If a war starts, who will win? Why is the United States preparing for a war with Russia if it cannot be won? “Russia is simply not ready for a long war”

Russia is once again returning to the thesis that the deployment of a missile defense system by the United States is associated solely with the desire to gain superiority over Russia and China.

This was stated during the Beijing briefing “The US global layered missile defense system as a threat to the military security of Russia and China and strategic stability in the world,” said the first deputy chief operational management Lieutenant General Viktor Poznikhir of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces.

According to the Russian General Staff, the Americans, by deploying the US global missile defense system, are trying to reduce the potential of Russia’s nuclear forces and completely “zero” nuclear potential China.

At the same time, as recently as October 4, a number of American Pentagon generals said that war between Russia and the United States will be in the very near future, and it will be “quick and deadly.” As the Chief of Staff of the US Army, General Mark Milley, noted, an armed conflict between Russia and the United States is “almost guaranteed.”

Against the background of foreign policy contradictions of both nuclear powers in Syria, such statements cause panic in the media and public environments.

Unlike their American colleagues, Russian military experts are in no hurry to scare the planet with nuclear war.

Thus, in response to the eschatological statements of the Pentagon generals, the head Russian Academy geopolitical problems Colonel General Leonid Ivashov said that American generals are simply bluffing and are trying to intimidate Russia with such statements.

After all, in the event of a war with Russia, the United States simply will not be able to avoid a strike on its territory. And, despite the fact that the consequences of the third world war will be disastrous both for the participants in the nuclear conflict and for all of humanity, the Russians have a better chance of preserving a limited number of their people and uncontaminated territories for the further restoration of civilization than the residents of the United States.

Let's see how the US missile defense system works.

These are, first of all, long-range radar systems, military tracking satellites nuclear facilities enemy launchers and other means of deploying land- and sea-based interceptor missiles.

The main component of the US missile defense system is ground complex Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GBMD) ballistic missile interception. This is the only weapon system capable of intercepting Russian intercontinental ballistic missiles. However, this complex is capable of hitting only monoblock ballistic missiles, which makes it vulnerable to the Russian nuclear triad.

At sea, the United States is protected by the Aegis missile defense system, which protects the American fleet from attacks by short- and medium-range ballistic missiles, as well as from space weapons.

This system is characterized by high mobility, since warships equipped with Aegis can be quickly deployed to almost any point in the World Ocean. Total number of SM-3 interceptor missiles included in the system "Aegis", reaches half a thousand.

The American missile defense system also includes radars of various bases, including sea, anti-aircraft missile systems MIM-104 "Patriot", mobile complexes Air defense "THAAD", and other components.

A whole group of states (primarily NATO members) are working on the US missile defense system. IN technical creation missile defense elements are participating in the UK, Germany, Japan, France, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, South Korea and other states.

However, for now American system Missile defense loses to Russia in the event of a global nuclear conflict.

American generals who declare the US military superiority over Russia apparently forget (or perhaps deliberately do not mention) those areas in which our country is superior to the rest of the world, including the United States.

First of all, Russia is superior to the United States in the nuclear submarine fleet, in long-range and operational-tactical aviation, in air and space defense systems, and in electronic warfare.

American experts rely on the power of the US fleet, primarily on 10 aircraft carriers, which are an offensive means of projecting military power at sea. However, in the event of a war with Russia, these expensive “watercraft” automatically turn into targets for the Russian submarine fleet and cruise missiles in service with the Russian Ministry of Defense.

Despite the fact that, according to Western experts, the flight time of NATO missiles from the Baltic states to Moscow can be 4-8 minutes, it will be very difficult for the Americans and their allies to penetrate Russian airspace, equipped with the most functional S-300 anti-aircraft missile systems in the world , S-400 and, starting from 2016, S-500 complexes.

In turn, the “response” will immediately overtake Europe: let me remind you that the flight time of the Iskander missiles armed with nuclear charges from Kaliningrad to Warsaw is only 2 minutes, and technically NATO warning systems will not be able to warn anyone.

But let's return to the USA.

As soon as a nuclear crisis breaks out, about 20 nuclear power plants will come into action. submarines, constantly on combat duty near the US maritime borders.

Russian submarines are capable of literally wiping out the entire northern American continent from the face of the Earth, given that they carry in their bellies more than 350 ballistic missiles with nuclear charges of about 200 kilotons (each of these charges is 15 times greater than the power of the bomb dropped by the Americans on Hiroshima in 1945).

Russia's capabilities to conduct electronic warfare against US military installations also pose serious threats to Pentagon military planners. The performance characteristics of electronic warfare systems in service with Russia still remain unclear to the US military command. However, it is known that Russia can successfully interfere with American radars and electronic intelligence systems, which form the basis of the air power of the American hegemon.

I'll bring you interesting quote commander ground forces USA in Europe General Ben Hodges:

“No American has ever come under fire Russian artillery and systems volley fire, not a single one has experienced the impact of Russian electronic warfare systems, electronic suppression, at least at the tactical level.”, - emphasized the American general.

And he's absolutely right.

For more than 70 years since the end of World War II, not a single state has been able to test the full power of Russia’s military potential.

“The deployed missile defense system, in its information and fire capabilities, is unable to withstand the massive use of the Strategic Missile Forces grouping”, - the commander is sure Rocket Forces strategic appointment of the Russian Federation Colonel General Sergey Karakaev.

Of course, it would be naive to believe that Russia can win in nuclear apocalypse. As I wrote above, in the event of a nuclear war, all participants in the global conflict lose, as do the rest of the states of the planet.

However, even if the United States manages to destroy all infrastructure on Russian territory with a massive preventive nuclear strike (which is practically impossible given the current realities), Russian submarines, which are on constant duty in the world’s oceans, will bring this war to its logical conclusion with the complete destruction of the United States.

Do not forget about the so-called Russian “system doomsday" - "Perimeter" (in NATO classification it was called Dead Hand - “Dead Hand”). In 1985, this system entered into combat duty, and continues to protect Russia’s defense interests.

"Perimeter" guarantees the application of a massive response nuclear strike even with the destruction of the country's leadership and command posts Strategic Missile Forces. That is, the “Dead Hand” will work without human participation, and will put the last bullet in the Third World War.

Today it is obvious that the military confrontation between Strategic Missile Forces of Russia and US missile defense will only deepen, especially in light of recent events related to Syria and Ukraine.

However, I would like to believe that the military and political leadership The United States is aware of the scale of the planetary catastrophe that further aggressive foreign policy U.S.A .

Experts believe that military technical superiority lies on the side armed forces USA. Therefore, in the event of a war with the Russians, the Americans will win. The Americans will defeat the Chinese too. Other analysts easily talk about a “small victorious” war. Still others object to the first two: they say, the Kremlin will have something to answer.

Who would win the war if Russia, China and America collided “right now”?

According to Logan Nye, whose article was published in, the United States is the most powerful militarily.

1. Stealth fighters.

The US Air Force currently has a fifth-generation stealth aircraft. However, there are problems here. The Air Force has only 187 F-22 fighters, and the brand new F-35 has encountered a number of difficulties, and even the high-tech pilot helmet still cannot be completed. Meanwhile, the Chinese and Russians are building their own planes. Beijing is building four models: J-31, J-22, J-23 and J-25 (the latter at the rumor level). Russia is working on one fighter, the T-50 (aka PAK FA), a stealth fighter with capabilities that some experts rate on par with the F-22. This T-50 will most likely enter service at the end of 2016 or early 2017.

In 1980, the US Army adopted the first M-1 Abrams. Since then, the tank has been significantly modernized, including in armor, transmission and weapon systems. Essentially, this is a new product with a 120mm main gun, excellent electronics, armor configuration, etc.

Russian T-90. Russia is currently developing a prototype of the T-14 on the Armata platform, but now the Kremlin is counting on the T-90A. And this tank still “surprises”: one of these tanks “survived a direct hit from a TOW missile in Syria.”

The Chinese tank is Type-99, equipped with a 125 mm cannon. The tank is upgraded with reactive armor and is considered almost as survivable in battle as Western or Russian tanks.

Likely winner? It's probably a draw here. However, America more tanks And " best preparation crews." And the US has more combat skills than its rivals, the author is sure.

3. Surface ships.

The US Navy has the largest military fleet in the world. 10 full-fledged aircraft carriers, 9 helicopter carriers. At the same time, alone technical advantages and the sheer size of the Navy may not be enough to overcome Chinese missile attacks or Russian submarine attacks (if the Americans were forced to fight in enemy waters).

As for Russia, its launch of Kalibr cruise missiles against targets in Syria showed that Moscow has found a way to carry out serious attacks even from its relatively small ships.

The Chinese Navy has hundreds of surface ships with advanced missiles and more.

Likely Winner: US Navy. American forces are still the "undisputed world champion." However, this champion “will suffer great losses if he decides to fight China or Russia on their territory.”

4. Submarines.

The US Navy operates 14 submarines with ballistic missiles(total 280 nuclear missiles), each of which can destroy an entire enemy city, with four submarines with 154 cruise missiles"Tomahawk" and 54 nuclear submarines. They are technologically equipped, heavily armed and stealthy.

Russia only has 60 submarines, but they are very maneuverable. Russian nuclear submarines are at the level or close to their Western counterparts. Russia is working on a new one underwater weapons, including a nuclear torpedo.

The Chinese Navy has a total of five nuclear submarines, 53 diesel submarines and four nuclear ballistic missile submarines. Chinese submarines are easy to track.

Likely winner: submarine fleet The US is winning here, although the gap is narrowing over time.

Military expert Alexei Arestovich expressed the following thought in a material for: It’s time for Moscow to get nervous, because America needs a “small war.”

Arestovich notes that the Americans intend to repeat the bluff of the SDI (Strategic Defense Initiative) system, hoping to kill two birds with one stone. They want to force Russia and China, that is, their opponents, to enter into an arms race - one that both states will not survive. At the same time, they will actually test their missile system (the material mentions a test launch of a ballistic missile long range Minuteman III). The level of technology already makes it possible to shoot down missiles on a ballistic curve, the expert notes, and the Americans are succeeding.

Such launches greatly irritate both US adversaries and those who have ballistic missiles. Because they raise questions about the effectiveness of the missile shield, the ability to launch a preemptive strike, a retaliatory strike, and so on. The US actions are not only related to the North Korean crisis, but are also a warning to everyone that it is time to be nervous. If you don’t want to be nervous, then you need to negotiate with us. The United States is slowly, millimeter by millimeter, gaining even greater superiority even over those adversaries who have nuclear weapons and can produce ballistic missiles. Another 10 years of such tests, and Russia’s missile power will become completely different from what was previously customary to talk about it, and which was usually feared. The same applies to Chinese, Korean, Pakistani, and Indian nuclear potential.

According to the Ukrainian author, the United States “needs a small, victorious war.” Trump personally needs it to overcome the wave of criticism. AND The White house Now he decides who to beat, the expert believes. Missile tests, he notes, are not only routine tests, but also acts of political influence “on the brains of the North Korean, Chinese, and Russian leadership.”

Harlan Ullman sees American, and at the same time NATO, power completely differently, in 2004-2016. who served as an employee of the main advisory group of the Supreme Commander of NATO in Europe, now Art. Advisor to the Atlantic Council in Washington.

In an article on the website, he talks about “black holes” that are not studied by physicists. There are also “strategic black holes,” and their origins are much more complicated than those that are “located in deep space.”

NATO will have to deal with three such holes.

First black hole- from the field of strategy. " Russian interference into the affairs of Ukraine and the seizure of Crimea,” the author notes, turned out to be frightening. Russia's involvement in Syria supported the "diabolical regime of Bashar al-Assad." Russia has also become much more visible in Libya and the Persian Gulf.

What about NATO? The Alliance at one time created strategic concepts necessary after the end of cold war and decay Soviet Union. And today NATO’s responses to Russia’s actions reflect the thinking and concepts of the 20th, not the 21st, century, the expert is sure. By the way, Russian President Vladimir Putin does not intend to go to war with NATO, the author believes. The Kremlin's policies rely on more than just blunt military force. Moscow was “not impressed” by the deployment of four battalions in the Baltic countries and the rotation of the brigade combat group within NATO.

The expert believes that the alliance needs new strategy to solve these real problems and to plug the “second black hole”: countering Russia’s “active measures” or what some analysts call “asymmetric warfare.”

Here's an expert's suggestion: NATO should move to a "pro-porcupine" strategy, especially for its eastern members. Fundamental concept: any attack is so bad that under no circumstances will Moscow even think about using military force. Where does this “so bad” come from?

What is needed here are Javelin anti-tank missile systems, surface-to-air guided missiles (Stinger and Patriot), and they are needed “very large quantities" Using thousands of drones will also deter any attack attempt, but this method is "too expensive." In addition, Harlan Ullman advises the use of manpower in the form of local fighters who could fight "guerrilla and insurgent warfare." But this is not enough.

Russian “active measures” include cyberattacks, propaganda, disinformation, intimidation and political interference, the author lists. And so far NATO can do little to counter these measures. Therefore, the alliance urgently needs to “make efforts to plug this black hole.”

The last black hole is the procurement of weapons systems. These processes take too long and are unable to keep up with the rapid development of technology. And NATO should take this into account.

Will the alliance be able to realize all this? After all, this is “vital” important questions", and on them "the future of NATO rests."

While some experts and analysts are prophesying to the world a “small war” in which the United States (apparently, even without NATO’s participation) will deal with some of its opponents in no time (apparently not the DPRK, but someone more powerful), others warn: NATO - There are holes all around! Without patching them up, the West may end up as losers. The alliance is stuck in the twentieth century, and it cannot resist the smart policies of the Kremlin.

There is endless debate in the world about the global trade deficit, as well as the constant threats that are present not only in the Middle East, but also in other regions.

But if we ignore the controversy over ISIS*, terrorism and other things, the question that arises is which countries have enough weapons and power to counter the real threat.

Below are facts about the three major military superpowers and their weapons in four main categories.

1. Fighters

The United States currently leads in this category, as it has the only fifth-generation fighter. However, China and Russia are also trying to keep up.

The US has 187 F-22 aircraft and the F-35 has entered service, but its testing faces a number of challenges.

China is also developing 4 fighter jets. The J-31 fighter debuted at an airshow in 2014, and the J-20, which only recently entered production, is the equivalent of the F-35.

Russia is developing only one fighter, but it is equal in capabilities to the F-22. The T-50 will enter service in 2017 and is highly maneuverable.

Likely winner: Since the rest of the fighters are still only hypothetically discussed, the real winner will be the F-22.

2. Tanks

The US Army fielded its first M-1 Abrams in 1980.

However, since then the tanks have undergone many changes and upgrades to make them more modern, maneuverable and useful in battle.

Russia is developing a prototype T-14 on the Armata platform, but currently has the T-90A tank in its arsenal - one of the best in the world today.

One of them even withstood a direct hit from a TOW missile in Syria. They were put into operation in 2004.

Like Russia, China is developing tanks and also has a number of different tanks in service. Chinese development for tank battle- Type 99. It has been updated and equipped with reactive armor. And this particular tank is capable of withstanding an attack by Russian or Western tanks.

It is difficult to indicate a likely winner, since it very much depends on the specific real-life situation. However, it is believed that American tanks V Lately had more experience in combat than competitors.

3. Combat surface ships

Possessing largest fleet in the world, the United States has ships of any configuration in reserve, in any case if they have to defend themselves in the middle of the ocean.

The pearl of the American fleet is 10 aircraft carriers and 9 helicopter carriers.

However, even such power and technological developments may not be enough to deal with missiles from China or Russian submarines. Russia has proven in Syria that it is capable of inflicting a serious blow on the enemy.

Russia also has missile system Club-K - container complex missile weapons, placed in standard 20- and 40-foot sea containers.

Designed to engage surface and ground targets. The complex can be equipped with coastlines, ships of various classes, railway and automobile platforms. Is a modification missile system"Caliber".

China also has ships in service with the Coast Guard and the People's Liberation Navy.

The Coast Guard is used to establish dominance in the waters. The navy uses, among other things, missile carriers.

It is difficult to calculate the likely winner, since, despite the widely recognized leadership of the United States, in the event of a direct collision, the country’s fleet will suffer great damage from Chinese or Russian ships.

4. Submarines

The United States has 14 nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines, a total of 280. Each of them can wipe out an enemy city.

In addition, the United States is armed with 4 missile submarines with cruise missiles - a total of 154 Tomahawks. And an additional 54 nuclear submarines. Russia has 60 submarines, but they are very powerful. Russian nuclear submarines are not inferior to their Western counterparts, but diesel boats are the quietest in the world.

In addition, Russia is working to develop new technologies in this area, including a 100-megaton nuclear torpedo.

China has only 5 nuclear submarines, 53 diesel submarines and 4 nuclear ballistic missile submarines. However, China is working on developing other technologies.

Thus, experts believe that Russian and Chinese submarines pose a significant threat to American competitors in the ocean.

* The organization’s activities are prohibited in Russia by a decision of the Supreme Court

Is the United States really preparing to die heroically in a nuclear conflict?

The press has recently noted more than once that a survey of US military personnel revealed that 40% of them are confident that in 2019 their country will get involved in global war. Last year there were only 5% of these. The jump in the number of those agitated is explained by the ideological pumping of personnel who are supposedly preparing for war. Both the US President and the Pentagon talk about the need to be prepared for a military conflict with the main enemies - China and Russia. And therefore the generals tell their soldiers, especially those being transferred to Western Europe that they are sure that war is on the doorstep.

This rhetoric is accompanied by the announcement of the US withdrawal from the SALT III and INF treaties. The budgets of American military-industrial complex enterprises are growing. The rhetoric of the American leadership is becoming tougher; in response, Russia is saying in plain text that if anything happens, the “partners” won’t even have time to repent before they simply die. It seems that everything, the world has come to its end. Propaganda draws huge masses into a whirlpool of passions and people believe that if not today, then tomorrow the lights will be turned off in the world. It seems that the elites have gone mad and are ready to die themselves just to kill their opponents.

In reality, of course, this rhetoric remains rhetoric, a means of political pressure on rivals. In the decades since the Cold War, the world's power configuration has become outdated and holds no one back. Russia forges its missiles without looking at treaties, since the balance of power requires it. The US was not particularly worried about this, but now it wants to restore its shaky lead and has decided to withdraw from the treaties. Naturally, we want to prevent them from doing this and detain them in a position that is unfavorable for them and advantageous for us, and therefore we are indignant at the whole world, realizing that in a military sense this will not give anything, but in a propaganda sense, some temporary gains are possible here glasses.

In fact, the sum of the forces of Russia and China upsets the balance of power between the United States and Europe, and therefore, without counting on Europe, the United States itself begins to increase its leverage. However, this is done solely for negotiation purposes. The US arms buildup makes it possible to negotiate with Russia, China, and Europe from a position of strength. New proportions must emerge. When they arise, and there is a new balance of power in the world, negotiations will begin again to fix the situation for a certain period. Then new agreements will appear on the limitation of certain types of weapons. They will again talk about limiting and even destroying some classes of missiles. But before this, all degrees of freedom in the new forward movement must be chosen.

“Stay here and wait. I won’t tell you when I start. The real war begins suddenly.”(Kill the Dragon, E. Schwartz). This is the US position and there is no need to think that it will be different. If war starts, they will not warn about it in advance. The principle of surprise of the blitzkrieg has not been canceled.

But China and Russia remember: " The best way to get rid of dragons is to have one of your own." The "dragons" of Russia and China will destroy the "dragon" of the USA if they strike together. If one fights the USA, then the one remaining will certainly finish off what is left of the USA. Give them the opportunity no one will take the wing again. No one from NATO will take revenge for the USA - Europe is incredibly cowardly in the face of a nuclear conflict. Dying for the USA is not the goal of Europe. The USA understands this prospect and will not really start a war. However, they will bargain for new peace conditions they can.

And in order for the bargaining to go more smoothly, prices will be increased three times and a strong advertising campaign. Part of which are announcements to the whole world that American soldiers mentally ready to start a fight. The task is to intimidate and put pressure. Maybe it will work! It turns out badly - Russia promised that there is no hope - when leaving planet Earth, we will certainly take “dear partners” with us. And it doesn’t matter where we end up - in heaven or hell. As the famous advertising formula said: “It’s more fun together anywhere.” So far, the Americans do not like this prospect. But there will never be another. Therefore, for world peace, as long as Russia and China have strategic nuclear forces, you can be calm.