Military Review

Global missile defense becomes a leaky umbrella

49
Russian experts suggest resetting the West’s missile defense potential


Global missile defense becomes a leaky umbrellaThe US military-political leadership (CDF), despite the agreement reached on the Iranian nuclear dossier, continues to deploy the US-European missile defense global segment of the global missile defense system (PRO).

So, 12 May in Romania (Deveselu) was alerted to the land-based Ajis Eshor anti-missile system (PRK) with the Standard-3 anti-ballistic missiles mod. 1B. It is a ship system in which a part of the equipment is dismantled and transferred to land. The structure weighing about 900 t is supplemented with a vertical launch superstructure for 24 anti-missiles. On the same day, it became known about the start of construction of a similar PRK in Poland (Redzikovo) under the upgraded Standard-3 antimissile with commissioning until the end of 2018.

Thus, the deployment of the European missile defense system means that US President Barack Obama did not fulfill his promise made in Prague in 2009: "If you can resolve the Iranian nuclear program, the task of creating a European segment of missile defense will disappear." At the same time, the US-NATO leadership states that the PPK in Deveselu, Poland and the entire European missile defense system are not directed against Russia and are intended exclusively for the defense of NATO countries and the United States from the hypothetical attacks of Iranian and North Korean missiles.

In this regard, Russian President Vladimir Putin said: “The United States itself has signed an agreement with Iran. We supported this position of the US administration. Iran complies with the provisions of the agreement reached. Where are these nuclear threats from Iran now? They are not there, and the creation of an anti-missile defense system continues. ”

According to Russian and foreign experts, the EuroPRO system will still be deployed by 2020. The created anti-missile group of ground-based and sea-based European missile defense, due to mobility and the ability to quickly increase the combat strength by 2020, will to a certain extent devalue the Russian nuclear deterrence potential. This is confirmed by sufficient and sustainable funding for its creation. Thus, the costs for the construction of the EUROPRO facility in Romania amounted to 800 million dollars, in the future financing will amount to 20 million dollars per year. In addition, about NATO 150 million should provide NATO allies.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said in this connection: “The deployment of the US missile defense and Euro missile defense systems poses a threat to the security of the Russian Federation. This is not a defensive system. This is a part of the nuclear strategic potential of the United States, taken to the periphery. In this case, the periphery is Eastern Europe. And people who make the appropriate decisions should know that they still lived quietly, comfortably and safely. Now, after the deployment of these elements of the European missile defense system, we are forced to think to stop these threats. ” The head of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, Army General Valery Gerasimov, in 2015, stated that "Russia will have to take military-technical measures in response to deploying a global US missile defense system, including with regard to the countries in which the objects of this system are located." “As a result, non-nuclear states, on whose territory anti-missile weapons are deployed,” Valery Gerasimov said, “become objects of immediate response.”

In this regard, the following complex of information, military-political, operational and organizational-technical measures is proposed to ensure the suppression and destruction of key infrastructure facilities and the breakthrough of the global US missile defense system and European missile defense system.

Information Measures

The leadership of many countries share the negative attitude of the CDF of Russia towards the deployment of European missile defense and other regional segments of the global US missile defense system. They are skeptical about these plans, and are in favor of a collective discussion of European missile defense issues. They objectively assess the risks associated with the deployment of these systems, and believe that any measures in the field of global security will be unviable without taking into account the interests of Russia.

Studies conducted in research organizations of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Russian Defense Ministry and the organizations of the Russian defense industry show that the global US missile defense system and the European missile defense system are vulnerable because they are built on the basis of land-based and ship-based infrastructure objects of considerable size. low vitality and physical security. They are also characterized by insufficient effectiveness in defeating Russian ICBMs, SLBMs and long-range cruise missiles with promising types of combat equipment, since it is not possible to achieve accurate kinetic interception ("bullet into bullet") of a large number of maneuvering warheads covered with a complex of anti-missile defense weapons.

Moreover, in the course of nuclear planning, a certain quantitative redundancy of ICBMs, SLBMs and combat units is provided for the purpose of ensuring a breakthrough of the missile defense system and inflicting a given damage to the military-economic potential of the enemy. It is strange that the leadership and the public of the alliance countries, who place on their territory the facilities of the European missile defense and tactical nuclear weapons (TNW), naively believing that they will be securely covered with an anti-missile umbrella. Actually, the aforementioned countries are becoming hostages, since the main elements of the EuroMD system will be destroyed first of all with the start of a strategic operation in the European theater of operations.

Most European leaders soberly assess the potential threats to their states if their policy on European missile defense turns out to be in the same vein as Washington’s political missile ambitions. Therefore, it is important to carry out information campaigns with the aim of delaying and in the long term - disrupting the process of implementing the American plans to create EuroMAN; to discredit the missile defense system among the population of the states involved by the Americans in the missile defense program, with an emphasis on the futility of its use against Russian BMs and their combat equipment of the new generation, capable of easily overcome any modern missile defense system; the formation of public opinion among the population of the states that their participation in the European missile defense program, the deployment of its elements, as well as US tactical nuclear weapons on their territory pose a real threat to the security of the states themselves, turning them into objects of primary defeat in the event of any military conflict.

To this end, it is necessary to engage the CDF of the state, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Defense of Russia and other agencies with representatives of Russian and foreign media to communicate to the international community Russia's position on the deployment of European missile defense, its negative impact on strategic stability and international security in the world; more extensive use of the media, including the possibilities of electronic networks, to distribute materials about the negative consequences of the US deployment of the European missile defense system; to intensify the work of non-governmental organizations in the United States, whose activities are in Russia's interests, including in areas that allow one way or another to counteract the deployment of anti-missile defense, etc.

In this regard, it seems very effective to use these arguments in the interests of strengthening the information confrontation and forming world public opinion about the questionable effectiveness and futility of the European missile defense system. In electronic and print media, various Internet resources, in the course of discussions, forums and briefings it is reasoned to justify threats to the security of the public of those countries that host objects of the European missile defense system and US tactical nuclear weapons on their territory.

It is also proposed to use the principle of enhancing the mood of the population, which consists in the fact that in countries where it is planned to deploy or have already deployed elements of the European missile defense system, to initiate protest movements of the local population in order to prevent the implementation of these plans or complicate the functioning of this system.

The proposal of the military analyst Konstantin Sivkov deserves attention, that in information work with the population one should refer to the possible use of geophysical destructive processes created by ammunition of a certain TNT as the main damaging factors. So a hypothetical impact of even a single ammunition of this type on such geophysically vulnerable points of the United States as the Yellowstone Volcano, can lead to the eruption of this supervolcano, which will lead to the complete destruction of the United States as a state. Several such munitions, exploded simultaneously in the calculated points of the Atlantic or Pacific Ocean, can produce superzuns capable of flooding the United States to a depth of several hundred kilometers from the coast with the destruction of almost all the infrastructure in these areas. The catastrophic consequences of Hurricane Kathryn in the state of California are graphic evidence of this.

It is necessary to intensify the work of the relevant structures of Russia to study the problems of the vulnerability of the territory of the United States and other European countries that have deployed in the territory the facilities of the European missile defense system and the US tactical nuclear weapons with a report of the results to the Russian Defense Ministry. Thus, the US military leadership, assessing the effects of the nuclear-missile strikes of the DPRK, announced the lack of protection of infrastructure facilities from the effects of electromagnetic pulses arising from high-altitude nuclear explosions or the action of special EMR generators.

Another example. Announced the start of work on the modernization of 150 – 200 nuclear bombs of type B-61-3, -4, -7, located in storage facilities in five countries - members of the alliance. It is planned to develop a new type B61-12 aerial bombs. In this case, the main work on its creation will be carried out in the continental part of the United States, which is associated with a large number of air and sea transfers of bombs back and forth. This means that the preparation and transportation of these bombs are attractive targets for terrorist attacks with unpredictable consequences for the US-NATO leadership and civilians. Is this not a topic for planning and conducting information campaigns on the part of numerous Russian structures of information confrontation and the media?

Politico-military measures

The Russian side has the opportunity to consider the following set of military-political measures.

Firstly, it is the constant informing of the Russian and world community about the gross violations by the United States of the provisions of the indefinite INF Treaty. Thus, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation has repeatedly stated that in violation of this Treaty, the Americans are creating target missiles of shorter and medium range, which are used in testing elements of the missile defense system. In the near future, the Americans are planning to move to the next stage of tests of anti-missile missile systems with interception of strategic target missiles, which will be associated with violations of the START Treaty. It should be constantly emphasized that the American leadership did not support the Russian-Chinese initiative for the globalization of the INF Treaty, which led to the proliferation of medium-range and shorter-range missiles. In this regard, Russian President Vladimir Putin noted: “Launchers deployed in Romania can be easily converted to accommodate medium and short-range missiles. This is a clear violation of the INF Treaty. Moreover, the re-equipment is carried out in a very short time and it’s really unnoticeable for us and us what is happening there. We can't even control it. ” According to Russian experts, it is not a serious technical problem to equip these missiles with Tomahawk type cruise missiles. IV, which is a serious threat to us. The Americans also cannot guarantee that it will be the interceptor missiles that will be launched from the US warships, and not completely new long-range missiles flying along a ballistic trajectory.

It seems that the Russian side should pragmatically approach compliance with the INF Treaty, especially with regard to the production and deployment of the Iskander type RK, including those with long-range cruise missiles. Moreover, the State Duma of the Russian Federation has already announced the possibility of preparing a draft statement on Russia's withdrawal from the INF Treaty. It should also periodically announce the possibility of restoring the INF range in the Eastern region of the Russian Federation, which will cause concern to the Chinese strategic partners. It becomes possible to work out with the leadership of China and other states of the Asia-Pacific region, of coordinated measures to counter US plans to deploy a global missile defense system and a missile defense system for the APR. It is important to note that Viktor Ozerov, Chairman of the Federation Council Committee on Defense and Security, did not rule out Russia's withdrawal from the START Treaty in response to the deployment of EuroMDF facilities: “Of course, this is an extreme measure, and I hope it will not come to it. However, a way out of strategic offensive arms is possible if Russia sees that the deployment of the European missile defense elements is irreversible and there is a real threat to our security. ”

Secondly, it is relevant to develop a dialogue with the above-mentioned NATO members, on whose territory infrastructure objects of the European Missile Defense System, tactical nuclear weapons and hypersonic weapon systems (GGDW) are located, in order to convince them of the United States anti-missile umbrella that they are hopeless. It is appropriate to inform the leadership of these states that these objects are considered strategic. To defeat them in advance, the necessary outfit of ICBMs, SLBMs and long-range WTOs deployed in remote regions and maritime areas of the Russian Federation that are outside the range of forces and facilities of the European missile defense system is planned. To emphasize that various variants of inaccurate kinetic interceptions of combat units of ICBMs and SLBMs by means of antimissile defense systems (THAAD, Patriot PAK-3 systems) will occur at the final leg of their flight over the territories of states with all the ensuing consequences. It is also useful to remind NATO members that the list of targets to be affected may include storage facilities with American tactical nuclear weapons, their carrier bases in Germany, Italy, Belgium, Holland and Turkey, where there are 150 – 200 nuclear bombs of the B61 type with a total power of 20 Mt.

Other military and political measures include further expansion of military-political cooperation with the Republic of Belarus in matters of the possible deployment of Iskander-M missile systems and the organization of a joint air defense system; engaging the potential of the CIS, the CSTO and the SCO to solve the problems of the collective security of states in the context of global and European missile defense deployment; the use of contradictions between the United States and some states of the NATO bloc on the deployment and financing of the construction of Euro missile defense facilities and ensuring the safety of US tactical nuclear weapons in Europe, etc.

Operational, organizational and technical measures

The composition of operational measures currently includes: the creation of promising types of missile systems and combat equipment of ICBMs and SLBMs, taking into account the global and European missile defense capabilities; optimal target distribution in nuclear planning in order to prevent ballistic flight routes of missiles from falling within the reach of global information and impact missile systems; the possibility of relocation of the Topol, Topol-M and Yars PGRK to new positional areas; selection and concealment of the combat patrol areas of Russian missile-propelled rocket launchers, where the interception of launching SLBMs using US missile defense systems is impossible; improvement of existing and development of new forms and methods of combat use of the Strategic Missile Forces, NSNF and ANSN to break the European missile defense system; the organization of operational camouflage when conducting combat training and test launches of ICBMs, SLBMs and prospective types of combat equipment; planning to work out conditional tasks for the destruction of Euro missile defense facilities during operational and combat training activities, etc.

As for technical measures, a significant part of them is implemented in the existing missile systems of the Strategic Missile Forces and NSNF. These include: the presence of a short active portion of the flight of solid-propellant rockets; use of separable warheads with individual homing warheads; reduction of radar and optical visibility of combat units; their masking on the transatmospheric part of the trajectory due to the use of passive false targets; manning platforms for dilution of warheads with active jamming stations for suppressing pro-information media, etc.

Regarding promising ICBMs and SLBMs, one can refer to the statements of Academician Yuri Solomon “on the creation of a fundamentally new type of combat equipment that will put an end to all the conversations regarding our struggle with a non-existent missile defense system of a potential enemy. It only remains to adapt the development to the existing missile systems. ” According to representatives of the defense industry of the Russian Federation, such an adaptation was taken into account in the State Armaments Program up to 2020. In addition, promising missile systems with enhanced capabilities for overcoming missile defense are under development: a missile system with the “heavy” ICBM “Sarmat”, RK “Rubezh” and the combat railway complex “Barguzin”. It is important to note that in the START Treaty, unlike in the previous START-1 Treaty, there are no restrictions on throwing weight. This creates favorable conditions for assembling platforms of the head part of the ICBM and SLBM warheads and means of overcoming missile defense (PCB missile defense) in the required ratio of their weight parameters depending on the type and characteristics of the object of destruction.

It seems reasonable to apply measures of asymmetrical counteraction to the global and European missile defense. The most realistic of them are: preventive destruction of information missile facilities of the European missile defense system by means of the WTO, including the involvement of the Iskander-M RK, Caliber type cruise missiles and X-101 / 102; functional suppression of the SPRNU, SCCR and ABM radar stations located in the territory of the European countries of NATO; destruction of control and communications facilities located in the territory of a number of NATO countries, which will lead to disruption of information exchange between radars and global and European missile defense control points, etc. The effective response to the European missile defense system will be the destruction of the control points of the US armed forces in the European zone, where preparation and anti-missile operations (Ramstein Air Base).

The most convincing and effective measure to overcome the US global missile defense system and its regional segments is the use of promising strategic missiles at targets in the United States across the South Pole. It is known that the territory of the United States from this strategic direction is not covered, except as a radar station at Eglin airbase, which is clearly not enough. What possibilities open up for justifying the US Congress of the need for an arms race and the formation of orders for the US military-industrial complex, as regards the development and deployment of additional strategic defensive arms!

In the interests of Russia's security

The Pentagon continues to repeat that the EuroPRO system is not capable of intercepting Russian ICBMs and SLBMs. They say that from the point of view of geography and physics it is impossible to knock down these missiles from points located in Romania or Poland. It is emphasized once again that the main objective of deploying a missile defense system in Europe is countering the missile threat from Iran. And that the 41 Mk launchers do not plan to deploy medium-range and cruise missiles, and the interceptor missiles will not have a high-explosive warhead.

It is legitimate to repeat the question to the US-NATO leadership. Why should the European missile defense facilities not be located in Turkey, Iceland, Great Britain and Canada - NATO allies, which would alleviate a number of Russia's concerns?

At a meeting with the leadership of the Ministry of Defense and the DIC of the Russian Federation in Sochi, Russian President Vladimir Putin said: “Placing American missile defense systems in Europe is not a defense, but building up the US nuclear potential in Eastern Europe, these are additional steps to swinging the international security system and launching a new race weapons. But we will not be involved in this race and we will go our own way, we will work carefully. But we will adjust plans to stop threats to Russia's security. "

It is obvious that the above measures of stopping are not a start to a new arms race, but are a set of regular tasks and functions of the state and military authorities of the Russian Federation, the focus of which should be clarified in accordance with the evolving military-political and strategic situation and implemented within the allocated allocations . As for military-technical measures, tactical-technical requirements for countering missile defense of potential enemies are always laid out in promising types of strategic offensive arms. As is known, the construction and development of the Strategic Nuclear Forces of the RF Armed Forces is determined by the corresponding plans, the START Treaty, the State Armaments Program and state defense orders. Additional funding is required.
Author:
Originator:
http://nvo.ng.ru/realty/2016-06-03/1_pro.html
49 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. The black
    The black 6 June 2016 05: 54
    +3
    What it means
    becomes a holey umbrella
    She never provided security.
    Recent missile defense missile defense exercises have shown that even its own target missiles are shot down every other time. smile
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. siberalt
      siberalt 6 June 2016 06: 07
      +13
      If the Americans themselves argue that the missile defense system is not effective, then it is designed to reinstall missiles for attack, and its, as it were, defensive purpose is a fiction.
      1. tlauicol
        tlauicol 6 June 2016 06: 14
        +1
        it only makes us worse - a nuclear pistol at the temple
      2. NordUral
        NordUral 6 June 2016 11: 52
        +1
        That's it!
    3. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 6 June 2016 06: 19
      0
      Noteworthy are the proposals of military analyst Konstantin Sivkov that in information work with the population one should turn to the possible use of geophysical destructive processes as the main damaging factors
      well, let's put another A. Sakharov talked about this, so Sivkov should not try on other people's "laurels" ... but about the lack of accuracy of the kinetic SM-3, they will probably try to compensate for the massiveness, and perhaps there are options with an explosive warhead, then things are getting worse ... with regard to missile defense, and if "axes" with a vigorous charge are pushed into containers, a completely different alignment turns out, this is a big step towards disaster, in general, we are on the eve of a "grandiose nix" what
      1. smith7
        smith7 6 June 2016 06: 40
        0
        At the expense of "... will try to compensate for the massiveness ..." you are too much smile The SM-3 compartment alone is "like a cast iron bridge"! The USA, of course, are rich thieves, but this is not a rocket for mass production. CDs from the Iskander complex seem expensive to us, but this is a penny compared to the SM-3.
        1. Andrey Yuryevich
          Andrey Yuryevich 6 June 2016 08: 41
          0
          Quote: smith7
          At the expense of "... will try to compensate for the massiveness ..." you are too much

          Well, not about a thousand, of course, but a couple of hundred can be charged, (although there is not yet such a quantity, it’s hard to arm "Arli Burks" along the way, and it is difficult to install in Europe). And it is undeniably expensive ...
        2. faridg7
          faridg7 6 June 2016 12: 15
          +1
          Are you sure that having declared the production of hundreds of cm-3, they will not stamp a thousand tomahawks on these Tugriks? here you will be mass.
    4. ava09
      ava09 6 June 2016 07: 28
      0
      Quote: Black
      She never provided security.

      I agree with this.
      Quote: Black
      Recent missile defense missile defense exercises have shown that even its own target missiles are shot down every other time.

      Meanings are floating ... Are you okay? (so in such cases, our "strategic friends" ask).
  2. sergsp
    sergsp 6 June 2016 06: 10
    0
    The catastrophic effects of Hurricane Catherine in California are clear evidence of this. recourse Was it in California?
    1. sgazeev
      sgazeev 6 June 2016 08: 00
      0
      Quote: sergsp
      The catastrophic effects of Hurricane Catherine in California are clear evidence of this. recourse Was it in California?

      New Orleans. Louisiana. Walked over the Sarai brothers.
  3. Ruswolf
    Ruswolf 6 June 2016 06: 15
    0
    Everything is right! Add nothing.
    Active defense is a passive attack!
    Although in this case, the difference between passive and active - not a bitch!
    1. Karasik
      Karasik 6 June 2016 06: 50
      0
      ... The PKK in Devesela, Poland, and the entire Euro-missile defense system are not directed against Russia and are intended solely for the defense of the NATO and US countries from hypothetical attacks by Iranian and North Korean missiles.

      Yes of course wassat This is called baby talk. If an adult wants to lie, then he is lying convincingly or at least believably. And here - some kind of nonsense. Do they think that such a "excuse" will do? Are battalions and tanks in Eastern Europe also against North Korean aggression?
      1. Ruswolf
        Ruswolf 6 June 2016 07: 00
        +3
        Europe wears a martyr’s belt.
        1. sgazeev
          sgazeev 6 June 2016 08: 03
          0
          Quote: Ruswolf
          Europe wears a martyr’s belt.

          They’re probably already thinking about creating a knife switch for cutting down especially zealous ones, like there is no method against scrap. It's cheap and cheerful. drinks
      2. The comment was deleted.
  4. jovanni
    jovanni 6 June 2016 06: 18
    +4
    So far, the Western media have successfully blocked critical information about the activities of the ruling elites of their countries, including those related to lowering the threshold for unleashing a new world war. To bring information to the townsfolk is the problem! And the rulers on the drum. They, seeing themselves as Serpents of the Mountaineers, consider about twelve heads. They hope that in return new ones will grow back! But in vain ...
  5. An60
    An60 6 June 2016 06: 21
    0
    That hit bulldozers and weddings, yes!
  6. Same lech
    Same lech 6 June 2016 06: 26
    +6
    The most convincing and effective measure to overcome the US global missile defense system and its regional segments is the use of promising strategic missiles at targets in the United States across the South Pole.


    Competent article ...
    In my opinion, all the same, military facilities in EUROPE for RUSSIA in the forthcoming armed battle are a secondary goal.

    The main goal is still the US State Department, the Pentagon ... the WHITE HOUSE finally ...
    further down the list ... (US)

    Electric and heating stations ...
    oil refineries ...
    strategic military factories ...
    strategic aviation airfields ...
    bases of submarines and aircraft carriers ...
    information centers ...
    and finally ... the military gps satellite system ... paralyzing it can blind the enemy and he will become defenseless.

    The US military really wants RUSSIA to retaliate in Europe and not in the USA ... everything should be exactly the opposite.
    Our main enemy today is the US State Department and then terrorism.
    TERRORISM is for the most part an artificial phenomenon and its sponsor is just sitting in the US WHITE HOUSE.
    1. 34 region
      34 region 6 June 2016 07: 09
      +3
      Lyokha! 06.26. True gutarish. But I hope we do not have woodpeckers sitting in the General Staff. And a sly bolt is in store for this tricky ass. Here, apparently, a question of mathematics. Or do we shoot down their missiles and cover their launchers or bomb the White House right away? What if their first launch is just blanks? We shoot down the blanks, and then the nuclear batons are flying! Could this be? And for good, of course, the Amerans should be said bluntly. In case of an attack, the first greetings will be with you! Moreover, the states are surrounded by water, and there (in the water) can be found everything that they are afraid of. This is one thing. Another thing is that we somehow do not tremble amers even psychologically. And I would like to be constantly warped and distorted. Either we keep money from them, then we ask for investments. What for? Why can't we impose sanctions against America? What are we afraid of? While we are sitting in a blank defense and not blather. And someone said: If a fight is inevitable, you have to beat first! So what were our hits? Have we set up our bases in Mexico and Canada? Introduced sanctions against the United States? Refused to purchase from amerskih firms? Abandoned the dollar in principle? We support the protest movement in the United States? Bomb Babaev? We bomb them. But we don’t touch their sponsors. So where did we go to them? In the ear, in the eye? Or just inflate your cheeks and create a formidable look?
      1. Ruswolf
        Ruswolf 6 June 2016 07: 31
        +2
        Same lech
        Our main enemy today is the US State Department and then terrorism.

        Alexey!
        You think correctly!
        Only need to generalize. The United States is not separable from Terrorism! This it is the one and not divisible!
        As in Mayakovsky: "When we say the States, we mean terrorism! When we say Terrorism, we mean the States!"
        They are held hostage all of Europe and half the world! And they talk about danger and struggle? ...
        Fighting yourself?
        Therefore, they don’t do anything. bully
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. Shark Lover
      Shark Lover 7 June 2016 03: 25
      0
      All right. If a machine gun was pointed at you, you shouldn’t knock it out, turn the barrel down or pour sand, you shouldn’t use tricky hand-to-hand combat tricks or dodge. It’s much easier and more efficient to kill a shooter.
  7. Yak28
    Yak28 6 June 2016 06: 27
    +3
    The global missile defense becomes a leaky umbrella that is not full of holes, and an anti-missile defense system is deployed at the borders of Russia, the missiles of which can be equipped with nuclear weapons, and missile defense can be used as an offensive weapon for the first crushing blow. So when our politicians, the military says nonsense of our borders, it doesn’t threaten Russia, all missiles will not be knocked down, military bases and airfields along our borders are okay, it's all lies. ABM is a serious advantage and handicap in case of an attack on Russia, the flight time will be very small. anti-Russian propaganda and hysteria? And in order to morally prepare your people for a war with Russia, so that if anything people have no doubt that Russia is an evil country and Russians should be killed.
  8. Ruswolf
    Ruswolf 6 June 2016 06: 40
    0
    Yak28
    So when our politicians, the military say that missile defense along our borders is nonsense, it does not threaten Russia, military bases and airfields along our borders are okay, it's all a lie. ABM is a serious advantage and handicap in the event of an attack on Russia, the flight time will be very small.

    What are you talking about? .... And for what? .....
    And the topic is not about who is better, who is worse!
    There are so many stocks of nuclear weapons that without any assessment of the effectiveness of interceptors or striking units, Europe will cease to exist. As in general, and "ball". Our nuclear submarines, too, are not collected from the American continent.
  9. Zomanus
    Zomanus 6 June 2016 06: 57
    +3
    All is eager to fight ...
    Diplomatically you need to be able to fight, to economically destroy.
    The union wasn’t destroyed by missiles and bombs, so we need to learn the same thing.
    1. Rus2012
      6 June 2016 10: 23
      0
      Quote: Zomanus
      so we need to learn the same thing.

      ... approximately in this vein -
      The 2017 in Russia in Sochi will host the World Festival of Youth and Students
      laughing bully

      Plus - it is necessary to organize support for the ideas of progressive youth and the labor movement in the United States and satellites "for a just world, equal rights and against war" (Abramovich's grants are permissible) ...
  10. Ros 56
    Ros 56 6 June 2016 07: 00
    +1
    Well, with stripes, everything is clear and understandable, an attempt to build a launch system for a nuclear weapon not from its territory, and then make six kopecks eyes and how to ask Ukrainians - and here we are.
    I’m interested in the position of the leadership and the population of the countries where the launches are planned from, they don’t understand, because in the event of a conflict the first blow will be delivered to them not in response, but in a transversal manner, and they’ll burn out without understanding, but for what.
    1. Yak28
      Yak28 6 June 2016 07: 16
      +1
      Leaders of the countries are bedding and henchmen of the United States, who if they run away from the country. And no one listens to the people who care about it.
      Almost every U.S. citizen is interested in the world and events that happen outside the states, so Europeans are second-class people for them, the United States considers itself an exceptional nation, which God made it possible to administer justice and fight evil all over the world. , they do not care about them, they do not mind.
  11. Yak28
    Yak28 6 June 2016 07: 02
    +1
    Quote: Zomanus
    All is eager to fight ...

    And who can’t wait? Not Russia is deploying a missile defense system in Mexico near the US borders, and Russia is not increasing the military contingent near the US borders wink
  12. Alex von Dorn
    Alex von Dorn 6 June 2016 07: 06
    0
    You need to be on the alert. The United States does not abandon plans to destroy Russia. They are followed by the European "partners". Germany has declared Russia a "rival". Well, she doesn't really feel like it, no way ...
  13. Foresterer
    Foresterer 6 June 2016 07: 07
    +1
    Virtually simulate our response to those bases and towns in Europe where missile defense elements and all other US gifts are placed, mount frightening and promising videos showing possible consequences for the host, and regularly show them on Russia Today, let the hans, mothers and sandors know whom and what they invited.
    1. Rus2012
      6 June 2016 10: 27
      0
      Quote: Foresterer
      Mateushi and Sandor know who and what they invited.

      ... okay, the Hans, this is a nation raped by the 3,14ndos for a long time, but among others - to develop "Zarnitsa" and "virtual" insurgency movement for the rapid withdrawal of missile defense facilities in Europe ... laughing
  14. Old26
    Old26 6 June 2016 07: 16
    0
    Quote: Andrey Yurievich
    well, let's put another A. Sakharov talked about this, so Sivkov should not try on other people's "laurels" ... but about the lack of accuracy of the kinetic SM-3, they will probably try to compensate for the massiveness, and perhaps there are options with an explosive warhead, then things are getting worse ... with regard to missile defense, and if "axes" with a vigorous charge are pushed into containers, a completely different alignment turns out, this is a big step towards disaster, in general, we are on the eve of a "grandiose nix"

    Dear Andrey Yurievich! This expression of Sakharov can be attributed to Vildanov in the same way. The most interesting thing is that I read his (historical) articles related to the Great Patriotic War and waited with interest, as well as his speeches on TV. But the last 5-10 years, "Monsieur General" has gone all out. And his articles became either "horror stories" or "Hurray-patriotic". Therefore, I do not put any plus or minus to the article.
    Now a few words about what you can shove in and what cannot.
    Let's start with the fact that the nuclear "Axes" are no longer in fact disposed of. And their nuclear warheads are used in other ammunition. New versions were created and tested for non-nuclear warheads with their own specific details. The ranges have dropped by almost half. The presence of a range of 2 thousand or more has become uncritical. Sometimes even such a range interfered. This was shown at the time by the attack on Bin Laden's headquarters.
    This means that the existing ones will either have to be "reworked", adjusting them to the YABZ, or new ones have to be built. What can now be delivered within a short time in the same Deveselu - only tactical "Tomahawks" with a range of 1,5 kilometers. And then we take the map and see where they will reach and what strategic targets these "axes" in nuclear-free equipment will hit. And we find out that nothing. WINGED is not a BALLISTIC missile. It does not always go in a straight line. And the base for this option is located not at the northern border of Romania (with Ukraine), but on the southern border (with Bulgaria).
    Second. "Standards" have warheads somewhere in the order of 30-35 kg. To put on this air defense missile a high-explosive warhead or as especially zealous comrades trying to thicken the colors, a nuclear one is STUPID. After all, it will be necessary to install not only a nuclear charge, which will generally be a dozen or two kilotons maximum, but also to make it thermal protection, which will eat up these kilograms.
    To put there medium-range ballistic missiles, which, as many have written, the Americans have developed under the guise of targets and in violation of the INF Treaty, will also fail, purely technically. They will not fit there.

    This, by the way, is the answer and comrade Yak28 to his post.
    Quote: Yak28
    The global missile defense becomes a leaky umbrella that is not leaky, and missile defense is deployed at the borders of Russia, the missiles of which can be equipped with a nuclear charge, and missile defense can also be used as an offensive weapon for the first crushing blow

    The possibility of installing YaBZ purely theoretically - maybe it exists. But only in theory. Rockets "Standard" as an offensive weapon cannot be used according to their performance characteristics
    1. Operator
      Operator 6 June 2016 10: 28
      -1
      The Mk41 unified mine launchers installed at US missile bases in Romania and Poland allow launching the BGM-109G GLCM Tomahawk cruise missiles with an 150-kt nuclear charge and 2500 km range without any modifications.
  15. Volksib
    Volksib 6 June 2016 08: 16
    +1
    There is no EuroPro, everyone understands this and Putin voiced it. This is the removal of launchers as close as possible to Russia. To strike at Russia. The countries hosting the American offensive potential are just "consumable" material. And the main battlefield is information. People must understand that they are hostages of the American strategy of a disarming strike on Russia. The fosterlings who are at the head of these states are sitting on the hook and working off the money invested in them. No sound dialogue with them will work.
  16. aszzz888
    aszzz888 6 June 2016 08: 17
    +1
    The article clearly and almost on the shelves decomposed the problems, both ours and the Merikatos. And so that they do not twitch once again, deploy their missile defense in Cuba. Moreover, the Cuban leadership is not delighted with the actions of the United States.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 6 June 2016 10: 20
      0
      Only this missile defense system in Cuba will be useless - the range to the United States is too great.
    2. faridg7
      faridg7 6 June 2016 12: 26
      0
      Interestingly, we doubt the adequacy of the Europeans who host the American missile defense system, but somehow we don’t think whether the Cubans would agree to this. They, too, placing our PUs at home will know that they are becoming a target. They are certainly not enthusiastic about the United States, but is it?
      1. Rus2012
        6 June 2016 13: 17
        0
        Quote: faridg7
        somehow we don’t think whether the Cubans will agree to this

        ... the thing is that there are offers that cannot be refused.

        Those. THIS suggests at least -
        - the opening of regular flights of both air and ocean liners, marine logistics
        - supplies of raw materials, industrial equipment and consumer goods
        - taking territory under its protective umbrella, including nuclear

        And most importantly, all this at the expense of renting the territory.

        But, with this, I think there will be no problems, because the Chinese will join a couple.
        T.ch. everything has a place to be!
  17. Pitot
    Pitot 6 June 2016 08: 42
    0
    Yes, that’s what the promises of the Anglo-American civilization stand. Now the conclusion is natural - Everything is nothing, priority is Russia.
  18. Red_Hamer
    Red_Hamer 6 June 2016 08: 43
    0
    The Pentagon continues to repeat that the EuroPRO system is not capable of intercepting Russian ICBMs and SLBMs. They say that from the point of view of geography and physics it is impossible to knock down these missiles from points located in Romania or Poland. It is emphasized once again that the main objective of deploying a missile defense system in Europe is countering the missile threat from Iran. And that the 41 Mk launchers do not plan to deploy medium-range and cruise missiles, and the interceptor missiles will not have a high-explosive warhead.
    For a complete moron, alignment! In the same way, since the time of "Perestroika" they have been saying that NATO will not expand to the east, and now you say that, and it never happened! So now, continue in the same spirit, no guys, that's it! We took advantage of the trust once, then it won't work with the Russians! Then the centuries-old mechanism, called "Russian unpredictability", which you are so afraid of, turned on. However, "Unpredictability" is for the West, that is, for you, for us it is routine, the "Russian Autoresponder" turned on, so to speak. Shedding busy, wait for an answer, wait for an answer, wait for an answer .....! I can only sympathize with your feeble mind, sir!
  19. Berber
    Berber 6 June 2016 09: 35
    0
    I don’t know what is in their heads, but it seems they are teasing us. In any case, they will be guaranteed destroyed or suffer unacceptable losses.
  20. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 6 June 2016 10: 11
    +1
    US missile defense system provides satisfactory defense
    from single launches of medium-range BR.
    Dozens of countries are currently producing (or purchasing) dozens of countries, and every year
    More.
    A protection system like Aegis is needed by anyone who does not want to suddenly get
    400–500 kg of blue explosives are far from an unknown ill-wisher.
    And Russia too. Therefore, the S-500 is on the way very on time.
  21. Samoyed
    Samoyed 6 June 2016 10: 13
    0
    To influence the politicians and the population of these countries. More precisely, the population and deputies. Hooked politicians. A preemptive strike on government agencies, starting with Diet, government houses. Tell us about the number and timing of missiles and shells. Still thinking about some days and hours of defense. No, kotuklizma will come in a quarter of an hour. Kick the officials, except Lavrov, Churkin, Zakharova, everyone else is stealth!
  22. Vadim237
    Vadim237 6 June 2016 10: 34
    0
    These subsonic Tomahawks do not pose a threat to Russia, since the terrain is flat and for air defense systems they will be an easy target. And in the USA, they are already working on an air launch of ICBMs - so far these are target missiles dropped from transport aircraft, but in the future they will be missiles with warheads.
  23. Air defense SSH
    Air defense SSH 6 June 2016 15: 25
    0
    Quote: siberalt
    If the Americans themselves argue that the missile defense system is not effective, then it is designed to reinstall missiles for attack, and its, as it were, defensive purpose is a fiction.

    This is clear as daylight; apart from offensive purposes, these missile defense systems also serve for "non-corruption" cutting of the military budget and forcing the payments of two percent of the rest of NATO members ... ...
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 6 June 2016 16: 04
      0
      And here is Donald Cook - did he try to bring down our ICBM?
  24. Old26
    Old26 6 June 2016 22: 38
    0
    Quote: faridg7
    Are you sure that having declared the production of hundreds of cm-3, they will not stamp a thousand tomahawks on these Tugriks? here you will be mass.

    It’s not that easy. The production capacity of the Tomahawk plant since 2007 is 440 tactical Tomahawks per year. Plus we will have to start producing nuclear warheads for them. And this is not a matter of one year. A thousand "axes" are 3 years ...

    Quote: Operator
    BGM-109G GLCM Tomahawk with a 150-kt nuclear charge and a range of 2500 km.

    Pancake. Me, what, BIG write again: ALL NUCLEAR "TOMAHAWKS" ARE DISPOSEDand their YaBZ USED IN OTHER WEAPON SYSTEMS. So understandable? Theoretically, you can put, but THEY ARE NOT HERE... So there is nothing to put there. Only tactical "Tomahawks" with conventional warheads and a range of 1500-1700 km

    Quote: Vadim237
    These subsonic Tomahawks do not pose a threat to Russia, since the terrain is flat and for air defense systems they will be an easy target. And in the USA, they are already working on an air launch of ICBMs - so far these are target missiles dropped from transport aircraft, but in the future they will be missiles with warheads.

    The Americans launched an air launch 40 years ago in October 1974. An experimental launch of the Minitmen-5 ICBM was carried out from the S-1A aircraft. It was the first ever launch of a rocket of this class from an airplane. A total of 21 trials were conducted.
    However, after this the article on the ban on launching ICBMs from aircraft was introduced into the OSV-2 agreement. So targets can be launched, ICBMs are gone ...
    1. Operator
      Operator 6 June 2016 22: 49
      -1
      You are contradicting yourself - then the factory produces 440 Tomahawks a year (what could prevent it from putting into production a proven model BGM-109G GLCM?), Then the unified launchers of Mk41 will have nothing to charge.
      How do you know the number of so-called inactive nuclear warheads with the capacity of 100-150 CTN in American warehouses?
  25. Old26
    Old26 6 June 2016 23: 35
    0
    Quote: Operator
    You are contradicting yourself - then the factory produces 440 Tomahawks a year (what could prevent it from putting into production a proven model BGM-109G GLCM?), Then the unified launchers of Mk41 will have nothing to charge.
    How do you know the number of so-called inactive nuclear warheads with the capacity of 100-150 CTN in American warehouses?

    I do not contradict at all. The plant actually produces 440 Tomahawks a year. But here in the VO, some are already expecting that the Americans will start deploying nuclear Tomahawks in Romania almost tomorrow. And they still need to be built (or modernized existing ones). And some talk about thousands of nuclear "tomahawks". But even 1000 is three years. Of course, there are no nuclear Tomahawks now, with which the Mk41 launchers must be equipped.

    How do you know the number of nuclear weapons with a capacity of 100-150 kt? So there is no secret. There are a lot of materials, of course, if we set ourselves the task of monitoring this topic. Tables, reports, etc. The number of nuclear weapons of this type (and not just this capacity) is known to within one. Until 1990, 376 W-80 warheads were produced. And how many of them are now available in an inactive state - a flag in hand. Look for yourself ...