Russia's National Defense Strategy issues

Massive Nuclear War Games to be Conducted by Russia in its Far North in October, 2019.


https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/russia-announces-massive-nuclear-war-games-arctic-week



U.S. moving out of Syria and into the Far North?

America will have the same ending in Afghanistan as in Vietnam
Russia, China, Pakistan will have to appease a restless country
http://www.ng.ru/world/2019-12-11/6_7749_afghanistan.html?print=Y

US activates in Central Asia
https://regnum.ru/news/polit/2808096.html

Extended meeting of the Board of the Ministry of Defense of Russia

The Minister of Defence of Russia, General of the Army Sergei Shoigu, made a report at a meeting of the Session.

- The military-political situation this year was characterized by a further buildup of military force.

- The US military budget in 2020 for the first time will reach nearly 750 billion US dollars. This is comparable to the total annual military budget of all countries of the world and exceeds the Russian one by 16 times.

- The North Atlantic Alliance implements the US four by thirty anti-Russian initiative. It is expected that in thirty days 30 mechanized infantry battalions, 30 aviation squadrons and 30 warships will be ready for use. As of December 1, full completeness of the land component was achieved, as well as 76% for air component, and 93% for the sea component.

- In our estimation, the full implementation of the concept of “four by thirty” is possible by 2022.

- The readiness of carrier aircraft for the use of nuclear weapons is planned to be reduced from 10 days to 24 hours.

- In the Baltic countries deployed American air defence radar to detect air targets. They allow to control our airspace to a depth of 450 km.

- Compared to last year, near our borders, the intensity of air reconnaissance increased by 33%, and marine by 24%.

- Every year, the NATO bloc in Europe holds up to 40 major exercises that have a clear anti-Russian focus. Compared to last year, near the borders of our borders, the intensity of aerial reconnaissance increased by 33 percent, and by 24 - marine.

-  Pentagon tests conducted in August and December for medium-range missiles confirm the fact that the United States developed missile systems that were prohibited by the INF Treaty during its term. The next step will logically be the deployment of such missiles in Europe, in the East. Also, there is no certainty on the part of the United States on the fate of the START Treaty and the Open Skies Treaty.

Improving the readiness of troops to carry out mission

- Level of field, air and sea training has increased. In total, over 18,500 exercises and trainings of various levels were held in the Armed Forces during the year.

- The task of increasing the flying and sailing time has been completed.

- Two surprise combat readiness inspection were carried out with the participation of military districts, branches and arms of the Armed Forces.

- The largest event in the training of troops was Tsentr-2019 strategic command-post exercise. It was attended by military contingents of seven foreign countries from the CSTO and SCO.

- The Russian Navy conducted Ocean Shield joint exercise. The created groupping has demonstrated the ability to effectively fulfill the tasks of protecting our national interests in the waters of the Baltic and North Seas and in the northeastern Atlantic Ocean.

- The interest of foreign countries in the International Army Games, which has become an important part of combat training, is growing every year. The Games competitions were held in ten countries with the participation of teams from 39 countries. For the first time in India, Uzbekistan and Mongolia.

- To increase the level of combat training of the troops and the Games 82 training grounds were modernized during five years.

- Conducted 42 exercises with foreign counterparts. The most significant of them were Joint Sea 2019 Russian-Chinese bilateral naval exercise and Indra Russian-Indian exercise.


Performing tasks abroad

- To ensure a military presence in strategically important areas, 48 strategic missile-carrier flights were carried out this year.

- In July, joint patrols of Russian and Chinese strategic bombers in the Asia-Pacific region were first performed.

- In October, the Tu-160 missile carriers made flights using airfields in South Africa.

- The ships of the Russian Navy completed 111 trips to the Arctic zone, the Central and North Atlantic, the Caribbean, as well as to the pirate-dangerous areas of the Gulf of Aden.

- Russian ships also took an active part in joint exercises in Southeast Asia and the Indian Ocean.

- Russian servicemen are the guarantor of peace in Syria.

- Russian Aerospace Forces aviation currently makes an average of 2–3 sorties per day for reconnaissance and air support for the actions of the Syrian army in the liquidation of disparate terrorist formations. In 2015–2017, during an operation, our aviation performed an average of 80–90 sorties per day.

- In total, we tested 359 modern weapons in Syria.

- Military personnel of the Russian Centre for Reconciliation of Opposing Sides conducted more than 2,000 humanitarian actions. 109,000 civilians received medical care.

- The Syrian authorities, with the active participation of Russian military personnel, are implementing a large-scale program to restore peaceful life and return refugees. Since 2015, around 2,000,000 refugees and internally displaced persons have returned to their places of former residence.

- Today, modern military and social infrastructure is deployed in places of deployment of the Russian force groupping in Syria.

- This year, shelters for operational-tactical aviation were put into operation at the Hmeymim airbase.

- The construction of a ship repair complex has been completed in Tartous.

- Russian military facilities are reliably covered by an air defence system and electronic warfare systems. This year, they shot down 53 unmanned aerial vehicles and 27 missiles of MLRS terrorists.

- Since 2015, Syrian air defence have repelled 83 air strikes by coalition forces led by the United States, Israel and terrorists. At the same time, they destroyed 217 cruise missiles, 38 guided bombs and 25 drones. Unlike the Patriot systems in Saudi Arabia, Syrian Air Defence systems bring down at least 72% of precision weapons and unmanned aerial vehicles in every massive strike.

- At the same time, along with the modern Russian "Pantsirs" and "Buks", the Soviet S-75, S-125 and S-200, restored and modernized with the participation of Russian specialists, form the basis of Syria’s Air Defence.

- This year, at the training ground of the 201st military base in Tajikistan, the S-300PS anti-aircraft missile battalion with Russian units took up an experimental combat alert duty. This system can be transferred in two years to the armed forces of Tajikistan after completion of training of their specialists.

- In the field of military and technical cooperation, China, India, Egypt, Algeria and Vietnam remained our priority partners. We continued to strengthen our allied relations with the CSTO, CIS and SCO countries.

- International Military and Technical Forum "ARMY-2019" was an important event in the development of international military and technical cooperation. In terms of its main indicators, it significantly surpassed last year's forum. The amount of the State contracts signed has exceeded one trillion rubles. In five years, the Forum has become the largest armament exhibition in the world. A record number of delegates – more than 1,000 from 111 countries and seven international organizations attended the annual Moscow Conference on International Security.

"In some respects Russian IADS are a sort of McGuffin plot vehicle. As long as time and munitions are spent on them, Russian critical objects are safe, and one way or another the IADS end up executing their mission – which is not to defend themselves but to defend that which is strategically significant for the success of operations in the TVD."

The guy gets it.

When will Russia stop stepping on the same historical rake?
https://regnum.ru/news/polit/2855788.html

GarryB wrote:

When will Russia stop stepping on the same historical rake?

Not really relevant any more... there is no future when any force can try to take Moscow because Russia would nuke any force powerful enough to get to Moscows gates, and any force not that powerful can be dealt with by the conventional Russian military which is developing and improving equipment, weapons and systems as well as tactics and training and support/logistics.

Anyone trying to lay a rake in Russias path in the future will get shot in the face... because Russia walks with its eyes open these days.

Yes, in addition, in case of large invasion force trying to get inside russian territory they could just use tactical nukes as soon as they cross the borders, and nobody could say anything because it wouldn't be nuking another nation...

Even if probably they would not even need to do that

Due to the complex and integrated air defence systems in Russia, an eventual enemy would have very low possibility to use their air force to support their army...

And in addition there is enough artillery (even with long(ish) range), tactical ballistic missiles and front line aviation to make short work of any invading army, with limited loss of personnel and without using nukes...

I am not sure about the retaliation, however... maybe it could be limited to some non nuclear IRBM, long range missiles to strategic objectives (e.g. airports, industry, military installations) inside the territory of the enemy countries and probably sinking their surface fleets...

Russia won't EVER drop tactical/battlefield nukes on her own territory. If anyone is so stupid as to try to cross the Russian border with a large invasion force they will find their marshaling areas bathed in hard rads and rendered inhabitable for a few decades. Given that this is the predictable reaction, who would be doubly stupid to allow such a force to be assembled on their territory?

Even the Poles aren't that stupid, though I think the Baltic flea-nation nationalists might just be that thick.

Logistics is a killer. It is NATzO that will have to extend its logistics chains in some hypothetical invasion. But there will not be
one since any clustering of NATzO forces will be tactically nuked. It will not be like 1812 and there will not be any grand battles
inside Russia. It will not be like 1941 either and no NATzO army will break through to close proximity of Moscow. The missile
era has nullified all such battle-field dynamics. We have no example of modern warfare. None aside from maybe some computer
simulations. All the wars around the world are primitive conventional ones even using WWII era equipment.

Perhaps the EW aspect in the Donbass gave us a hint of an aspect of real modern warfare. The Ukr army was literally shut down
with total disruption of internal communications on more than one occasion. But the Donbass is not even a real modern field of
war. In the past armies had to come into close contact to obliterate each other. Even air power did not provide a total
advantage unless the opponent was not equipped to response. During WWII air power was used mostly to kill civilians. In
modern war the missiles will make the engagement non-local. The "front" blows up into vast regions. So no blitzkrieg and no
safety anywhere with a radius of thousands of kilometers.

The pathetically obsolete NATzO deployments in the Baltic flea statelets, tells me NATzO is either not prepared to fight Russia
or is terminally deluded. Both are rather the same.

BTW, I have an example of how impotent WWII air power actually was.    There is a major petrochemical facility in Saratov that
was key for the Soviet army effort during WWII.   It was endlessly attacked by the German airforce and the surrounding residential
areas were basically destroyed over time since the bomb scatter and failed bombing runs accumulated.   But the plant kept on operating.
OK, today precision munitions would supposedly be way more effective.   But then just as during WWII, the anti-aircraft operation
would do its job as well and frustrate any sustained air assault.

But nuclear weapons make this a different problem.   Even one getting through and close enough will achieve the objective.  
So no conventional, aka industrial, war is possible.   There will not be any safe zones on the planet where industry can operate
to maintain a frontal war.   During WWII, the USA was a total safe haven and the USSR around the Urals and Siberia was one as
well.   That is why factories could be moved there and could operate.    Nothing of the sort can happen in a modern war.   It is
a 30 minute all or nothing conflict.  If you are timid, you lose.   So no way in hell is any side going to hold back and all the yapping
by so-called pundits and politicians about limited nuclear war and preemptive strikes is drivel for the sheeple who cannot evaluate
it for what it is.  

I suspect that NATzO degenerates are actually thinking that they can frighten Russia into capitulation.   This is basically a prefect coup
scenario that will never happen.   The retards and their game of chicken has a high potential of resulting in a full blown nuclear
war since that is the only logical path.   Nobody fights total wars with self-restraint.   And NATzO ain't so mighty that Russia is
afraid and will capitulate.

Russia major weakness of its military by far.. is the lack of power projection..   this is a real issue..
in a real war with US , it will have no easy way to fly to the atlantic and to the eastern coast of US and take a major offensive operation. something that NATO can do from plenty of places.. in eastern europe and norway ,sweeden too..

So the only weapons that Russia can use are nuclear submarines that manage to sneak into atlantic ocean undetected, but they are next to useless for a conventional war.. since russia don't have enough attack submarines that can reach the atlantic.. and do it at the right time.. so NATO closes allies and Anglo powers  in case of war ,will hit all russian strategic and long range airforce before it can reach the atlantic..  they can fly to atlantic sea  through the artic.. but they will face thousands of planes,drones targeting them..

Russia need to invest more in a powerful airforce ,than a powerful navy.. make flying submarines and call them
bombers..  and that are stealth and fly at very high altitudes.. something like a mini space shuttle bomber ,
dozens of them.. that can fire a ton of bombs and hypersonic.. this is what Russia needs ,to become a real
offensive power.. instead of a defensive one...  because is a major war with NATO start.. Russia fight will be limited to europe ,middle east and zones close to russia main land..  

Russia needs to prepare for dominating space , with high altitude space bombers.. that can easily bypass the entire NATO airforces ..that will force them to develop space plane interceptors  and build a lot of them..

in case of a world war 3..Putin weakness will not allow him to take advantage of its powerful weapons ,
and will limit its fight to defense and regional targets only.. near rusia and europe. have the stomach to use its big nuclear weapons against US mainland..  by having a powerful space force bombers.. Russia could have at hand the option to use its tactical weapons , including hypersonic conventional or nuclear.. , on US main land
in case a major war start..

in other words.. the limitations of projection of power that Russia face.. for putin to scale the war ..
from from 1,2-3  as if was in the fight in syria.. to number 10.. by using bulavas and sarmats missiles..
Russia needs tactical and strategic near space airforce power projection  , that is fast and highly mobile ,and deploy withing 1-3 hours near US coast..  submarines will take a month ,to reach the US eastern coast from Russia.. and such level of response will be too late... yet they can fire a sarmat withing seconds from russia.
but the problem remains the same..

1)-Russia is very good in small scale regional conflicts like syria
2)-Russia is very weak in intermediate power projection.. lets striking at US main land with conventional or small tactical nukes.. at miltary positions
3)Russia is very strong in full scale total destruction..

So because of this weakness in #2.. the end result is that in order to retaliate ..at US ,they will need to scale very fast.. the war ..from zero to ten in a small time.. this limit significatively Russia capabilities to impose its
will in a war. and defend its interest.. in .small scale conflict or an intermediate one.. as we saw in syria vs turkey.. and vs israel.. Russia is not dominating completely.. and the end result is .. if Russia victory is a very limited one ,and will always fail ,at imposing its will ,in any conflict for ending it.. so even when "win.".
it will lose. and conflicts will not be solved.. ever.. as it is the conflict in syria ,ukraine and many others that will happen.. and NATO will start..  

if russia had a real powerful airforce ,it could shut down hundreds of NATO planes from near space orbit altitude, easily destroy nato satelites and reach with total impunity the atlantic ,and reach US aircraft carriers formations..
as it is now.. Russian submarines is the only thing Russia have to bypass NATO superior airforce formations .
that is sneaking secretly into the atlantic.. but this is an obsolete policy ..because once russia fire a missile .the position of their subs will be known and wawrships will be sent to the area..

all that said.. US is way better prepared to fight Russia in a medium scale conventional war.. or a very limited
tactical nuclear one.. and Putin options vs US and major nato allies will be either .

1) accept an humiliating cease of fire.. with US losing warships and planes.. but Russia suffering 10x times more .. suffering the worse part..  
2)escalate the conflict to a total nuclear war.. where russia will hit harder.. but will not achieve a victory either..
since nobody will win in a full scale nuclear war.. every one will be destroyed .

So Russia needs to change dramatically their tactics.. all those surface warships ,im not convinced on them..
versus the $$cost /performance they offer.. is too expensive with so little power..  just 10x  su-34 ,could achieve the same damage results of one russian frigate.. if not higher.. Russia best frigate only fire 32 missiles..
something that israel airforce can do to syria with 6x cheap f-16s.. and if one of them is shotdown..then it will
be not much lose.. and only 2 pilots killed.. contrary to a warship ,that if sink you lose near a hundred of sailors.

Russia needs to build a space force , with high altitude bombers .if wants to have a real deterrence force ,
that can easily bypass nato airforces..and nato navies.. in europe and in the atlantic.. so to send the few attack submarines ,that russia have to the atlantic in 3-4 weeks of of travel ,is not real deterrence force..
in a wars timing ,speed and positioning is everything. having a powerful near space orbit stealth bomber force
will do far more difference ,than a large surface navy.and more cost effective too..

Why Russia would launch a nuclear war if the NATO started a conventional war?

NATO can't stand a massive hits from Russian conventional weapons ,hypersonic weapons from bombers , land and navy. Russian advantage over NATO in cannon artillery is 4:1, in long-range rocket artillery 16:1, in long-range air defense artillery 17:1 and in short-range air defense artillery the Russians outnumber NATO an astounding 24:1. NATO aircrafts can't fly freely over baltic countries , If Putin send the army into Baltic, they will fight inside a Russian (IADS) bubble that is one of the most formidable in the world.

ahmedfire wrote:Why Russia would launch a nuclear war if the NATO started a conventional war?

NATO can't stand a massive hits from Russian conventional weapons ,hypersonic weapons from bombers , land and navy. Russian advantage over NATO in cannon artillery is 4:1, in long-range rocket artillery 16:1, in long-range air defense artillery 17:1 and in short-range air defense artillery the Russians outnumber NATO an astounding 24:1. NATO aircrafts can't fly freely over baltic countries , If Putin send the army into Baltic, they will fight inside a Russian (IADS) bubble that is one of the most formidable in the world.

Real in service numbers of hardware are not that high. Most of their hardware is in reserve. Russia can't stand alone against NATO conventionaly.

Hypersonic missiles deceloped are mainly for their nuclear deterrance.

Wrong.
The same is true for NATO numbers so the relation stays the same. And hypersonic weapons are there for conventional deterrence. No need for a nuclear warhead when your hypersonic missiles can destroy any ABM system or ship.

Isos wrote:

ahmedfire wrote:Why Russia would launch a nuclear war if the NATO started a conventional war?

NATO can't stand a massive hits from Russian conventional weapons ,hypersonic weapons from bombers , land and navy. Russian advantage over NATO in cannon artillery is 4:1, in long-range rocket artillery 16:1, in long-range air defense artillery 17:1 and in short-range air defense artillery the Russians outnumber NATO an astounding 24:1. NATO aircrafts can't fly freely over baltic countries , If Putin send the army into Baltic, they will fight inside a Russian (IADS) bubble that is one of the most formidable in the world.

Real in service numbers of hardware are not that high. Most of their hardware is in reserve. Russia can't stand alone against NATO conventionaly.

Hypersonic missiles deceloped are mainly for their nuclear deterrance.

The numbers were published by US Rand association .

NATO militaries have retooled to focus on stability operations and lighter forces that can be more easily deployed out of area to places as Afghanistan but Russia has retained a combined-arms force that ensure mobility and firepower and trains to conduct larger scale combined arms operations. This gives Russian forces an important advantage in conflicts between mechanized forces close to their border.

If NATO need to achieve surface-to-surface Fires matching it should invest in an arsenal that includes longer range, hyper velocity munitions that can fly at low altitutes, engage moving targets and avoid return fire en route to its destination.

Vann7 wrote:Russia major weakness of its military by far.. is the lack of power projection..   this is a real issue..
in a real war with US , it will have no easy way to fly to the atlantic and to the eastern coast of US and take a major offensive operation. something that NATO can do from plenty of places.. in eastern europe and norway ,sweeden too..

Ability to turn any country on our planet in aches in a matter of minutes if anyone dares to defy its rightful moves is guaranteed deterrent and of any country only US has the means and all others are either allies or have even smaller power projection so thus US is kept in check. It can escalate and it risks so what will it do no one can know and Russia does not care. Russia needs to do what Russia needs to do and its doing it.

What you are advocating is ability of Russian army that can conventionally guarantee ultimate blow in a conventional warfare in a matter of hours so no one could even think off doing something against their will and than proceed from that point on as to what might those weapons be and in what numbers. Well throughout history there where times where some country came close to it still it was challenged along the way all the time until its demise. Now we have US blinded with that same idea of world hegemon thinking it can put all others into submission with the power of its army. It has tried and it has failed. Now its situation is that with even its all McDonalds producing money and Silicon Valley and 700+bin $
per year is still struggling to keep what it has without hope to reach finished job phrase and economy that is crumbling. Essencially it is where SU was with only forward as its choice of option so let them venture there unopposed we already know how will it end up to a point. Still Russia has marked its lines and China has and Iran and India and many other countries with in time more taking on the brave face and stood down for the interest of their own people.

So at this moment as in any other moment in time no country had the ability to attain military power that could end conflict in a matter of now so war is a process that lasts and takes into consideration many different concepts and there is no wonder weapon that can nullify all which existed so far.

I saw this tread flagged in my feed and in my naivete I hoped we might actually have some fresh news about PAK-DA but instead it turned out to be just a side effect of yet another one of Vann's retarded ramblings...