a nuclear bomb [Theme]

No matter how to treat Gorbachev's agreement, but then the Soviet leadership had at least some reason to go to asymmetric solutions. The Russian leadership are such grounds, not in principle. Despite the fact that Americans clearly demonstrate the intention to dismantle the entire system of arms control and even more - the entire current system of international security.
Published 17 January, the Pentagon "policy Review ABOUT" seeks to protect not only ballistic but also cruise missiles and hypersonic missiles, which is supposed to deploy a space-based system. "These opportunities will deprive our opponents of the deterrent" - said the acting Minister of defence of the USA V. the.
Notice, "to deprive of a deterrent." Not attack, namely containment. That is, they are not going to hold back. The hypersonic, we have, according to experts, a minimum of five years of benefits. While changing one flight time. In the case of a Hyper - critical. It is not minutes and seconds. In fact, to preserve the system security will need two sides at least. And to "just die", just the one will of one party. And yet this side this will is adamant.

The agreement of 1987 provided for the zero option. For the first time eliminated an entire class of weapons - land-based missiles with ranges of 500 to 5,500 km. While the Soviet Union went on the asymmetric reduction, abandoning the rockets carrying more than 3,000 nuclear warheads, twice now set for Russia and the United States capabilities. That some now interpret as a betrayal, given that, Gorbachev agreed to the destruction of a unique complex "Oka", are generally not subject to the parameters of the agreement. It's funny that now, as 30 years ago, the ultimate need to destroy our missiles, the so-called SSC-8, also do not fall under the parameters of the agreement.
"The claims of both sides have one thing in common despite their difference: formally neither the one nor the other side do not violate the letter of the Treaty. That is, in this case violated the spirit of the Treaty, but literally, the contract is not violated. Since this contract is about the tests and the deployment of strike systems with a range of over 500 kilometers," - said the Deputy Director of the Center for analysis of strategies and technologies, Konstantin Makienko.
Then the Americans believe that the modernization potential of our missiles does not allow to increase its range to as much as you want. And we don't believe that Americans don't stick to launcher PRO or missile target normal combat.

Oh, what a blessing that my "remoska" still going after this, and then me another year on the loan to pay, you know? Here I'd glad...

- Russia has never been defeated in war!
- Well, put. And The Crimea? And Tsushima? And with Finns, you know?
- So I had to reset the Finns a nuclear bomb, you know.
- The Finns?
- Yes, even one! On sorry, what?

In General, over the 20 years of "democracy" Russia has lost more than 80% of the nuclear potential, inherited from the Soviet Union.

I would say that the threat here is not the possibility of possessing a nuclear bomb. Have one or two, it's not so bad. Where he could drop this bomb? Israel? Yes, it is two hundred meters will not fly, as the Teheran would be wiped off the face of the earth!

Only one atomic bomb can spoil your day.

If someone decided to destroy Russia, then we have a legitimate right to respond. Yes, for mankind it will be global. For the world it will be global. But I still as a citizen of Russia and the Russian President want to ask the question: why do we need such a world, if there will not be Russian?

... unfortunately, no one is trying to disperse two dark clouds gathering at the time, as we discuss the world order: this is a nuclear war and an environmental disaster, literally threatening the survival of the species. Just the opposite. Both these threats are becoming more menacing and growing.

Russia needs nuclear parity with the United States, and it must be maintained and enhanced. It may look old fashioned, but the danger of mutual destruction - a guarantee of security for the world.

But, as they say, fear has big eyes - the Western politicians, experts, journalists, accepted Vladimir Putin's speech as a challenge. <...> Surpassed all the Turkish newspaper Yeni şafak [Yeni Şafak - on tour. New dawn]: "the Russians can hit anywhere in the world."

Any use of nuclear weapons against Russia or its allies of small, medium, Yes, whatever power we consider as a nuclear attack on our country. The answer is immediate and with all the ensuing consequences.

In 1945, my great-grandfather served in the army and wondered if he would return home to his wife and son, whom he has never seen.
His wish came true when the United States completed world war II, dropping on Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombs. The world froze in anticipation of a nuclear Apocalypse.
But a miracle happened: we began to use atomic energy for military and peaceful purposes. What once seemed the stuff of fiction: domestic robots, machines to fusion fuel, portable computers have all become a reality.
But in the twenty-first century American dream dissipated like smoke. The years of mindless consumption led to the depletion of all natural resources. The world creaked at the seams. Now, the year 2077. Humanity is on the threshold of a new world war. And I'm scared. Scared for himself, for his wife, for the little boy. During the time spent in the army, I realized something... war... never changes.

Good instincts... Always leads to ruin. <...> "I found a way to fly", "I found a way to make bombs...", "I found a new field...", "I found who we should hate..." it is this sense he is called the cause of the damage.