Russia in case of a nuclear war with USA:

miketheterrible wrote:

owais.usmani wrote:Why would Russia need to attack USA in the first place? Its not like Russians would be like "Hey we got this hypersonic 9 mach missile now, what should we do with it, hmm lets see now............hey guess what...lets attack Washington with it, US will never be able to see them coming"

Some events (or rather many events) would have happened leading up to a direct military confrontation between USA and Russia. The nature and severity of those events would determine who attacks first, attacks with which missile, and attacks where.

If US interferes in Russia's waters, then yes, Russia can indeed sink or capture their vessels without repercussions

US ships won't be entering Russian territorial waters without attacking Russian mainland / military bases first. They would be just giving Russia some nice target practice and gain nothing in return.

And attacking Russian mainland bases means those ships would not have a home left to return to, so it becomes irrelevant whether they interfere in Russia's waters or not.

Russia and USA going head on in any capacity anywhere means only one thing.....MAD. They both know it very well, regardless of who is there in Whitehouse and Kremlin.

owais.usmani wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:

owais.usmani wrote:Why would Russia need to attack USA in the first place? Its not like Russians would be like "Hey we got this hypersonic 9 mach missile now, what should we do with it, hmm lets see now............hey guess what...lets attack Washington with it, US will never be able to see them coming"

Some events (or rather many events) would have happened leading up to a direct military confrontation between USA and Russia. The nature and severity of those events would determine who attacks first, attacks with which missile, and attacks where.

If US interferes in Russia's waters, then yes, Russia can indeed sink or capture their vessels without repercussions

US ships won't be entering Russian territorial waters without attacking Russian mainland / military bases first. They would be just giving Russia some nice target practice and gain nothing in return.

And attacking Russian mainland bases means those ships would not have a home left to return to, so it becomes irrelevant whether they interfere in Russia's waters or not.

Russia and USA going head on in any capacity anywhere means only one thing.....MAD. They both know it very well, regardless of who is there in Whitehouse and Kremlin.

US already did. In the arctic and near Kurils. Russia just threatened to RAM them, and the US fled.

What I am saying, if the US entered territorial waters again, and got sunk or their boats taken over (like what Iran did), US cant do anything.

They could complain. And cry a lot.

US already did. In the arctic and near Kurils. Russia just threatened to RAM them, and the US fled.

In that case I am surprised they did not get rammed with a sea skimming missile.

if the US entered territorial waters again, and got sunk or their boats taken over (like what Iran did), US cant do anything.

If this happens, they can at least do one thing: slap a badge on their chests saying "most retarded military planners of the world"  

Btw my responses were targeted towards the notion of Russia doing a surprise attack on US mainland with Zirkon, just because Zirkon flies at Mach 9 and cannot be detected and stopped. That would probably not be happening, even in a MAD scenario.

Territorial waters are something like 25km from the coast. They don't need hypersonic missiles for those scenarios but 152mm guns on patrol vessels.

I get the sense that American deciders think that a nuclear war is like yet another coalition of the billing colonial marines
adventure in the 3rd world. There is no way that any informed leader would conclude that Poland, Romania and whatnot
are some sort of bulwark against Russia. And that Russia would be nullified with a local confrontation with these meat
puppets. It does not matter if Ameritard generals know this, their bosses apparently don't.

In the last decades american generals turned more and more into politicians. I doubt that most of them are any better then their civilian "commanders".

They want to leave Russia without a "Dead Hand"

Why NATO worries about Russia's nuclear retaliation command complex

The media reported that NATO demands to ban the use in Russia of the automatic control complex for a massive retaliatory nuclear strike "Perimeter", which in the United States is called the "Dead Hand". The military observer of Gazeta.Ru, Mikhail Khodarenok, assessed this initiative and the possible consequences of its implementation.

According to some publications, such a proposal was made by "some Western research centers close to NATO ." The basis of the demands is that the "Perimeter" may be triggered by mistake not in the event of a nuclear strike on Russia, but arbitrarily before it. At the same time, there are no references to the official structures of the North Atlantic Alliance and specific officials of the military bloc who have publicly presented such demands.

To begin with, let us clarify how the decision to use nuclear weapons in Russia is made. It is believed that the head of state has a kind of "red button" by pressing which the president carries out a simultaneous massive launch of intercontinental ballistic missiles and the launch of ballistic missiles of strategic submarine cruisers. In fact, this is not the case.

The head of state only gives a signal to authorize the use of nuclear weapons and sends a code signal to unblock nuclear warheads. The launch of intercontinental ballistic missiles and submarine ballistic missiles, as well as strategic cruise missiles with nuclear ammunition, is carried out independently by appropriate combat crews. But before that, with the help of code-blocking devices, the blocking is removed from the missile warheads.

To solve this problem, the head of state has the so-called nuclear briefcase. This is a portable subscriber terminal (code "Cheget") of the automated control system for strategic nuclear forces "Kazbek". The Minister of Defense of Russia and the Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation have exactly the same devices .

The most unfavorable scenario in the event of a possible nuclear strike by the enemy is the instantaneous incapacitation of all the highest levels of state and military administration, and, consequently, the impossibility of giving the necessary orders for the reciprocal use of nuclear weapons and transmitting a code signal.

In this case, the "Perimeter" system should come into play and implement the entire range of measures for a retaliatory nuclear missile strike.

The peculiarities of the functioning of the "Perimeter" system, or the so-called "Dead Hand", can be judged at the present time only very tentatively. There are no precise data on this issue. There is some reason to believe that the "Perimeter" consists of command posts, command ballistic missiles, receiving devices and an autonomous control and command system (all terms are arbitrary).

After the Perimeter system makes a decision on the use of strategic nuclear weapons, which is actually a computer decision, a command missile or missiles with a special warhead are launched, which in flight sends commands to launch all nuclear weapons carriers that have appropriate receivers at command posts. In this case, missiles are launched automatically.

The decision to retaliate "Perimeter" takes on the basis of information from numerous sensors deployed in the country - seismic, radiation and atmospheric pressure, which determine the signs of nuclear explosions. Even in peacetime, this system can determine with almost one hundred percent accuracy where in the world a nuclear device was detonated.

Refusal from the "Perimeter" at the request of NATO or "some Western academic research centers" will lead to the actual elimination of Russia's status as a nuclear power and the very possibility of a guaranteed nuclear retaliation strike.

If the "Perimeter" system is eliminated at the initiative of NATO, then later verification measures by the North Atlantic Alliance will be necessary. And any verification activities will involve a detailed acquaintance of the bloc's representatives with the specifics of the use of nuclear weapons in general and the functioning of the Perimeter system in particular. Since it is unrealistic to separate these spheres in any way. NATO understands this very well.

https://www-gazeta-ru.translate.goog/army/2021/10/20/14113627.shtml?_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=nui

Ameritards can dream. They also wanted Russia to ban its hypersonic weapons systems.

Of course, their attempt to get nuclear primacy with the ABM racket was simply the Work of the Lord Our God in Heaven (TM).

Hey, Uncle Joe can outlaw Perimeter System right now, all he has to do is sign executive order and problem solved

I mean the whole thing will still be up and running same as usual but this time it will be outlawed just the way USA wants

I love how he keeps a straight face until she cracks up

At the moment, as per available sources, Russia's nuke stockpile is at around 5k+ while its current strategic arsenal stands at 1.7k+

Is this even enough to turn the continental US + Alaska + occupied islands into an unlivable wasteland? And this is just one country in NATO, how about the rest of Europe? plus Canada? (and also don't forget Anglophile Australia and New Zealand)

IMO, 5k+ nukes are NOT enough to ensure the COMPLETE DESTRUCTION and ANNIHILATION of NATO's entire population.

If a few of them survive, they will just rebuild their Colonial Empire from the ashes, and will again pursue Global conquest.

Nuke stockpile of at least 75k+ to 100k+ range should be the minimum deterrence force to keep NATO NAZIS at bay.

Of course deterrence is not enough to secure Russia's security. On top of 100k+ nukes, Russia will still have to work on finding ways to DESTROY NATO from within and cause its demise