The Third World War: Predictions and Expectations. Is a war between two nuclear powers really possible?

“Russia is the only country in the world that is really capable of turning the United States into radioactive ashes,” proclaimed the “herald of the Kremlin’s will,” Dmitry Kiselyov, at the peak of the “Russian Spring.” Then, three years ago, no one in our country even thought about a war with America - is it a joke to fight a superpower?

Today the situation is fundamentally different - according to VTsIOM, less than half of our compatriots consider such a war impossible. Meanwhile, the situation in the world is heating up, and the topic of the coming war with Russia and China is no longer leaving either overseas television screens or the editorial pages of local periodicals. Is a clash in battle inevitable? And if so, what will it be like?

An April poll by VTsIOM exploded like a landmine: 30% of Russians assume a military clash between our country and the United States, and 14% believe that the war between us has already begun. At the same time, only 16% of our fellow citizens consider the military scenario absolutely implausible. In other words, our society is already mentally prepared for war. At the same time, the vast majority of people have no idea what it will be like. Either a copy of the Great Patriotic War, with full-fledged land battles of armies, or “hybrid actions”, as in the south-east of Ukraine, in Iraq or Syria, or an exchange of nuclear strikes. Our experts, as a rule, do not go into such details, but those overseas have sucked every possible scenario of a military clash between Moscow and Washington like a bone. They started talking seriously about the upcoming war in the United States in 2008, after the strategic Research Center RAND proposed revitalizing the American economy through war. Our press ignored this signal, but the Chinese press sounded the alarm: all the leading publications in the Celestial Empire reported that RAND analysts were lobbying for the start of a war with a major foreign power - Russia or China - in order to prevent the impending recession and stimulate the American economy. The date of the future collision was also very clearly outlined - “the next decade.” Now this decade is just coming to an end, and deadlines are running out, because, according to military analysts, the United States has a chance of success only if it starts a war before 2018. To be late means to lose the chance to win, because the rearmament of the Russian army will be completed in 2018, and the Pentagon will lose its advantages.

Scary predictions that are already coming true

It seemed that with victory presidential elections In Donald Trump’s USA, the topic of war with Russia was exhausted, or so the majority of Russians believed. But overseas the situation was seen completely differently. In December, Kissinger’s National Interest, which is maximally loyal to Russia, publishes Robert Farley’s study of five probable military conflicts in the coming 2017 - and the first scenario, North Korean, comes true in less than four months. It is noteworthy that Farley directly pointed out the reason that makes the future big war virtually inevitable: America has entered the most unstable and most uncertain period in its history. And the new owner of the White House, Trump, who actually has no political experience, “it will be difficult to maneuver between Russia, China, numerous satellites and adversaries of the United States.” Here are five military scenarios that can hardly be avoided. The clash with Pyongyang is what we are witnessing today. The second scenario, the Syrian one, is also developing before our eyes. The recent missile attack on Shayrat marked a transition from words to deeds. And here’s what the National Interest wrote about this four months ago: despite the fact that the war has been going on for five years, its escalation, fraught with a direct clash between the American and Russian military, is possible right now. “While Trump does not appear to be seeking confrontation, it could ensue if incidents such as the US Air Force strike near Deir ez-Zor are repeated... A repeat of such an incident by one side or the other could lead to retaliation.” Is this why Moscow refrained from responding to the attack on Shayrat?

On this topic

North Korea has declared its readiness for nuclear disarmament, as well as continued dialogue with the United States. The first mention in the North Korean press of Pyongyang's commitment to denuclearization after the Hanoi summit appeared on the Uriminjeokkiri portal.

The third military scenario did not directly affect Russia, it would seem - it assumed military action between India and Pakistan. And in December, it seemed to many that Moscow would be on the same side as Delhi. Alas! On the eve of the May summit in Beijing with the participation of President Vladimir Putin, fundamentally new outlines of the future Eurasian military alliance - China, Russia and Pakistan - are emerging. This is surprising, but the National Interest expert anticipated the events, warning about Delhi's offense and a possible preventive military strike by the Indians on Pakistani territory. Robert Farley believes that in addition to the Chinese and Americans, our country will also be drawn into this conflict.

The fourth scenario is hardly worth dwelling on in detail, because it is, so to speak, virtual - we are talking about a cyber war between Russian and American hacker groups. But the fifth one is quite tangible. These are clashes in the Baltic states. No wonder from Vilnius, Riga and Tallinn to Lately they are increasingly shouting about the Russian military threat: Trump’s desire to reduce the military presence in Europe and shift security in the region with the United States to the shoulders of European NATO members, Farley writes, could become a signal for Moscow. “Russia may go into confrontation, and then the Americans will have to intervene, which will lead to war.” It is noteworthy that the Ukrainian conflict, according to National Interest experts, “is not capable of becoming a catalyst for a major war.”

Sergei Glazyev, economist, adviser to the President of Russia:
– There is no point in discussing whether we will fight with the United States or not; in fact, we are already in a state of hybrid war, which Washington is waging against all the territories that the Americans seek to control. The center of impact in this hybrid war falls on Russia. The center of US aggression is Ukraine and Syria. At the same time, we clearly underestimate the consistency of the American strategy for starting a war. They say: Trump bombed the Syrian airbase because his emotions got the better of him. But this is not so; such reasoning is, to put it mildly, frivolous. It's not about the emotions of the US President, but about the economy. Its epicenter today is moving from the United States and Europe to Southeast Asia. China has overtaken America in terms of production and investment. The growth of the Chinese economy is five times higher than the growth of the American economy. The American elite has already lost. But the United States remains the first in the military field, and it will certainly use this primacy to restore its economic hegemony. They simply have no other options but to start a world war. Even if it’s a hybrid one.

This is not the first time that Russians and Americans have fought each other.

Other publications are not far behind National Interest. In Forbes, analyst Lauren Thompson comes to the conclusion that the American army will undoubtedly lose the war with Russia, while experts from the British Independent, American generals William Hicks and Mark Milley, assure the opposite. Thompson makes the following arguments: the forces of America and Russia are approximately equal, but if the war takes place in Eastern Europe (read - in the Baltics), the Yankees will have problems with logistics. In addition, it will be impossible to use the fleet, which, according to the expert, is the Americans’ most combat-ready branch of the military. And most importantly, Thompson writes: it is not clear whether NATO member countries will be involved in the Russian-American conflict. After all, their intervention could force Moscow to use nuclear weapon. In general, the Yankees have practically no chance of winning the war with Russia. But the generals think differently: Hicks and Milley are convinced that while a future war between the United States, Russia and China is “virtually inevitable,” it will be “short, costly, and victorious for the United States.” At the same time, there is a risk, Hicks believes, that the United States will lose its advantage in the air, and Milley fears “a breakthrough by Moscow and Beijing in the latest military technologies.” However, the same Milly is convinced that a Russian-American war in the very near future is “virtually guaranteed.”

It should be noted that after the American missile attack on Shayrat, the eyes of Russian experts were finally opened. Thus, political scientist Maxim Shevchenko cuts from the shoulder: “This is the beginning of a big war that can engulf the whole world. Trump is testing how Moscow and Tehran will react. Will they intervene?

Declaring war on America is crazy, obviously. Not declaring war on America, pretending that nothing happened means that politicians are simply running their mouths.”

Such a reaction could be attributed to the ardor of the commentator, but this is how the head of the Center comments on current events international security Institute of World Economy and international relations RAS Alexey Arbatov, known for the extreme balance of his assessments: “Everyone rejoiced at the arrival of Trump. And so Trump won. In the White House there was a politician, to put it mildly, ignorant of either international relations or international law. He is capable of sudden, unpredictable, even, I would say, terrorist actions.” Can Trump start a war? Yes, easily! “Trump’s policy is unpredictable,” explains Pavel Podlesny, head of the Center for Russian-American Relations at the Institute of the United States and Canada of the Russian Academy of Sciences. – And his foreign policy doctrine is quite capable of provoking a global crisis. So it’s hardly surprising that the United States launched preemptive strikes against its potential opponents. It’s just that the consequences of such attacks can be very different – right up to war.”

Are you scared already? It will feel better now. It just seems that the military confrontation between America and Russia will inevitably end with nuclear strikes, scorched earth and an all-out war in which there can be no winners. Let's remember how many times in the last century Russians and Americans shot at each other. Let's cross our fingers: Afghanistan, Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Somalia, Angola - off the top of my head. By the way, in Angola, Soviet military experts were opposed not only by their American, but also by their Chinese colleagues. In general, we have fought already, not for the first time.

Andrey Klimov, Deputy Chairman of the Federation Council Committee on international affairs:
– How many times over the last 100 years has there been talk about a possible war with America - but it never started! Yes, the number of those who consider a war between Russia and the United States possible has grown, but there are many more overseas large quantity people are convinced that such a conflict with our country is possible. I think our indicators are still quite peaceful. People of my generation lived through the Cold War era, when everyone was sure that World War III would begin any day now. But now there is no trace of anything like that, no one hides a gas mask under their pillow or dries crackers in case of war. But my generation also influences the survey results, and, understandably, a certain percentage of respondents express concern that a military scenario is possible. Diplomatic war - yes, probably, local, hybrid conflicts - probably too. But I would be careful not to talk about a direct clash between Russia and the United States.

“The bomb is already ticking” - much more terrible than just war

Well, since we, one way or another, have to fight, then let’s figure out how we will do it. Nuclear warheads - 7,700 American (1,950 missiles ready for deployment) versus 7,000 ours (1,800 missiles ready to launch) - let's put them aside. The Americans have deployed 598 military facilities in 40 countries and 4,461 bases in the United States - this is such a force that, it would seem, you cannot argue against. But, as military experts note, this is the case when a ship can sink to the bottom under the load of its cannons and cannonballs. This whole thing needs to be serviced. And now we count: 1,400,000 military personnel and 850,000 reservists in the United States versus 845,000 military personnel and 2,500,000 reservists in Russia. But we have practically no large military bases abroad; all human resources, so to speak, are at hand. The same cannot be said about the Yankees, who will have to pull in their military from everywhere. Here is a British political scientist, professor at New York University Mark Galeotti, who concludes: although Russia is not able to fully resist NATO, one should not be mistaken about the prospects for a direct Russian-American clash. Yes, the Americans have excellent aircraft, the best radars and electronics in the world, but our fighters are no worse, and even better in handling. However, it may not even come to air combat, warns military expert Ruslan Pukhov. It is known that due to the lag behind the United States in the air, the USSR relied on the development of air defense systems, in which it succeeded. Today our S-300 and S-400 systems are the best in the world. “It’s like in boxing,” explains the expert. – Right hand weak – we work with the left.”

However, it may well turn out that Moscow and Washington will not come to war this time either. For example, a representative of the expert council of the board of the Military-Industrial Commission of the Russian Federation, Viktor Murakhovsky, having analyzed the statements of American generals, came to the conclusion that behind their menacing escapades there is nothing but banal populism: “It seems that American generals are completely divorced from reality and live in some imaginary world. They talk about some kind of “flash war” with Moscow and Beijing, but at the same time they are unable to win either quickly or slowly in either Iraq or Afghanistan. We see that the wars are protracted and no high technology allows America to end them quickly.” What if you have to fight not with the “steppe armies”, but with well-oiled Chinese or Russian military machines? Economist Mikhail Khazin also believes that Moscow and Washington will not have a war in the traditional sense: “Trump’s bombs and missiles are 90% a spectacle for American domestic consumption. This is how Trump decides his internal problems. However, the bomb is ticking primarily under the global economy, but it can explode in such a way that any war will seem like a child’s prank.”

“Russia is the only country in the world capable of turning the United States into radioactive ash”

D.K. Kiselev, director of Russia Today

But is it possible for events to develop according to such a scenario? Will there be a war in 2017, will we have to take up arms in the near future and again defend our Motherland? Let's figure it out.

Looking ahead, we note that the war it's already underway, and a lot of money is spent on it. But this is not open confrontation, but war in other ways. But first things first…

To begin with, about the latest events that indicate that war between Russia and the United States in 2017 is likely

Since 2014 (when, you know who, managed to ignite the conflict in Ukraine), political life planet and Russia, in particular, has been replenished with many interesting events. The most important of them, of course, is the return of Crimea to the Russian Federation.

Of course, the “Western partners”, who were pursuing completely different goals and were already figuring out how the destroyers would be deployed in the port of Sevastopol, did not like this very much. And the fact that V.V. Putin and others politicians Russia reacts with unshakable calm to all sorts of attacks in our direction, which also angers its “partners.”

Of the latest events that indicate that there is a possibility of war between Russia and the United States in 2017, the following are noteworthy:

The latest conclusions of the international commission on MH17, and the statement of the Dutch prosecutor Fred Westerbeke, that the BUK was imported from the territory of the Russian Federation (and after the launch was safely taken back). But until now no one has bothered to obtain data from Ukrainian radars. Moreover, the members of this commission “don’t care” about the primary radar data presented by the Russian side. What does this mean? At a minimum, they are trying to blame the death of Boeing on the Russian Federation as a motive for starting a war against the “aggressor.” Why don't they untie it? More on this below.
Statement by US representatives of their intention to cease cooperation on Syria. What does this mean? That the attempt of the “partners” to exhaust Russian troops with the campaign in Syria, and to show their low combat effectiveness, was not crowned with success. On the contrary, the Russian Armed Forces have proven that they have an army capable of not only accurately hitting targets, but also surprising (remember the missile launches from surface ships that made State Department representatives go into hysterics?).
A hint from US State Department spokesman John Kirby that further Russian actions in Syria will provoke terrorist attacks on Russian cities. Well, it’s already clear who and how they will be coordinated. Considering the fact that, according to representatives of our Ministry of Defense, the Russian side knows the locations of American specialists providing assistance to terrorists operating in Syria (and also, do not forget about what weapons they are fighting with, which confirms the fact that the war between the USA and Russia is already underway, but not directly...).

And yet, will there be a war in 2017?

Considering the “attempts” of the United States, it can be assumed that they want war with Russia in 2017. However, the emergence direct conflict One-on-one is impossible. Why, let's find out.

If we analyze the history of the United States, they have never participated in an open confrontation with an enemy comparable in strength to the states. America always invades weakened, "battered" countries civil war and allies, or acts as part of large coalitions, preferring to “participate with money” (as in the Second World War). Therefore, the likelihood that the United States will suddenly change its views and rush into battle, unleashing a third world war in 2017, is low.

If the United States starts a nuclear war in 2017, they will receive a very, very sensitive blow. And while they are recovering from it, the world order may change greatly. After all, there are contenders for the role of world leader (you know who) who are intensively growing their economy.

It is extremely inconvenient to wage a war while on another continent. Yes, the United States can use the military bases of its NATO allies for this. But how will the countries that are members of the alliance view retaliatory strikes on American bases located on their territory? Not everyone will go for such a “big brother” adventure. As they say, you can attack a bear with ten men and kill it, but it will certainly maul several attackers.

An April poll by VTsIOM exploded like a landmine: 30% of Russians assume a military clash between our country and the United States, and 14% believe that the war between us has already begun. At the same time, only 16% of our fellow citizens consider the military scenario absolutely implausible. In other words, our society is already mentally prepared for war. At the same time, the vast majority of people have no idea what it will be like. Either a copy of the Great Patriotic War, with full-fledged land battles of armies, or “hybrid actions”, as in the south-east of Ukraine, in Iraq or Syria, or an exchange of nuclear strikes. Our experts, as a rule, do not go into such details, but those overseas have sucked every possible scenario of a military clash between Moscow and Washington like a bone. People started talking seriously about the upcoming war in the United States in 2008, after the RAND strategic research center proposed reviving the American economy with the help of war. Our press ignored this signal, but the Chinese press sounded the alarm: all the leading publications in the Celestial Empire reported that RAND analysts were lobbying for the start of a war with a major foreign power - Russia or China - in order to prevent the impending recession and stimulate the American economy. The date of the future collision was also very clearly outlined - “the next decade.” Now this decade is just coming to an end, and deadlines are running out, because, according to military analysts, the United States has a chance of success only if it starts a war before 2018. To be late means to lose the chance to win, because the rearmament of the Russian army will be completed in 2018, and the Pentagon will lose its advantages.

Scary predictions that are already coming true

It seemed that with the victory of Donald Trump in the US presidential election, the topic of war with Russia was exhausted, or so the majority of Russians believed. But overseas the situation was seen completely differently. In December, Kissinger’s National Interest, which is maximally loyal to Russia, publishes Robert Farley’s study of five probable military conflicts in the coming 2017 - and the first scenario, North Korean, comes true in less than four months. It is noteworthy that Farley directly pointed out the reason that makes a future major war virtually inevitable: America has entered the most unstable and most uncertain period in its history. And the new owner of the White House, Trump, who has virtually no political experience, “will find it difficult to maneuver between Russia, China, numerous satellites and opponents of the United States.” Here are five military scenarios that can hardly be avoided. The clash with Pyongyang is what we are witnessing today. The second scenario, the Syrian one, is also developing before our eyes. The recent missile attack on Shayrat marked a transition from words to deeds. And here’s what the National Interest wrote about this four months ago: despite the fact that the war has been going on for five years, its escalation, fraught with a direct clash between the American and Russian military, is possible right now. “While Trump does not appear to be seeking confrontation, it could ensue if incidents such as the US Air Force strike near Deir ez-Zor are repeated... A repeat of such an incident by one side or the other could lead to retaliation.” Is this why Moscow refrained from responding to the attack on Shayrat?

The fourth scenario is hardly worth dwelling on in detail, because it is, so to speak, virtual - we are talking about a cyber war between Russian and American hacker groups. But the fifth one is quite tangible. These are clashes in the Baltic states. It is not without reason that Vilnius, Riga and Tallinn have recently been increasingly shouting about the Russian military threat: Trump’s desire to reduce the military presence in Europe and shift security in the region from the United States to the shoulders of European NATO members, Farley writes, could become a signal for Moscow. “Russia may go into confrontation, and then the Americans will have to intervene, which will lead to war.” It is noteworthy that the Ukrainian conflict, according to National Interest experts, “is not capable of becoming a catalyst for a major war.”

Sergei Glazyev, economist, adviser to the President of Russia:

– There is no point in discussing whether we will fight with the United States or not; in fact, we are already in a state of hybrid war, which Washington is waging against all the territories that the Americans seek to control. The center of attack in this hybrid war falls on Russia. The center of US aggression is Ukraine and Syria. At the same time, we clearly underestimate the consistency of the American strategy for starting a war. They say: Trump bombed the Syrian airbase because his emotions got the better of him. But this is not so; such reasoning is, to put it mildly, frivolous. It's not about the emotions of the US President, but about the economy. Its epicenter today is moving from the United States and Europe to Southeast Asia. China has overtaken America in terms of production and investment. The growth of the Chinese economy is five times higher than the growth of the American economy. The American elite has already lost. But the United States remains the first in the military field, and it will certainly use this primacy to restore its economic hegemony. They simply have no other options but to start a world war. Even if it’s a hybrid one.

This is not the first time that Russians and Americans have fought each other.

Other publications are not far behind National Interest. In Forbes, analyst Lauren Thompson comes to the conclusion that the American army will undoubtedly lose the war with Russia, while experts from the British Independent, American generals William Hicks and Mark Milley, assure the opposite. Thompson makes the following arguments: the forces of America and Russia are approximately equal, but if the war takes place in Eastern Europe (read - in the Baltics), the Yankees will have problems with logistics. In addition, it will be impossible to use the fleet, which, according to the expert, is the Americans’ most combat-ready branch of the military. And most importantly, Thompson writes: it is not clear whether NATO member countries will be involved in the Russian-American conflict. After all, their intervention could force Moscow to use nuclear weapons. In general, the Yankees have practically no chance of winning the war with Russia. But the generals think differently: Hicks and Milley are convinced that while a future war between the United States, Russia and China is “virtually inevitable,” it will be “short, costly, and victorious for the United States.” At the same time, there is a risk, Hicks believes, that the United States will lose its advantage in the air, and Milley fears “a breakthrough by Moscow and Beijing in the latest military technologies.” However, the same Milly is convinced that a Russian-American war in the very near future is “virtually guaranteed.”

Declaring war on America is crazy, obviously. Not declaring war on America, pretending that nothing happened means that politicians are simply running their mouths.”

Such a reaction could be attributed to the ardor of the commentator, but here is how the head of the Center for International Security at the Institute of World Economy and International Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Alexei Arbatov, known for the extreme balance of his assessments, comments on current events: “Everyone was happy about the arrival of Trump. And so Trump won. In the White House there was a politician, to put it mildly, ignorant of either international relations or international law. He is capable of sudden, unpredictable, even, I would say, terrorist actions.” Can Trump start a war? Yes, easily! “Trump’s policy is unpredictable,” explains Pavel Podlesny, head of the Center for Russian-American Relations at the Institute of the United States and Canada of the Russian Academy of Sciences. – And his foreign policy doctrine is quite capable of provoking a global crisis. So it’s hardly surprising that the United States launched preemptive strikes against its potential opponents. It’s just that the consequences of such attacks can be very different – right up to war.”

Andrey Klimov, Deputy Chairman of the Federation Council Committee on International Affairs:

– How many times over the last 100 years has there been talk about a possible war with America - but it never started! Yes, we have an increased number of those who believe that war between Russia and the United States is possible, but even overseas, a much larger number of people are convinced that such a conflict with our country is possible. I think our indicators are still quite peaceful. People of my generation lived through the Cold War era, when everyone was sure that World War III would begin any day now. But now there is no trace of anything like that, no one hides a gas mask under their pillow or dries crackers in case of war. But my generation also influences the survey results, and, understandably, a certain percentage of respondents express concern that a military scenario is possible. Diplomatic war - yes, probably, local, hybrid conflicts - probably too. But I would be careful not to talk about a direct clash between Russia and the United States.

“The bomb is already ticking” - much more terrible than just war

However, it may well turn out that Moscow and Washington will not come to war this time either. For example, a representative of the expert council of the board of the Military-Industrial Commission of the Russian Federation, Viktor Murakhovsky, having analyzed the statements of American generals, came to the conclusion that behind their menacing escapades there is nothing but banal populism: “It seems that American generals are completely divorced from reality and live in some imaginary world. They talk about some kind of “flash war” with Moscow and Beijing, but at the same time they are unable to win either quickly or slowly in either Iraq or Afghanistan. We see that the wars are protracted and no high technology allows America to end them quickly.” What if you have to fight not with the “steppe armies”, but with well-oiled Chinese or Russian military machines? Economist Mikhail Khazin also believes that Moscow and Washington will not have a war in the traditional sense: “Trump’s bombs and missiles are 90% a spectacle for American domestic consumption. This is how Trump solves his internal problems. However, the bomb is ticking primarily under the global economy, but it can explode in such a way that any war will seem like a child’s prank.”

About the coming big war

Since January 2015, US preparations for an attack on Russia have become obvious.

First, let me remind you only of some of the events accompanying this preparation - combat, logistics, information. Fragmentary data collected together will help assess the scale of preparations. Then briefly about the meaning of the events happening right now.

War is a competition of organizational structures. The initial task is not the massive transfer of heavy equipment, but the deployment of headquarters and preparation of conditions for the massive deployment of troops. The question being solved is not “how much?”, but “where?” And How?". This includes a whole range of activities - familiarization of command personnel with the terrain in which they will have to fight, organization of premises for future barracks and hospitals, determination of places for storing ammunition and parking of equipment, information training of the local population - people are accustomed to the fact that armored vehicles roaming the roads is becoming commonplace In the background, the enemy is being “dehumanized” in the media and public opinion is being prepared for the inevitability of war. Etc. etc. etc.

January 2015 ("Barbarossa 2.0. Our chances in the coming war") “US European Command is preparing to send Eastern Europe so-called monitoring groups. Military experts must determine locations for tanks and other weapons. This mission is carried out as part of a large-scale strengthening of the US military presence near the borders with Russia. Writes about thisofficial publication of the Pentagon Stars and Stripes. “In the next few weeks we will send a monitoring team toEstonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria "- the newspaper quotes the words of the commander of US ground forces in Europe, Lieutenant GeneralBen Hodges …»

2015, winter-spring « History of the Third World War. The skeleton is overgrown with muscles"

February 24: Narva, columns of American armored vehicles move towards the Russian-Estonian border; March 2: Mass reactivation and loading began in the USA military equipment; March 6: Units of the 3rd Infantry Division, the most combat-ready unit, arrive in Latvia ground forces the USA, which took Baghdad in 2003; March 10: transfer of American armored vehicles toLatvia , plus another column of American armored vehicles on the Latvian road, but from a different batch (not sand-colored), plus the transfer of Abrams toLithuania ; March 12: transfer of American tanks and paratroopers to Tapa,Estonia ; March 15: Trains of NATO armored vehicles move east through the territoryRomania ; March 22: BRiga Michigan Guard soldiers and 155mm howitzers arrived; March 25: The US began military exercises inRomania and Bulgaria …

The Czechs are scared: US preparations for an attack on Russia are reaching the point of no return; March 26: Trains with US armored vehicles pass throughAustria towards Russia; March 28:Polish hotels received orders to prepare for the reception of military personnel and for conversion into hospitals and headquarters... The United States transferred a motorized infantry regiment toRomanian-Ukrainian border; April 20: American paratroopers and tank crews began training inEstonia ; April 21: NATO aviation,Sweden and Finland conducts exercises in the Baltic states; April 23:France throws toPoland armored unit; April 27:Finns preparing for war with Russia; May 6: US moves troops and equipment toGeorgia May 7: The US transferred toEstonia A-10 Thunderbolt attack aircraft; May 25: More than 100 NATO aircraft are practicing an attack on the Russian Federation from the territoryFinland, Sweden and Norway

October 2015 « Baltic puzzles form an ominous picture»

"In the hotels of the capitalEstonia every tenth person staying overnight is a military personnel from NATO countries.” “A single railway connection along the so-called “European gauge” (1435 mm) route Warsaw - Tallinn (Rail Baltica project) speeds up the delivery of military equipment and equipment from NATO allies to the Baltic states.”

Then it went on and on - amid laughter about “three Baltic tanks”, military equipment was constantly being pulled up to our borders, NATO commanders were studying the area of future military operations, Western propagandists were intensively dehumanizing the Russians.

April 2017 « America is preparing for a big war. And it will be long.»

May 2017 « Reconnaissance of strategic places» (Italian article about NATO deployment plans in case of war with Russia and the current deployment of US and NATO troops in Eastern Europe).

I missed a lot. News of US and NATO military preparations on our western borders has become so familiar that ordinary citizens, including myself, have practically stopped paying attention to them. Man is designed in such a way that even if he lives on a powder keg, he cannot constantly think about it.

Now about the present moment. Briefly

Recently, another American tank brigade was transferred to our borders. Finally, Russian officials began to express open concern about the accumulation of enemy troops. But this is no longer the most interesting thing. Everything is already clear with this - troops are being concentrated. And not at all to “calm down the Eastern European allies.” On the contrary, the “allies” were told to actively “worry” in order to explain the gathering of troops to our border.

There are even more interesting points. The question is why the Americans began to intimidate so actively North Korea. Why does she bother them so much? They put up with its existence for more than 60 years, and nothing. And the Koreans have had nuclear weapons for a long time, about 20 years already. Now what happened?

Answer - under the guise of preparing to “repel a nuclear attack by the DPRK,” force exercises are being conducted civil defense(FEMA), nuclear shelters are being put in order, etc. - the entire range of measures to prepare for a possible nuclear war is being rapidly carried out. Only not with the DPRK, but with Russia- “Korean threat” is just a cover. We don’t know what role Kim Jong-un plays in this. Maybe he is acting on orders from the United States (hardly, but anything is possible), maybe he is simply being cleverly provoked into aggressive rhetoric.

In any case, the situation with the DPRK gives the Americans the opportunity to openly prepare for a nuclear war with Russia, and, well, for an attack on us from the outside Pacific Ocean. A similar purpose is served by some suspicious swarm of hurricanes that struck in recent months to the USA. Whether they are caused artificially (which is quite real), or whether their power is artificially inflated by the media is not so important. It is important that, under the guise of fighting the elements, it is possible to conduct exercises for the mass evacuation of residents from large populated areas.

Another extremely alarming moment is the situation with Russian diplomatic missions, intentionally aggressive and offensive American behavior towards our diplomats. Why is all this? Why was it necessary to tear down our flags from diplomatic missions, for example? What kind of pettiness?
I suspect that this is not at all a matter of innate Anglo-Saxon-Jewish rudeness.

We are being provoked to a very harsh response. As a result - a complete severance of diplomatic relations. Target? The evacuation of the embassy is one of the important signs of the last phase of preparations for war. Take it yourself and, for no apparent reason, take all your diplomats, agents, etc. out of Russia. - means to give the enemy an alarm signal. It is better for such an evacuation to occur as if by itself, step by step, as if even on our initiative. But it is important to see the meaning behind the rhetoric - American diplomats are being evacuated on the eve of war.

I'd like to be wrong. But Trump's recent statement at a meeting of senior US military leaders about the "calm before the storm" refers to an imminent war with Russia. That Trump was made president precisely to prepare for a big war, I suspected a year ago. True, I didn’t think that he was such a smart guy - he gave me several years to prepare. Although, perhaps, another six months or a year will pass before the decisive events.

Will start simultaneously on Ukraine- they will waste the cannon fodder of the Ukrainian Armed Forces to pin down part of our forces, attack Crimea, will hit Kaliningrad from Poland, will hit from Baltics deep into Russia - there are directions to Smolensk, cutting off Belarus(they are trying to agree on neutrality with Lukashenko, it’s not a fact that they can, but they are trying), to Moscow and St. Petersburg. They will strike from the North from Scandinavia at the bases of the Northern Fleet. From Georgia. And from the Pacific direction.

They can light it in one place - Donbass, Baltic transit, Syria- doesn't matter. But then, to have a chance of winning, they need to attack from all directions at the same time. That's what they will do. In the end we will win, but a lot of people will die. Perhaps Putin will decide on a preemptive strike - then we will win faster and an order of magnitude fewer people will die on our side.

Nuclear weapon- a separate topic. Let me just remind you that chemical weapon It did nothing to prevent the Second World War. Well, about the fact that its reserves, in comparison with the 70s-80s of the last century, are not at all so large. Many military experts believe that nuclear war It is quite possible, and there may be a winner. Whether it is true or not, I don’t know. The criterion of truth is practice. We'll live to find out. The question is - what about the losses of the American military? The answer is that it is not the loss figure itself that is important. What matters is what you get in return. For the victory over the great and terrible, but not bothering anyone, North Korea, it would be a pity to give up even one aircraft carrier. For victory over Russia and, as a consequence, absolute world domination, it would not be a pity to give up all the aircraft carriers and 90 percent of the fleet. Then you can build more, there will be no competitors in the military sphere, and there won’t be any at all, no one will dare to contradict.

The question is - have they gone crazy?

Long-term service to evil really seriously undermines mental abilities. Perhaps they simply have no choice and they think it’s better external war than the loss of global hegemony, a sharp decline in consumption levels and a violent surge in violence within the United States itself.

I would very much like the self-preservation instinct of the Western elite to somehow work and the operation to attack Russia to be cancelled. The only question is whether they have the physical ability to stop the already running mechanism of war.

The US Army can now accept recruits with various mental problems into its ranks, USA Today reports.

The ranks of the American military will also accept people who had problems with alcohol and drugs, and who suffered from depression. Those who have ever engaged in self-harm without suicidal intent and who have suffered from bipolar affective disorder will be allowed to serve.

As the publication clarifies, the decision was made back in August, but it was not publicly announced. According to journalists, the new rules are due to the fact that by September 2018 the American army needs to recruit 80 thousand recruits. This order was given by the President of the United States Donald Trump which intends to expand the fight against terrorist groups. Previously, when it was necessary to recruit 69 thousand recruits, the United States allowed to draft into the army young people who had previously used marijuana and those who showed poor results on entrance tests.

If someone thought it was funny, I wouldn't have much fun.

Note to those who do not understand - the United States is not preparing for local wars, not for showdowns with the DPRK or Iran, but specifically to attack Russia. There was so much irony in the comments to the material “The United States is preparing to attack not the DPRK, but Russia” - https://dima-piterski.livejournal.com/567431.html

Well, let citizens explain with a sense of humor why the Pentagon needed to recruit tens of thousands of inadequate. For Afghanistan and other local conflicts? So that the hatred of the local population towards the Americans will intensify even more?

I'll tell you what kind of war such people are needed for - this cannon fodder for the Last Great War , when it will no longer give a damn about the “opinion of the world community” and even more so about the opinion of the local population, which is subject to destruction. For the War, after which, as they plan, no one in the world will ever dare to contradict them in anything.

The intensity of hatred of Western propagandists towards Russia is staggering. Such an emotional barrage cannot end in anything, just disappear. Throughout the Western direction, from Norway to Ukraine and Georgia, troops are gathering. Going to Eastern European and Ukrainian cannon fodder, which it would not be a shame to put in the first strategic echelon - to exchange hundreds of thousands of lives of “second-class people” to gain momentum, to tie down the forces of the Russian army at least for a short time in secondary directions in order to deliver a powerful blow to one or two decisive ones.

We have to stop this entire horde.

From the latest:

NATO calls on European countries to upgrade their infrastructure for the rapid deployment of troops and military equipment, reports Daily Mail. As the publication notes, giving a speech to NATO defense ministers in Brussels, the Secretary General of the Alliance Jens Stoltenberg stressed that European roads, bridges and railway networks must be suitable for the transport of tanks and heavy military equipment.

Report in the German magazine " Der Spiegel" (issue 43/2017), based on a secret NATO document, indicates how far war plans have progressed. The magazine concludes: “In plain English: NATO is preparing for war with Russia.” NATO is establishing two new command centers in Europe.Transfer of American combat helicopters to Europe

Expert: The United States is preparing the population of Poland for a military strike on Kaliningrad

The USA is preparing the Polish population for preventive strike in Kaliningrad. This assumption was expressed to a REGNUM correspondent by a political scientist and expert on Poland. Marina Klebanovich, commenting on the publication in Poland of the book “Suwalki Corridor. Russia versus NATO,” where the author discusses the advisability of NATO seizing the Russian exclave.

“I am sure that the author of the book performs NATO order- voice the Alliance’s far-reaching plans for the preventive seizure of the Kaliningrad region. This book is the first sign,” says the political scientist. In her opinion, one of the most important elements of modern information warfare is the “right mood of the population” to justify certain actions.

“Today, even the United States must explain to the population - at least its own and the European one - why they come here or there for military purposes, to convince them that they are doing the right thing, that they have no other choice, that they are actually defenders , Klebanovich continued. “And under the premise that Russia allegedly wants to seize the Suwalki corridor, plans are being made for a preventive attack on the Kaliningrad region.” The political scientist noted that today the Polish population has already succumbed to US information processing.

“Last week I read the latest sociological survey data on Poland and was amazed that 85% of the population do not rule out an attack Russian troops to Poland. These figures were published exactly on the eve of Polish Independence Day. These are more than alarming figures,” summed up Marina Klebanovich.

A REGNUM correspondent clarifies that the author of the book “Suwalki Corridor. Russia versus NATO" Tadeusz Kisielewski in an interview with the Polish portal WPolityce.pl, he said that he sees two options for the capture of the Kaliningrad region by NATO troops. According to Kiselevsky, the first option is “a preemptive operation designed to prevent a Russian attack on the Suwalki corridor.” The second is “the capture of the Kaliningrad region as a result of the Russian defeat in the Suwalki corridor.”

Let us remind you that the 60-kilometer section of the land border between Poland and Lithuania is the object of increased attention from NATO military analysts. This corridor is the shortest path to reunification Armed Forces Union State. In June 2017, more than 1.5 thousand NATO troops trained in Lithuania protection of the Suwalki corridor.

Putin: the economy and civil departments must be prepared to work in wartime conditions

November 22. President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin called for studying the shortcomings identified during the Zapad-2017 exercises and developing additional measures to increase mobilization readiness.

“As a result of the exercises, certain shortcomings were identified, we need to carefully study them, develop additional measures to increase mobilization readiness,” Putin said, opening a meeting with the leadership of the Russian Ministry of Defense, defense industry enterprises and a number of regions of the country. The President noted that during the meeting they plan to primarily touch upon the civilian aspects of the past exercises, since many civilian departments and regions were involved.

Summing up the results of the exercises, Putin called for an analysis capabilities of defense enterprises to quickly increase production volumes.

“I would like to note that the economy’s ability to quickly increase the volume of defense products and services in war time- one of the most important conditions ensuring the military security of the state, all strategic and simply large enterprises, regardless of their form of ownership, must be prepared for this,” Putin emphasized.

Putin about the Third World War. 2017

USA - RUSSIA war is inevitable

An attack by the US and NATO on Russia could begin in THREE directions. How can the Russian army respond?

More details and a variety of information about events taking place in Russia, Ukraine and other countries of our beautiful planet can be obtained at Internet Conferences, constantly held on the website “Keys of Knowledge”. All Conferences are open and completely free. We invite everyone who wakes up and is interested...

Terrorist attacks, armed conflicts and disputes between the leaders of leading countries... Recently, such events are happening more and more often and give rise to thoughts of a new war that will affect all states globe. There is an opinion that the Third World War has already begun. It is being waged not on the battlefield, but on the Internet: through mutual attacks and distortion of data. Alas, if the battles become reality, others may use nuclear weapons. This threatens a huge number of casualties and destruction. No wonder everyone more people wondering: is there a third planet waiting? World War? There are a great many opinions on this matter. We have collected all available information to present you with the big picture.

Clairvoyant prophecies

In difficult times, even skeptics turn to psychics in the hope of positive forecasts. Unfortunately, this is not the most reliable source. Often, fictitious “revelations” are published under the name of a famous or not so seer. On the Internet you can find surprisingly detailed “prophecies” of Vanga, Nostradamus, Edgar Cayce and other outstanding clairvoyants.

Many clairvoyants predict a cataclysm, but will it be a world war?

Many of the predictions relate to World War III, the role of Russia and Ukraine in the battles, the conflict in Donbass, and so on. Such data should be carefully checked. The older the prediction, the less clear information it provides. As a rule, real clairvoyant prophecies are very vague and can be interpreted in different ways. We present you with several such forecasts. Believe them or not - the choice is yours.

Vanga's predictions

At the end of the last century, a Bulgarian seer promised the beginning of destructive battles: “ War will be everywhere, between all nations" According to Vanga, the events she described will be equal in scale to the biblical Apocalypse. They will begin, " when a person loses the ability to compassion" The cause of the conflict must be religion.

It can be assumed that the danger comes from the Islamic East, where the terrorist organization ISIS operates. According to Vanga, the war will be accompanied by a huge number of disasters and natural disasters. But exact dates the seer did not name. She told her listeners that it was not they who would see the war, but their children – today’s youth.

Prediction of Matrona of Moscow

A blind Russian seer made similar predictions. One of the saint’s latest predictions has become the subject of much controversy. " There will be no war, without war you will all die, there will be many victims, you will all lie dead on the ground... Without war, war goes on!" - this is how these words sound. But what would that mean? One of the interpretations assumes a cosmic catastrophe, the other - incurable disease, from which many people will die. An environmental disaster is being considered as an option.

According to Matrona’s predictions, it is not the Third World War that awaits the earth, but an inevitable environmental disaster

You can read on the Internet that Matrona’s words refer to 2017. But that's not true. The seer, like many of her colleagues, rarely mentioned specific dates. By the way, the terrible prophecy has a continuation: “ At sunset, all people will fall to the ground, and at sunrise they will rise, and the world will become different.». To the Russian people Matrona promised salvation and rebirth.

Nostradamus's prediction

The legendary seer interpreted the future based on the movement of celestial bodies. He passed on his knowledge in collections-almanacs consisting of quatrains - one for each year. These quatrains cannot be taken literally. This mysterious verse refers to the coming 2017:

“Out of rage, someone will wait for water,
The army was in great rage.
Nobles loaded onto 17 ships
Along the Rhone; The messenger arrived late."

Most likely, the predictor had in mind a disaster at sea. The Rhone River is in France, and the events described are most likely to occur there. But this quatrain hardly foreshadows a global conflict. As for the near future, alarming hints can be seen in the following quatrain. The verse dates back to 2018 and contains the following lines:

“The fortress has been undermined, and the old freethinker
He will show the Genevans the traces of Nir."

According to one interpretation, World War III will break out in Iran

The mysterious "Nira" is considered an anagram of the word "Iran". Accordingly, the threat of World War III may come from this country. The Non-Aligned Movement becomes a possible initiator of war. By “Genevians” we can mean the United Nations. Its headquarters are located in the Swiss city of Geneva.

Prediction by Pavel Globa

The famous Russian astrologer is confident that the confrontation between the superpowers will not go beyond the Cold War. At the same time, serious things await the world. In many countries, poverty and unemployment will reach peak levels. The United States and Europe will lose their positions on the world stage.

But Russia will improve its well-being thanks to energy resources. Subsequently, former Soviet states will join the Russian Federation: Kazakhstan, Belarus, and perhaps even Ukraine. Russia's eastern ally, China, will also become stronger. The world is facing natural disasters. However, Globa believes that things will not come to global conflicts and a third world war.

Prediction by Malakhat Nazarova

A modern prophetess originally from Baku also gives quite clear predictions. In her prophecies, she speaks of 2017 as turning point stories. According to Nazarova, in September it will become clear whether the Third World War is coming. At the end of every century, give or take ten years, chaos reigns on Earth. This period will end in 2017.

World War will be the inevitable outcome of the conflict between the superpowers

The start of a war depends on the situation in the political arena. If the conflicting superpowers reach a compromise, the threat can be avoided. Nazarova believes that in 2017 the world will be hit by many natural disasters. States will devote all their efforts to combating disasters, and it will not come to international clashes. The seer also believes that in 2017 China will face a conflict with Japan. However, it is unknown whether it will affect other countries.

The clairvoyant does not believe that the war will end. Life on earth is eternal, says Nazarova. According to the theory of hierarchical catastrophes, the end of the world awaits us in 2017. But let us note that almost every year followers of one or another teaching wait for the Apocalypse, and so far in vain. Therefore, you should not rely entirely on the opinions of seers. It is better to pay attention to the statements of politicians and experts.

Military-political forecasts

The prospect of World War III scares not only ordinary people, but also those who influence the fate of the world. In 2015, American political analyst and former military man Joachim Hagopian published an article on the GlobalResearch portal. The expert draws attention to “warning signals” that indicate the approach of war. Hagopian writes that the strongest powers - the United States and Russia - are preparing for a possible conflict. The parties enlist the support of their allies. The States are guided by the EU, Russia by China and India.

The depletion of natural energy resources, on which the well-being of many countries rests, is another prerequisite for hostilities. The expert believes that America is facing bankruptcy in the near future. This will lead to war. The opponents will be the USA, NATO and Israel on the one hand, and Russia, India and China on the other. Australia will side with the US. But between South and North Korea a separate conflict will begin. Hagopian predicts that entire nations may be destroyed during the war.

The most likely parties to the conflict are the United States and Russia

Another American officer former boss NATO Alexander Richard Shirreff presents his forecast in the book “2017: War with Russia.” The work is not a documentary, but it is easy to discern behind the fictional events main idea: reckless US policy leads to conflict with the Russian Federation. The result will be the defeat of the United States.

According to the plot, Russia captures the Baltic states, which are members of NATO. This event marks the beginning of the war. Reducing funds allocated for the needs of the army leads to defeats for the United States... Western media found this version of events plausible. But the Russians themselves have a hard time believing in the capture of the Baltic states. Such a decision would be reckless for Russian government, whose position is stronger than ever.

Possible outcome of a clash between the USA and Russia

But if you imagine that the events described will happen, you can estimate the strengths of both sides. According to British air colonel and international relations lecturer Ian Shields, the number of NATO military units significantly exceeds the resources of Russia. Let’s compare: the North Atlantic Alliance has more than 3.5 million soldiers, Russia – 800 thousand. The number of NATO is 7.5 thousand versus 2.7 thousand for the Russian Federation.

But in battle, not only the amount of resources is important. Many factors can become decisive. According to Shields, World War III will be little like World War II. Ultra-modern technologies, including computer ones, can be used in battles. The battles will become less protracted, but there will be more losses than in any of the previous wars.

There is a possibility that World War III will become a war not of arms, but of minds

Unlike many political scientists, Shields does not consider risk nuclear war seriously. The use of atomic weapons will entail global destruction, which neither side wants. The expert shares this opinion with regard to chemical and bio-technologies. If a weapon of this type is used, it will not become the main one.

Alas, this does not mean that World War III will not bring significant consequences. Shields believes the conflict will cover all areas human life. The so-called “ information war”, which will unfold on the Internet, television screens and newspaper pages. In addition, the war will affect the economy, finance, politics, and so on. The expert believes that the battles will even move into outer space.

Predictions of Vladimir Zhirinovsky

The threat of World War III is talked about not only in the United States. In April 2016, the head of the LDPR, Vladimir Zhirinovsky, said that the West was preparing for a world war, which would be carried out “by the hands of the Slavs.” According to the politician, the American method is for Ukraine to fight against Russia, and the United States to receive financial benefits.

Zhirinovsky emphasized that the United States entered all wars at the very end, when the outcome was clear. After the end of the conflict, the United States imposed conditions favorable to America on the remaining states. If you believe Zhirinovsky, the same will happen this time. The states will enter the war when Russia captures the capital of Ukraine, and will dictate to the Russian Federation which regions of the country to transfer to neighboring states. When will these events happen?

One of the likely scenarios is a clash between the Russian Federation and Ukraine

The politician is confident that war could break out from 2017 to 2025. After this, the world will experience a technical breakthrough comparable to human space flight. Russia will have such military resources that no country will dare to confront the Russian Federation. This radical scenario is fully consistent with the spirit of the Liberal Democratic Party. But Zhirinovsky's statements rarely come true.