When things are investigated, knowledge is extended. When knowledge is extended, the will becomes sincere. When the will is sincere, the mind is correct. When the mind is correct, the self is cultivated. -- Confucius
Politically correct ideals are garbage: true wisdom comes from decades of deep thought and neutral observation. Only a so-called sociopath could ascertain wisdom from this crazy world in a neutral way. Cool thoughts- uncorrupted by modern politics, social norms, or societal ideals- are required for wisdom. Questioning everything, and going against the grain on all universally accepted norms is the path to true intelligence. The Gods notice this.


Watch This Space

Since I last posted here, my mom passed away, I’ve driven across the country and back ↭ twice, lost a lot of my belongings, been homeless for several months in Knoxville, hung out in Las Vegas for a few months, and, spent a small fortune on gas! A lot of it was bad, a lot was good; all of it was an adventure and life experience! Now I am finally settled and have set up a household with a nice new desktop PC and will be writing again- posting when I can. Several subjects are in queue and should be interesting to previous readers here. 


Bases Around Russia- surrounded or not?

It is unfortunate that so many nonsensical rumors incessantly make the rounds on the internet, while no one reposting them bothers to check if they are true or not. In recent years, many people, even some Russian politicians, have been repeating the statement that Russia is now 'surrounded' by 'hundreds of' american bases. How true is it though?

Any foreign bases beyond a friendly country with a common land border are simply malicious imperialistic ventures. America has no moral right to place military bases in any nation except Canada or Mexico, and that would be if they gave permission. However, they have 144 bases in 16 countries- none of which are Canada or Mexico either! Did they "surround" Russia? Let us take a look...

-The Gambia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Morocco, Pakistan, Somalia, and Liberia all allow america to use their military facilities and have other close military ties.

-Germany, Greece, and Turkey allow america to store free-fall atomic bombs on their territories. Germany, Turkey, Belgium, and the Netherlands allow america to store both free-fall and guided nuclear bombs and missiles on their territories.

-Poland and Romania are housing ground launched cruise missiles, likely nuclear Tomahawks, in their so-called radar facilities that america operates.

-Georgia hosts an american bioweapons laboratory. {funny how america is frantically working on anthrax spores, and even shipped some to South Korea last year, and now there is an outbreak of it in Siberia...}[related]

-Australia is about to host a new long range bomber base designed specifically for B-52s, and they already have a joint military oriented space tracking and spying facility there as well.

-Israel has an american radar facility and two large military depots. This is besides the massive mystery buildings at the Chamish facility that are speculated to house an american version of the "deadman switch" nuke launching system, hidden nuclear silos, and/or a supercomputer complex complete with underground tunnels. All aside from their own arsenal of nuclear weapons, which may be under their control or american control- no one knows since they will not admit they exist. (The tunnels could also be hiding battalions of tanks for a regional invasion, just like the ones being warehoused in Poland.)

A few of the above nations are close to Russia, especially Georgia, Pakistan, and the European states, but the only ones that actually border Russia are Norway and Georgia- and we all know what happened to them last time they tangled with The Bear. All others have a buffer area of at least one other nation to cross if they wanted to attack Russia. But then, what about the actual bases?

The following 19 countries have actual american bases in them (this includes NATO bases): Afghanistan, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Japan, Kenya, South Korea, Spain, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Antigua, Denmark, Netherlands Antilles, Oman, Portugal, Turkey, Greece, France, and Norway. Only one country with an american base- Norway - borders Russia directly (196 km long).

Of course missiles and supersonic jets can close the gaps quickly and fly over other nations' airspaces if they so choose. If there would be resistance depends upon whose airspaces they cross. Keep in mind that Russia very wisely has set up common airspace defense zones with several of its neighbors.

How is Russia really surrounded then? Maps must be consulted.

This meme has been circulating on the net for a long time, though it is very inaccurate in many areas:
well meaning- correct in spirit at least...

This one is more accurate: 

The rest of the story drawn up by Der Spiegel:
sorry map is wrong- Crimea is Russia

Add to that the "aspirations" not on that map- Sweden and Finland want to join as well and have been acting like NATO states in every way except on paper, with joint military exercises and a large dose of russophobia to boot. Ireland allows NATO cargo planes to land and refuel there, as its govt. supports them. All three of these countries, along with "neutral" Switzerland and Austria have sent troops to Afghanistan at NATO's behest at various times. Also keep in mind that NATO has been actively pressuring Serbia and Cyprus to join up as well. How long they can hold out before they happen to have a (CIA) color revolution? Hard telling...

This blogger made up his own maps, edited from wikimedia commons templates:

Black- hostile / Yellow- friendly or neutral

situation grave...
As one can see, the holdout countries include at least 3 that would side with america in event of war, leaving 6 friends. Kosovo, too small for this map, would be considered an american ally. It is also a known daesh hotbed complete with several training camps.

Asian areas are not so grim:

The method used to color-code them is as follows: Russia is red; nations that are either friendly toward Russia or neutral are yellow; nations hostile to Russia are black.

A few such as Iraq, are not openly hostile to Russia, but allow america to use them as a base which is just as dangerous. They could set up an invasion point from their territory anytime. Pakistan has lots of trade including military sales with Russia, but allows america to run rampant there and is not overall trustworthy. The same goes for Malaysia and Indonesia- both hosting american naval vessels regularly a little beyond common port calls. As far as Turkey- they may be attempting to mend ties right now, but still are in NATO and hosting american nukes, AWACS planes, and fighter jets. Some yellow ones are of interest as well, including India- of dubious intent but highly unlikely to mount an invasion of Russia, nor allow america to use them as a base.

A number of countries try to be friends with both america and Russia, and should be watched carefully. These include Serbia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, India, Vietnam, and Malaysia. Belarus may sound surprising, but consider that they would not allow the planned CSTO air force base to be built there, without explanation. They also have been selling lots of military vehicles and arms to ukraine.

No one can doubt the close ties between Russia and Serbia, Belarus, Armenia, or India- but their governments' actions sometimes give pause...

The only countries that would have a snowball's chance in hell of successfully invading Russia may be america, China, India, or Iran. China and Iran are too close of friends, and India tries to stay out of Russian-american discords (though they've been absurdly taking america's side against China in the Spratly dispute). The root cause of all of Russia's security issues are obvious- those countries that bow down to the imperialists become proxy states and are endangering themselves as future battlegrounds.

In the end, the 144 american bases are not spread around Russia evenly as imagined- in some giant ring, but mainly concentrated in Germany, Japan, and South Korea. If there is a global war, the South Korean bases will have their hands full with North Korea, and Japan based troops will have a lot of water to cross. Now that Russia is fortifying the Kamchatka Peninsula, Sakhalin Island, and the Kurils- and have also emplaced S400s in the far northeast to keep Alaska in check- the main concern is the European border.

Considering Russia's excellent multi-layered air defense systems, it seems highly unlikely anything will sneak in. Rest assured, Shoigu and Putin have you covered.

See also:

Hubris Quelled: american bully soon to be in hospice

Who would win a nuclear war? 

Exaggerated evil - most accurate list on net of american bases 

(C) 2016 james platt. do not repost without permission, even with link. 


Want Russian News? Go to the Source!

Am I the only one who can see that the pro-Russia crowd in america is being hoodwinked? 

Many americans and other Westerners are thoroughly disgusted with their governments' warmongering and lies, understandably so. They seek alternative news and views- which is good. All of these folks are drawn towards Russia and its polar opposite policies, myself included. I have been following Russian news for about 30 years, and can state that all these new sites are more of a fad than anything serious. Sure, the people who read them are serious, but they are still americans by and large. This means they are used to being lied to and tricked, and are easily fooled by false stories. The spooks at Langley are having a heyday with it. Virtually every comment thread on every one of these sites under every article has a dedicated troll sitting on it, spewing out anti-Russian propaganda, lies, and badgering. A lot of people take the bait and argue with them, pointlessly.

What is worse though is that the progenitors of this army of trolls have their own entire sites churning out disinfo and lies as well. They have become so persistent that most of the pro-Russian americans do not bother to check these sites' sources at all. This opens the door for disinfo pieces. They will write a very anti-american piece here and there, and then intersperse them with articles that are out and out lies. These fictional essays are then parroted amongst the pro-Russian sites and everyone buys the tales without checking any info or sources out themselves.

I have decided not to name names of other sites; it is not necessary. Almost all of them to some degree are doing the same things:

1. They have more and more ads all the time, and ask for donations more and more often. One of the earliest donation campaigns of these sites stated that they raised 70 grand in one month, while claiming it was needed since they have no ads. Very soon after this, they started posting ads anyway and continued the gofundme campaigns. It's become all about money for them, and the other sites are on a parallel track.

2. All of them repost other sites' articles, apparently without permission in most cases. Copying and pasting other peoples' writing is illegal and can be taken down by DMCA complaints. I have done it 14 times, including to one person who posted a long 'fair use' disclaimer. Disclaimers and the words 'fair use' do not negate the laws. It irks me that so many ignore this, because they are not only breaking the laws, they are also too lazy to write their own material. Plus they have no concern over posting other peoples' work while they make money off of their sites' ads and donation funds. It is wrong; stealing; lazy. And all these sites I am discussing do it.

3. Hype is always more important than fact. Very dubious sources are regularly cited on these pages and even copy/pasted with no regard to their verity. One site even admits it is owned by voice of america- a us govt. agency- and people still take their word for stuff. Another one's owner and main writer has admitted on record before that he makes up stuff when it will get more hits, and his fictional hysterics are regularly cited as truth. One Russian site exaggerates so much it is like the national enquirer of Russian news, regularly citing themselves as sources with links to their own articles- the whole site looking like a crazed op-ed section. They are more and more often being used as source info when it serves to embellish a story. Worst of all, certain obvious CIA operatives are planting stories under ridiculous usernames with no backing evidence whatsoever, and then Reuters reposts them, and everyone reposts Reuters, and it becomes “fact” in the Western media. The sites I am speaking of here buy into this as well, frequently parroting these same phony sources. Unfortunately, even the pro-Russian sites continue to cite these buffoons/stooges.

4. All of these sites have gone off on irrelevant and conspiratorical tangents. Some stupidly obsess over Obama being an alleged Kenyan and/or Muslim. Some make it sound like WW3 will happen tomorrow. Lately, most have been going on about Putin having Hillary's emails, and he will release them soon...Yeah, right. There is a quote from Putin going around, where he says how minorities have to basically suck it up. He never said it though. There is even a facebook group about the “Russia, China, North Korea military alliance”. There is no such alliance...Hype and hits are top priority for all of these groups- not truth.

5. They post a lot of junk. Many articles are obviously not edited by anybody, and written by people with a second grade education. Both spelling and grammatical errors are rife. One frequent contributor to these sites comes up with lots of run-on sentences, some even being as long as a lengthy paragraph. In one piece he wrote, I counted the word Russian 35 times, and the word Russian was written 13 times in one sentence even! Other articles are lengthy but have no conclusion, while some are as little as one small paragraph. Almost all have shocking titles that do not match the content of the pieces. It is tabloid quality filler...

6. They are authored by mystery people. Who are they? One or many is also unclear on most, and it never says specifically. One that does say is written by one person who is posting more and more copy/paste pieces as well as guest articles, and even the main person's articles are obviously in two very different writing styles. I could out a very popular site as government run, but am not that devoted to risking my safety. Trust me. All of the news and analysis sites should be suspect.

If you look for them, there are many interesting pages on Facebook and other websites about Russia. President Putin has his own website, as well as a fb page called “World”. P.M. Medvedev has a fb page as well. So does their Ministry of Defense, and their army. So does the country itself: Russia-Official Country Page: the Real Russia. It details mostly cultural items and tourism related subjects. There are also numerous excellent sites about Russian culture. Beware fake Russian sites such as the Moscow Times, Russia!, and others, which are funded and written by reuters, Voice of America, and other dubious sources (all funded by the american govt.). Some so called mainstream news sites are not only biased, they seem to be obsessed with rabid, blathering anti-Russian bias that is so obvious it is laughable. These include business insider, huffington post, n.p.r., and reuters, to name a few.

You do not need the tabloid style american 'news' sites about Russia to know about what that country is doing. Check their official sites first. Russia has a govt. news page called Tass. Sputnik is not govt. owned and has a little hype here and there, but is a pretty good source. Also see RT, they are a very good site for all kinds of info. For more information, it is best to learn Russian and peruse the Russian only sites.

Russian is not as hard to learn as people think. Once you learn the cyrillic alphabet, it is no more difficult than learning any other language. Of course, you can try Google translate but it is woefully inept, especially with grammatical phrasing. Learn Russian, and then use Yandex to find their sites. What is Yandex? Look it up! Just do not depend upon the tabloid sites to translate for you; a lot of it is pretty rough.

Everyone needs to see the other point of view, and in the West- america especially- that is very rare. When they do try, it usually involves these money grubbing tabloid style hype-fest sites. Look up your own info, and start with foreign sites. Please.

Americans have forgotten who they are, what america stands for, and why it was founded to begin with. Shifting back and forth into periods of professed patriotism, while forgetting their rights and values when convenient, their robotic actions reflect some sort of mass dissociative fugue. The government uses this to lead the citizens into a contrived war that will only serve the neocons' goals while they go along blindly, knowing nothing of the war's causes or dangers. Information is essential to those who want to survive the coming war.

Recommended sites:

Learn Russian: 

Recommended Documentaries:

Crimea- the Way Home
see below also

see below also

President- Putin's 15 Years in Power
full doc combined into one video in Russian here,
and with English subs at this site

I, Putin- a Portrait
link to full video, in English

Why We Fight: the Battle of Russia
old documentary made by american govt. about Russian valor, spirit, and invincibility. should be played on C-SPAN daily for awhile...

(C) james platt 2016. do not repost or copy, even with link. 


Hubris Quelled: american Bully Soon to be in Hospice

It is easy to wonder if Russia could win a war with america. After all, they are surrounded by american/NATO bases and flotillas. All of these have tens of thousands of troops with all the equipment needed to swarm in from all sides and overrun Russia, taking its cities before they could mount a defense. Some things have been so thoroughly shoved into our minds through constant brainwashing, that it is hard to comprehend the Russian military as anything but a disorganized, low-tech, bunch of bumbling fools that will cower in fear as american techno-hulks stomp in. After all, that is what happened in Iraq, remember? Never mind the fact that they had antiquated tanks and sabotaged antiaircraft guns- the Iraqis still surrendered in droves and lost miserably. Virtually every movie made in america portrays the Russian army as a keystone-cops operation, trying to look important but shrieking in fear as their junk weapons malfunction. Could any of this be true? What would really happen?

Every army has its strengths, and all of them are proud and determined, and all that stuff. The thing is, the american military thinks it is the ONLY one that is strong, proud, high tech, wily, or prepared. It is arrogant and over-confident in the extreme. This attitude goes all the way from the privates to the admirals. It is taught from the time they were kids growing up in the Land of Brainwashing, to their basic training where it is hammered in the rest of the way. This is the greatest weakness of the american military: arrogance. They will be shocked to the core when they see what the Russian military is really like, and finding out the hard way will be an unnerving experience for them all. 

The first thing they will learn is that Russia is decades ahead of them in electronic warfare technologies. Their EW systems can literally turn off the guidance systems and/or fry the circuit boards of any incoming missiles, jets, trucks, radars- whatever. All of their aircraft have a system called Khibiny on them, which can turn off american Aegis ship defenses, and they have a ground and ship based system as well which shuts off everything within a 200 mile radius- including satellites. They also are at this moment shielding their command centers, radar units, and other key areas with giant electromagnetic absorption boxes which will blind any spying aircraft or satellites. This is to say nothing of their other ten electronic warfare systems.

Russia already knows that america has placed 4 geostationary spy satellites over its country, and rest assured they will be the first to go if a shooting war starts. The S-400s and S-500s will knock them out immediately. An interesting side note here is that america depends upon GPS for many targeting and tracking features of almost all of its weapons systems and flight controls. Russia has a similar dependency- but they have their own system of worldwide satellites which are a lot like GPS but said to be more accurate and, unlike GPS, able to work over the poles. It is called Glonass. The good part is that they have been designing all their systems to work with either Glonass or GPS. While both systems utilize 31 satellites, Russia has begun encoding the signals from theirs. They also have another backup: it will not matter if their Glonass satellites are shot down; they will use GPS. America won't touch those because they need them too. So Russia will have global positioning data either way, and if someone knocks out a GPS unit, america is in trouble. While Russia can shoot down american satellites for sure, can america? Perhaps, with their experimental Falcon space glider, which they just had one of- but wait- oh yes, that crashed in 2012. 

While american electronics fry and shut off, their troops will next notice that everything they send in never returns. Drones, jets, choppers, missiles- all shot down. As previously detailed, Russia has excellent air defenses on every level and range. 

The tank battles will be disheartening as well. American tanks are very big, but German Leopards are even better, and Russian T-72s are even better yet. The next two generations of Russian tanks- the T-90s and Armatas- are worlds different yet. There is a video of an american made modern Abrams tank getting shot by an old Soviet Kornet missile (1970s) from about a mile away (in Yemen). It destroys it completely.

There is also a video of a T-90 getting hit by a modern american anti-tank missile (in Syria). It is not damaged significantly, and the crew jumps out unharmed.

While Russia only has 200 Armata tanks for now out of the planned 2,300, they are high tech wonders that can shoot down land and air targets, and coordinate battlefield operations. Dispersing these to strategic areas will make certain there is at least one in every battle zone. The 550 T-90s will take care of the rest, crushing all in their paths with sheer numbers and sturdiness. They can shoot farther, faster, and with more types of ammo than any other tanks. Backing them up will be the 5,000+ T72s. There are also at least 2,000 old but usable T-64s in storage that could in theory be used in time of war, probably as local defense for cities/villages.  

Perhaps most horrifying of all for Western troops will be when they realize they have nowhere to retreat to. One day of Russian bomber strikes will eradicate all american and NATO air force bases while simultaneous mid-range missile attacks will decimate all land bases. You see, america has 44 air force bases in 13 countries, besides its own domestic ones. There are also 18 NATO bases. Add in the essential first targets of the two long range radar stations(PAVE-PAWS) on the american East and West coasts, Whiteman air force base in the american Midwest- which houses the stealth bombers as well as nuclear silos, the 'electronic fence' array which stretches across the US South to monitor the atmosphere and near space for NORAD, and Cheyenne Mountain which houses NORAD itself-- you have a total of 82 imperative first strike targets. With a grand total of 128 foreign military bases, plus the 18 NATO bases, as well as Whiteman, PAVE-PAWS(2), the 'fence', and NORAD- you get 151 targets. So even if you also add in the rest of the bases- army, naval, and marine- there are still more than enough Russian long range bombers to take them all out in one operation if you assign two targets per mission per aircraft, as there are 124 long range Russian bombers (Tu-95 Bears: 41  Tu-160 Swans: 13  Tu-22s: 70 --although the Su-35 is multi-role, and several other types of their military jets could bomb, let us assume they stay home to bomb targets near their borders...). With this much overlap they could also add in a few more strategic targets, such as White Sands, HAARP, Alaskan bases, and D.C.

Destroying air force bases will remove any possibilities of scrambled jets from landing, so one mission is all any of them will get to fly as they will run out of fuel and crash. Even the refueling planes have to land somewhere, and few jets of any type will survive the initial onslaught. The remaining air force will be on the american mainland, and unable to travel across the world, especially on short notice. Besides, they would be preoccupied with trying to patrol the lengthy american borders and vast airspace with heavy patrols, since a state of war would be at hand.

Will their air force have to do all the work though? One word: Iskander. The Russians have extensive, overlapping missile defense systems, but they also have some heavy duty offensive missiles that can pulverize land bases in short order. Watch the video below and ponder how long the 18 NATO bases will exist if war breaks out- not to mention the military bases of France, Germany, and other allied countries.

In the meantime, the us navy has been estimated to last about 2-3 days by most experts if war broke out. This is because of several huge weaknesses it has. It is large and widespread, which works great for bullying small nations with no navies or air forces, but the huge ships are very slow and large: targets. The 10 american aircraft carriers will become massive coffins for the 6,000 sailors on each of them. Both Russia and China have designed weapons specifically to destroy aircraft carriers. Russia has Moskit (mosquito) missiles, launchable from ships, subs, and jets, as well as the Bastion coastal defense systems. China has their Dong Feng (East wind) missiles. Iran, Venezuela, China, and other friends of theirs have already purchased numerous Moskit missiles, by the way. Keep in mind that anything that can destroy an aircraft carrier will easily destroy any smaller naval vessel as well. The sheer size and speed of these missiles is widely believed to be able to literally capsize a large naval vessel just from the kinetic energy it would have- even if its warhead didn't go off for some reason. Since the us navy has a grand total of 430 ships, the question is: does Russia have at least 430 Moskit missiles? Indonesia has 50, Vietnam has 40, Syria has 72, China has 500, and Russia has an unknown number of them. Why it is not listed on any site is mysterious, but we can assume that as the manufacturer and seller of these weapons, they have more than they've sold. China alone has bought more than enough of them to sink the entire US navy. This is all aside from the submarines. Lots of countries have subs, but can the american flotillas detect attack subs when they sneak up on them? It would seem not, as a Chinese sub surfaced in the middle of an american flotilla awhile back, shocking the seamen to the core.. So between the Moskit supersonic radar-evading anti-ship missiles, the Dong Fengs dropping straight down from miles up at mach 10, the lack of adequate sub detection capabilities, and the warships of the Russian and probably numerous other navies hunting them down- how long would it be before they become artificial reefs?

The bulk of america's army and marine troops are in bases in South Korea, Japan, and Germany. If North Korea were to invade the south simultaneously- which they no doubt would be happy to- this would tie up 28,500 troops pretty well. Fifty thousand more troops would be bogged down in nearby Japan, especially if China harassed Taiwan militarily at the same time. Troop estimates in the Middle East vary wildly, but most tallies for Europe end up at around 400-500K. Even if China did not enter such a war, it could move large amounts of its troops and lure/preoccupy american forces in the Middle East. For example, it could mass troops near its southwestern border making the West think it is about to invade Pakistan. Iran could pull a similar maneuver, feigning invasion designs upon Saudi Arabia or Turkey (or they may actually do it!). Anything going on militarily will bait foreign imperialist brigades away from their home land, even as it is being invaded. The only troops Russia would have to worry much about would be ones in Europe. The TOS will whittle their numbers down very quickly, evening the odds fast.

Considering all of this, what would actually happen is anyone's guess- there are too many factors to predict accurately. It is also fairly certain that neither Russia nor any other nation will come out unscathed: war is never pretty. The way america's neocon controlled government has been needling Russia and China both for decades now, at some point something is going to give. Here is my prediction, largely based upon what could happen.

Though many actions could lead to a war, it is most likely that america will start it by attacking Russian territory that they officially do not accept. Sevastopol, an autonomous city in Russia's Crimean Peninsula, has a large naval base. They will possibly attack it, claiming a Russian naval vessel fired at them or something- a la Gulf of Tonkin. Fast escalation will result since one side is trying to actually start a war. After their vessels are sunk, there will be a 'retaliatory' action involving perhaps a tactical nuclear weapon being used, such as a field nuke fired at St. Petersburg. This city actually is now within range of american artillery from the new base in Poland. Despite the likelihood that Russian air defenses will intercept it, a nuclear attack would not go unanswered. They would want to make sure that the attack is answered in spades, and also make sure that it is understood: we can and will bring this war to your mainland. Therefore a military base in america would be nuked with a submarine launched cruise missile. Possibly the San Diego naval base, perhaps Whiteman air base- right in the middle of the country. Of course the neocons will with great glee order a major nuclear attack instead of taking the big hint. Then the Russian air defenses will be put to use, and in reply america will end up with no navy, air force, or foreign bases, in a matter of days. After or even preceding this scenario, Russia could make things very nasty for america in very short order.

For example:
-large swathes of forests could be napalmed, starting unquenchable fires that couldn't be put out,
-a nuke could be dropped into the Yellowstone caldera, likely to cause the supervolcano to erupt covering half the country in ash,
-an earthquake bomb dropped onto the Salton Sea  would cause a massive earthquake in California;
-a single, large EMP bomb over central US- 200MT nuke would suffice. all electronics would fry...

These are in addition to what special forces teams on the ground could do, which I will not list here but you can use your imagination. The point is that america is extremely vulnerable, especially in its home turf.

This is to say nothing of what Russia could do geo-strategically in order to make its positions stronger. If they see war as inevitable, there are many measures they could take:
-reopen the spying base in Cuba
-set up an air force base in Venezuela
-invade Turkey, or at least take the Bosprous area, and close the Black Sea off
-remove all silo based Topol ICBMs and place them onto train cars to randomly traverse the country
-set up air force base in Iran, and naval base in Malaysia
-invade and hold Georgia and Ukraine to prevent them from being used as bases against them
-showers of hundreds of kinetic bombardment rods onto american ICBM fields. these are telephone pole sized tungsten rods launched from space, which act as extreme bunker busters. theoretically possible but not known to have been built yet by either side, these could be used in shotgun type blows to the 3 large areas where active silos are known to be, or other targets.

Longer term, there are numerous things they could do to strengthen their home defenses as well, and probably will. Besides continuing all of their current programs and projects, they should and very likely will also:
-speed up implementation of the five Barguzin (rural) 'nuclear trains', which transport ICBMs hidden in boxcars, and can be launched from them at any time or place. each train will have six of the new Yars missiles with 6-10 warheads apiece, making 180-300 nukes unfindable and untargetable.
-speed up the production of their own slightly smaller version of the Mistral type helicopter carriers, and make more-ideally 6 of them: one each for the baltic and norwegian seas; the kara and barents seas; the east siberian, chukchi, and laptev area; the okhotsk and japan seas;  the bering sea; and the black and mediterranean seas. Since their coastlines are so extensive and difficult to watch at all times, an enemy could sneak a landing in easier. With these assault landing type ships they could go in after them, coming up from behind and trapping them. -see map below-
-make more Zubr type hovercraft, to patrol the major river deltas and deep into the interior as needed. although there is only two now, these are already being reproduced with modern equipment. 10 would cover all major river systems. see this map and chart below it.
-double production at all military hardware factories, from jets to bullets. more factories should be built now.
-save defunct ordnance and equipment. instead of disassembling or scrapping it, it could be used as backup supply in time of war, and at least given to local units. this also applies to decommissioned nuclear warheads, which should be placed onto new missiles. if america violates all of the treaties and prepares to invade, then why should Russia have to follow them?
-they should abandon their plans to make new aircraft carriers. they have one now and a new one is being designed, but they are very expensive and of little use in wartime. the same money could be used for several helicopter carriers or hovercraft, or other systems.
>start a public campaign to recycle old cars etc. across country, shred, sort, and stockpile it for imminent use by tank factories etc. besides steel this could be done with brass, lead, and copper as well for increased production of bullets and shell casings.
-their recent consideration of restarting the four old army trains used during the Chechen war should be done and expanded, with at least a dozen criss-crossing the country at any given time. the old version should be expanded to include an engine on each end, a track repair car with materials and a crane, a fuel car with armor plating, a storage car, two sleep cars, a dining and rec car, a radar/radio/EW car, a flatbed car with a TOR anti-aircraft system installed onto it, another flatbed car with a BUK unit on it, and a car with an ICBM in it. these small 12 car trains could pose as a mobile rail repair crew and sapper transport, antiaircraft, and mobile ICBM units all in one.

...America is extremely weak: most of its armed forces are on the other side of the world, while most of its domestic bases are either small local national guard units or training bases, there are no fortifications whatsoever on either of its lengthy land borders, its air defenses are completely inadequate (see last post), its navy is a sitting duck, its air force is just too far away, and its arrogance will allow for complete surprise by the enemy.

It is sad that the vast majority of the american public has no clue that any of this not only could happen, but is actually about to happen. They will have no idea why. While the politicians have champagne in their bunkers, the populace will be vaporized, or worse starve to death after Russia and/or China retaliates. Simultaneously, Europeans will see a repeat of the destruction of both world wars yet again. Their cities will be rubble, their citizens will be mostly dead. As american colonies they will act as battlefields for the next major war, and at best will be collateral damage/at worst cannon fodder.

(C) james platt . do not repost, even with link.

map of seas around Russia and main rivers 


Strategic Air Defense and Nuclear Deterrence: Is America Doomed?

Researching military hardware and systems- especially missiles- is a veritable nightmare of lists and statistics. Wading, sifting, and interpreting it all is not only frustrating, but ultimately terrifying. We all assume america is protected from nuclear attack, but is it? To what degree? And if there is no protection, what is the strategic balance of power today?

It is very inaccurate- even lopsided- to directly compare american and Russian military systems, as they developed so independently that the technologies are contradistinctive. While american technology is pathologically claimed to be superior, in reality corporate profits have complete control over defense contracts, and thereby, what weapons systems are developed and when. It can take decades for an idea to come to fruition, and by the time it happens it is obsolete by other nations' standards. An excellent example is the very profitable piece of junk known as the F-35. This jet is a very expensive lemon, slated to replace the time tested F-15s, F-16s, F-18s, and F-22s, while it snaps the necks of pilots and breaks down every whipstitch. This cash cow for Lockheed seems to be un-killable by the few politicians who oppose it, however. An even better- and much lesser known story- involves the refusal of army bigshots to place armor on humvees, or replace them with safer vehicles. See this story, posted on a conspiracy site because no one else will put it up! Impediments to progress like these undermine technological development in a huge way.

In the meantime, Russia decided to rebuild, re-equip, and modernize their military. Their progress is a wonderful example of how it could be done if only america would give the concept of defense priority over corporate profits. They have thus developed vastly superior technologies and systems in all areas of their military- especially missile and anti-missile systems, electronic warfare, and fighter jets. These areas are crucial as the theaters of land and sea warfare are lost causes for the West. On land, the Russian tank superiority and sheer numbers insure that Europe would be overrun in a matter of days in any ground conflict- by some estimates a matter of hours. American naval superiority is also fallacious. Most estimates predict its survival in a world war scenario at two to three days. These are subjects of different essays, which are forthcoming.  Air superiority, however, is key. While most bemoan america's alleged air prowess, they fail to consider several key issues: a. american aircraft are dispersed amongst bases worldwide, and cannot strike as a large unit anywhere, b. american stealth technologies have been nullified by new types of radars- nothing is invisible, c. the oldest Russian military jets are faster, have longer ranges, and carry more weaponry than the newest american jets, d. all but one type of Russian fighter jet is "super-maneuverable" which means they will win any dogfight easily- while the american F-22 and F-35 supposedly are as well, they are nothing like the Sukhois they tried to copy, e. the F-35 debacle will seriously hurt Western air forces in many ways (see link earlier: 'piece of junk'). This all will come into play if there is a conflict because air power will determine if a lot of cruise missiles are launched or not, what will and will not be bombed, and what may be taken out as ground targets.

Defense against marauding jets is critical, to prevent all manner of targets from being decimated by everything from napalm to JDAMs (bunker busters). The air defenses against them are interesting- both in what there is and what there is not. To ward off enemy aircraft, america has stinger missiles, which are used as MANPADS (MAN Portable Air Defense Systems-- shoulder fired rockets), mounted onto land vehicles, helicopters and even jets.

Russia has similar missiles called Strelas (arrows), also used as MANPADS, vehicle, or aircraft mounted. Plus they have smaller ones called Iglas (needles) which can also shoot down aircraft from the ground, or are aircraft mounted. These were supposed to be replaced by the newest Verba systems, but the Iglas are still in wide use, mainly mounted onto attack choppers. The Verba is considered to be the most high tech manpad in the world, as it can even shoot down cruise missiles. It also is mounted on land and air units as well.

SA-14 missile and launch tube.jpg


The only other land based air defense missiles america has are the Patriot system- the well known hawk missiles are used by other countries still, but have been phased out and mothballed/sold by the american military. This leaves four different naval based missiles- the RIM66 Standard (medium range), RIM 67 Standard (extended range), RIM 174 Standard ERAM (anti-cruise missile), and RIM 161 Standard Missile 3- a naval based anti-ABM missile which has been adapted for land launches at two bases in Poland and Romania. Any of these could shoot down aircraft, as well as the naval AEGIS system designed for short range anti-ABM and aircraft defense. The RIM 161s have been placed on many american naval ships, which Russia has been complaining about lately. It is more of a threat to low-orbiting satellites than nuclear warheads though. Their main point of contention is that this deployment is a violation of the ABM treaty (what treaty has america not violated?). While all of this sounds impressive, especially considering that there are two other american air defense systems designed exclusively for anti-ballistic warhead defense, it is actually woefully lacking. All of these except the patriot and stingers are too big and overdesigned for small targets like aircraft. There needs to be an in between system, and there is not: going from stinger to patriot is quite a gray area and specialty jets and missiles will get through this chasm of extremes.

Comparatively, Russia has a multitude of air defense systems. Besides the manpads and smaller units (verbas, strelas and iglas), they have several naval based ones as well. These include the S300F, S300FM, S400F, CIWS Kashtan(chestnut) (similar to Phalanx), and M11 Shtorm (storm) missiles. Any of these can shoot down aircraft or missiles, and all but the CIWS and M11 are designed to take out ballistic targets as well. But does Russia have the happy medium that america lacks- something primarily designed to take out aircraft?

First, they have the ZU-32-2. It is a towable, dual barrel 23 mm cannon. Actually a giant twin machine gun that can shoot accurately for two miles, it is commonly bolted onto military vehicles and has been sold to dozens of countries. These are what the terrorists in Syria cram into the back of their Toyota pickups, and have shot down several aircraft with.

ZU-32 in truck mount 

There are also S125 launch systems, with V600 type missiles. They can be ground, tracked vehicle, truck, or trailer mounted. Supposedly, they have been 'replaced' by the S300s, and now are only 'practice' rockets; however, they still dot the country and have also been spotted in the defensive ring around Hymeimim air base in Syria. They are mostly used to defend bases and strategic land targets such as factories. It was an S125 that shot down an american "stealth" fighter over Serbia.

S125 Neva 250 brPVO VS, september 01, 2012.jpg
S125 ground mount
S-125 tracked mount

The S-200 surface to air missiles are another formidable obstacle to anything entering Russian airspace. The massive 35 foot long missiles can fly at mach 8 and hit targets almost 200 miles away. There are over 2,000 of these on standby. The Syrian Arab Army recently shot down an israeli F-16 with one of these. They also destroyed 70 of 103 Tomahawk cruise missiles in a recent attack by nato with both the S125 and S200s. Their Pantsirs which were protecting government buildings, were not needed. The 32 enemy missiles that got through were headed for empty buildings and other defunct targets and were not bothered with. This incident proved that old systems can really defeat newer high tech ones.
ZRK S-200V 2007 G1.jpg
S200 on ground mounted launcher

Then there is the 2K22 Tunguska, a tracked vehicle with antiaircraft cannons and 8 missiles apiece- designed specifically to shoot down american A-10s and other jets (250 in operation), and the larger and more modern TOR units with 16 missiles apiece- which can also shoot down cruise missiles (172 units in use), and the K300P Bastion systems- large truck based groups designed for coastal defense with supersonic anti-ship missiles, said to be able to shoot down aircraft, cruise, and even ballistic missiles if needed. There are only a handful of these in use, but more are being made (these were used to deter an american invasion of Crimea in 2014, and are stationed in the Kurils now). The TORs are used for short range defense and normally guard bases and permanent ground targets such as the Kirch bridge in Crimea. Osa (wasp) units are very similar to TOR but are a little smaller, amphibious, and more mobile. The Tunguskas are frequently mixed into military columns and other exercises/groupings. Both are usually operated in groups of four vehicles with a central radar unit to aid them. Pantsirs are mobile vehicles which can be tracked or wheeled, and have land, naval, and arctic versions. They carry 12 anti-aircraft missiles and two dual 30mm cannons each. There are 200 of these in use in Russia and a batch of 50 units with 300 spare missiles was just sent to the Syrian army. There are also the new Fowler being made now which is a smaller version of the Pantsir, so it can be airdropped with paratroops; and, the newly improved version of the Kornet missiles. Kornets are designed to take out tanks, but the new models also work well for helicopters and drones, and are being placed near S400 units. They also have the Archer- E units. These are small, light armored vehicles with 6-8 igla missiles mounted on top. They are designed for stealthy, fast, and independent defense uses against all non-ballistic air threats, though they can take out cruise missiles. They're commonly used to escort military columns.

2008 Moscow Victory Day Parade - 9K22 Tunguska.jpg

new Kornet vehicle

wheeled Pantsir 
File:Pantsir-S1 SAM at Engineering Technologies 2012.jpg
tracked Pantsir
Bulgarian SA-8.jpg


Besides these, there is the venerable BUK (beech [tree]). BUKs are vehicles which can be wheeled or tracked, with usually four or six missiles apiece, and are designed to shoot down high flying aircraft and cruise missiles. There are 250 of these wandering the Russian countryside at any given time, travelling in groups of 2-3 launch vehicles with a radar truck as well. They are being replaced with newer models at this time- the BUK-M3- which holds six missiles per unit and has greatly increased range. They are scheduled to all be replaced by the end of 2016. The new models are said to be more effective than the S300s in some ways. The Syrian army has a large contingent of these as well, recently upgraded. The older ones' fates are as yet unknown, but may be given to ally CSTO nations. And, its manufacturer, Almaz-Antey, has announced that it is already working on a 5th generation model.

wheeled BukM2

There are also five Russian air defense systems that are all designed for anti-aircraft, anti-cruise missile, and anti-ballistic missile defense. These units consist of groups of vehicles- with multiple/redundant radar trucks, a command vehicle, a scout vehicle, a reloading crane truck, and at least 4 launch trucks. When parked and set up, all are linked by direct cables, local telephone lines, and/or radio control. Each grouping may contain 4 to 8 launch truck units, and each launch tube contains either one or four missiles. These groups are also escorted by at least two Pantsir or TOR units as well, largely to set up perimeters and prevent drone or swarm attacks on the larger systems. Their command vehicle can integrate radar info with their escort units, and function up to 100 km from the launch trucks. It is widely acknowledged that only the F-22 Raptor could possibly attack these setups successfully, though recent Russian advances in technology with photon and shortwave radar systems nullifies all enemy stealth aspects, so the lightly armed Raptors would be easily spotted and dealt with.
The five multi-role defense missile systems are: 

S300 :
Oldest of this series; these are being upgraded, with some adapted for and used on naval vessels, and some are being phased out in favor of ones listed below. After the recent nato attack on Syria, Russia is preparing to sell these to Syria and possibly other allies as well. Iran already has an upgraded battery of these. There are about 1,000 total launch trucks just in Russia, with 4-10 missiles apiece. They can be on tracked or wheeled vehicles. Their primary purpose is air defense, but can strike distant land and sea targets as well. The newest upgrade of these, called the S300V4, was set up recently in the Russian naval port of Tartus in Syria to protect the Syrian air force bases from impending cruise missile attacks.
MoscowParade2009 7.jpg
S300 type Kalibr (club) missile systems can also be hidden inside of shipping containers. They could be on any cargo ship or any dock/port anywhere in the world at any time, as this video illustrates:

The S300/Kalibr missiles are also mounted onto most of Russia's corvette and larger naval vessels, and soon into their submarines as well. They can accurately destroy sea targets 350 km (217.5 miles) away as well as land targets up to 3,500 km (2,174.8 miles) away. Their original design as air interceptors is assumed to be intact when fired from sea instead of land.

S350 : Vityaz (Warrior)
A new yet different system, these are made for medium range and supplemental defense, and are being emplaced near major cities and bases. Their main task is ballistic missile defense, but can engage any airborne targets. Each truck has 12 missiles, and 30 systems are scheduled to be made by 2020.

S-350 Vityaz launcher (Image from Igor Korotchenko's Military Diary http://i-korotchenko.livejournal.com)

S400 : Triumf (Triumph)
Latest high tech system in wide use, with more on the way. Sold to China and a sale of 6 battalions to India is nearly complete. Much larger than the S300, it uses 5 types of missiles depending on the situation. It generally has 4 launch trucks with reloads (32+ missiles) per battalion, with 25 battalions being produced (800+ total missiles on standby). This is what was sent to Syria to protect the Hmeimin air base from more Turkish attacks. An interesting note about these is that certain strategy think tanks and others have posted vomit-quality nonsense videos on youtube about how easy it would be to defeat S400s (as well as the 300s, 500s, etc.) with saturation attacks utilizing several small cruise missiles or swarms of mini-drones. They conveniently fail to mention numerous reasons why it would never be so easy, as laid out in this video (turn down volume- robot voice is nerve racking..). [Basically they are guarded by Pantsir, BUK, and TOR batteries, and also watched closely by nearby air bases. See also entry below about the Morfey.]
С-400 «Триумф».JPG

S500 : Prometey (Prometheus)
The latest of this series, said to create a 100% shield that can detect and take out anything airborne, from drones to satellites. Increased range as well. Mostly electronic improvements, the appearance is very similar to the S400. It is designed for protection of specific high value targets such as major cities and military bases, as opposed to swaths of border regions. The warheads are nuclear and can destroy entire swarms of ICBM MIRVs before they re-enter the atmosphere. [Nice little video here which shows differences between S400 and S500]. Some units are in use as of 2016, and once more in place there are plans to include them in a nationwide integrated air defense system.


S600 : Like the story about Moscow's fallout shelter upgrades, it was there and then it wasn't...This was rumored to be under development and said to be entirely airborne. Whenever Russia admits to a military device existing, it usually means it is alot farther along than they let on, and could be in use already. This is meant to be the next generation of ultimate air defense, utilizing S500 technology in an airborne instead of ground based delivery. This researcher predicts it will be in a group of permanently airborne planes switched out in-flight as needed for maintenance. The likely air group for this could be the newly refurbished Tu-95 long range bombers as missile carriers/launchers, adapted as spy planes like the old Tu-95 MR versions, or perhaps accompanied by their AWACS style A-50 spy plane; and, either way escorted by a pair of MiG 31BM long range escort/fighter-interceptors. The group could fly randomly non-stop over Russia's vast expanses to be always-ready and virtually impossible to target. Launching these missiles from high elevations would give much longer ranges, and faster response. Very little is known yet about the 600; this is all guesswork at this point.

42S6 Morfey: (Morpheus)
This system was designed specifically to defend the S400 batteries from saturation- or last ditch- attacks, with a close in range of 5-10 km, or about 3-6 miles. It could also be used to defend any military unit, city, or building as well if needed. Effective against aircraft, cruise missiles, and ballistic warheads.

Mozyr : This system deserves an honorable mention. It is comprised of 100 or more artillery pieces synced together and arrayed in a circle around the land based ICBM silos. When an incoming object is detected, up to 6km out, they all fire at once creating a wall of ordnance. One could think of it as a Phalanx or CIWS unit on steroids, creating a curtain of lead around its silo...

Now Russia has let it be known that on top of all this, they are testing yet another entirely new system for long range air defense.

One more system that begs mention here is the Polyana command and control system. There are so many overlapping air defense systems in Russia they had to invent a universal mobile control station to synchronize them. These units are truck based and can park wherever they need to, each covering a region larger than France in area. More details are here. Short video below also illustrates it well.

What comparable systems does america have to any of the aforementioned systems? Absolutely nothing. The Patriot missiles are frequently compared to the S-300, though that is actually a laughable analogy. The old S-300- being upgraded, replaced, and/or phased out now with its measly (by Russian standards) 90% hit rate, is hardly comparable to the Patriot missiles, which have been rated at best to be 30-70%. They were once sent to israel, and after Hezbollah rained missiles onto them for weeks unabated, they were sent back with a Zero % rating. They now operate a few they upgraded themselves, and are replacing them with their own version soon. Despite ongoing upgrades, there is still little to no confidence in these lemons of the anti-missile world. They are designed to blow up next to their target, destroying its body shotgun style, like BUK missiles do. They do not directly hit incoming warheads, like the S series Russian missiles do, so how these would stop incoming nukes is completely unknown. They allegedly can shoot down aircraft, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles. On top of all this, the launchers raise at an angle- not all the way up vertically like the Russian S systems do. Therefore they have to be facing the incoming target to acquire it.  This means that they only protect the area directly behind them, not 360 degree protection like the Russian systems. So 4 Patriot batteries would need to be placed in an outward facing circle to offer the same protection as any one Russian S series system...So far 1,106 units have been produced, though the number that are actually set up in U.S. territory is unclear, as they are known to be in use at most if not all 128 foreign american bases. [This video compares the patriot system to the S400.]

Patriot missile launch b.jpg
patriot missile system 
There is a new system, recently tested and not mass produced yet nor deployed, that was designed to replace the patriots. It was made for Germany and is interoperable by other NATO states. The MEADS is obviously a simplified knock-off of the S-350 Vityaz. Whether it works as claimed is dubious considering how other missile system tests were rigged in the past, and of course the patriot will not be easily abandoned nor this one implemented anytime soon, if ever, for american air defense. The tenacity of the corporations that profit from weapons systems will not let the patriot go any more than the F35, the Zumwalt, or any other monstrosities. Even if it functions well in Germany, expect decades to pass before it may be deployed in North America. Regardless, it is medium range only and still vulnerable to attack, as america has no special defensive units such as the Pantsir, TOR, Morfey, or Mozyr. It is only mentioned here since it is built by an american company and will be used by one or more of their allies, giving them access to it in theory.

As far as the S-400, 500, 600, or Tunguska, Tor, Osa, Pantsir, Archer, Fowler, Morfey, Mozyr, BUK-- there are no similar systems at all.

There are, on both sides, a few systems that are for anti-ballistic defenses only.

The american ones are the GDI(GMD) and the THAAD. The GDI (ground-based defense interceptors) are part of the GMD (ground-based mid-course defense) system. It is supposed to detect ballistic missiles and then destroy them at their apogee before the warheads separate. This system depends upon several failed ideas such as the sea based X band radar floating-lemon-debacle. One test of this system after another, for years now- and as recently as January 2016- have failed. The last test cost 250 million dollars (yes, 1/4 of a Billion dollars spent for a single test!) and was not only unsuccessful, they lied about it to the press. Coupling this with the fact that Russia's new Sarmat ballistic missiles utilize dummy warheads mixed with real ones- all using independently evasive maneuvers and sub-orbital flight paths, travelling at hypersonic speeds, and having such a long range they can be launched from and subsequently strike anywhere in the world (such as from southern Russia going south over Antarctica and coming up on Florida from below...), one wonders if these american defense units will hit any targets at all. Worse, there are only 30 of these in silos ready to fire. Thirty. All looking North. (Detailed, yet old, site on these missiles here.) There has also been recent talk of making 15 more of these missiles at a cost of 6 billion dollars, which would be placed at either Vandenburg or at a new facility on the East coast somewhere. Of course the difference between 30 and 45 of these is moot when 1,700 warheads are coming in...

The THAAD (similar to a simplistic/smaller version of the S350 system in purpose and range), has 48 missiles per battery and there are currently 5 total batteries, making 240 interceptor missiles available. Of the 5 batteries, there is known to be one in Japan, one in South Korea, and one in Qatar. Of course this gives the benefit of the doubt regarding the military's claim that they can be reloaded very quickly. Quick enough? If not, expect no more than 30 defensive shots to be fired. Sadly, this is the best hope for american air defense, as it still makes for sparse coverage from Russia's 1,700 nukes on ready-to-fire status. The recent Russian replacement for its warheads- hypersonic gliders capable of independent evasive maneuvering and speeds of mach 14, with a range of over 6,200 miles- makes THAAD obsolete, however. These gliders can also be fired 24 at a time encased into one Sarmat ICBM, with some being nukes, some EW devices, and some drones. This brief article explains how these hypersonic warheads will be mass produced within a couple years at most, and only Russia has this capability.

Russia's dedicated anti-ballistic missile systems are stationed in a circle around the Moscow region, and are known as the Moscow Ring. There are the older and shorter range A-135s, and the newer, long range A-235s. These missiles- 135s in land silos and 235s truck mounted- are an extra double-shield of defense for the capital city and its suburbs. There are 68 A-135 launchers with 16 missiles apiece (1,088 interceptor missiles), and an unknown number of the newer A-235s. Since the new A235s are truck based, it is believed they are also being placed at the new Arctic Aerodromes on their northernmost islands (such as Nagurskoye Air Base, Sredny Ostov Air Base, Temp Air Base, and Zvyozdny Air Base). More info on these here. The american military is complaining that these are anti-satellite missiles, and even though they probably can shoot down satellites their main role in the northern islands and around Moscow is to intercept nukes...They are also now testing a new "organic and short range interceptor missile", which is a modern replacement for the old A-135s.

A-235 "Nudol" 

Of course, this is not including the thirteen S300 batteries and one S400 already encircling Moscow.
S300/400 locations w range overlays 

An intriguing possibility is what would be done in time of war with the obsolete missiles that Russia has. This is because they have several thousands of them. It is estimated that there are about 4,600 S-75 missiles, unknown numbers of S-125s, 2K11s and 2K12s, and at least 11,000 S25s. All of these are now used only for 'target practice'. It will be many years before all of these can be used up in target practice. If war broke out, it is a real possibility that all of these excess, obsolete- yet functioning- air defense missiles could be preliminarily fired in massive volleys towards an enemy's bases and flotillas to overwhelm them and cause massive random destruction. About 5,000 apiece could be placed in and fired from the areas of Kaliningrad, St. Petersburg, and Rostov-on-Don, to equally spread the mayhem. They also have 500 of the monstrous old Ganef units sitting around, awaiting 'target practice'. Usable and effective, but may miss modern small fighter jets; however, perfect for bombers and spy planes. The old behemoths may see their day yet...

SA-4 Ganef 

Meanwhile, all of america's old missiles have been disassembled or sold to other countries, the best example of which is the Hawk system: in use in several nations but not by america anymore.

S25: 11,000

S75: 4,600

Russia likes joint air defenses with its neighbors, having specific agreements with Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Armenia, as well as tacit and pending agreements with other CSTO states. On May 28 of 2016 the Russian Ministry of Defense posted on their Facebook page that there was a new joint Russian-Chinese Computer Command ("...development of joint action of quickly established air and missile defense groups of Russia and China to protect the territory from random and provocative strikes of ballistic and cruise missiles. The goals have been fully achieved: harmonization and the use of joint air and missile defense groups, as well as to determine the direction of further cooperation in the field of missile defense..."Any conflict with one of them would almost surely result in a war with both, which would make all of the above even more complicated for america. American hand-wringing over supposed nuclear threats from North Korea and Iran are laughable, baseless, and deliberately deceptive: very likely contrived to distract the american public from the very real vulnerability of their mainland from Russian and Chinese forces.

Without getting into the separate yet related subject of radar systems, keep in mind that Russia has a type of radar called Sunflower that can easily detect stealth jets including the F35s. They are also now installing a system to tap into their cell phone towers, which will detect the smallest of drones and low flying crafts with the 1/4 million cell tower relays across the country (see this or this). Of course, those are mere asides from their main long range systems: the new Voronezh and the older Don and Daryal types- all of which are extremely impressive.

This is all to say nothing of the newest Russian system to pop up- 6th generation fighter jets. They include manned and unmanned aircraft, with one pilot controlling a swarm of up to ten planes. It has a special engine which is a hypersonic jet engine and a rocket engine combined: it can go in and out of the atmosphere, travelling thousands of miles in almost no time, dropping atop enemy formations from high above without warning. They also will have an EM cannon to shut off enemy vehicles. The engine is already made, and the smaller parts are being tested now in the new PAK-FA T-50 5th generation jets. America can't even keep a space shuttle working or place its own satellites into orbit, so their formulation of a defense against these space glider swarms is hard to fathom.

In conclusion, Russia is extremely secure from enemy air attacks of all kinds, including nuclear warheads. They could shoot down at least 98 to 100% of all incoming threats... America is extremely vulnerable. They could shoot down a few incoming jets, cruise missiles, or nukes, but only a small percent, maybe 5-10%. This is terrifying, as stated at the beginning, for two reasons: 1. Russia knows this, and 2. america knows this too, and continues to try to start a war with them anyway.

(C) james platt. do not copy or repost without permission. link does not negate DMCA law. 

-see also: Who would win a nuclear war? 
-excellent article, in Russian but worth translating if needed: http://ostkraft.ru/ru/articles/1765
-detailed history and specs on S-300 and 400 systems here

pic credits:
stinger: http://www.marines.mil/
strela: https://naveodtechdiv.navsea.navy.mil/
verba: http://bastion-karpenko.ru/VVT/VERBA_ARMIA-2015_150520_01.jpg
igla: http://vitalykuzmin.net/?q=node/87
ZU-32: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=711752
S125 ground: Srđan Popović-https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=21432478
S125 tracked: Ministerstwo Obrony Narodowej- http://www.mon.gov.pl/en/artykul/2283
S200: George Chernilevsky- https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=7008734
tunguska: By Пользователь -CC BY 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=10907606
tor: http://sdelanounas.ru
wheeled pantsir: wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/MAKS_Airshow
tracked pantsir: http://www.vitalykuzmin.net/?q=node/353
kornet: vitaly v. kuzmin
osa: KGG1951- https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=8444244
wheeled buk: By Leonidl CC BY-SA 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=15294627
archer: http://tonnel-ufo.ru/eanglish/articles.php?id=2786
S300: Kremlin.ru, CC BY 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=6740178
S350: http://i-korotchenko.livejournal.com
S400: Соколрус, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=40082350
S500: http://en.alalam.ir/news/1814028
42S6 Morfey: militaryrussia.ru
patriot: Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=894093
thaad: https://www.mda.mil/global/images/system/thaad/3._TH_Launcher.jpg
A235: militaryrussia.ru
Moscow outer ring: google earth image with overlaid ranges
SA4: https://www.onwar.com/weapons/rocket/missiles/Russia_SA4.html
S25: Leonidl - CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=15209749
S75: Tourbillon - , CC BY 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=4215918