled to mattress at age 20, so you live there yourself ... or did you decide to try to fight, judging by your dictum?

        You try to fight with our two third non-contractual in real life ... then we'll see ...
        1. andj61
          andj61 7 October 2015 08: 32 New
          +5
          Quote: Dali
          You try to fight with our two third non-contractual in real life ... then we'll see ...

          Actually, he was talking about something completely different.
          Quote: B- 3ACADE
          Felling the states is stupidly simple: we put out the light, and we begin to grab
          for all sorts of places. They will finish the rest themselves. About how I see
          these 13-14 year old dummies jumping from the rooftops just because
          there are no Internet iPhones and androids are not working. Black will go to rob
          and the rest to rob and shoot. And unnecessary bonbs, buns, buns, tanks and masaletics.
          It is only necessary to turn off the light.


          And turning off the light with modern means, which are in the arsenal of the army, is quite simple.
      2. andj61
        andj61 7 October 2015 08: 29 New
        +7
        Quote: B- 3ACADE
        Felling the states is stupidly simple: we put out the light, and we begin to grab
        for all sorts of places. They will finish the rest themselves.
        Quote: B- 3ACADE
        Jung, I live here for almost twenty years and I have the right to say so. And as for your complete nonsense, I'm sorry
        I don’t know him personally. But I know Brad Pete.


        I agree with you in many ways, colleague. And there is actual evidence of this. When, due to an accident in the power system in New York, the "end of the world" came in 2003, robbers and looters just got out onto the street. Cellular and many computer networks did not work - even often where the power supply was. Shops, banks, enterprises did not work - a real end of the world!
        And if you still can’t fix it quickly, it will collapse.
  7. valokordin
    valokordin 7 October 2015 06: 01 New
    +2
    Having begun delivering air strikes in Syria, President Vladimir Putin inspired an indirect war with the United States. As a result, the powerful armies of the two countries were in the role of assistants to the opposing sides in a multipolar conflict. For Moscow, this is a very risky adventure, experts say. “It will be very difficult for them. This is difficult in terms of logistics. Russians don’t have much strength, means and opportunities to project forces over long distances, ”said Mark Galeotti, a specialist in Russian security issues from New York University.
    СTatya anti-Russian, it is visible with the naked eye. But in order for the country not to lose, it is necessary to mobilize resources and the economy. The modern bourgeois model is not capable of this. The oligarchs and bourgeois, whose interests are expressed by the government and other accomplices, are not capable of this in principle. The war of attrition our partners are hoping for is in principle unacceptable. If we do not quickly win the fight against obscurantists and their Western patrons and do not take economic measures, burrows not at the expense of the people, the consequences will not be predictable.
    1. Per se.
      Per se. 7 October 2015 07: 03 New
      +6
      Quote: valokordin
      If we do not quickly win the fight against obscurantists and their Western patrons and do not take economic measures, burrows not at the expense of the people, the consequences will not be predictable.
      It’s unlikely to be fast, but, unambiguously, declaring a desire to revive the multipolar world, we must get out of the alien pole of power, the capitalist world has long found a transnational core, its pole, as well as the rules of the game for the benefit of its “founders” and “winners”, Anglo-Saxons. Here, without a return to socialism, it is difficult to hope for your true autonomy and independence. Second, in order to mobilize forces, in addition to new industrialization in the economy, it is necessary to solve the problem of national defense, that is, by whom and how we must defend our homeland, should it happen. A fully contracted army, as well as year-old conscripts, are also in doubt here, both for economic and moral reasons. We need orientation to Russian reality, our problems, our borders and possible threats, and not the problems of Israel, US tactics or anyone else, without understanding the difference in interests, opportunities and outgoing threats. Here, the solution is seen in an integrated approach, where universal military duty should be put at the forefront, with the separation of military service into army and civilian. Those who are unnecessary or unsuitable for the army must fulfill their constitutional duty in the civil service (work in defense enterprises or deductions from salaries to the army fund). As during the war, some at the front, others in the rear for the front. Universal military duty should cover all draftees, including girls. At the same time, it is possible to select the best for the army and increase the term of military service up to 3-4 years (introducing benefits and bonuses to those who have served in the army). Contract service can and should be maintained for individual specialties and units of high readiness. This is the only way to mobilize strength, increase the prestige, quality and motivation of the service, saving the budget. Without raising the quality of the human factor, human resources, no, the most modern technology will be effective. Well, and last, no less important, we need a national idea that would rally and inspire, and this idea is clearly not consumerism and money.
  8. Wolka
    Wolka 7 October 2015 06: 04 New
    +3
    a lot has been said, but if you make a alignment, the author doesn’t give anything new and archival, just verbiage, although the Yankee’s military potential is huge, it’s necessary to understand that all this potential cannot be used on a particular theater, definitely, therefore, it’s panicky to fear it’s not necessary, in addition, any war is not only the conduct of hostilities, here it is necessary to think broader ...
  9. ImPerts
    ImPerts 7 October 2015 06: 05 New
    +6
    Experts agree that the US armed forces capable of acting on a global scale in a war using conventional means will rout the Russian army.

    Napoleon also thought Hitler was going to do this in one summer ...
    And?
    They probably had experts and analysts.
  10. sl22277
    sl22277 7 October 2015 06: 10 New
    +11
    Numerous errors, inaccuracies and conjectures of the authors of the article regarding Russia, its interests and its armed forces once again testify to the incompetence of Euro-Atlantic military-political analytics. Lord, what American-analytical bullshit in this article! (And the Chinese Army is smoking aside ...). And how about this “Conclusion” for you: -One third are subunits and units equipped with the most modern equipment, including T-14 Armata tanks. I was pleasantly “surprised” ..
    1. sl22277
      sl22277 7 October 2015 07: 31 New
      +1
      Why are you so cowardly hiding, afraid to justify your minus ?! Well then, know that I’m somehow “violet” on anonymous. I expressed my point of view openly, without hiding. Do you agree or not it does not bother me at all!
      1. Erg
        Erg 7 October 2015 08: 20 New
        +1
        The "competence" of Western analysts has long been known to everyone. Therefore, it is not surprising that they did not pay attention to the vector of the changing situation in the world. And they did not continue it ... hi minus not me
  11. Riv
    Riv 7 October 2015 06: 12 New
    0
    "Impudent geopolitical strategy" - I liked it. :)

    Something reminded the attitude towards impoverished samurai and ronin in medieval Japan. Imagine a gopnik with two swords (and you don’t have one, by the way), who carries weapons on a completely legal basis and which, if he kills you, most likely nothing will happen. Now he will come to you and ask for the phone ... An impudent strategy? Of course.
  12. Dimy4
    Dimy4 7 October 2015 06: 13 New
    +3
    In the article addressed to us too often the word "arrogant" is mentioned; they still cannot see it. Well, the whole point is like in Krylov’s fable: how dare you clean your muddy drink with sand and silt here with your unclean snout ... But it will be problematic to rip off your head.
  13. shinobi
    shinobi 7 October 2015 06: 19 New
    0
    After the phrase, the experts agree that the US armed forces capable of operating on a global scale in the war using conventional means will rout the Russian army utterly, ceased reading.
  14. EvgNik
    EvgNik 7 October 2015 06: 28 New
    +5
    Full nonsense, of course, but still you can draw 2 conclusions:
    1. The West understands that Russia is not going to conquer campaigns not only on the American continent, but also in Europe. In the worst case, Russia's interests in the Baltic States and Ukraine.
    2. The West is ready to start a direct invasion of Russia, waiting for the right moment. The only thing is that the more the West waits, the stronger the defense of Russia.
    So that from complete nonsense we can draw sound conclusions.
    1. Aleksander
      Aleksander 7 October 2015 10: 46 New
      +3
      Yes, the author speaks about the "impudence" of Russia, and discusses the whole article, how to invade the West, not noticing that this is impudence and aggression.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  15. RUSOIVAN
    RUSOIVAN 7 October 2015 06: 39 New
    +5
    Russian Security Specialist from New York University
    did it amuse me alone?
  16. SPIKER
    SPIKER 7 October 2015 06: 49 New
    +2
    This "masterpiece" from Matthew, Andrew from the "Military Times" will be played in Ukraine or in the Baltic countries, they love such shit !!! All this from the series: "One grandmother said" !!!
  17. slizhov
    slizhov 7 October 2015 06: 59 New
    0
    To all I want to say that our valiant ancestors knew how to fight NOT NUMBER, AND ABILITY ...
    For us, however, it is time to be so.
  18. as150505
    as150505 7 October 2015 07: 12 New
    +1
    Only these analysts do not take into account the morale of the troops, but only compare the amount of equipment. An analysis of recent wars shows that they are no warriors, with the exception of the Germans. But even that broke the ridge of the Nazis. So the article is bullshit !.
  19. jetfors_84
    jetfors_84 7 October 2015 07: 23 New
    +1
    Narcissists who consider themselves superhuman. Have seen enough of Hollywood. How much has been said - do not touch the Russians.
  20. A1L9E4K9S
    A1L9E4K9S 7 October 2015 07: 28 New
    +1
    Quote: B- 3ACADE
    It is only necessary to turn off the light.


    I agree with you three hundred percent to stop modern life, it’s enough to leave the world without electricity and the modern world will fall into the Stone Age in three to four days.
  21. mamont5
    mamont5 7 October 2015 07: 33 New
    +4
    "Experts agree that a US military capable of operating on a global scale in a war using conventional means will rout the Russian army."
    Frank lies. This is unlikely to succeed in the United States, even with the addition of "allies" from NATO. Wrong forces, wrong soul.

    "Today, the United States spends almost 10 times more on national defense than Russia. The US has 10 aircraft carriers in the ranks, while Russia has only one."
    So what? Their funds are allocated for the maintenance of a huge number of military bases around the world, which are suitable for the care of lackeys, and in military terms - nothing. The remaining funds are to be cut in such amounts that our treasuries did not even dream of.
    Russian aircraft carriers are not needed yet, but the United States is unlikely to be useful in a war with Russia. These will be the ships for slaughter. It is very easy to disable them, even despite a powerful escort.

    "Russia is still weak by many traditional criteria."
    This is for what? Well, perhaps, the surface fleet of Russia is weaker, so we DON'T even think about carrying out an amphibious operation in the USA. But if SUCH continues, then we can reflect.
  22. Volzhanin
    Volzhanin 7 October 2015 07: 52 New
    +2
    Striped degenerates are not high opinion of us. laughing !
    All the worse they will fall into the abyss.
    I just wallow out of laughter, as they categorically declare that they will defeat us with conventional, non-nuclear weapons! Laugh at 1/6 of the land!
    Who will smash something - the natava veins in thongs?
    Psacking and only ...
    laughing
  23. Socialism 2.0
    Socialism 2.0 7 October 2015 08: 04 New
    +2
    I liked the article. She expresses their astonished perplexity about our country. Perplexity from the word - perplexity.
  24. Erg
    Erg 7 October 2015 08: 27 New
    0
    I never received a response. What will this war look like? wassat
    1. Gost171
      Gost171 8 October 2015 02: 35 New
      0
      Probably like in the old joke: Like I'm sitting in a trench, I paint my lips, and the Viet Cong is still rushing, although makeup has not been spoiled, like the last time. In general, there is experience. Supply, airstrikes (MK.kein), ground operations, etc., etc., and .... And when you see this on-screen-screen this Voodoo doll, it is screwed up, well, is there a New Year tree and insurance? Will they fight SO? So I see, in a tent with a bourgeois, singing along in the mud, about lunch, not a word, I will stop, it seems not at all right to them, well, if someone gnawed at the service
  25. oracul
    oracul 7 October 2015 08: 36 New
    +1
    Authors, like US politicians, suffer wild pride and self-confidence. The numbers are one thing, and life is another. In reality, the capabilities of American soldiers for a direct confrontation were tested by the Germans in the Ardennes when the USSR saved the allies from defeat. They will never be able to understand the phrase - Our cause is just, the victory will be ours! For the simple reason that they never did a just thing, but always engaged exclusively in business. But business is such a thing, today won, then missed the moment, and in the end - lost.
  26. Proud.
    Proud. 7 October 2015 08: 49 New
    0
    "... It will be very difficult for them. It is difficult in terms of logistical support ..." -You worry for your "rear", with our rear support, we will figure it out ourselves.
    "... Putin demonstrates an unwavering willingness to use military force in his awkward foreign policy, .. "." ... it develops some extremely important technologies and models of equipment, new tactics of military operations and impudent geopolitical strategy ... "- Yes, you can’t even decide! AnAlitiGi.
  27. RUS33
    RUS33 7 October 2015 08: 57 New
    +2
    Quote: slizhov
    To all I want to say that our valiant ancestors knew how to fight NOT NUMBER, AND ABILITY ...
    For us, however, it is time to be so.

    Plus, at all times, all the people get up. And at the SGA, the contract soldiers will run the first to give up.
  28. Rurikovich
    Rurikovich 7 October 2015 09: 19 New
    +1
    I represent what With what faces are these ... mmm .... "experts" wrote this opus laughing With the same confidence in one's own invincibility and strength, one can write about anything. True, there is one caveat: “using conventional means” ... It's the same as sitting in the sandbox and saying that let's go to the war room, but, really, not really laughing Kindergarten....
    Or are comrades confident that, by virtue of our kindness and honesty, we will sit and endure when they beat us in the face without using a club behind us? ....
    Everything that threatens security and poses a threat to territorial integrity must and WILL have an adequate response! Even if you need to put all the trump cards in the form of strategic nuclear forces. Weapons and weapons to use.
    So "whoever comes to us with a sword will die by the sword." But it’s not specified what this sword will be like. lol
    So all these "expert" calculations are worthless. Well, only if Western residents are scared lol For they have so much confidence in what the box is that they have forgotten how to think at all.
    Personally, my opinion hi
    PS Yes, and if the Americans really were so strong not only in terms of quantity and quality of iron, but also morally, they would have long ago shaken their rights in the Middle East without looking at Russia, even if necessary, and shooting down planes. But the reality is what she is. So I would argue about US power lol
  29. lloaderr
    lloaderr 7 October 2015 09: 48 New
    +2
    That's because of such "experts" who have replaced real US analysts and could lead the world into a nuclear war.
    Well, yes - 2/3 of the army among our conscripts, but even they will prove themselves better in battle than their regular "contract soldiers" who will put on their pants during real hostilities (remember last year in the Crimea how they managed when taking them on sight) .
  30. The comment was deleted.
  31. Vovan 73
    Vovan 73 7 October 2015 09: 58 New
    0
    Speak hats in America has become more? Well, well, throw
  32. Aleksander
    Aleksander 7 October 2015 10: 21 New
    +4
    Philip Breedlove (Phillip Breedlov). - I did not see a single aircraft at ISIS, for the destruction of which the SA-15 or SA-22 anti-aircraft systems (“Tor” and “Carapace”) would be required.


    Has anyone seen Iran’s nuclear missiles? But the United States has already built a missile defense system in Europe. So with igil - aircraft can also appear yes
  33. Zomanus
    Zomanus 7 October 2015 10: 45 New
    +1
    The article may not be entirely adequate, but it makes you think.
    Turkey is now beginning to speak out against us.
    It is clear with whose filing.
    Well, so she can completely wind up a tantrum and close the straits for us.
    And then how are we going to carry the goods?
    If air, then gold will be.
    If by land, then all the thugs of BV will declare a hunt for us.
    So think about it ...
  34. Lionnvrsk
    Lionnvrsk 7 October 2015 11: 57 New
    +1
    The article is a complete distortion of the facts, turning upside down and the poorly concealed impotent spite of the "exclusive" nation.
  35. zenith
    zenith 7 October 2015 12: 06 New
    0
    Quote: venaya
    Well, why so, right into the firebox. First, let's figure out which cockroaches run in their head there. This will be useful to us, nevertheless: "warned - means armed."

    Yes, we need to figure out what's wrong with their cockroaches. I figured it out. In this regard, a simple question looms. Why is it that they try on the volume of cradles that they will rake without fail for some kind of GDP, military budgets, and so on? When our grandfathers did not have the Internet and reports on Germany’s GDP, which exceeded the USSR’s GDP by tens if not hundreds, but rolled up their sleeves and smashed the aggressor who had already bent half the world. Why the modern aggressor will avoid this, neobreb without fail do not even bother. Nothing has changed. Russian go no one has canceled. Remember the aggressors, do not forget. True, sadly, but they have only 1 chance to achieve something - this is a nuclear option. But then there will be none, too, do not go to a fortuneteller. They all understand. The calculation is only on stuffing experts, which can scare us with gossip. Freaks.
  36. Tambov Wolf
    Tambov Wolf 7 October 2015 12: 24 New
    +1
    In vain, they minus an article. If you carefully read, among the screams - we’re still wow, the thought goes quietly: “- They missed Russia, what should we do now? They can beat it with a drill, the whole triad is modernized. "r.r.m.o." And here we need to keep our ears open. This enemy is capable of anything. He has neither conscience, nor shame, nor any torment.
  37. andrew42
    andrew42 7 October 2015 12: 26 New
    +2
    Not everything is so bad while such Onanalysts at our "partners" scrap their essays:
    FAR MIND -
    ".. The Russians in their military campaign in Syria are very dependent on supply routes requiring air corridors that pass through Iranian and Iraqi airspace. The only alternative is sea communications coming from the Crimea. Up to 10 sea routes for such shipping "days. It is not clear how long Russia will be able to withstand such a stress of forces."
    MYSELF CONTRADICTING AND NOT ABLE TO LINK THE ENDS TO THE ENDS -
    "A new advanced forward base will give Russia the opportunity to fly missions, conduct surveillance and reconnaissance, and launch unmanned aerial vehicles throughout the Middle East, including Iraq .."
    Fearing to call things by their names (so as not to expose your mediocre lie) -
    "..Philip Breedlov. - I haven’t seen a single ISIL plane that would require the use of SA-15 or SA-22 anti-aircraft systems (Tor and Shell) to destroy them. These modern air defense systems are not for fighting ISIS ... they are for fighting something else. ”
    MYSTERIOUS AND NOT APPRECIATING THEIR CAPACITY ALLIES (IN PARTICULAR, EXPERIENCED RABBITS - RIGHT-HAIRED) -
    “It's interesting to listen to what they learned,” Lieutenant General Ben Hodges, Commander of the US Army in Europe, told Defense News. “Not a single American came under the fire of Russian artillery and multiple launch rocket systems, not a single one was affected by Russian electronic warfare systems, electronic suppression, at least in the tactical level.”
    CONFIDENTIAL TO MADNESS -
    ".. the US armed forces in the war using conventional means utterly defeat the Russian army .."
    (IF TOMAHAWA ARMADA AND STEEL STAINS ARE USUAL FUNDS, THEN NUCLEAR WAR IS A BACK FIGHT)

    PLAYING EXHIBITIONISTS -
    "... the true goal of Russia in the Baltic states is to show .."
    (They DO NOT SHOW ANYTHING TO THEM - IT IS SCARY FROM UNCERTAINTY)

    Well and finally, just dumb as military experts
    "... in the Baltic, Russia can also attract the naval composition of the Northern Fleet, since its ships are often in military service in the North Atlantic and are able to come to the rescue in case of .."
    (I wonder how the Northern Fleet will pass through the North Sea and the Danish Straits)

    These are our modern 3,14 .., uh sorry, "dear partners".
  38. nivander
    nivander 7 October 2015 12: 34 New
    0
    Tears dripped
  39. Trapperxnumx
    Trapperxnumx 7 October 2015 13: 17 New
    0
    Normal article. I’m not saying that it’s true, but quite normal. More precisely, this is a typical view from America. The bottom line is that the USA is the strongest country in the world and we will erase any of them into powder. But the Russians are sitting at home, they are not going to sail with us, they have powerful anti-aircraft defense and electronic warfare equipment, missiles and other unpleasant landmines, but how to fight in a modern war if your electronics are strangled and there is nowhere for the aircraft to turn around? Their army is almost equally with the US Army is fighting in Ukraine. The article is full of slogans and stereotypes, but in general there are real things in it.
  40. Roust
    Roust 7 October 2015 14: 24 New
    0
    A typical and very predictable heresy of the West ... However, they are scared - this is what pleases.
  41. NordUral
    NordUral 7 October 2015 15: 14 New
    +1
    For Moscow, this is a very risky adventure, experts say. “It will be very difficult for them. This is difficult in terms of logistics. Russians don’t have much strength, means and opportunities to project forces over long distances, ”said Mark Galeotti, a specialist in Russian security issues from New York University.
    My friend, we have always had less power than the arrogant West. But managed so far. We can handle it now, if you decide on a war. Enough with your charter to climb into other people's gardens, that's enough.

    Russia's increasingly aggressive operational and strategic plans have sparked a flurry of ratings and reviews from US military strategists on US military policy and action plans in the event of a conflict with the former Soviet state.
    Well ... well ... from a sore head to a healthy one - the usual arrogant Saxon practice ... The article is a provocative lie with elements of truth.
    Russian experts believe that the invasion of Syria, coupled with Putin’s aggressive speech at the UN 28 September, signal that he intends to become a key player in the region for a long time.
    Which experts are Borya Nadezhdin and K?

    The following should be extremely clear. Experts agree that the US forces capable of operating on a global scale in a war using conventional means will utterly crush the Russian army. But modern wars are unusual, and geography, politics, and terrain conditions inevitably give advantages to one side or another.
    It’s you who are fighting with the Papuans. Here is a slightly different case. Aloizych also thought so, but Malekh was mistaken.

    And finally:
    By and large, the Russian military is no match for the US. But the distance between them in recent years has been reduced.
    No one is forbidden to make mistakes. Vietnam has already shown this at one time, but it does not seem to teach even its own experience.

    Predicting new hot spots
    Not predicting, but creating, while lying impudently.
  42. vovashturman
    vovashturman 7 October 2015 17: 33 New
    +1
    And, educated people write this - paranoia ...
  43. Conn
    Conn 7 October 2015 17: 41 New
    +1
    Nonsense from stoned pin to owls.
  44. Belousov
    Belousov 7 October 2015 19: 25 New
    0
    Hmm ... times are changing, US stereotypes remain ...
  45. zulusuluz
    zulusuluz 7 October 2015 20: 03 New
    +1
    Bravourno and one-sided. Unmotivated recruits are instantly motivated when it comes to life and death. And the Russians always fight to the death ...
    1. sharp-lad
      sharp-lad 7 October 2015 22: 23 New
      +1
      And the Russians always fight to the death ...
      For the sake of life. hi
  46. nazar_0753
    nazar_0753 7 October 2015 22: 50 New
    0
    US vs. Russia: What the war between the two most formidable armies in the world will look like ("Military Times", USA)

    It will look fun, but not too long. Until the rockets fly. And this can happen both immediately after the start of the war, and after some time, not too long,
  47. MAD_SERGANT
    MAD_SERGANT 8 October 2015 07: 42 New
    0
    the article looks like self-consolation and self-hypnosis, from the realization that they can’t do anything, the Americans will not trample in Europe, because the Europeans themselves shout that they have no "strength". The author hinted about the Baltic states. In Estonia, for example, only a scout battalion will be able to show something and kaitseliit (voluntary squad). All the rest will run away when the "armor" appears. In short, two morons are power))))
  48. kvapu1976
    kvapu1976 8 October 2015 11: 31 New
    0
    Yapping yusovskie pugs, and yesterday Russia clearly demonstrated what awaits you.
  49. Straight
    Straight 8 October 2015 14: 26 New
    0
    As usual, the war against Russia will look like. At first it will seem that the United States won. Then it turns out that the whole war is ahead, Then Russia will have allies and a lot. Then the Russians hoisted the Red Banner on the capitol and the White House. And then the Indians and Negroes will slaughter everyone in revenge for everything ..
  50. win
    win 14 October 2015 11: 43 New
    +2
    About the authors of the article, we can briefly say: "Every gopher is an agronomist"