How can World War 3 be prevented? Tree of Peace: How "Topol" prevented the Third World War. Occidental Restaurant: This is how history is made

About the danger of a new world war that could arise as a result of conflicts in the Middle East and the Western Pacific. Western governments, especially the Obama administration, which is advised by Tony Blair, have set a course for confrontation with Russia and China. A world war today will mean an exchange of thermonuclear strikes and will lead to the disappearance of man. But there are very few people speaking out against this danger, and public and political figures practically do not talk about it. The threat of war is a direct consequence of the economic decline of the transatlantic world, whose financial oligarchy declares the end of the nation-state and seeks to maintain its power over the world. Russia and China, which insist on sovereignty and adhere to the UN Charter, are an obstacle to maintaining such control.

“The Near and Middle East faces the fate of the new Balkans, where alliances formed before the First World War led to general conflict. The unthinkable may happen - the doctrine of “mutual assured destruction” will lose its deterrent force, and mutual destruction will become a real consequence of a war in which thermonuclear weapons will be used and will lead to the destruction of man as a species. And not just some time, but in the near future... Humanity is ready to crash into a brick wall at full speed. And we must immediately decide whether a Man who finds himself in a situation of self-destruction is smart enough to change the direction of movement and stop the disastrous attempts to strengthen the world empire and legitimize war as a means of resolving geopolitical conflicts, and change the approach to a more vital one.”

A call to avert the looming threat of a third world war!

The call is being distributed by the international Schiller Institute.

It's time to break the most terrible taboo of our time, it's time to realize and eliminate the acute danger of the extermination of humanity in a matter of days or weeks.

On the 70th anniversary of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the world finds itself closer to the brink of thermonuclear war than at any time since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. The Obama administration and the NATO military bloc, through successive absurd provocations directed primarily against Russia, but also against China, have put humanity under the threat of unexpected extinction.

When the Iron Curtain opened, it was agreed that, in response to allowing the Soviet Union to reunite Germany within NATO, there would be no further NATO advance eastward. Those who expected stability and cooperation in Europe after the end of the Cold War hoped that states with potentially powerful industrial economies - Poland, then Czechoslovakia, and after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Ukraine - would become bridges connecting the European Union with the emerging Eurasian economic bloc .

But all these basic agreements aimed at preventing war have now been violated. US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland publicly boasted in December 2013 that the US spent five billion dollars to drag Ukraine into the European Union and then NATO through “color revolutions.”

The United States unilaterally withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in order to deploy a missile defense system in Eastern and Southern Europe under the pretext of protection against Iran, but in fact against Russia. The Obama administration confirmed this fact in July of this year, announcing that it would continue to deploy missile defense, despite the agreement reached by the Six with Iran. Russian officials have argued from the outset that the US asymmetric missile defense system in Europe is part of a plan to create a means of launching a pre-emptive thermonuclear strike against Russia.

The deployment of this anti-missile system is in full swing in Romania and Poland, and the first three ship-based Aegis missile defense systems have already been deployed and participated in maneuvers in the Black and Baltic Seas, i.e., near the Russian borders.

Reports have emerged that the upcoming NATO exercise Trident Juncture 15 will involve practicing the use of nuclear weapons against Russia. Washington is continuously producing and deploying a new generation of tactical nuclear weapons, the B61-12, which allows F-35 stealth fighters to hit targets on Russian territory. It is estimated that 500 of these thermonuclear bombs are planned to be produced and approximately 200 of these thermonuclear bombs to be deployed on the European continent.

These clear provocations did not go unnoticed by either the West or the East. Since the start of the coup in Ukraine in November 2013, Russia has significantly upgraded its thermonuclear strategic forces. Russian defense leaders have publicly warned that the development and deployment of an inevitable nuclear retaliatory strike has been carried out. To demonstrate this, Russian strategic bombers and submarines participated in exercises conducted in international waters near NATO territories.

Throughout August, there remains a serious threat of anti-Russian provocations from President Obama, who could take advantage of the parliamentary recess to start a war. Concerns about this have already been expressed by a number of influential international figures, including retired military leaders from Russia and the United States. The severity of the danger is confirmed by the fact that three days after the start of the holidays, that is, without congressional approval, Obama changed the instructions for the actions of the US Air Force in Syria; this creates a direct risk of escalation leading to war against Syria, which the US Congress voted against two years ago.

In 1914, the world did not awaken, although it was heading towards disaster. Today, when thermonuclear arsenals make it possible to wipe out civilization from the face of the earth dozens of times, the world is again, like a sleepwalker, heading towards the edge of the abyss.

We, the undersigned, demand an immediate end to confrontation with Russia and China and a return to the path of political resolution of all conflicts.

The intense tensions that exist between the United States and North Korea, India and Pakistan, and a number of other states have raised questions about the likelihood (or in the worst case, the inevitability) of a global military conflict.

Let's take a look at the top 7 probable reasons why World War III could theoretically start.

With the economic downturn and rising inflation, the cost of food in the developing world has reached incredibly high levels. According to various estimates, residents spend from 50% to 70% of their income on food.

In this scenario, those below the poverty line receive less and less food, while those at the other end of the pyramid of needs accumulate more and more resources.

According to the State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2018 report, 821 million people in the world, or one in nine people on earth, are hungry. And over 150 million children under 5 years of age are stunted due to malnutrition.

In addition, the rapid growth of the planet's population and climate change, for which many crops are not prepared, and the decline in groundwater levels, as well as many other factors, also play a role in this problem.

According to analysts of the American military magazine The National Interest, the Third World War will begin in one of the locations where the interests of the world's largest powers collide. These places include:

South China Sea. There are a number of disputed islands there that are claimed by China.
Ukraine. Recent events related to the attempt of Ukrainian Navy ships to pass through the Kerch Strait from Odessa to Mariupol have led to increased tensions between Russia and the United States. And the British publication The Daily Express even admitted that the Russian-Ukrainian crisis could develop into an open military confrontation between the countries.
Persian Gulf. There, a military conflict between the Kurds, Turks, Syrians and Iraqis could begin at any moment.
Korean Peninsula. Although tensions in the region have eased somewhat over the past year, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un is unpredictable.

About 75% of the planet is water, but only 2.8% is fresh. Of this 2.8%, only 1% is easily accessible to the world's population.

And if you believe scientists who predict that in the next 100 years the temperature on the planet will increase by 3.7-4.8 degrees compared to pre-industrial levels, we can assume that the value of water as the main resource for life will only increase.

By 2026 in the worst case, or in 2031 (with the most optimistic forecast), the average temperature in the world will increase by 1.5 degrees Celsius due to global warming.

Therefore, the struggle for freshwater resources may be one of the reasons for the Third World War.

The world's non-renewable energy sources, such as coal, oil and natural gas, are disappearing at too rapid a rate. For example, according to a statement made by the head of the Russian Ministry of Natural Resources, Sergei Donskoy, in 2016, proven oil reserves in Russia will only last for 57 years. What will happen when the shortage of “black gold”, “blue fuel” and other non-renewable resources is felt throughout the world? Strong countries will certainly try to replenish their reserves at the expense of weak countries.

However, no one knows exactly how oil is formed, so it may also be a renewable resource. There is also no reliable information about the Earth’s oil reserves.

In Russia, for example, data on oil reserves have not been officially published since Soviet times. This allows businessmen and politicians to manipulate the numbers depending on the current economic situation.

3. Diseases

We live in an interconnected world, and the question is not if a deadly disease outbreak will happen, but when it will happen. And, more importantly, will the world be ready for it.

And the fact that he may not be ready was shown by the outbreak of the deadly Ebola fever in Guinea in 2014, which spread beyond the country’s borders, affecting not only nearby states in West Africa (Liberia, Sierra Leone, Nigeria, Senegal, Mali) , but also the USA and Spain.

This case is unique, since such an epidemic began in West Africa for the first time, and local doctors simply did not have experience in dealing with it.

Of course, the zombie apocalypse shown in “Resident Evil” is unlikely to threaten humanity. However, trying to prevent an epidemic by regulating the movements of tens of thousands of people and denying them the right to access the outside world is not a step in the right direction.

Such discrimination, instead of treating the disease, can lead to unbridled violence and aggression for the right to life and health. Hitherto unknown diseases, as well as the presence or absence of medications, could potentially lead to a catastrophic world war.

Did you know that the World Wide Web is a military product? The development of the Internet began back in the distant 60s of the last century, when the US Department of Defense implemented a project to connect individual computers installed in various organizations of the defense complex. So the US military wanted to make communication lines less vulnerable in the event of a nuclear war. If some nodes are damaged,

Therefore, the boom in the world of information technology is very important for understanding the mechanisms of relations between nations. Information has become a powerful means of waging wars, both virtual and real. And those in power are those who have all the information.

The question of what information should remain confidential and what should be shared is the subject of considerable debate today. If something that is confidential is revealed to the world, and this information leads to world-class scandals (as in the case of Wikileaks), then we may already have World War III. And it is being conducted in cyberspace.

Growing investments in weapons, especially nuclear weapons, pose a potential threat to the world and future generations. Billions of dollars are allocated annually for the maintenance and modernization of military equipment.

Although weapons of mass destruction are most often created to deter a potential adversary, they have been used in the past. You probably already guessed that I will cite the example of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

In an attempt to “keep weapons with weapons,” countries enter into a crazy arms race that can only end with a few missiles flying around the world in a few generations. After which it will be completely unimportant who first started the Third World War. After all, it will end the same for everyone.

On this day exactly 56 years ago, during the Cuban Missile Crisis, which involved the deployment of Soviet medium-range missiles in Cuba in response to similar US actions in Turkey, Moscow protested to Washington due to the naval blockade of the Caribbean island, which was still rebellious to the Americans. According to international law, a blockade, unlike the deployment of missiles that did not violate any agreements, is an act of war. And in this case it was practically programmed. Since Soviet ships sailing to Cuba were carrying nuclear missiles and bombs there, Soviet military personnel. If they were intercepted by the US Navy or attacked by air due to their refusal to stop, the destruction of tens of millions of people in many countries could no longer be avoided.

This could also happen in the event of “preemptive” US strikes on Soviet launchers in Cuba. And when trying to land American troops on the island: to completely destroy it, there were already Soviet tactical nuclear weapons there. Because the bulk of the Soviet military contingent of 50 thousand people with nuclear weapons in the form of medium-range ballistic missiles, aerial bombs, tactical and front-line cruise missiles had already safely reached Cuba and were on combat duty.

Operation Anadyr

The Americans only realized it at the final phase of the daring super-secret operation of the Soviet General Staff “Anadyr”. It was specially named so as to mislead the Americans that the mysterious cargo in the holds of Soviet ships was intended for Chukotka. However, sheepskin coats, felt boots and hats with earflaps, which were specially shown to everyone in the ports, of course, did not go to the tropical paradise, which turned out to be the Achilles heel of the United States. Their passengers and even captains found out where the ships were going after sailing. 85 ships were allocated to transport the Group of Soviet Forces to Cuba with ballistic weapons and everything else.

It was one of the most outstanding and brilliantly executed logistics operations in history. The first batch of ballistic missiles arrived in Havana secretly from the Americans on September 8, the second on September 16. By October 15, when the Americans, having studied photographs of the spy plane, began to realize what was happening, all 40 missiles and most of the equipment were delivered to Cuba.

A feat unparalleled in history: 85 Soviet ships successfully transported an entire Group of Forces with ballistic weapons to Cuba under the noses of the Americans. Photo: www.globallookpress.com

Why was all this necessary?

Operation Anadyr was not developed and carried out by Moscow out of good fortune. In those years, the United States had many times superiority over the USSR in strategic nuclear weapons, more powerful bomber aircraft and fleet. This massive advantage was not only quantitative, but also qualitative. American bases with deadly weapons aimed at the USSR were located along the entire perimeter of the Soviet borders, and American submarines with nuclear weapons on board were constantly on duty in the adjacent waters.

The patience of the Soviet leadership, who knew that Americans understood and respected only force, was overflowing with Washington’s deployment of medium-range missiles aimed at the USSR in Western and Southern Europe and especially in Turkey. From there, they were separated by 10-15 minutes of flight time from targets on the territory of the USSR, which sharply increased the temptation for the United States to use them for a disarming nuclear strike on stationary Soviet launchers and air defense systems, as well as the main industrial areas of the country, including Moscow.

And crises followed one after another, even after the completely friendly visit of Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev to the United States in September 1959. In 1960, the United States attempted to overthrow the regime of Fidel Castro in Cuba, and an American U-2 spy plane scouting targets for nuclear strikes was shot down over the USSR.

In 1961, another Berlin crisis arose: Soviet and American tanks stood with guns pointed at each other at Checkpoint Charlie, on the border between West and East Berlin. Attempts to resolve problems in bilateral relations at the Soviet-American summit in Vienna that same year failed.

The Americans, anaconda style, strangled the USSR, preparing for the decisive blow. They knew that there was no serious threat from the USSR to their own territory yet. In this critical situation, Moscow was required to come up with something extraordinary, which would sharply increase the risk of a nuclear war for the United States. This is how Operation Anadyr appeared and began to be implemented. The Cuban leadership agreed to the deployment on the island of medium- and intermediate-range missiles with nuclear filling aimed at the United States. They did not adequately ensure nuclear parity with the United States, but should have made them think twice before going to war. The Soviet R-14 missiles that appeared in Cuba with a firing range of up to four thousand kilometers and a flight time of less than 20 minutes could keep Washington and half of the US strategic air force bases at gunpoint.

There were also enough targets for the R-12 medium-range missiles with a radius of about two thousand kilometers.

With the installation of Soviet missile systems in Cuba, the number of Soviet nuclear missiles capable of reaching US soil doubled and were very difficult to shoot down. In addition to the Cuban armed forces, the missilemen were assisted by Soviet units: one helicopter regiment, four motorized rifle regiments, two tank battalions with the latest T-55s, a MiG-21 squadron and 42 Il-28 light bombers. The USSR Navy group included two cruisers, four destroyers, 12 missile boats, eleven submarines, including seven nuclear submarines. The commander of the Group of Soviet Forces in Cuba was General Issa Pliev.

Panic in Washington

The realization that Moscow had achieved relative nuclear parity with the United States caused shock in Washington. On October 16, the White House created an “Executive Committee” (EXCOMM) of members of the National Security Council and a number of experts, who soon presented President John Kennedy with three possible options for resolving the situation: “surgical strikes” on Soviet missiles, a full-scale military operation against Cuba, military - naval blockade of the island. After further discussions, the three options were reduced to two: either a blockade, which could lead to war, or a full-scale invasion of Cuba, which would further increase the risk of nuclear conflict. At that moment, the Americans did not yet know that their invasion fleet could be destroyed by Soviet nuclear weapons already in Cuba. Although in general, the United States at that moment had multiple nuclear superiority over the USSR, which was able to catch up with the Americans in this area only after 15-20 years.

US President John Kennedy did not decide on a nuclear war with the USSR and made the concessions sought by Moscow. Photo: www.globallookpress.com

It is curious that the US Congress - both houses - demanded intervention in Cuba. And if the country had had a different president at that moment, perhaps this would have happened, with all the inevitable and monstrous consequences that followed. Kennedy was supported by Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara. He had no doubt that the Soviet contingent in Cuba and the Cuban army would be doomed if the United States attacked them with all its might, but the USSR would have the opportunity to take it out on the Americans elsewhere, for example, in Western Europe.

Therefore, Washington decided to resort to a naval blockade, which, we repeat, according to international law, which had not yet gone out of fashion in those years, also actually meant war. This decision was made on October 20. “Quarantine” was introduced on October 24 and theoretically did not mean a complete cessation of sea traffic, but the prevention of further supplies of Soviet weapons to Cuba. In practice, it was precisely a naval blockade, because missiles, military equipment and personnel of Soviet units were delivered to Cuba on civilian ships that would not allow their inspection. The Soviet command ordered the crews of ships heading to Cuba not to comply with the “illegal demands” of the Americans on the high seas. And they knew about this order.

However, some Yankees were itching. One day, the American fleet surrounded, attacked and attempted to destroy the Soviet submarine B-59. At that moment, the only thing separating peace from war was the launch of an atomic torpedo for self-defense, for which its commander had permission. When many years later, in October 2002, former American military leaders Robert McNamara and Arthur Schlesinger met in Cuba with Fidel Castro at an anniversary event dedicated to the Cuban missile crisis, they admitted that only the endurance of the Soviet naval officer Vasily Arkhipov saved the world from full-scale suicide. conflict. This meant the future vice admiral’s response to the attack on his submarine: “Stop the provocation,” after which the Americans completed their aggressive actions. It is not surprising that at this event one of the American participants honestly admitted: “A guy named Arkhipov saved the world.”

Dramatic correspondence between Kennedy and Khrushchev

Kennedy sent a telegram to Khrushchev on October 24 calling on him to “show prudence” and “comply with the terms of the blockade.” Khrushchev responded by sending Kennedy an angry message demanding that he stop imposing “ultimatum conditions.” The Soviet leader called the American blockade of Cuba “an act of aggression pushing humanity into the abyss of a world nuclear missile war.” After assuring Kennedy that Soviet ships would not submit to American demands, Khrushchev warned:

If the United States does not stop its piracy activities, the USSR government will take any measures to ensure the safety of ships.

Amid the noise, excitement and dramatic scenes at the UN, both countries put their armed forces on alert. It smelled fried. In Russia this was not felt too strongly: the threat of death does not frighten Russians. But many Americans said goodbye to life, stocked up on food and hastily prepared shelters to try to avoid nuclear death.

At that moment, a second message from Kennedy arrived in Moscow. The American president accused the Kremlin that “the Soviet side broke its promises regarding Cuba and misled him.” Khrushchev responded by offering Kennedy a compromise way out of the crisis: okay, we will dismantle the missiles, and you will publicly promise not to touch Cuba and withdraw your medium-range missiles from Turkey. The last demand was made in Khrushchev's radio speech on October 27.

As a result of the Cuban Missile Crisis, Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev achieved all of his main goals. Photo: www.globallookpress.com

It is curious that Kennedy Khrushchev wrote his answer himself, without even showing it to the Politburo members:

You and I should not pull at the ends of the rope on which you have tied the knot of war, because the harder we both pull, the tighter the knot will be, and the time will come when the knot will be pulled so tightly that even the one who tied it will will not be able to untie it, and will have to cut it.

In conclusion, the Soviet leader suggested that the American president “not only stop pulling the ends of the rope, but take measures to untie the knot,” emphasizing that Moscow is ready for this.

And Khrushchev was not lying: the deployment of American medium-range missiles in Turkey caused, in fact, Operation Anadyr. If they are not there, then the Soviet missiles can be removed from Cuba if Washington promises for itself and its vassals to leave the Cubans alone.

All these days of crisis, the USSR, knowing that Americans respect only force, non-stop conducted nuclear weapons tests on Novaya Zemlya. On October 27, for example, a powerful thermonuclear bomb was detonated there. It is this day - “Black Saturday” - that is considered to be the apogee of the crisis. It became “black” because on that day an American U-2 spy plane was shot down over Cuba by a Soviet missile. Its pilot, Major Rudolf Anderson, was killed.

Meanwhile, a process had already been launched the day before, which led a few days later to the long-awaited turning point in the Cuban missile crisis.

Occidental Restaurant: This is how history is made

On October 26 at 13:00 Washington time (21:00 Moscow time), ABC News journalist John Scali, a confidant of the Kennedy clan, reported to the White House about his meeting at the Occidental restaurant in Washington with Soviet embassy adviser Alexander Fomin (aka KGB resident Alexander Feklistov), who suggested that Scali talk with “high-ranking friends in the State Department” about a diplomatic end to the crisis.

Fomin-Feklistov warned that if the Americans invaded Cuba, as their military circles insisted, the USSR would respond painfully to the United States in another part of the world. A few hours later, having received the go-ahead from the White House, Scali met again with the undercover Soviet intelligence officer. As a result, Khrushchev’s proposals were accepted with one nuance: in response to the dismantling of Soviet missiles in Cuba, the Americans had to publicly give guarantees of non-invasion on the island, lift the naval blockade, and after some time remove their medium-range missiles from Turkey, without directly linking this step with deal with the USSR on Cuba.

This fundamental agreement was tried unsuccessfully to be disrupted, on the one hand, by the American military, who demanded an invasion “before it’s too late,” and on the other, by the enraged Cuban leader Fidel Castro, who decided to die along with his compatriots and half of the US population.

After the restaurant conversation, contacts between Moscow and Washington rose to a higher level: they were maintained between the Soviet Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin and the brother of the American President Robert Kennedy, who served in his administration as Minister of Justice and Prosecutor General. The younger Kennedy confirmed to Dobrynin that his brother was ready to give guarantees of non-aggression and the speedy lifting of the blockade from Cuba, and that if after this the “only obstacle” to resolving the crisis remains American missiles in Turkey, “then the president does not see insurmountable difficulties in resolving this issue.” That's what happened later. Despite protests from the Turks and American NATO allies concerned about the “loss of prestige” of NATO, Washington declared these modern missiles “morally obsolete” and removed them from Turkey. They went home after three months; the dismantling of Soviet missiles in Cuba took three weeks. After they left Cuban territory, the United States lifted the naval blockade of the island. The Americans have not yet broken their promise not to invade Cuba.

The commander of the Soviet submarine B-59 Vasily Arkhipov in the United States is considered “the guy who saved the world.” Photo: www.globallookpress.com

Who did win?

Contemporaries and historians have long argued who was the winner in the Cuban Missile Crisis. It is clear that, despite the difficult and dramatic compromise that prevented it from leading to nuclear war, the terrible damage to the USSR, the United States and Europe, where American missiles aimed at the east were located and strategic bombers were based, there were significant stockpiles of US nuclear weapons, the winner turned out to be the USSR. Because the goal for which Soviet missiles were sent to Cuba - to force the United States to withdraw its missile weapons from Turkey - was achieved. As well as another very important goal, the Americans publicly pledged not to attack Cuba.

Despite the risk, Moscow outmaneuvered the United States, whose president was removed by the American establishment the following year—including, of course, for this reason. Winners are not judged, only losers are judged. By the way, a few years after John, his brother Robert Kennedy, who played a large practical role in ensuring that the Cuban missile crisis did not become the last in earthly history, was also killed.

Khrushchev also deserves a positive assessment, who, having frightened the Americans, stopped in time and got what he wanted without war. If we remember at the same time John Scali, Alexander Feklistov, Anatoly Dobrynin, Vasily Arkhipov and Robert McNamara, we will mention the main characters thanks to whom it was possible to save the world.

The sanctions pressure on Russia is increasing, the Americans are not going to stop in their attempts to destroy Russia, and one day the notorious “red line” will inevitably be crossed, which will indeed be red. And when the military gets involved, nothing can be fixed.

The war will truly be a world war for the simple reason that the massive use of nuclear weapons on such a scale will not give anyone a chance to stand aside and watch what is happening with a can of popcorn on their lap.

Will Putin decide to use nuclear weapons? And he may simply have no choice but to either use it or fly with the first rocket to America. Our people are patient, but this patience has a limit - if we disappear, then we will disappear with loud music. However, our conversation is not about who will use nuclear weapons and how. How to stop the looming inevitable - a third world nuclear war?

Why are we “afraid”, but Americans are not afraid?

On the one hand, the Western establishment has been quite successful in frightening its population with the looming Russian threat, with Putin, with impending Russian attacks on the Baltics, with Russia’s worldwide successful intervention in the affairs of countries that some Russians have never even heard of.

The NATO people are indignant, they hate Russians more and more (polls show that the number of Russophobes in Western countries is steadily growing), but somehow they are not very afraid of a possible war. During the Soviet era, a tenth of what is written today in the Western media would have been enough for Americans to begin crossing the Mexican border en masse, and for Europeans to organize huge rallies of peace fighters.

Why are they no longer scared today?

Russia is a colossus with feet of clay. Have you heard this before? I have been reading the Western press for several years and can note the general trend - we (NATO countries) are a hundred times more powerful than Russia economically, and therefore the Russians have no chance of winning the war. Yes, Russia has some weapons, but we will now increase the military budget and we will have more such weapons. The Russians mostly have rusty missiles that won't fly. And we will successfully shoot down those that fly over Russia, since the Americans have the best missile defense system in the world. The war will be easy and almost fun. Americans shouldn't worry at all. I am, of course, exaggerating, but the general mood is exactly this - Putin puffs out his cheeks and tries to scare, but he himself is even more afraid. This is, so to speak, public opinion.

It feels like the world is just going crazy... I ask Americans in the center of New York how they would react to a nuclear strike on Russia and everyone (!) thinks it’s right, since the Russians interfered in their American affairs. And no one even thinks about what will happen to America half an hour after such a blow is delivered!

Is there really not a single sane person left in the USA?

I just recently listened to a very interesting interview with Dmitry Simes (he immigrated from the USSR, became a professor in the USA, was an adviser to Nixon, etc. Now he heads the fairly authoritative “Center for National Interests” and publishes a serious expert magazine. In general, he is very knowledgeable and far from the last person in the US political world).

I won’t give the entire interview, because Mr. Simes answers awkward questions in a purely American way: the shadow is on the fence, and it’s your own fault. However, it can be understood. It is quite difficult for an intelligent person to justify the actions of an idiot without looking like an idiot himself. It is also very important for a former citizen of the USSR to show increased American patriotism.

What's interesting, in my opinion, is what Symes said:

Trump does not want to worsen relations with Congress and the Senate, and therefore will carry out the decisions of the people’s representatives. Moreover, today Russia is exclusively dealt with by the Congress. Therefore, sanctions pressure will continue and intensify. However, Trump will try not to bring the situation to the “red line”;
It is politically advantageous for Trump today to follow the lead of Congress, since this relieves him of accusations of sympathizing with Russia. Trump will support tough measures against Russia because he needs it for his domestic political struggle;
The American Congress is a collective body, and therefore congressmen know that no one will hold them accountable for their mistakes. Today they follow the trend towards Russophobia created by the media - this is such a fashion. Accordingly, there is such an invisible competition going on in Congress - who will come up with something more shocking against the Russians, who will speak more harshly, etc. Congressmen behave like opinion leaders on social networks - it doesn’t matter how, but to get more likes (about social networks - this is my conclusion. Simes could not say this about his Congress) right today and right now;
The Trump administration employs mostly realists. They understand that a red line could be crossed as a result of Congressional action. But today it is difficult for them to work with congressmen, since the latter are convinced that “Russia will never, under any circumstances, use nuclear weapons. Russia’s nuclear potential can simply not be considered” (this is a quote word for word);
congressmen are confident that Russia can be endlessly strangled and humiliated - the Russians will simply get tired and give up;
American generals know and understand that Russia is a dangerous adversary and a clash with it would be a disaster for America. And the presidential administration understands that in Russia they can rightly regard sanctions as an act of aggression and will begin to respond in kind, but the generals keep their thoughts to themselves. Now is not the time for such revelations;
There is no political force in the United States that today would even try to explain to Americans the real threat of escalating relations with Russia, since such a politician (or expert) will be accused of loving the Russians and his career will be instantly destroyed. But among American Democrats in Congress, “their fighting spirit is not proportional to their willingness to take risks,” and as soon as the threat arose that perhaps one North Korean missile would reach continental America, a proposal was quickly introduced to Congress to limit Trump, as commander-in-chief, on the use of force against North Korea, and even more so to prohibit it from launching nuclear strikes on Korea. Now congressmen are confident that Russia will behave obediently under sanctions and comply with European values, i.e. will not use nuclear weapons under any conditions. Therefore, you can press further. And Congress is terrified of North Korea, even with its one missile;
Russians should understand with understanding that the United States is now in a stage of “political paranoia” and not take sharp retaliatory steps that could affect the domestic political situation in the United States. There will be no friendly relations between the United States and Russia for a long time, but political paranoia cannot last forever. Russians need to be patient for the sake of a future partnership with great America.

This is the expert opinion from an American realist that people in America don’t want to listen to.

From all of the above, I can draw the following conclusions:

In the next decades, there can be no talk of any improvement in relations with the United States. American politicians are now making a mess, but traditionally no one wants to admit it, much less sprinkle ashes on their heads. This happened after Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, etc. Yes, they were wrong, but not a step back. America can do anything;
The Americans will put pressure on Russia until Russia stops them. And this “stopping point” will determine the level of relations between countries for the coming decades. The more we allow them today, the worse our children will live tomorrow. Their sanctions are really undermining the Russian economy. And the further it goes, the more money and time it will take to nullify the consequences of these sanctions;
In its hysteria, Congress may well agree to a preventive nuclear strike (if not a massive one, then a targeted one) and today no one is able to stop them. Until they in Congress (and therefore the average American) become really scared, they will not stop.

Therefore, stop promising to think about retaliatory measures that will be non-mirror and very painful. It's time to take these measures. Russia really has little opportunity to fully participate in the economic war with the entire Western world.

But this world has many pain points now. We need to remember the experience of the Soviet Union. The Americans currently have a difficult situation in Afghanistan - they don’t have to be shy and help the “rebels” against the American occupation. There are also Libya and Iraq. North Korea is suffering under sanctions. Refugees in Europe... And they need somehow help in the fight for their rights. Especially in countries that advocate tightening sanctions.

We are regularly accused of gas blackmail. It's time to deal with this blackmail. And it’s better to talk some sense into politicians before the start of the heating season.

I have a couple dozen more proposals that will make civilized world leaders fly higher than their striped flag.

And one should not think that Russia’s retaliatory actions will worsen relations with the United States. They would rather stop the naughty congressmen who are now going crazy to come up with something else.

And most importantly, stop calling them “partners.” The US has already declared Russia an enemy. It is necessary to make changes to the Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation and name the United States as the main adversary, i.e. enemy. Without any politeness. Determine that economic sanctions against the Russian Federation can be regarded as a declaration of a hot war. And Russia reserves the right to launch a preventive nuclear strike (massive or targeted) in response to such actions. Let them think about what sanctions could provoke a war. So that misters have more responsibility when making decisions.

And these should not be just words - appropriate actions are needed. The Americans are now violating almost all agreements on arms limitation, on the deployment of troops in Europe, and on the INF Treaty. And they are also afraid that they will withdraw from all these agreements. There is no need to wait - put forward an ultimatum on bases in Europe and, if it is not fulfilled, withdraw from the agreements yourself. Now only Russia carries them out, so it won’t get any worse. And for ordinary Americans and especially Europeans - a gift for the elections.

If Russian diplomatic property is not returned and sanctions against the Russian ambassador to the United States are not lifted, diplomatic relations will be severed. Why do we need relationships that really don’t exist? So that it would be convenient for liberals who take different courses in America to obtain visas?

We need to create problems for them, then they will have no time for Russia and no time for world hegemony.

Now to answer harshly. So tough that America will remember that Russia has nuclear weapons, and patience has almost run out. This is the only real chance to avoid nuclear war. Everything else is already a betrayal.

31 Jan 2018 Tags: , 2406

Russia yearns for the future
The US threatens to launch a preemptive military strike on Russia
American experts are in despair - Putin’s indecisiveness is leading the world to World War III
The liberal public around the world is outraged again

Discussion: 3 comments

Everything else is already a betrayal.+++++ The entire foreign and domestic policy of Russia is a pure, continuous betrayal of a werewolf man driving the Titanic who is playing with Trump in the same goal of Russia.. They are both servants and puppets of the same master, the shadow master of this world from the shadow world government and do not decide anything themselves since they are simply dolls and puppets running the country. preparing the third world war, carrying out the command of the FAS of their Masonic masters. Hence, this is a more than strange policy of Russia.

Answer

How long can you humiliate yourself before the USA? It’s time to hit them in Russian a long time ago! There are many places on the globe where this presumptuous bastard can and should be pinned down. They are convinced of our weakness, of their power. It is necessary to crush them wherever possible, proving that our Armed Forces are strong enough. Why do we let them bully us? They crossed the red line a long time ago and there is nothing to be afraid of these scum. I saw their vile nature in Syria and Egypt. These enemy faces only understand when they get it. Are we Russian or not? It's time to crush them all over the world so that they choke in their stinking blood!

Answer

To hit us, we need not only a powerful army. but also a monolithic society. And we have liberals.

Answer

People usually remember the more famous Stanislav Evgrafovich Petrov, who prevented a nuclear explosion at the height of the Cold War. This happened on September 26, 1983. On this day, Lieutenant Colonel Petrov was the operational duty officer at the then secret Serpukhov-15 facility. He observed the USSR satellite system. Around 24:00 the computer signaled the start 5 ballistic missiles from an American base.

But there was a much more serious case of direct military conflict between the USA and the USSR.

Vasily Aleksandrovich Arkhipov, who served on a submarine during the Cuban missile crisis, saved the world from nuclear war.

While replacing the commander on the K-19 while a nuclear boat was cruising in the north, between the Greenland and Norwegian seas, on July 4, 1961, an accident occurred on the boat, in the liquidation of which Vasily Arkhipov took an active part, receiving a serious dose of radiation.

And in October 1962, he prevented the launch of a nuclear torpedo. There were atomic weapons on board the boat, but no clear instructions were given on how to use them. The only argument was a special order from Moscow, and only in case the boat was damaged as a result of the attack. And so, near Cuba, the Soviet submarine B-59 was surrounded by eleven American destroyers and Randolph aircraft carriers, which used depth charges against ours to force them to rise from the depths. The commander of the submarine, Valentin Savitsky, wanted to launch a retaliatory atomic torpedo, but Vasily Arkhipov, the senior officer on board, stopped Savitsky, advising him to send a signal to stop the provocation.

When the American leadership accepted this message, the “enemy” military forces were withdrawn and the situation was somewhat defused. On the fortieth anniversary of the Cuban Missile Crisis, October 13, 2002, at a conference in Havana, Thomas Blanton of George Washington University emphasized that “a guy named Arkhipov saved the world.