The British TV channel BBC showed the film “The Third World War. A look from the command post. A peculiar mix of reality shows and a conspiracy thriller.
The film provoked a storm of indignation among Russian politicians and journalists. And actually, what are they dissatisfied with? The film is false and Russophobic. Sorry, so in England the media has always been extremely false and always denounced Russia. If someone does not believe, look at the repulsive caricatures of Alexander Suvorov, Catherine the Great, Paul I, Alexander I, and further down the list down to Vladimir Putin.
In London, they spoke favorably of Russia only when there was an urgent need for Russian cannon fodder to fight Napoleon, the Kaiser or Hitler.
But I consider the beginning of a conversation about a nuclear war in the 21st century to be extremely timely.
Neither we nor the “over the hill” are not only the townsfolk, but the generals do not, by and large, have the slightest idea of a nuclear war. Well, for example, let's ask the NATO Secretary General and his brave generals, how will the explosion of dozens of nuclear warheads of 1 megaton each at 100 – 300 km affect the functioning of the American missile defense system - both its ground version and the sea one?
I remember that at the end of 1950-x - the beginning of 1960-s every high-altitude explosion of the American hydrogen bomb on the Johnson Atoll interrupted radio communications throughout the Pacific for a day or even more.
In 2001, the Pentagon’s Threat Mitigation Department (DTRA) attempted to assess the potential effects of such nuclear tests on low-orbit satellites. The results were disappointing: one small nuclear charge with power from 10 to 20 kilotons (similar to a bomb dropped on Hiroshima during World War II) exploded at an altitude from 125 to 300 km, “is enough to disable for several weeks or even months all satellites that do not have special radiation protection. "
Denis Papadopoulos, a specialist in plasma physics at the University of Maryland, had a different opinion: "An 10-kiloton nuclear bomb detonated at a specially calculated height can lead to a loss of 90% of all low-orbit satellites for about a month."
Nobody wrote about the American missile defense system, since all information on it is completely secret. However, the author does not exclude that the developers of the American missile defense system carried out any research work on the topic "The impact of the explosion of several thousand nuclear charges in Europe on the missile defense system." Read the report, wept and classified it. And rightly so. Money for missile defense today is given without restrictions, and if what happens, there will be no one to ask, and no one to ask.
NUCLEAR SHEARS AND POLISH SHAPPING JACKET
European citizens, politicians and generals have long forgotten the 1950 – 1970 nuclear nightmares and are now absolutely confident in their complete impunity and security.
In 2015, a well-known Polish politician declared: “In the event of a NATO war with Russia, Poland will get rid of several bruises”. And you think that someone in Poland was outraged? Began to refute it? Wrong audience! The grandfathers of these gentlemen in August 1939 were convinced that a week after the start of the war, the Polish lancers would take Berlin, and another two weeks later - Moscow. And whoever does not believe, let him read the Polish newspapers for August 1939.
What is nuclear war? The population and the generals represent its nuclear apocalypse. And this is true when it comes to an all-out war using intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and strategic bombers. But what is a local war, neither we nor they know 99,9% of the population.
After the end of World War II, the United States blackmailed our country with unpunished nuclear strikes against dozens of Soviet cities. And when the USSR acquired nuclear warheads and their strategic carriers, the Americans developed a theory of local nuclear war.
Its essence is that the United States unilaterally or at the same time as the USSR launches nuclear strikes on a limited area with a limited power of special 10 – 20 ammunition kilotons.
In April, 1954, the United States was on the verge of a local nuclear war in Vietnam. There, the Vietnamese surrounded the French forces in the area of the fortress Dienbienfu. During Operation Buzzard, the Americans planned to strike the Vietnamese forces with a 60 B-29 “Flying Fortress” based in the Philippines and the six A1J-1 “Sevenge” simultaneous strike on the Vietnamese forces. And the latter had to drop six atomic bombs "Fat Man" power 21 kilotons.
A few hours before the operation, it was canceled. Not because of political, but because of purely tactical considerations. The nature of the area and the numerous powerful fortifications of the Vietnamese, the dispersal of their troops in any form did not allow the French garrison to unblock.
Suppose the United States would still drop six of these bombs. Would this be the beginning of a total nuclear war? Of course not. Another question is that Dienbienfu would still have fallen, and the USSR would have received an excellent trump card in the propaganda war.
I will not dwell on the numerous variants of local nuclear wars developed by American generals and deliberately or through a misunderstanding leaked to the Western media. It should be said only about the plans of a local nuclear war in the territory of the Federal Republic of Germany in the event of the invasion of the Soviet troops there. There, the Pentagon planned to blow up several thousand nuclear warheads up to 20 kilotons. Among them were hundreds of nuclear land mines, which in peacetime laid in special concrete wells near highways, bridges, etc.
At the same time, the White House was convinced that the Kremlin, even after losing the local nuclear war in Germany, would not risk a nuclear strike on the territory of the United States. In some ways, this position was logical. Any of the superpowers in the course of local nuclear wars lost only on points. So there could be no talk of any surrender, but only concessions in certain issues.
I draw attention to the fact that none of the well-known American scenarios of local nuclear wars considered a nuclear strike on the territory of the USSR. Then the Americans understood the inevitability of a retaliatory nuclear strike with all the consequences for them.
But back to the film "Third World War." The plot of it is made according to the old propaganda cliché. In Eastern Latvia, the Russian population is raising an uprising and creating the People's Republic of Latgale with its capital in Daugavpils (the city of Dvinsk before the 1918 of the year). In response, the United States is launching a "limited nuclear strike on Russia."
I'm not going to talk about the plausibility of such a scenario. Let's better ask the EU gentlemen what would have happened in Belgium, France, Spain, if the Walloons, Corsicans and Catalans were declared “aliens” there, imposed bans on the use of their native language and everything else on the list, as in the Baltic border countries. The answer is more than obvious - in all three countries there would be a civil war and there would be a separation of the areas inhabited by the Walloons, the Corsicans and the Catalans.
Why did London and Brussels not force the governments of the Limits to grant the Russians in the Baltic States the same rights that the Walloons, Flemish, Basques, Corsicans, etc., have long ago? Balts pushing Europe unceasingly, and let them adopt European laws guaranteeing the equal rights of nations.
Alas, in Riga and London, Russians are considered subhumans, for whom the status of non-citizens will do. Hitler was of the same opinion. Then it ended the death of 50 million people during the Second World War. And how many will die in the third?
So the emergence of a third world war due to national conflicts in the Baltic states is not excluded. But, in my opinion, the provocation of the stupid illiterate Baltic officials with their shallow worldview is much more likely. Neither Latvia nor Estonia has ever existed. All of them история based on the lies that they are forced to teach Russian children.
Tallinn was allegedly founded by the Estonians themselves. I’m not going to talk about Kolyvan, founded by Yaroslav the Wise, but I’ll just ask why the Estonians gave the city founded by them such a strange name: Tallinn in the translation “Danish city”. In November, 2015, I visited the Maritime Museum in Tallinn, where I learned that Ivan Fedorovich Kruzenshtern, Faddey Faddeevich Bellingsgausen and Ferdinand Petrovich Wrangel are famous Estonian navigators. Edak hot Estonian guys with us and Wrangel Island require?
The rulers of the Limits of all forces seek to spoil Russia. Thus, the Lithuanian government has already threatened to cut off transit from Central Russia to the Kaliningrad region a dozen times since 1992. Lithuania itself sets the prices for oil and gas supplied from Russia. Raise the price to the world - block the transit. And in September 2013, Lithuanian Foreign Minister Linkiavicius said that if Russia would put pressure on Ukraine, "we could block the transport, and this is not only the train, it is also the delivery of goods, anything." And that was before the Maidan!
Peter the Great cut a window to Europe, and Yeltsin smashed it, leaving a small window leaf. Alas, I do not exaggerate. After 1991, ships and aircraft should follow more than 200 km in the Gulf of Finland in the ultra-narrow corridor from 5 to 10 km. And this at night, and in the storm, and in a storm.
The ship or plane will deviate by several tens of meters, in Estonia there is a “nationwide outrage” and threats of the use of force. So, 17 December 2015, the Estonian Foreign Ministry sent Russia a terrible note, they say, the unarmed An-72 transport aircraft flew over Estonian waters in the Gulf of “less than a minute”, that is, translated from Estonian to normal - a few seconds.
Well, if tomorrow Estonians will shoot down our plane or sink a tug or yacht, deviating a few tens of meters from this ultra-narrow fairway?
Recall that our Su-24, according to the Turks, no more than three seconds was in the airspace of Turkey, and he was shot down! Although the current Turkish President Erdogan two years ago was crucified, that a small violation of the airspace is no reason to shoot down an airplane. Some Turkish politicians and journalists said that Turkey would close the Black Sea Straits for Russian ships. In both the first and second issues in Washington and Brussels, they did not even attempt to short the Turks, but on the contrary, supported them. What kind of behavior of NATO is not a signal to the Baltic border frontiers - dare!
Do the Europeans, from the average man to the minister, understand that their lives and the lives of their loved ones depend on the whims of the illiterate Baltic official? I want to - I will close the transit to Kaliningrad, I want to take the plane.
And back to the film. To make a nuclear strike on Russia an element of local war is utter and extremely dangerous nonsense. Allegedly, after a nuclear strike on Moscow, you can put an ultimatum to Russia.
In the event of a nuclear strike on the territory of Russia, its leadership will not even consider this ultimatum. I note that even in the 1980-ies in the USSR, the Perimeter complex took up combat duty. When hundreds of sensors that identify a nuclear attack were triggered, the control of the nuclear triad of the USSR assumed the automation of the invulnerable complex "Perimeter", without human intervention. Are the filmmakers confident that in the event of a nuclear strike on Russia, the president, rather than the computer, or the rocket men, submariners and pilots themselves will take the decision to strike back?
So any nuclear strike on the territory of Russia will automatically plunge all of humanity into a thermonuclear apocalypse.
Well, the fourth world war will be waged by Yakutia, Xinjiang and Nepal. The main weapons there will be a bow and arrows, as 70 warned Einstein about years ago.
But local nuclear wars, limited to the territories of Middle Eastern countries, Poland, etc., may well occur. For three years, three divisions of our MiG-15 fought with thousands of American “Seybrov” and “flying fortresses” over North Korea. Is it possible to exclude similar over Latvia? For half a century, our and the American Air Force have air-to-air missiles with special ammunition, and air defense missiles have ground-to-air missiles with the same, but slightly more powerful combat units.
Well, explode 2000 or at least 500 such special warheads over Latvia. No matter who wins, Latvia will turn into a radioactive desert, and the radiation background in Moscow and Paris will remain within the normal range. I think so.