Military Review

Do not be afraid of war: neither ordinary nor nuclear

103
Increasingly, the world's media, experts, historians, analysts and politicians are raising the themes of a possible world war in which the United States, Russia and China will participate. It is believed that the war between the great powers with the use of conventional weapons is inevitable. And it should not be afraid of her. Moreover, there are pluses: war accelerates progress. Someone else is sure that one should not even be afraid of nuclear war.




Rick Searle, associate professor of political science and stories for Delaware Valley College, a writer, analyst and scholar of the Institute of Ethics and New Technologies (IEET), asked himself: “What makes war between the United States and China or Russia unavoidable?” The scientist tried to give an answer in an article on the website IEET.

The scientist reminds that there is a dangerous and not a new idea, which is being talked about today: they say, ordinary war between great powers is inevitable, and it represents a much smaller threat to the existence of mankind than anyone thinks. Moreover, it is even necessary for the progress of mankind.

The emergence of such an argument in favor of war has replaced the preceding assertions about the obsolescence of the concept of war, because history is characterized by trends aimed at prosperity and peace. However, they said the same thing in the 19th century. There were many who claimed that war was becoming unnecessary, since peaceful global trade made it possible to make profits where war was previously required. Opponents of these "peaceful" ideologues, in turn, stated that war was the main vector of human progress and that without it, people would have degraded.

Argument with clearly racist overtones, right? It is because of racism that such statements about the degradation of mankind without war in intellectual circles are not customary to discuss. But instead, the war was tied to technological development: supposedly, without war in general and the great war for power in particular, people are doomed to a technological dead end. This was written, for example, by Ian Morris (Ian Morris) in the book "War What is it Good For?"

Supporters of such technological “progress” for some reason do not take into account one simple thing: the conflict between the great powers can lead to a tragic prospect of an exchange of nuclear strikes. Perhaps the war drives progress, but it is better to move forward at a snail's pace than to return to the Stone Age through similar conflicts.

Nevertheless, some people cite the argument that a nuclear war will not completely destroy the civilization of earthmen. But it is unlikely the broad masses will believe in this thought. Another thing is the dissemination of the idea that the great powers could collide with each other and still somehow miraculously avoid the use of all the power of their conventional and nuclear forces, even under the condition of terrible losses.

This is written, for example, by Peter W. Singer and August Cole in the book “Ghost Fleet: A novel of the Third World War”, in which outlines the fictional story of the Third World War using exclusively traditional weapons. The war is fought mainly on the sea and goes between the United States, China and Russia.

This book has been the subject of much research. Perhaps it really shows quite well what the war will look like in the next ten to fifteen years. If only its authors are right, in the wars of the future unmanned vehicles will operate under the ground, on the ground, in the air and at sea - in short, everywhere. Military operations will be conducted with the help of artificial intelligence.

Cyber ​​attacks in the future will be a natural theater of operations. Yes, and outer space, too.

In the Third World, the achievements in the field of neurology and bioelectronics will be applied, at least where it is necessary to conduct “extended and brutal” interrogations.

The war will begin with a Chinese or Russian attack on US satellites, and this attack will “effectively blind” the US military. Some American equipment is vulnerable because the elements of its devices are made in Chinese factories.

As for the war at sea, everything in the book is “standard”: a sudden attack by the Chinese and Russians on US forces in the Pacific Ocean. Most of the american fleet destroyed, Hawaii captured.

The problem of the authors is that they do not give themselves something in some report. Are people able to control such conflicts? Without thinking about it, the authors do not remind that everything should be done to avoid conflicts. The book draws a conflict, clogged in the waters of the Pacific Ocean. Neither the possibility of an exchange of nuclear strikes or strategic bombardment is taken into account. But how can this be in reality? Rick Searle strongly doubts this.

The uniqueness of the historical works of Herodotus is that at that time, for the first time, one people tried to really understand their enemies. “The Greeks, as far as I know, were the first and only ones here,” the analyst notes.

In the book “Ghost Fleet”, the Chinese are reduced to the level of some kind of cardboard villains, with whom someone like D. Bond must fight. The American control over the Pacific Ocean is fully justified, the “heroes” of Washington are declared models of virtue.

The weakness of such book "prophecies" is that the true imagination is inaccessible to their authors. The motives, prerequisites, as well as “deep historical grievances,” which would probably lead the Chinese or Russians to any such conflict, are not even outlined in the book.

And it is here that Rick Searl sees the main problem - “lack of understanding.”

It is this misunderstanding that makes the great wars of humanity, if not inevitable, then, in any case, more likely.

Many foreign experts, we will add on our own, now hint that the leading powers are now going to war. However, it is still possible to avoid it.

Recently, one expert considered a way to circumvent the military situation in relation to the PRC and the United States.

On the path of the coexistence of two states - China and the United States - on the international stage are many “traps of Thucydides,” says the political scientist S.N. Fukidida at the Free University of Berlin and the American School of Classical Studies in Athens, political scientist. Jaffe. He shared his opinion with The National Interest magazine (the source of the translation is the website RIA News".

The “trap” referred to in the article is described by Thucydides in the History of the Peloponnesian War. The two sides of the conflict, the Delian Union (Athens) and the Peloponessian Union (Sparta), were held hostage by the inevitable war caused by Sparta’s fear of the growth of Athens’s power. Nowadays, theorists use the concept of "traps" to describe the relationship between the United States ("governing power") and the PRC ("rising power"), RIA notes "News».

Getting into the “trap of Thucydides” for the United States and China does not mean that war is inevitable, but it means that the tension in Chinese-American relations will be heating up due to the appearance of attractive and dangerous interpretations of “national interest”.

“The Peloponessian war became inevitable (or, in other words, necessary) when Athens and Sparta no longer saw her as an alternative,” indicates Jaffe. In his opinion, the United States and China should try to avoid just such a scenario in the conditions of special interconnectedness of the ways of their development.

According to the scientist, Mr. Obama and Comrade X can fall into the “trap of Thucydides” if they refuse to recognize the deep contradictions that cannot be avoided (and this cannot be done now) due to a change in the balance between the two states.

The same thing, we add from ourselves, can be characteristic of the deteriorated relations between the United States and the Russian Federation. If Washington refuses to recognize the changed geopolitical situation and continues to call Russia a "regional power", then people from the White House, the State Department and the Pentagon, as well as from NATO, where Washington plays the first violin, cannot avoid the "Fukidida trap". Russia, too, will fall into it if it means “deep historical grievances”, and not insist on diplomacy.

Oh, the “trap” would have disappeared, try the White House on the model of no longer Fukidida, but Herodot “understand your enemies”! But American strategists are used to planning not understanding, but denying everything that does not fit into their hegemonic doctrine. In addition, to understand the enemy - it is too difficult and fraught with concessions; another thing is to kill and become a winner, thereby confirming the status of a “great power”.

This is why Professor Searle writes that misunderstanding makes the big wars of the future more likely.

Observed and commented on Oleg Chuvakin
- especially for topwar.ru
103 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Armored optimist
    Armored optimist 20 October 2015 06: 26 New
    +19
    Unfortunately, today's generation of politicians, both European and American, is really not afraid of nuclear war. We have been scared for many years by its consequences in the form of a "nuclear winter." But this has long been refuted without unnecessary publicity. According to modern models and the current number of nuclear weapons, it does not work.
    And that's bad. There would be fear, there would be more chances for peace.
    1. Tatyana
      Tatyana 20 October 2015 07: 06 New
      +23
      Quote from the article
      But American strategists are used to planning, not understanding, but denying everything that does not fit into their hegemonic doctrine.
      Impunity impudent "hegemon" corrupts him in thoughts - and in deeds!
      1. mirag2
        mirag2 20 October 2015 09: 59 New
        +14
        The same from the article:
        Increasingly, the world's media, experts, historians, analysts and politicians are raising the themes of a possible world war in which the United States, Russia and China will participate. It is believed that the war between the great powers with the use of conventional weapons is inevitable. And it should not be afraid of her. Moreover, there are pluses: war accelerates progress. Someone else is sure that one should not even be afraid of nuclear war.
        one to one as before the First World War.
      2. Alexey M
        Alexey M 20 October 2015 11: 31 New
        +5
        The last wars got used to fight with the wrong hands. Well, they forgot how the coffins came from Iraq and Afghanistan.
    2. i80186
      i80186 20 October 2015 07: 25 New
      +15
      Quote: armored optimist
      We have been scared for many years by its consequences in the form of a "nuclear winter."

      Nuclear winter is actually a funny thing. For example, if the contents of the reactors of the Leningrad or Novovoronezh NPPs are evenly spread across Europe, then only rats and cockroaches can live there for a very long time.
      Quote: armored optimist
      There would be fear, there would be more chances for peace.

      There is not just fear, there is panic horror. The use of Caliber and the subsequent reaction of NATO have clearly demonstrated this.
      1. Walking
        Walking 20 October 2015 08: 09 New
        +7
        America hopes to survive in a nuclear war, hoping that most of the attacks will be delivered on Europe and on American bases in other countries.
      2. Albert1988
        Albert1988 20 October 2015 09: 13 New
        +13
        Quote: i80186
        For example, if the contents of the reactors of the Leningrad or Novovoronezh NPPs are evenly spread across Europe, then only rats and cockroaches can live there for a very long time.

        Well, not only they, but the total majority of reptiles, amphibians, insects and other invertebrates, but you shouldn’t even talk about plants and unicellulars)) The main thing is that “Homo sapiens” will not be able to live there ...
        Quote: i80186
        There is not just fear, there is panic horror. The use of Caliber and the subsequent reaction of NATO have clearly demonstrated this.

        This is more likely not a fear of the TTX “caliber” (although this is an important component) - after all, amers have many such missiles, so far more than ours, but before that. that Russia can now fully respond to their "lightning fast global strike" the essence of which is to spit us a cloud of Kyrgyz Republic from their ships (do not fall under all kinds of INF missiles), which we will not be able to shoot down our air defense, but we must respond with "nuclear crackers" we don’t dare, but we don’t have any similar CDs ... But it didn’t work out - there are CRs and they fly, so we’ll respond to their “long arms” with our “long arms”, which means that this strategy is all tail ))).
        1. i80186
          i80186 20 October 2015 09: 20 New
          +7
          Quote: Albert1988
          Well, not only they, but the total majority of reptiles, amphibians, insects and other invertebrates, but you shouldn’t even talk about plants and unicellulars)) The main thing is that “Homo sapiens” will not be able to live there ...

          Well no. Just the majority will refuse to live. An example is the red forest in the immediate vicinity of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. That's close to it will be everywhere.
          1. Albert1988
            Albert1988 20 October 2015 12: 47 New
            +6
            Quote: i80186
            Well no. Just the majority will refuse to live.

            Far from a fact - it all depends on the isotopic composition and dose. In the Chernobyl zone, there is mainly radioactive graphite dust - and it penetrates the body only through the oral cavity or respiratory tract, does not penetrate the skin of the fruit, is not absorbed by the vascular system of plants, which is not as dangerous as, for example, radioactive strontium, which is chemically similar to calcium, which is important for cells, and therefore penetrates well into the body, in animals it is deposited in bones and in plants in decent amounts in cell vacuoles (especially in fruits and other juicy tissues). Strangely enough, there is not so much strontium in Chernobyl, mostly not far from the station itself. So even a person in the exclusion zone can live, not too close to the epicenter, observing certain precautions.
            But in the region of the East Ural Radioactive Trace (EURT) - it is just full of this very strontium (the bones of all animals are excellently fonit). And there are there the fruits and meat of the beast of death alike, plus strontium in the environment. And yet - nowhere else in Russia, perhaps, is there such a concentration and such a variety of Red Book species as on the territory of the EURT. So the vast majority of species will not suffer much (given that modern bombs are clean enough), unlike humans.
            All this is well described in the works of Professor A. Rubanovich, Head of the Laboratory of Ecological Genetics, Institute of General Genetics, Russian Academy of Sciences))).
            1. i80186
              i80186 20 October 2015 15: 49 New
              +3
              Quote: Albert1988
              All this is well described in the works of Professor A. Rubanovich, Head of the Laboratory of Ecological Genetics, Institute of General Genetics, Russian Academy of Sciences))).

              Well, then the bombs are, yes, they are clean. But here the spent fuel atomized by a nuclear explosion, in which, together with strontium, cobalt, polonium, will still have three hundred kilograms of plutonium, obviously no one will like any living thing. That is, one destroyed reactor will be, according to the contamination of the area, somewhere alongside all the detonated nuclear munitions taken together throughout history. By the way, this was the main reason for the decrease in the power of the well-known Kuz'kina Matter, the shell from U238 (Jekyll-Hyde reaction) was changed to lead there, thereby reducing the pollution of the area by an order of magnitude. smile
              1. Albert1988
                Albert1988 20 October 2015 18: 22 New
                +1
                Quote: i80186
                But here the spent fuel atomized by a nuclear explosion, in which, together with strontium, cobalt, polonium, will still have three hundred kilograms of plutonium, obviously no one will like any living thing. That is, one destroyed reactor will be, according to the contamination of the area, somewhere alongside all the detonated nuclear munitions taken together throughout history.

                The main thing is that this dust will then be chased around the world and poison survivors by radioactive fallout, but still most organisms will survive quietly, with morphoses, mutations (read cancer, but animals and cancer are very normally tolerated, unlike humans), snakes are out of dose, deadly for humans for an hour, generally on the side, plants with rare exceptions (pine) are also extremely resistant to radiation and even with many critical mutations and morphoses manage to survive and leave offspring. But the main thing is that a person will not survive, like most higher mammals and birds.
                1. Xsanchez
                  Xsanchez 21 October 2015 01: 03 New
                  +1
                  The whole world is in dust!
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. Aleksandr72
      Aleksandr72 20 October 2015 08: 26 New
      +20
      “Nuclear winter, summer, autumn, spring” - does it matter what time will come after the massive use of WMD, it’s not only a “world scarecrow” in the face of global nuclear missile exchange, but also the use of non-nuclear weapons of WMD (military chemistry, biological weapons), which will certainly not fail to be used by both world leader powers and poorer countries that do not have nuclear weapons. None of the most advanced missile defense systems will give a 100% guarantee of repulsing a nuclear strike against major industrial and political centers; therefore, large cities (of which there are many in the USA, Russia, and especially in the PRC) will most likely be archived with the population (do not forget about such damaging factors as gamma radiation, resulting in radiation sickness). Now they write a lot (and mostly utter nonsense) about the so-called climatic (option - tectonic) weapons. But who can guarantee that the use of powerful thermonuclear munitions will not follow all kinds of natural disasters (such as the movement of the earth's crust in earthquake-prone areas, the eruption of mega-volcanoes, tsunamis, etc. - can you continue the list yourself)? The massive use of WMDs (especially nuclear weapons) will almost certainly destroy statehood in countries that own these weapons - because opponents in these countries will launch their arsenal of WMDs, so to speak in the manner of applying preventive security measures - so as not to get the same. And about the fact that now there are few nuclear warheads left in the world, I would not be particularly deceived, provided that modern means of delivering nuclear weapons to the target have become much more effective (increasing survivability, range, accuracy, etc.) even the remaining number quite enough to destroy statehood in the countries-owners of WMD. And there are also numerous civilian nuclear power plants that are very vulnerable and could well explode no worse than high-power nuclear munitions. So Europe and the United States are hoping for their invulnerability in vain - they are not sitting in God's bosom.
      Conclusion: it’s time for politicians and diplomats to think about how to defuse the international situation so that the Third World War does not happen according to the scenario of the First, when the world slid to war because the diplomacy of the XNUMXth century simply could not cope with a heap and especially the speed of the problems of the century The XNUMXth.
      I have the honor.
      1. Mikhail Krapivin
        Mikhail Krapivin 20 October 2015 08: 41 New
        +4
        Here is one hundred percent sure that the striped leadership has a detailed plan for how to stay in shelters, and then create a new striped empire to replace the destroyed one, based on Mexico, Canada and other countries with itself, loved ones, at the head. Hence the recklessness of such.
      2. i80186
        i80186 20 October 2015 09: 02 New
        +11
        Quote: Aleksandr72
        And there are also numerous civilian nuclear power plants that are very vulnerable and could well explode no worse than high-power nuclear munitions.

        Here everything is much worse. For example, in one RMBC-1000 as many as 190 tons of fuel. This is approximately the same as in 1500 “Babies” dropped on Hiroshima. This is a true Doomsday Machine from the unforgettable Dr. Strangelove Kubrick. smile
      3. Slax
        Slax 20 October 2015 10: 59 New
        +5
        Quote: Aleksandr72
        And there are also numerous civilian nuclear power plants that are very vulnerable and could well explode no worse than high-power nuclear munitions.


        civilian nuclear power plants are the primary target for an adversary’s nuclear strike their destruction hi to national blackout, contamination of the area for hundreds of kilometers and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people from radiation sickness because it will be a constant source of megawatts of radiation that no one will cover with sarcophagi in the conditions of total destruction in a nuclear conflict
      4. _GSVG_
        _GSVG_ 23 October 2015 02: 44 New
        0
        Alexander72 nobly laid out everything on the shelves, the picture was bleak, but it should be so, no one should have meaningless illusions.
        I also tell my friends that we would have to celebrate the New Year without war, and even manage to survive the whole 2016, otherwise the international situation is like before both world wars. But for the mattresses, a fucking war is so necessary, it’s only scary that there will be nobody to use its results later.
    5. Starover_Z
      Starover_Z 20 October 2015 08: 27 New
      +11
      The weakness of such book "prophecies" lies in the fact that their authors do not have access to genuine imagination.

      To develop the imagination, these "prophets" must be sent to Syria, Iraq, on the front of the battles with ISIS!
      That's all! And let them write from there how wonderful humanity is developing, waging regional wars!
      1. Turkir
        Turkir 20 October 2015 10: 15 New
        +12
        These homegrown specialists and Americans in general, do not understand what war is.
        In addition to the civil war in the 19th century, all the wars that America waged were not on its territory. Therefore, a generation has grown up for whom the war in Korea or Vietnam is a very grandiose war of equal importance to the Second World War.
        The rest of the war is like in a computer or in a Hollywood blockbuster.
        To develop the imagination, as you write correctly, they must be sent to the forefront in Iraq.
        I think that in a week they will forget about their concepts forever.
        1. Alexy
          Alexy 20 October 2015 18: 18 New
          +3
          That is yes. They are used to fighting on game consoles. Hence the desire to play war games. And if they had lost a couple of tens of millions and each family had a memory alive, I think those who wished would be reduced.
    6. Albert1988
      Albert1988 20 October 2015 09: 08 New
      +6
      Quote: armored optimist
      Unfortunately, today's generation of politicians, both European and American, is really not afraid of nuclear war. We have been scared for many years by its consequences in the form of a "nuclear winter." But this has long been refuted without unnecessary publicity.

      You see what’s the matter, it doesn’t matter whether this notorious nuclear winter will be or not, because there will still be radioactive contamination, and the person, alas, is very, very sensitive to it (like most higher vertebrates).
      Moreover, the largest cities will be destroyed - it will be hit against them - and this means enormous human casualties, the collapse of the economy, the collapse of infrastructure, and therefore the collapse of, if not civilization, then specific states, and the transformation of most of the developed countries into a kind of Somalia is even worse than this radioactive infection itself, because people simply will not live to see its effects for obvious reasons.

      So, in any case, nuclear war will bring absolute damage to all its parties, and the lack of fear among some modern politicians (although they are more likely politicians) is a consequence of a lack of education, as a result of which they believe that, for example, some mythical missile defense ...
    7. Corsair
      Corsair 20 October 2015 09: 39 New
      +12
      Quote: armored optimist
      But this has long been refuted without unnecessary publicity. According to modern models and the current number of nuclear weapons, it does not work.

      wassat Who is refuted? Here, frequent fires and small emissions change the climate from time to time on the whole planet, and who exactly calculated and knows how the sudden heating of the atmosphere in one place of the planet is compensated for by other processes of cyclone formation, descending and ascending flows, clouds and showers, etc.? Volcanoes may not wake up, but winter somewhere in Africa can easily happen, or snow will fall in New York or warm states like Texas, with a dose exceeding the monthly norms by several (or maybe tens) times, in terms of danger, like bullshit (for us) - but for infrastructure and people who are not accustomed / unprepared for such - this is a real kopek, almost like in the movie "The Day After Tomorrow". A frost in degrees 20–40 in warm regions is a star in all living things, because cardboard boxes do not heat them, and the infrastructure is not designed for such emergency situations.
      1. Thronekeeper
        Thronekeeper 20 October 2015 10: 59 New
        +8
        Yes, that's it. What is the theory of the dust effect refuted by?
        1502 g. Explosive volcanic eruption in Latin America. Within two years, the average annual temperature in Europe fell by 2 degrees C.
        1816 Another volcano in Lat. America. "A year without summer" is famous.

        The rise in the troposphere of dust and soot, especially from burning cities and forests of the temperate zone of the USA and the Siberian taiga, even with a limited exchange, will block these volcanoes dozens of times. The polar cap will grow, the evaporation area will decrease, summer droughts and low humidity will lead to a loss of thermal inertia of the planet and the cooling will cascade.
    8. max702
      max702 20 October 2015 11: 38 New
      +5
      Quote: armored optimist
      We have been scared for many years by its consequences in the form of a "nuclear winter." But this has long been refuted without unnecessary publicity.

      Sorry but you are raving !!! It is possible that precisely because of the use of nuclear weapons alone there will be no nuclear winter, BUT! Because of the consequences of its use, there will be more! Tell me WHAT goals will nuclear weapons strike? That's right in terms of military and industrial potential! If everything is clear with the military, then what is industry? And these are thousands of hazardous industries that pose a real threat to humanity, some nuclear power plants are worth it! Recall Chernobyl there tore an overheated ONE reactor, there was an ordinary thermal explosion, and what are the results? And they are such that the most powerful country, at the peak of its capabilities, got tired of eliminating all this and was not able to do everything to the end .. And then, as a result of the conflict, HUNDREDs of power units will be destroyed, thousands of dangerous chemical plants will be destroyed, dam hydroelectric power plants, massive fires of oil and gas fields will be destroyed, global forest fires, radioactive and chemical contamination of everything and everything, completely destroyed infrastructure (bridges, ports, airfields and much more) .. And most importantly, tell me Who will eliminate all this? After all, the conflict will not end there and the survivors will continue the database in order to acquire / preserve the remaining resources, and so what? How will the planet feel? And if you look at the future perspective and imagine that there was no miracle of a nuclear winter, then this will not change anything for mankind, because as a result of the amount of muck that will break out into the biosphere of the earth, it’s enough to end life and at least for the look of “man reasonable". Look not at 5–10 years, but at 50–100 in the future, if anyone escapes to the Stone Age and will not be able to use the experience and knowledge of a bygone civilization in the future, the problems will be too great ..
      RS: They say that there is a detailed newsreel from the test of “Kuz'kina’s mother”, but they don’t show it to the mass audience because it’s very scary .. it seems time to remove the privacy stamp and put it into the public domain, as some people in the world play too much ..
      RRS: According to rumors, during the test the fusion reaction itself started and at the command post someone who understood understood - "Everyone .. arctic fox .. played out ..", and when after 46 seconds it all stopped breathing out relieved ..
    9. CTEPX
      CTEPX 20 October 2015 15: 44 New
      0
      Quote: armored optimist
      a generation of politicians, both European and American, is really not afraid of nuclear war.

      Not afraid. Because the chaos construct is implemented when there is no one to use WMD in. Enemies are dissolved in the population. Moreover, the whole world will defend itself against the use of WMD by chaotic terrorists. But the Anglo-Saxons are not going to fight, they are going to be allies of Russia)).
    10. SAXA.SHURA
      SAXA.SHURA 20 October 2015 16: 17 New
      0
      Let them tell this to their old people, mothers and children, with such a population density, America will not be like a country.
  2. Yak28
    Yak28 20 October 2015 06: 37 New
    +3
    Russia and the USA have a huge amount of weapons, and it’s like a gun that hangs on the wall and it will ever shoot. It seems to me that over time the US will be tempted to start a war, if they only believe in the power of their missile defense or other technologies that will not allow missiles destroy their territory from outside. In America, there’s little threat to America without nuclear war; you can set NATO countries against your former socialist camps on Russia, help them with your huge air and sea fleet, and watch it from across the ocean. But without a nuclear war, 100% will turn into a nuclear one if some of the parties to the conflict is cornered. And of course, after the Nuclear War, humanity will not die out and the planet will not fall apart. And to avoid such an army, such military technologies, so that the thought of war would not slip at a potential enemy and in delirium.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 20 October 2015 11: 06 New
      -5
      So far, the United States has been reducing its fifth consecutive year
      your military budget, drastically cut back on land
      forces, tank troops, reduce the number of bases and strength
      staff in Europe.
      This is hardly a preparation for World War II.
      1. i80186
        i80186 20 October 2015 11: 34 New
        +9
        Quote: voyaka uh
        So far, the United States has been reducing its fifth consecutive year
        your military budget, drastically cut back on land
        forces, tank troops, reduce the number of bases and strength
        staff in Europe.
        This is hardly a preparation for World War II.

        Yeah, and at the same time, their military budget is equal to the total budget of the three countries following them, in this rating. And this is over the past 20 years. And they naturally didn’t fight anywhere. And everything that is happening in the Middle East is not their work. And they are not involved in the events in the former USSR and eastern Europe. And NATO is not expanding. The Nobel Prize was given to Obama for nothing.laughing
      2. PSih2097
        PSih2097 20 October 2015 12: 00 New
        +4
        Quote: voyaka uh
        So far, the United States has been reducing its fifth consecutive year
        your military budget, drastically cut back on land
        forces, tank troops, reduce the number of bases and strength
        staff in Europe.
        This is hardly a preparation for World War II.

        the Anglo-Saxons are somehow not used to fighting with us (RI, USSR, RF) to fight on their own, for this they have one ... a bunch of sixes, if by analogy with the first and second world ...
        Or, as an option, gather a coalition - Korea, Iraq, Yugoslavia, Libya ...
        Independently only Vietnam, and then there they got the full ...
      3. Petrix
        Petrix 20 October 2015 15: 18 New
        +2
        Quote: voyaka uh
        So far, the United States has been reducing its fifth consecutive year
        your military budget ...
        This is hardly a preparation for World War II.

        This is because of the economic crisis, but not because of peace aspirations. Rather, they want a war in order to eliminate the crisis, so that it would not be necessary to reduce the military budget.
  3. Aleks28
    Aleks28 20 October 2015 06: 40 New
    +1
    Moreover, it is even necessary for the progress of mankind.
    Somewhere I already heard similar ... recourse negative
    1. inkass_98
      inkass_98 20 October 2015 07: 03 New
      +2
      Quote: Alex28
      Somewhere I already heard similar ..

      You can even look around, not just strain your memory. War has always been the engine of progress and the engine of the economy. Not for everyone, of course, but nonetheless. Antibiotics, jet aviation, nuclear energy, space research, modern electronics, laser medicine, cellular communications, the Internet, all kinds of metal alloys, composite materials, etc. etc. - All this is an arms race product. As sad as it may be, peaceful coexistence is not yet possible.
      1. There are a lot of us
        There are a lot of us 20 October 2015 07: 09 New
        +9
        If war can be called the engine of progress, then progress is an absolute evil. Where in a hurry, gentlemen (and comrades)?
        1. Petrix
          Petrix 20 October 2015 15: 36 New
          0
          Quote: There are a lot of us
          If war can be called the engine of progress, then progress is an absolute evil.

          Rather, the proximity of war makes it possible to learn how to prevent it, which is very useful for the development of civilization. Those. developed society can solve the problem without physical extermination.
          In other words, rivalry is progress. How do philosophers and criminals argue? Both those and others "are at war". But the difference is significant.
          Probably in order to be afraid of war (to understand the consequences) at the genetic level, humanity needs to improve its DNA through thousands of years of deprivation.
      2. ussur
        ussur 21 October 2015 06: 32 New
        0
        And to direct all this for the good of man weakly? If you reason like you, there will never be peaceful coexistence.
    2. saygon66
      saygon66 20 October 2015 18: 30 New
      0
      - "War protects peoples from decay ...! (C) Nietzsche, it seems?
    3. The comment was deleted.
  4. aszzz888
    aszzz888 20 October 2015 06: 42 New
    0
    Any underestimation of the situation leads to the aggravation of such shortcomings.
    And there can never be a war, useful or not useful.
    They don’t understand how, in the West!
  5. Glot
    Glot 20 October 2015 06: 43 New
    +14
    Once upon a time, back in school, our historian assured us that war is an inevitability, and we need to prepare for it. We were preparing ... Then, as it was quietly, although not everywhere, the Union collapsed and they stopped talking about the war. She already walked, walked a long time and in full swing. Then we lost the battle ...
    The war in the world has been going on for a long time. And people are dying in it, leaders are being replaced, someone is getting richer, someone is sinking to the very bottom, some countries are completely ceasing to exist.
    Will it go into something global? I doubt it. Now they’re fighting not face to face, but out of silence, meanly.
    So the war is already underway, and not the first ten years.
    While we live. And I hope it will live on!
  6. sagitch
    sagitch 20 October 2015 06: 45 New
    0
    The repeating words "trap of fukikidia" is something annoying, "Yandex" does not know what it is, writes that it is better for those who fall into the "trap" to give up. Our business is not to drive ourselves into this "trap".
    1. Armored optimist
      Armored optimist 20 October 2015 06: 52 New
      +8
      Thucydides, not Thucydidia. Thucydides trap - the empire's fear of external enemies, which forces the ruler to aggression, leading to its death.
  7. Russ_Dry
    Russ_Dry 20 October 2015 07: 06 New
    +1
    August in French reads as Auguste and not August. can Sean like Sean pronounce.
  8. noWAR
    noWAR 20 October 2015 07: 08 New
    +13
    With the craving of Americans for disaster films, I can understand these scribblers, they themselves are to blame, they’ll punish me!
    1. Mikhail Krapivin
      Mikhail Krapivin 20 October 2015 08: 43 New
      +5
      The picture is valid, only instead of an explosion in the middle you need another one with a mushroom so cute ...;)
      1. PSih2097
        PSih2097 20 October 2015 12: 03 New
        +2
        Quote: Mikhail Krapivin
        The picture is valid, only instead of an explosion in the middle you need another one with a mushroom so cute ...;)

        according to rumors (in some circles) under the pentagon, just below the place of the explosion is an atomic reactor, I think the consequences do not need to be explained ...
  9. Cap.Morgan
    Cap.Morgan 20 October 2015 07: 09 New
    +10
    The Americans did not fight seriously even once. They did not have the forty-first year. They simply do not understand, with their near mind, what it is. Their homes have never been bombed.
    A country that faces such a catastrophe will inevitably use nuclear weapons. Then at once - the end.
    1. max702
      max702 20 October 2015 11: 51 New
      +4
      Quote: Cap.Morgan
      The Americans did not fight seriously even once. They did not have the forty-first year. They simply do not understand, with their near mind, what it is. Their homes have never been bombed.

      This is the main problem! Especially when the generation leaves knowing what war is!
    2. PSih2097
      PSih2097 20 October 2015 12: 08 New
      -2
      Quote: Cap.Morgan
      The Americans did not fight seriously even once.

      in Vietnam, as I understand it, they had fun and relax ...
      1. kotvov
        kotvov 20 October 2015 13: 09 New
        +2
        in Vietnam, as I understand it, they were having fun and relaxing ... ,,
        that's it, they thought that they would have a rest and have fun. Like a world power and some kind of former colony. They did not even think that the USSR and China would join. Ironically, the Americans really thought that it would be just a walk.
  10. SeregaBoss
    SeregaBoss 20 October 2015 07: 14 New
    +11
    But I am afraid of war in any form, I want my children to live happily, live and not survive! And in order not to get to this, it is necessary to create a joint center for resolving conflict situations Russia + USA + China, otherwise because of one moron, instead of land there will be a common grave!
  11. parusnik
    parusnik 20 October 2015 07: 16 New
    +8
    It is believed that war between the great powers using conventional weapons is inevitable. And you should not be especially afraid of it.... Of course ... why be afraid .. Hunger, cold, sorrow, tears, death .. These theorists in the Donbass .. under fire ukrov ..
    1. PSih2097
      PSih2097 20 October 2015 12: 09 New
      +3
      Quote: parusnik
      These theorists in the Donbass .. under fire ukrov ..

      can be in Syria, in the infantry ...
    2. The comment was deleted.
  12. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 20 October 2015 07: 42 New
    0
    misunderstanding makes big wars of the future more likely.

    And especially when this misunderstanding is mixed with the desire to achieve what is not feasible.
  13. Vladimir73
    Vladimir73 20 October 2015 07: 50 New
    +1
    Oh, the “trap” would have disappeared, try the White House on the model of no longer Fukidida, but Herodot “understand your enemies”! But American strategists are used to planning not understanding, but denying everything that does not fit into their hegemonic doctrine. In addition, to understand the enemy - it is too difficult and fraught with concessions; another thing is to kill and become a winner, thereby confirming the status of a “great power”.

    This is why Professor Searle writes that misunderstanding makes the big wars of the future more likely.


    The text is interesting, but the ending gives idealism. As practice shows, misunderstanding always leads to conflicts, but the Yankees are well aware of what game they are leading. I do not mean those clowns who are called politicians, and those who are behind them ...
  14. Wise Kaa
    Wise Kaa 20 October 2015 08: 24 New
    +7
    That's right, we must not be afraid of war, we must prepare for it, let others be afraid!
    The war is already underway, look what is happening in the world !!! Syria, Ukraine, Nigeria, Israel, Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, Yemen plus hidden conflicts between Japan and China, Pakistan and India and many others, and the fact that refugees from Africa are drowned in the Mediterranean Sea !!! Europe is close to a social disaster! Such tension in the world has not happened for a long time! But everything is logical, the population is growing and it lacks space and resources, there are too many "mouths", so two ways are either to destroy the "extra" population or the "extra" to go to space to live on another planet, because the second option with the current level of progress is unlikely then there will be the destruction of the population. The question is who will go to salvage and who will be the executioner ?!
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Corsair
      Corsair 20 October 2015 09: 54 New
      +2
      Quote: Wise Kaa
      there are too many "mouths", so the two ways are either the destruction of the "extra" population, or the "extra" ones sent to space to live on another planet, because the second option with the current level of progress is unlikely, that will be the destruction of the population. The question is who will go to salvage and who will be the executioner ?!

      Well, there’s a double-edged sword, on the one hand there are a lot of superfluous mouths, on the other hand, having risen slightly above the usual level, he begins to want beautiful things, benefits, good pay and other privileges, but he doesn’t want to multiply (in the EU there are many where one child is considered the norm). Robots have not yet been implemented everywhere, so when they teach robots to do all the rough work, including the process of repairing the maintenance and self-production of these same robots, then the heads of the overheads will figure out how to eliminate everyone except the mysterious golden billion.
    3. ussur
      ussur 21 October 2015 06: 47 New
      0
      About one who is intended to be scrapped for a year already over the hill a shout in plain text.
  15. sl22277
    sl22277 20 October 2015 08: 30 New
    +3
    Not to be afraid of war is as dangerous as not to be afraid of fire, or any other element. Such thoughts can arise in a head free from the presence of the brain. There are no viewers in atomic war, nor are winners with beautiful flags. We need to remind everyone of this, the more often, the better.
  16. Letterksi
    Letterksi 20 October 2015 08: 31 New
    +6
    And what is the purpose of this war? In World War I, it’s kind of understandable with reservations. In World War II it is clear without reservations. But this one is not clear at all. To fight for TNCs? For the fact that oligarchs around the world earn even more dough, and all the rest rest in the earth forever?

    At present, there is an escalation of the situation through the media, so that people absorb the "inevitability" of war. When they absorb this, they will be ready to go under the bullets. And this is the goal of the media. Then politicians will be able to declare it, relying on the "opinion of the people."

    We must prepare for war, but "do not absorb its inevitability." There will be no war if the majority does not want it.

    They are trying to drag the world into a war for the destruction of the majority, and for the destruction of states in favor of TNCs.
  17. Zomanus
    Zomanus 20 October 2015 08: 32 New
    +6
    Only one can welcome war
    who definitely do not have to hide in the corners under bombing and shelling.
    America practically didn’t wage wars on its territory, receiving only profit from them.
    Therefore, its citizens dare to put forward such thoughts and judgments.
  18. cniza
    cniza 20 October 2015 08: 33 New
    +6
    Quote: Wise Kaa
    But everything is logical, the population is growing and it lacks space and resources, there are too many "mouths", so two ways are either to destroy the "extra" population or the "extra" to go to space to live on another planet, because the second option with the current level of progress is unlikely then there will be the destruction of the population. The question is who will go to salvage and who will be the executioner ?!



    The conclusion which is difficult to refute, the scenario is quite realistic.
  19. cniza
    cniza 20 October 2015 08: 36 New
    +5
    Russia never attacked first and in this all their scenarios and fantasies are crossed out.
    1. RUSLAN
      RUSLAN 24 October 2015 13: 43 New
      0
      YES OK ... IF YOU INCLUDE THE SOVIET UNION IN THE CONCEPT OF "RUSSIA", I HAVE TO REMEMBER YOU TO REMEMBER THE SOVIET-FINNISH!
  20. pimen
    pimen 20 October 2015 08: 39 New
    +1
    in fact, we must proceed from the fact that in terms of the degree of harm to civilization, the American state has surpassed all the most odious regimes in history, taken together
  21. Kibl
    Kibl 20 October 2015 08: 40 New
    +3
    Some idiots in the West as a child did not play enough in war!
    1. PSih2097
      PSih2097 20 October 2015 12: 12 New
      +2
      Quote: KIBL
      Some idiots in the West as a child did not play enough in war!

      In the mid-90s, the book of the American Colonel of the Main Intelligence Directorate “Committee 300 ″ was translated into Russian. For about 30 years he studied the secret mechanisms of world governance and came to the conclusion that 300 of the richest family clans control global processes (and the decisive only for 13 banking families).

      ========================

      This “Committee of 300 ″ ordered a major research corporation in the 70s, research and development. When the results were obtained, it turned out that the natural resources on earth were very limited. And for a comfortable stay on the earth, natural resources are enough for only 1 billion then the theory of the “Golden Billion” was developed, which “has the right” to remain on the earth for 100-150 years. This “Golden Billion” included the population of the USA, Canada, Western Europe, Israel and Japan. As you know, neither the Russians, nor the Tatars, nor many other peoples living in our country fell into this billion.

      In 1985, the world community formed a program - a minimum for the Soviet Union: by 2020, halve the population, in 35 years, kill every second person in our country. To kill not only by war, as is done with Muslim nations that are not subject to what we are subject to. Destroy the older generation with poverty, which will be organized, and destroy the younger generation with alcohol, tobacco, drugs and debauchery, which will be universally and massively introduced.

      Speaking a few years ago, Margaret Thatcher, the former Prime Minister of England, dropped the mysterious phrase: “According to the international community, it is economically feasible to live in Russia 15 million people.” The translator thought he misheard and translated 50 million. But Thatcher corrected him right away. at that time there was another 150 million, and where the rest 135 million? And the rest will go under the real knife of madness, lack of culture, debauchery, drugs, alcohol and tobacco.

      Two years ago, Madeleine Albright, who was the US Secretary of State at that time, arrived in our country in person and, speaking, dropped the same mysterious phrase: “According to the international community, it’s economically feasible to live in Russia for 15 million people.” 130? We were already 145 million then. As you can see, the hateful program has only set its course on its implementation.

      Whom did these cannibals of the 20-21 century decide to leave in our country? Two million is the service of the Trans-Siberian Railway, the shortest route from Japan and Southeast Asia to Europe. They decided to leave another 13 million for servicing the dirtiest metallurgical and chemical industries and servicing the world nuclear repository into which Russia will be converted. By the way, the current Putin State Duma has already adopted a law on turning Russia into a global nuclear repository. A large-scale road construction program for this project is being implemented in Siberia.
  22. vladimirvn
    vladimirvn 20 October 2015 08: 46 New
    +3
    Some played too much so that they began to confuse virtual, computer reality and the existing one. But have you heard how to sob a mother over a murdered son, a man who has lost a family is crying, have you seen the eyes of children in a war? Those who were there often don’t want to remember about it.
  23. Mikhail Krapivin
    Mikhail Krapivin 20 October 2015 08: 47 New
    +2
    As I remember now, in Soviet childhood we were taught in the lesson to make a bandage on the face from bandage and cotton wool, with which you can not be afraid of nuclear war, because such a bandage saves everything! :) It seems that in America these lessons are still being taught.
  24. cniza
    cniza 20 October 2015 09: 01 New
    +6
    Quote: Mikhail Krapivin
    As I remember now, in Soviet childhood we were taught in the lesson to make a bandage on the face from bandage and cotton wool, with which you can not be afraid of nuclear war, because such a bandage saves everything! :) It seems that in America these lessons are still being taught.



    And go to bed, for example, over the curb and cover your hands with your hands.
    1. ussur
      ussur 21 October 2015 06: 56 New
      0
      Well, yes, and keep the machine in outstretched hands so that molten iron does not drip on the official shoes!
  25. Mantykora
    Mantykora 20 October 2015 09: 04 New
    +3
    just over a century ago, they were not afraid of war either and patriotically marched to the front "to defend their country." Everyone remembers how it ended? And what did the Australians, Canadians, New Zealanders, the indigenous inhabitants of the French colonies in Africa defend? I am already silent about the Europeans. The war turned out to be only because of money, through and through "imperialist", as Lenin correctly said. Today's miniature of this is the conflict in the Donbass, where the ukrobanda was driven to "defend the country."
  26. JIaIIoTb
    JIaIIoTb 20 October 2015 09: 16 New
    +1
    “I don’t know what weapons they will fight in the 3rd World War, but in the 4th World War they will fight with sticks and stones”. Albert Einstein.
  27. Warrior 61
    Warrior 61 20 October 2015 10: 25 New
    +4
    The United States must have absolute confidence that nuclear weapons will be used in case of war! This is spelled out in our doctrine. Moreover, I believe that the development of pro on their part will not change anything, even if ours can not overcome it. Then it will be necessary to declare that we are ready to blow up our entire arsenal of nuclear weapons in our territory in the event of an attack. "Fucking and the whole world in ruin" - DMB. We will have nothing to lose. And they will lose their meaning. Tell me not humanely ?! It's my opinion. I do not impose it on anyone.
  28. The comment was deleted.
  29. The comment was deleted.
  30. provincial
    provincial 20 October 2015 10: 37 New
    +2
    Nice. It is a pity that no one on earth will have to live. Neither you nor me!
  31. zyablik.olga
    zyablik.olga 20 October 2015 11: 00 New
    +3
    Some American equipment is vulnerable because the elements of its devices are made in Chinese factories.

    Unfortunately, not only American, but ours too. The share of imported components in electronics used on defense products is very large, mainly the elemental base of Chinese and Indian production.
    1. zyablik.olga
      zyablik.olga 20 October 2015 12: 10 New
      +4
      For those who put not argued cons (hurray-patriotic citizens) fool I report that a significant part of the element base in the Su-35С avionics that are built at KnAAZ in Komsomolsk-on-Amur is just Chinese and Indian production. I myself live and work just in Komsomolsk, it is easy to check it by going to "lichku".
  32. Denis DV
    Denis DV 20 October 2015 11: 00 New
    +2
    Western professors are slipping into triviality, the problems of their education (Hurray! We are the USA, Europe - we all owe it to us! Who are we not homosexual!) Is an inevitable misunderstanding, not with them global issues. They work with limited, relatively simple, not always high-quality material, which gives rise to the corresponding conclusions.
  33. Hort
    Hort 20 October 2015 11: 11 New
    +1
    Well, that's right, we must not be afraid of nuclear war - we must be afraid of gamma radiation and radiation sickness laughing
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Aleksandr72
      Aleksandr72 20 October 2015 12: 59 New
      0
      I believe that fear, fear, and not fear, should not be a nuclear war and the consequences of the use of weapons of mass destruction, not a hypothetical invasion of aliens, zombie apocalypse and other Hollywood horror stories. It is necessary to be afraid of not quite adequate politicians, such as the unforgettable Porosenko and Black Lord - B. Obama, as well as their backstage puppeteers, for whom war and political instability in general is just an opportunity to increase their capital.
      These are precisely in the pursuit of profit that they are ready to destroy the whole world, especially if they are firmly convinced that this will not touch them sideways. Cm.
      It is believed that war between the great powers using conventional weapons is inevitable. And you should not be especially afraid of it. Not only that, there are pluses: war accelerates progress. Someone else is sure that even nuclear war is not worth fearing.

      I have the honor.
  34. Eastern wind
    Eastern wind 20 October 2015 12: 00 New
    +5
    "I am not afraid of nuclear war!" shouted a two-headed boy, entangled in four legs and falling on his own tail.
  35. koksalek
    koksalek 20 October 2015 12: 28 New
    +1
    The desire to reduce the human population is increasingly driven into the head
  36. gg.na
    gg.na 20 October 2015 12: 36 New
    0
    Oh, and agree, they will actually add up to the war! Probably you have to make the Strait named after I.V. Stalin according to an earlier version, and if you take the current version then: etc. named after V.V. Putin!
  37. kostavit
    kostavit 20 October 2015 12: 40 New
    0
    Quote: Alexey M
    Polls

    I remember my friends near Kandahar, but what are you talking about?
  38. 33 Watcher
    33 Watcher 20 October 2015 12: 54 New
    +1
    Quote: Alexey M
    The last wars got used to fight with the wrong hands. Well, they forgot how the coffins came from Iraq and Afghanistan.

    Forgot? No, they don’t know. They did not see what war was in their cities, in their homes, on their streets. From this reasoning.
  39. Northern Fleet
    Northern Fleet 20 October 2015 12: 59 New
    +2
    There will be no war simply because there is no one to fight, China will not fight the United States because China’s entire economy is somehow tied to the United States. Russia has nothing and no one to fight, and the money of those in power is probably not in Sberbank, but somewhere in Switzerland. All these cries about possible wars are needed only to maintain the ratings of the authorities and distract the population from real problems.
    1. ussur
      ussur 21 October 2015 07: 02 New
      +1
      Right! war, as such, will not be. There will be total extermination.
  40. Alexx
    Alexx 20 October 2015 13: 01 New
    0
    hello everyone. I just want to remind or pay attention and I would like the editors to pay attention, I want to pay attention that our country has officially started and is at war, and our country and we ordinary people live by peaceful rules and laws, something will happen again terrible before we mobilize and somehow prepare. and we understand we live in a warring country
  41. Belousov
    Belousov 20 October 2015 13: 18 New
    +1
    "war was the main vector of human progress and that without it people would have degraded." You can immediately see who the war is, and who the mother is dear to. Shtatniks have never fought (Vietnam is even somehow ashamed to remember, began to intermeddle, crap and quickly dumped), especially on its territory. But when the rockets fly to their homes - the rhetoric will change dramatically. In addition, the beginning of the war looks funny - the aggression of Russia and China on American satellites. What for? Deprive of "sight"? So to continue the operation requires significant technical (landing operation) and human resources. Otherwise, the point is simply to cut down the satellite? This is some kind of petty domestic hooliganism, which, in principle, is just in the spirit of the staff.
    "Some American equipment is vulnerable because the elements of its devices are manufactured in Chinese factories" - the equipment is primarily vulnerable because of poor quality, and not because of where it was manufactured.
    And why the hell did the Pacific Ocean surrender to us? China still understands, but not to that extent.
    And why did these pseudo-specialists decide that nuclear weapons would not be used? Because otherwise the staff will immediately finish? So on the contrary, it stimulates striking. Or because they are superior to all the others in other conventional weapons, so it is necessary to fight only this way? And a bunch of questions will remain.
    In general, for such “specialists” I’m sorry for the quote from Sergey Lavrov, they will cost their relatives:
    1. ussur
      ussur 21 October 2015 07: 10 New
      0
      Quote: Belousov
      And why the hell did the Pacific Ocean surrender to us?


      But what if I am a Far East in the fifth generation?
  42. VadimSt
    VadimSt 20 October 2015 13: 48 New
    +5
    The USA is so lively because its population, for 240 years, has not known what war is on its own territory! If at least one rocket falls there, a cheerful mood will give way to panic, and instead of a crowd of a recruiting station there will be a string of cars to the Mexican and Canadian borders. It is clear that not all cowards and alarmists are there, but vigorous calls not to be afraid, are just intended for ordinary inhabitants.
    And in Europe, this number does not work! There, like ours, in every family there is a bitter memory of wars.
  43. Gormenghast
    Gormenghast 20 October 2015 14: 35 New
    +4
    Those who were not struck by “exclusivity”, specialists (alas, not politicians) have more real views.

    Let us recall the relatively recent Amer’s exercises “Bear Spear”, which suggested a “global tactical strike” on a certain “Eurasian autocratic state Usira”

    The simulation result - either 400, or 500 million corpses (due to the use of the "Perimeter" and strikes through the North Pole); Apocalypse; no winners.

    It is hoped that these results were only “merged” by someone into the network, but also reported to customers who (even more recently) were considering some mythical possibilities to still use nuclear weapons.
  44. Robert Nevsky
    Robert Nevsky 20 October 2015 15: 22 New
    0
    With the title of the article - I completely agree! good
  45. inferno_nv
    inferno_nv 20 October 2015 16: 15 New
    0
    Well, Americans generally lost their heads in the bathroom, think of such a scribble ... wassat
  46. inferno_nv
    inferno_nv 20 October 2015 16: 19 New
    0
    NEW RUSSIAN SUBSTERS IN THE BLACK SEA ALARMED THE USA: 6TH FLEET THREATENS Aircraft Carrier
    Posted by Aleksey Refatov | Date: 20 October 2015
    http://warfiles.ru/show-97974-novye-russkie-podlodki-v-chernom-more-vstrevozhili
    -ssha-6-y-flot-grozit-avianoscem.html
    What, then, is the Admiral cowardly? laughing
  47. alovrov
    alovrov 20 October 2015 16: 32 New
    -1
    Some very strange discussion above ... YES! - If you start to destroy nuclear reactors, then you will not be able to live in the territory where the reactors were blown up, sapiens and most living organisms. But tell me dear - 500 kg of brizant in a concrete-breaking warhead, will not the reactor core be destroyed with all the ensuing consequences? And if one does not destroy, then a dozen will destroy for sure. The question is what does nuclear weapons have to do with it? The war to destroy the biosphere through the destruction of nuclear power plants can be waged by conventional weapons. And war with the help of modern pure nuclear weapons, without destroying the nuclear power plant, will not destroy the biosphere - and such a war is possible.
    And to understand the place of man in nature and the possibility of a nuclear winter, it is enough to compare the power of the eruption of ONE large volcano and the volume of its emissions with the power of ALL nuclear warheads. Compare and understand the mythology of nuclear winter, which was needed in 70-80's to justify the limitation of nuclear weapons.
    And yes - war with the use of nuclear weapons is possible, to not understand this and not to prepare means to lose before the start.
    1. Gormenghast
      Gormenghast 21 October 2015 06: 53 New
      +1
      The so-called "unacceptable damage" comes from the direct impact of the damaging factors of a nuclear explosion. The population of all countries lives not distributed on the ground, but compactly in cities; accordingly, millions of victims appear a second after a nuclear strike. The apocalypse comes immediately; radiation is a secondary effect - it begins to act after civilization is destroyed.

      And, if we recall the Bear Spear once again, it concludes that, in addition to the victims, unacceptable damage also lies in the destruction of vital industries (power supply, etc.). Stone Age, in other words.

      Only a madman can start a nuclear war, the disorder of which is clearly classified by the ICD. Which, of course, does not exclude the very possibility of nuclear war. There is no protection against this, alas.
  48. Yak28
    Yak28 20 October 2015 17: 27 New
    +1
    Quote: voyaka uh
    So far, the United States has been reducing its fifth consecutive year
    your military budget, drastically cut back on land
    forces, tank troops, reduce the number of bases and strength
    staff in Europe.
    This is hardly a preparation for World War II.

    Increasing troops in eastern Europe, expanding and expanding NATO bases, and the United States is the leader of the NATO terrorist organization. Plus to this missile defense, as the United States reduces arms
  49. _my opinion
    _my opinion 20 October 2015 19: 03 New
    +1
    with some constancy they frighten with the end of the world, then as a result of a round date, then a certain calendar ends,
    now war.
    and the thought is material ... the impression is that someone or something is striving
    to erase humanity with his own help ...

    ... about the war .... you know, I remembered the words from the movie "and the dawns here are quiet" (c):the war is won not by the one who shoots the enemy, but by the one who changes his mind(I can not vouch for verbatim) ... I think this can be attributed to many confrontations.
  50. Bayun
    Bayun 20 October 2015 19: 21 New
    -1
    Russia, China, Europe, India - TRADITIONS. And who is the USA? Experiment. A couple of others (USSR and Reich) - were blown away, showing that the idea is weaker than tradition; the United States will also burst, since the "American dream" (the seizure of other people's wealth) also does not have GOOD at its core. War is evil, and only bad people can talk about the "usefulness" of war.