VVP's State of the Country speech, 01/03/18. New Russian strategic weapons

A video made by Jean Pierre Petit. He is a french scientist that worked on MHD propulsion with great success. He is talking about the russian new weapons that Putin presented.



I watched an interview of him in french, he said his work was analyzed by US and they told him they are working on a MHD torpedo that goes much faster than the shkval.

He also think that burevestnik nuclear missile is supersonic.

You can check his profil on the net. He is an interesting guy.

Sounds like Armageddon.


So is Russia really ahead in regard to these weapons?



Putin Issues a Strong Warning to Unspecified Countries

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/in-a-fiery-warning-to-rivals-putin-says-any-country-that-nukes-russia-will-drop-dead/ar-BBOzOUA?ocid=SKY2DHP

Back to MAD.

Odin of Ossetia wrote:


Sounds like Armageddon.  


So is Russia really ahead in regard to these weapons?    



Putin Issues a Strong Warning to Unspecified Countries

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/in-a-fiery-warning-to-rivals-putin-says-any-country-that-nukes-russia-will-drop-dead/ar-BBOzOUA?ocid=SKY2DHP

The above statement by Putin can possibly be a response to this:


U.S. Government Considers a First Strike Against Russia

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-nuclear-russia/u-s-would-destroy-banned-russian-warheads-if-necessary-nato-envoy-idUSKCN1MC1J6


It is from the 2nd of October, 2018, so it is possible that Putin was responding to this.


It is amazing that the U.S. government actually makes such public announcements, albeit they do accuse Russia of violating a treaty, so that might be a case of trying to create a legitimate excuse for such a first strike before it takes place.


Or it might be a clever attempt to fool Russia into believing that this will be only a "very limited strike" but in reality it will be a full scale attack meant to obliterate Russia.

As said some times ago this situation was largely expected and a reproduction of a well known historical precedent; the US ,put in a serious technological backlog angle, would have surely attempted to respond to the wide superiority of our new strategic elements (both offensive and defensive) capitalising like in '80 years the unique asset at theirs disposition to attempt to "counterbalance" those systems : political/economical influence on theirs allies-vassals and possibility to mass produce technologically inferior missiles rendered in some way relevant by the geographical placement allowed by the......hoped......compliance of theirs NATO vassals.



The problem here is that the scenario is absolutely NOT SYMMETRICAL when strategic civil/economic/military assets and density at stake on both part are taken in consideration as highlighted and hinted by the always clear headed Виктор Мураховский

https://riafan.ru/1153185-podletnoe-vremya-12-15-minut-ekspert-reshil-matematicheskuyu-zadachu-putina-dlya-ssha


In facts taking only into consideration IRBMs and IRCMs we have that:

1) Those IRBMs and IRCMs placed in the CONUS will be totally uncapable to put at risk any significative high density Federation's industrial/economic centers (mostly the most eastern part of Far East district) and will remain highly vulnerable to widely deployed Federation's Air Defenses systems, on the other side even considering classical IRBMs, without new generation hypersonic blocks warheads, or IRCMs the entire very high populated West Coast, that include the most important US civil and military technological and production centers, and all US Pacific ground and Naval military infrastructures will be under a constant thermonuclear and conventional cross hair and the US Air Defense at coverage of those critical infrastructures is , to put it midly, simply pathetic.


2) Those US IRBM and ICBM placed in Europe (to acquire some kind of menacing relevance) will force hosting nations to accept a "losing hand" from the beginning; in facts Federations IRBMs and IRCMs, even discounting the new class of offensive weapons that obviously offer capabilities not reproduceable by western nations for at least 15 years and that defensive ones (majority of which still covered) that will equally revolutionize strategic paradigm in the next years, could cover the entire European territory while placed well within Federation's territory very far from the most highly populated and developed centers while European countries will have to accept that both in a "first strike" than in a "second strike" scenario theirs esistence will cease with a probability near to 100% cause the fact that each of them lack the territorial deepness to avoid that attacks on the missile-related military infrastructures will contemporaneously exetrminate theirs population and destroy theirs civil and industrial centers.


Mine foresight, based on the new situation created by the widening technological gap existing between Federation and US strategic systems, is that the US, being perfectly aware that the placement of intermediate missiles in Europe will not last for a very long time (maybe with the only exception of Poland) before internal military and political pressure and mere preservation instinct will slowly crumble it (with potentially deflagrating effects on same NATO's existence) will attempt to persuade main European allies that a "temporary" placement of those nuclear missiles in Europe will persuade Federation authorities in accepting new arms control Treaties where a ban and limitations to theirs most cutting edge offensive and defensive systems would be ratified.

Naturally, to the contrary of the '80 situation when true political betrayal prevented the СССР to take advantage of the broad technological and geostrategic advantage offered by РСД-10 system, today authorities will hopefully leave the growing burden of pressure exerted on European and Asian Usa's allies, generated by the matchless capabilities offered not by one, but more than a dozen of new kind of revolutionary offensive and defensive strategic systems, to slowly corrode the American grip on them based on the charging of all the existency capital risks and public opinion hanger on the shoulders of theirs vassals.

Within some years, under that huge political and geostrategic pressure, the most powerful European nations will quickly search an agreement with Federation authorities outside of NATO format ,but instead an independent European military security one that will grow in influence, and a similar agreement taking into account exclusively Russian Federation and Europe mutual security interests instead of US ones will be easily found .



In substance if managed with wisdom and above all patience the long terms effects of this collapse of INF can trigger the progressive neutralization of the selfish US influence on Europe and Eastern Asian nations until, with the loss of it, will be rendered evident the total inconsistence and unsustainability of US economic and production system when desprived of this basilary element and put instead in the same overall conditions of any other major competitor worldwide; it could be the beginning of a real multi-polar world.

Mindstorm wrote:...Within some years, under that huge political and geostrategic pressure, the most powerful European nations will quickly search an agreement with Federation authorities outside of NATO format...

There will be no pressure whatsoever and no European country will ever under any circumstances disobey orders from DC

It never happened and never will happen

They will all do as they​ are told without question, they will host those missiles as ordered to and will be roasted by Russian strike the moment something goes wrong/right

These murican missiles are mostly there do blackmail their european and asian vassals. But Mindstorm is right, this could lead to some sort of revolt against the mainstream political parties in those countries.

The critical part is not to sign any new treaties with Washington. If someone starts to bitch about Russia's evilness, then point to this recent test of a missile
that the US supposedly did not have and accused Russia of having. Why would anyone sign a treaty with liars and blood libelers?

Hole wrote:These murican missiles are mostly there do blackmail their european and asian vassals. But Mindstorm is right, this could lead to some sort of revolt against the mainstream political parties in those countries.

Revolt? By whom?

When was the last time Europeans did anything against the program?

Orders will be given (by both USA and EU) and orders will be obeyed without question same as always.

And what makes you think that Europeans would be against it?

They have their own gameplan and exterminating Russians is high on priority list. Americans aren't doing this because they are bored, they just follow established dogma, one that white Europeans came up with long ago.

EU-tards have failed to subjugate and/or exterminate Russia for 1000 years. Meanwhile they have become vassals of the yanquis. Clearly these
retards don't learn. It will be the EU that will disappear before Russia. That is the way God wants it.

PapaDragon wrote:Revolt? By whom?

When was the last time Europeans did anything against the program?

Orders will be given (by both USA and EU) and orders will be obeyed without question same as always.

PapaDragon the situation, as already said, that would be generated would be not different (rather significantly worse in terms of negative implications for western US allies....) from the situation at the end of '80 years; now also then US and European Allies was perfectly aware that the placement of INF was practically impossible to continue in the long terms for the growing European pubblic and political pressure above all in a scenario where the CCCP was proposing a solution that avoided the placement of the deadly missiles (also in those time technically and for performances superior at times in comparison with the US -built ones) against European nations , exactly as now cleverly proposed by President В. В. Путин.
That is the content of an high amount of by now publicly released classified and reserved analytical documents .

Just to provide an example :

"European (and American) officials agree that the consequences of not-ratification would be detrimental to the continued well-being of the alliance . This is because the leadership position of the U.S. would be questioned, while the Soviet Union would be perceived like the promoter of peace in Europe, NATO would be uncapable to continue its INF deployments and may , in facts, be forced to withdraw existing INF deployments due to strong public pressures and, worst of all, while U.S. systems would be withdraw without an agreement, the Soviet Union would be permitted to maintain its INF systems".


https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP90M00005R000300070027-8.pdf

You can personally control almost any previously classified document of the time analysing political impact of INF deployment in Europe and its sustainability and you will read always the same elements : US and European authorities was perfectly aware that it was effectively a time gamble.
In substance European Chiefs of State would have supported the militarily and technologically very weak hand of USA, with Pershing and GLCM, in the hope that someway, with some strong aid from within the Kremlin, CCCP would accept a table of arm ban of theirs widely superior system before internal pressure would render that effectively impossible and potentially deadly for alliance's tenue. The same situation was considered for not signing of the Treaty to obtain even greater counter-gains.

Exit from INF Treaty was a largely expected and, for a side, even partially "forced" decision by part of US that begun to be explored when, more than a decade ago, first informations on technological trasformation program of strategic deterrence systems in the Federation permeated in the US.

Like in the '80 years USA will be forced, one more time, to use in this losing technological struggle the unique real weapon at theirs disposition : geopolitical influence, but that is linked to a significative amount of enormous risks of what American are perfectly aware.
The role of an oculated Federation policy will be to continue to consistently maintain the position that ,in absence of US INF systems on foreign soil, Federation will abstain to place against those nations its own INF systems (that incidentally greatly surpass US ones on all cardynal parameters); this will effectively force the US to obligate its "allies" to host its systems in order to amintain any military relevance in this way triggering a true time bomb for NATO.

Year after year, introduction of new category of strategic systems, offensive but even more defensive ones, with possibilities widely beyond the possibilities of any western counterparts, and aimed proposals to those nations to resolve the question in an European-Russian Federation bilateral format will render the growing resentment for the US's conferement of those enormous existence's risk entirely on the shoulders of its "allies" unbearable and slowly, but inexorably, decree the sunset of the sustainment element of US system: geo-political, military and economical influence on Europe.