Will America go to war with Russia?

Back in early 2017, Stephen Cohen, a member of the American Council on Foreign Relations, made an unexpected statement. They say that, according to him, at the request of senior US officials, the Pentagon has prepared a new plan for war with Russia.

I quote: “For the first time in my life, I consider the possibility of a war between Russia and the United States to be very real. I became aware of the plans of senior American officials that were associated with the direct outbreak of military action against Russia” (Stephen Cohen, member of the American Council on Foreign Relations, political scientist and journalist)

If Cohen is right, then this plan is one of the newest and toughest. According to him, it will not be America that will start hostilities, as many people think, but individual countries allies of the United States. (By the way, an example of this is Israel’s constant provocations and attacks on Syrian territory, and Israel, as we all know, is an ally of the United States)

Cohen argues that the offensive is envisaged from several directions simultaneously. The most important thing still remains Ukrainian. The development of events speaks in favor of this version. For example, the NBC News news agency reported that the Pentagon has prepared a plan to supply the Ukrainian army with the first batch of anti-tank systems worth $50 million.

However, some sources indicate that these complexes already exist in Ukraine.

The Baltic states also have a special role, especially after they failed to capture Crimea. The Romanian analyst Valentin Vasilescu spoke very well about this, and may the laws of authorship forgive me, but I will still insert his statement:

"The United States is not planning a landing in the Russian Far East; instead, like Napoleon and Hitler, the United States will seek to occupy the country's strategically important capital, Moscow."

Valentin Vasilescu believes that Euromaidan was initially started to create a convenient springboard for aggression against Russia. However, the plan of American aggression was preventively thwarted after the reunification of Russia with Crimea and the creation of people's republics in the East of Ukraine.

It was after this that the Baltic direction became relevant. Vasilescu said that NATO's main task is to inflict a quick defeat on Russia, which will force the country's political system to collapse. However, if you look at all this more globally, then there really is some truth in his words. For example, plans to capture Kaliningrad are being worked out very carefully and this is a fact! Regarding Moscow, in principle I’m not even surprised. The West has always dreamed of this!

Very often I hear statements from Western politicians and military personnel that Kaliningrad needs to be taken back for the annexation of Crimea, and such heated statements continue to this day.

However, statements, statements... But what alarmed me even more was the very serious activity in building up nuclear bunkers throughout Russia. Moreover, both new ones are built and old ones are modernized. The question arises: why is the Kremlin suddenly concerned about building up nuclear bunkers right now?

This information is not new and it has already been discussed on the Internet more than once, so I think there is no need to describe in detail where and how all this is being built and in which regions. I will give just one example, and it is not our media that are writing about this, but the Western ones. So recently, CNN reported on Russia’s modernization of nuclear bunkers in Kaliningrad. The channel claims that satellite images it has received confirm the construction of another 40 new bunkers in the region.

As CNN points out, the Russian military is carrying out significant modernization at at least four military installations in the Kaliningrad area. In addition, according to the TV channel, a bunker for storing nuclear weapons in the Kaliningrad region has been reconstructed. Satellite images proving this fact were obtained by CNN from the private company ImageSat International between July 19 and October 1.

Another series of images indicates that Russia has begun building 40 new bunkers in the Primorsk area since July, CNN claims. Referring to satellite data, the channel announced the likelihood of reconstruction of the territory of the Chkalovsk Air Force base located in Kaliningrad, as well as at the military facility in Chernyakhovsk, where Iskander operational-tactical missiles were delivered in February. CNN emphasizes that the Russian Ministry of Defense refused to comment on this information, which is otherwise not surprising.

And against this whole background, recently American President Donald Trump makes sharp statements about withdrawing from the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Nuclear Forces, and is also preparing to withdraw from the START-3 treaty with Russia "Strategic Arms Reduction-3", providing for the reduction of the nuclear arsenals of both states. According to the current American President Donald Trump, the US withdrawal from this very treaty is due to the fact that the Russian Federation allegedly does not comply with the adopted agreements. The head of the United States noted that this, in his opinion, has been going on for many years. Even his predecessor, Barack Obama, said Donald Trump, should have closely dealt with the issue of the US withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty.

Whether the states decide to withdraw from the treaty or not will become clear very soon, or rather after the meeting between National Security Advisor John Bolton and Vladimir Putin.

After all of the above, the question arises: why are the states so hastily breaking all agreements with Russia? They devote considerable effort to spying on Russian military facilities and pay special attention to Kaliningrad and arms supplies to Ukraine (by the way, deliveries are currently in full swing) What is this all for? And the answer is quite simple, the United States will stop Russia at any cost, which with its actions in Syria, Crimea and Ukraine is changing the American-centric status quo. It is also extremely important for the states to prevent economic reforms from being carried out in Russia, which is why recently there has been such a large-scale build-up of the so-called “fifth column” in Russia. This is clearly visible on the Internet in various social networks and video hosting sites.

That being said, the US only really has a chance of success if it invades before 2020. After 2020, the chances of success will decrease significantly, since after the rearmament of the Russian army is completed, the Pentagon will lose its technological advantage in conventional weapons. And in order to win the war, you will have to resort to nuclear weapons - and this is a step towards mutual nuclear destruction.

For reference: by 2020 it is planned to update the Russian army up to 70% with modern weapons and equipment.

To summarize, I hope that I am wrong and all my conjectures about the series of events that were mentioned will remain only conjectures.

In the United States, another military exercise of the third brigade from Fort Carson has ended. And these exercises are interesting in that if earlier American soldiers were increasingly trained to fight various kinds of rebel and partisan military structures, now they are trained to counter the regular army of a potential enemy. This enemy, naturally, is our country - Russia.

How the war between Russia and NATO will end

As stated by the brigade commander, Colonel Mike Simmering, "we are training to counter the most serious threat we can face." He also noted: "One man by himself cannot do much, but when you have four thousand men in an armored brigade, you can do amazing things."

A number of media outlets note that, judging by the nature of the exercises, potential opponents mean the armies of China and Russia. In general, the build-up of war hysteria continues. And this is far from her first act. Only this summer, the Saber Strike exercises in the Baltic countries ended relatively recently. There, NATO troops also “repelled the attack of the eastern enemy.”

Over the past few years, the US Armed Forces have been purchasing Soviet military equipment to practice fighting on it. We are talking about Soviet planes and helicopters. I think everyone remembers about the entry of NATO troops into the “Russian village”. When NATO recruiters were looking for people to be extras in order to portray a small Russian settlement and practice the entry of a military contingent there.

From the beginning of this year, the Pentagon began quite officially and publicly to select the candidacy of a general who “will be involved in planning a likely conflict with Russia and China.”

In general, the current exercises are another stage in a series of consistent military policies. And these are just exercises. And if we take into account the increase in the number of American warships in the Black Sea and regular air provocations in Russian waters off the coast of Crimea, it becomes clear who American politicians now see as “enemy number one.”

However, in the States many people talk about this openly. And when it comes to the next sanctions, and simply when it comes to increasing the military presence on Russian borders.

At the same time, US rhetoric periodically amazes with its “uncloudedness.” For example, according to US State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert, new sanctions that may come into force against Russia on August 22 of this year are needed in order to “force the Russian government to behave correctly.”

And earlier, commenting on the increase in the naval group of troops in the Black Sea, Pentagon representatives stated that such a build-up of forces is needed to “reduce conflict in this region.” In general, “war is peace, freedom is slavery” in its pure and unadulterated form.

As for the latest exercises, in addition to infantry, military equipment also took part in them: M1A2 Abrams tanks, Bradley fighting vehicles and M109 Paladin self-propelled guns. At the same time, many officers noted “the radically changed nature of the exercises.”

The confrontation is not only in the area of ​​military exercises. Many current and former officials in the United States are talking seriously about confrontation with Russia along the lines of “hybrid warfare.” Naturally, in a purely defensive manner. True, the defense turns out to be somewhat strange.

Also, from the latest speeches of Donald Trump, it follows that a space force will be created in the United States and many of the elements of space defense are planned to be taken from Ronald Reagan’s program, known to the general public as “Star Wars.” And yes, in Trump’s speech about the need to build up weapons in space, Russia and China again appeared as the main competitors, and even potential adversaries.

In the United States itself, something completely paranoid is happening. Immigrants from Russia there automatically became control and law enforcement agencies as a “potential threat.” Considering that the Russian diaspora in the United States amounts to approximately three million people, then the hunt for “enemies of America,” if it begins, will give a hundred points to the entire era of McCarthyism.

By the way, issuing American visas to Russians has become more expensive, shorter, and more complicated in recent years. Up to a third of such visas are generally issued outside the Russian Federation. Well, the detention of Russians in the United States is, in general, also a trend in recent years. At the same time, people are arrested both for banal crimes and for political reasons, such as suspicion of “espionage,” as was recently arrested.

Experts, by the way, point out that if mass detention or banal restrictions on the freedom of immigrants from Russia in the United States begin, this will be the first sign of a new round of conflict and that the United States has finally and irrevocably decided that it is necessary to fight with Russia.

As they write in a number of telegram channels, if this course does not change, then in the near future we should expect, at a minimum, the “squeezing out” of citizens of the Russian Federation who are in the United States for a variety of reasons on long-term visits. Or maybe not with long ones.

However, Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev started talking about economic war in the context of upcoming sanctions. And he noted that if they are adopted, then Russia will respond to such a declaration of economic war “with political, economic and other methods.”

From a political point of view, by the way, this behavior of the United States contradicts its own declared goals. Since all these sanctions and other build-up of military presence, firstly, are officially of a defensive nature. Secondly, the States seem to be fighting exclusively with the Russian political system. But not with all citizens of the Russian Federation.

In fact, everything turns out to be exactly the opposite. Washington is now trying to hit Russian society as a whole. And labeling immigrants from the Russian Federation as a threat is a measure from the same series. Why American strategists think that such measures will arouse hostility among Russians towards Putin, and not towards the United States, is an interesting question.

By the way, this question is also asked by American analysts from the pages of the same newspaper The Washington Post. In one of the latest materials, a number of experts stated that sanctions, of course, could undermine the Russian economy, but at the same time they would increase Putin’s popularity as a politician who opposes these sanctions. Well, these experts also quite reasonably assumed anti-American sentiments with their escalation.

In general, it is clear that anti-Russian hysteria is now such a political mainstream in the United States, and the Cold War rhetoric has finally returned to Washington. On the other hand, it is good that in Russia there is a much more mature and sober attitude towards current geopolitics and the confrontation between Russia and the United States. We are still very, very far from such a “witch hunt.”

Read the article on

Recently, the previously forgotten threat of a third world war is again a topic of general discussion. A week ago, US and Russian military vehicles almost collided in Syria. NATO is increasing its military potential on the border with our country and is not going to give up hostile rhetoric.

What are the scenarios for a possible military conflict? We need to think about this in order to prevent the not entirely adequate actions of our “Western partners,” who have long since turned back into “probable opponents.”

Military analyst Valentin Vasilescu from Romania, a country at the forefront of NATO's anti-Russian front, is trying to answer this question based on the tactics and characteristics of the weapons used in recent US military operations. On the pages of the English-language analytical center "Katekhon" he argues that aggression by the United States and its allies against Russia is not an excluded scenario.

The United States is obliged to stop Russia at any cost, which, through its actions in Syria, and before that in Crimea and Ukraine, is changing the American-centric status quo. In order to maintain hegemony, the Americans are heading towards a big war.

Main direction of impact

According to Vasilescu, the main direction where we can expect a US strike is the west. "The United States is not planning a landing in the Russian Far East; instead, like Napoleon and Hitler, the United States will seek to occupy the strategically important capital of the country - Moscow", he sums up.

According to him, the goal of Euromaidan was initially to create a convenient springboard for aggression against Russia. Lugansk, the analyst notes, is located only 600 kilometers from Moscow. However, the plan of American aggression was preventively thwarted after the reunification of Russia with Crimea and the creation of people's republics in the East of Ukraine.

After this, the plan of American aggression was revised, and the Baltic direction was chosen as the new zone of aggression. From the Latvian border to Moscow is the same 600 kilometers, and to St. Petersburg it’s even closer.

To ensure that the local population did not resent the fact that their countries would soon be turned into a springboard for aggression, the American and local media and generals began to talk in unison about the fact that the Baltic and Northern European countries were in danger of attack from Russia. Norway even launched a series about the future Russian occupation.

In addition, the United States increased pressure on Sweden and Finland. They are not joining NATO yet, but they have already deployed American troops. Moreover, in May 2016, the northern quintet - a meeting of the foreign ministers of Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Norway and Iceland - announced that it was urgent to neutralize the Russian threat. Defense cooperation between Swedish-Finnish neutrals and NATO members was proposed as a way out.

According to Valentin Vasilescu, NATO's main task is to inflict a quick defeat on Russia, which will force the country's political system to collapse. Pro-American agents of influence will overthrow Vladimir Putin, and the war can be considered won. Therefore, the United States will act according to Hitler’s logic, relying on blitzkrieg tactics. In the event of Russia's defeat, NATO will occupy territories up to the line St. Petersburg - Veliky Novgorod - Kaluga - Tver and Volgograd.

At the same time, as the expert notes, due to the rapid modernization of the Chinese army, which will pose a serious danger to the United States in the Pacific theater of operations, the Pentagon will not be able to throw all the necessary forces and means against Russia. At least a third of all US armed forces will have to be concentrated in the Pacific region, anticipating a possible attack from China, now allied with Russia.

Probable time of impact

According to a military analyst, the US only has a chance of success if it invades before 2018. After 2018, the chances of success will decrease significantly, since after the completion of the rearmament of the Russian army, the Pentagon will lose its technological advantage in conventional weapons. And in order to win the war, you will have to resort to nuclear weapons - and this is a step towards mutual nuclear destruction.

War in the air - colossal losses

The main targets of the first wave of air raids will be Russian airfields and air defense systems. Russia is armed with high-quality fighters and mobile anti-aircraft systems capable of detecting and destroying even a fifth-generation American aircraft.

Therefore, even with the support of NATO allies, the US military will not be able to achieve air superiority. With great effort, they can achieve temporary air superiority in some areas along the Russian border, 300 kilometers deep. In order to secure flights in those areas where Russian air defense systems are actively operating, the Americans will be forced to throw at least 220 aircraft into the first wave of attack (including 15 B-2 bombers, 160 F-22A and 45 F-35). The B-2 can carry 16 GBU-31 laser-guided bombs (900 kg), 36 GBU-87 cluster bombs (430 kg), or 80 GBU-38 bombs (200 kg). The F-22A aircraft can carry 2 JDAM bombs (450 kg) or 8 bombs of 110 kg each.

A serious obstacle for the Americans will be the fact that the AGM-88E missiles, designed to combat air defense systems with a range of 160 kilometers, are too large to be loaded inside the F-22A and F-35s (4.1 m long and 1 m high).

If they are installed on pylons, the vaunted “invisibility” of these aircraft will suffer. Previously, this problem did not arise, since in the last 20 years the United States has waged wars exclusively against opponents with outdated air defense systems.

In order to complicate the task of Russian air defense systems, the United States will fire more than 500-800 cruise missiles from ships and submarines in the Baltic Sea. Russian aircraft, primarily MiG-31 fighters, and air defense systems will be able to neutralize most of these missiles, the expert is sure, but this is not all that the Americans can use.

At the same time, F-18, F-15E, B-52 and B-1B aircraft, being at a safe distance from the Russian border and not entering the range of the S-400 systems, will strike with AGM-154 mini-cruise missiles or AGM-158, whose range is up to 1000 kilometers.

They can hit ships of the Russian Baltic Fleet and missile batteries of the Iskander and Tochka complexes. If successful, the Americans will be able to neutralize 30 percent of the Russian radar network, 30 percent of the S-300 and S-400 battalions stationed between Moscow and the Baltic countries, and 40 percent of the components of the automated reconnaissance, control, communications and target designation system, in addition, airfields will be affected. The departure of more than 200 planes and helicopters will be blocked.

However, the expected losses of the Americans and their allies will be 60-70 percent of the aircraft and cruise missiles that will enter Russian airspace during the first wave of air raids and strikes.

But what will be the most important obstacle to NATO forces gaining air supremacy? According to the expert, these are effective means of electronic warfare.

We are talking about the Krasukha-4 complexes of the SIGINT and COMINT types. These systems can effectively conduct electronic warfare against US Lacrosse and Onyx tracking satellites, ground-based and air-based radars (AWACS), including those located on RC-135 reconnaissance aircraft and Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk drones.

According to the expert, the electronic warfare systems in service with the Russian troops can effectively interfere with American bombs and missiles with laser, infrared and GPS guidance.

Russia can also create two zones on the border with the Baltic countries in the areas of St. Petersburg and Kaliningrad that are impenetrable to enemy aircraft, combining air defense systems (S-400, Tor-M2 and Pantsir-2M) and electronic warfare.

Currently, 8 S-400 battalions protect the skies around the Russian capital, one is in Syria. In total, the Russian armed forces have 20-25 S-400 battalions. Some of them could be redeployed to the western border along with 130 S-300 battalions, which could be upgraded and equipped with the 96L6E radar, which effectively detects NATO stealth systems.

Currently, an even more advanced air defense system, the S-500, is being tested, which is expected to enter service with the troops in 2017.

The author is confident that due to Russia's advantage in electronic warfare, NATO will not be able to achieve an advantage in electronic warfare. As a result, in the first wave of attacks against Russia, NATO troops will strike decoys in 60-70 percent of cases.

Due to high losses in the first wave of airstrikes and the inability to achieve air superiority, NATO air forces will suffer high losses. The American group of 5,000 aircraft will be joined by their allies. But they will not be able to provide more than 1,500 aircraft.

War at sea

At sea, the Pentagon can deploy up to 8 aircraft carriers, 8 helicopter carriers, several dozen landing craft, missile carriers, destroyers and submarines. These forces could be joined by two Italian aircraft carriers and one each from Spain and France.

Russian anti-ship defense systems - cruise missiles Kh-101 and NK Kalibr - move at subsonic speed and can be neutralized at the initial stage of approach. It will be more difficult for NATO to cope with the P-800 Onyx and P-500 Basalt missiles.

And finally, in 2018, the Russian fleet will receive the “aircraft carrier killer” - the 3M22 Zircon missile, capable of traveling at hypersonic speeds at low altitudes. “The United States will not be able to oppose anything to this weapon.”, - the expert concludes.

Superiority in armored vehicles

The armored vehicles currently in service with the Russian army - the T-90 and T-80 tanks and modernized versions of the T-72 tanks, Vasilescu notes, correspond to their NATO counterparts. According to the expert, only the BMP-2 and BMP-3 are inferior to the American M-2 Bradley.

However, the new T-14 Armata Tank has no analogues in the world. In all respects, it surpasses the German Leopard 2, the American M1A2 Abrams, the French AMX 56 Leclerc, and the British Challenger 2. The same can be said about the T-15 and Kurganets-25 infantry fighting vehicles and the new VPK-7829 Boomerang amphibious armored personnel carrier. After 2018, Russia will have the most modern armored vehicles, which will radically change the balance of forces on the battlefield.

During the Gulf War and the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the United States used mobile teams of tanks, vehicles, armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles to breach enemy defenses. The actions of these groups in Russia will need to be supported by massive airborne operations.

And here an unpleasant surprise awaits them. If against the Russian Pantsir and Tunguska air defense systems, as well as against the Igla and Strela MANPADS, American combat helicopters and aircraft can use the AN/ALQ-144/147/157 electronic warfare system, then against the 9K333 MANPADS "Verba", entering service with Russian troops in 2016, this equipment is powerless.

Verba's homing sensors are capable of operating simultaneously at three frequencies in the visible and infrared spectra. "Verba" can work in conjunction with the "Barnaul-T" system, responsible for electronic reconnaissance, electronic warfare and automatic control of landing forces. "Barnaul-T" neutralizes the radar of enemy aircraft and interferes with the operation of laser guidance systems for enemy missiles and bombs.

RESULT

As can be seen from the above analysis, even now a war using conventional weapons can be costly to our Western adversaries. The rearmament of the Russian army, which will take place by 2018, will completely eliminate the technological advantage of the West in the military sphere. The more ready, powerful and equipped our Armed Forces are, the less likely it will be that the West will decide on open war against Russia.

Experts believe that military technical superiority lies on the side of the US armed forces. Therefore, in the event of a war with the Russians, the Americans will win. The Americans will defeat the Chinese too. Other analysts easily talk about a “small victorious” war. Still others object to the first two: they say, the Kremlin will have something to answer.

Who would win the war if Russia, China and America collided “right now”?

According to Logan Nye, whose article was published in, the United States is the most powerful militarily.

1. Stealth fighters.

The US Air Force currently has a fifth-generation stealth aircraft. However, there are problems here. The Air Force has only 187 F-22 fighters, and the brand new F-35 has encountered a number of difficulties, and even the high-tech pilot helmet still cannot be completed. Meanwhile, the Chinese and Russians are building their own planes. Beijing is building four models: J-31, J-22, J-23 and J-25 (the latter is rumored). Russia is working on one fighter, the T-50 (aka PAK FA), a stealth fighter with capabilities that some experts rate on par with the F-22. This T-50 will most likely enter service at the end of 2016 or early 2017.

In 1980, the US Army adopted the first M-1 Abrams. Since then, the tank has been significantly modernized, including in armor, transmission and weapon systems. Essentially, this is a new product with a 120mm main gun, excellent electronics, armor configuration, etc.

Russian T-90. Russia is currently developing a prototype of the T-14 on the Armata platform, but now the Kremlin is counting on the T-90A. And this tank still “surprises”: one of these tanks “survived a direct hit from a TOW missile in Syria.”

The Chinese tank is Type-99, equipped with a 125 mm cannon. The tank is upgraded with reactive armor and is considered almost as survivable in battle as Western or Russian tanks.

Likely winner? It's probably a draw here. However, America has more tanks and “better crew training.” And the US has more combat skills than its rivals, the author is sure.

3. Surface ships.

The US Navy has the largest military fleet in the world. 10 full-fledged aircraft carriers, 9 helicopter carriers. At the same time, technical advantages and the enormous size of the Navy alone may not be enough to overcome the attack of Chinese missiles or attacks by Russian submarines (in the event that the Americans had to fight in enemy waters).

As for Russia, its launch of Kalibr cruise missiles against targets in Syria showed that Moscow has found a way to carry out serious attacks even from its relatively small ships.

The Chinese Navy has hundreds of surface ships with advanced missiles and more.

Likely Winner: US Navy. American forces are still the "undisputed world champion." However, this champion “will suffer great losses if he decides to fight with China or Russia on their territory.”

4. Submarines.

The US Navy has 14 ballistic missile submarines (a total of 280 nuclear missiles), each of which can destroy an entire enemy city, four submarines with 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles, and 54 nuclear submarines. They are technologically equipped, heavily armed and stealthy.

Russia only has 60 submarines, but they are very maneuverable. Russian nuclear submarines are at the level or close to their Western counterparts. Russia is working on new underwater weapons, including a nuclear torpedo.

The Chinese Navy has a total of five nuclear submarines, 53 diesel submarines and four nuclear ballistic missile submarines. Chinese submarines are easy to track.

Likely winner: The US submarine fleet wins here, although the gap is narrowing over time.

Military expert Alexey Arestovich expressed the following thought in a material for: It’s time for Moscow to get nervous, because America needs a “small war.”

Arestovich notes that the Americans intend to repeat the bluff of the SDI (Strategic Defense Initiative) system, hoping to kill two birds with one stone. They want to force Russia and China, that is, their opponents, to enter into an arms race - one that both states will not survive. At the same time, they will actually test their missile system (the material mentions a test launch of the Minuteman III long-range ballistic missile). The level of technology already makes it possible to shoot down missiles on a ballistic curve, the expert notes, and the Americans are succeeding.

Such launches greatly irritate both US adversaries and those who have ballistic missiles. Because they raise questions about the effectiveness of the missile shield, the ability to launch a preemptive strike, a retaliatory strike, and so on. The US actions are not only related to the North Korean crisis, but are also a warning to everyone that it is time to be nervous. If you don’t want to be nervous, then you need to negotiate with us. The United States is slowly, millimeter by millimeter, gaining even greater superiority even over those adversaries who have nuclear weapons and can produce ballistic missiles. Another 10 years of such tests, and Russia’s missile power will become completely different from what was previously customary to talk about it, and which was usually feared. The same applies to Chinese, Korean, Pakistani and Indian nuclear potential.

According to the Ukrainian author, the United States “needs a small, victorious war.” Trump personally needs it to overcome the wave of criticism. And the White House is now deciding who to beat, the expert believes. Missile tests, he notes, are not only routine tests, but also acts of political influence “on the brains of the North Korean, Chinese, and Russian leadership.”

Harlan Ullman sees American, and at the same time NATO, power completely differently, in 2004-2016. who served as an employee of the main advisory group of the Supreme Commander of NATO in Europe, now Art. Advisor to the Atlantic Council in Washington.

In an article on the website, he talks about “black holes” that are not studied by physicists. There are also “strategic black holes,” and their origins are much more complicated than those that are “located in deep space.”

NATO will have to deal with three such holes.

The first black hole is from the area of ​​strategy. “Russian interference in the affairs of Ukraine and the seizure of Crimea,” the author notes, turned out to be frightening. Russia's involvement in Syria supported the "diabolical regime of Bashar al-Assad." Russia has also become much more visible in Libya and the Persian Gulf.

What about NATO? The Alliance at one time created the strategic concepts necessary after the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union. And today NATO’s responses to Russia’s actions reflect the thinking and concepts of the 20th, not the 21st, century, the expert is sure. By the way, Russian President Vladimir Putin does not intend to go to war with NATO, the author believes. The Kremlin's policies rely on more than just blunt military force. Moscow was “not impressed” by the deployment of four battalions in the Baltic countries and the rotation of the brigade combat group within NATO.

The expert believes that the alliance needs a new strategy to solve these real problems and to plug the “second black hole”: countering Russia’s “active measures” or what some analysts call “asymmetric warfare.”

Here's an expert's suggestion: NATO should move to a "pro-porcupine" strategy, especially for its eastern members. Fundamental concept: any attack is so bad that under no circumstances will Moscow even think about using military force. Where does this “so bad” come from?

What is needed here are Javelin anti-tank missile systems and surface-to-air guided missiles (Stinger and Patriot), and they are needed “in very large quantities.” Using thousands of drones will also deter any attack attempt, but this method is "too expensive." In addition, Harlan Ullman advises the use of manpower in the form of local fighters who could fight "guerrilla and insurgent warfare." But this is not enough.

Russian “active measures” include cyberattacks, propaganda, disinformation, intimidation and political interference, the author lists. And so far NATO can do little to counter these measures. Therefore, the alliance urgently needs to “make efforts to plug this black hole.”

The last black hole is the procurement of weapons systems. These processes take too long and are unable to keep up with the rapid development of technology. And NATO should take this into account.

Will the alliance be able to realize all this? After all, these are “vital issues” and “NATO’s future rests” on them.

While some experts and analysts are prophesying to the world a “small war” in which the United States (apparently, even without NATO’s participation) will deal with some of its opponents in no time (apparently not the DPRK, but someone more powerful), others warn: NATO - There are holes all around! Without patching them up, the West may end up as losers. The alliance is stuck in the twentieth century, and it cannot resist the smart policies of the Kremlin.

Endless terrorist attacks, ongoing armed conflicts, and ongoing disagreements between Russia, the United States and the European Union indicate that peace on our planet is literally hanging by a thread. This situation is alarming for both politicians and ordinary people. It is no coincidence that the issue of starting the Third World War is being seriously discussed by the entire world community.

Expert opinion

Some political scientists believe that the mechanism of war was already launched several years ago. It all started in Ukraine, when a corrupt president was removed from office and the new government in the country was called illegitimate, and simply a junta. Then they announced to the whole world that it was fascist and they began to scare one sixth of the land with it. First mistrust and then outright enmity were sown in the minds of the people of the two fraternal peoples. A full-scale information war began, in which everything was subordinated to inciting hatred between people.

This confrontation was painful for the families, relatives, and friends of the two fraternal peoples. It has reached the point where politicians in the two countries are ready to pit brother against brother. The situation on the Internet also speaks to the danger of the situation. Various discussion platforms and forums have turned into real battlefields where everything is permitted.

If anyone still doubts the likelihood of war, they can simply go to any social network and see how intense the discussion of topical topics reaches, from information about oil prices to the upcoming Eurovision Song Contest.

If it is possible to quarrel two fraternal peoples who have shared grief and victory for more than 360 years, then what can we say about other countries. You can call any nation an enemy overnight by preparing timely information support in the media and the Internet. This is what happened with Turkey, for example.

Currently, Russia is testing new methods of war using the example of Crimea, Donbass, Ukraine, and Syria. Why deploy multimillion-dollar armies, transfer troops, if you can carry out a “successful information attack”, and to top it off, send a small contingent of “little green men”. Fortunately, there is already positive experience in Georgia, Crimea, Syria and the Donbass.

Some political observers believe that it all started in Iraq, when the United States decided to remove the allegedly undemocratic president and carried out Operation Desert Storm. As a result, the country's natural resources came under US control.

Having gained a little fat in the 2000s and having carried out a number of military operations, Russia decided not to give in and prove to the whole world that it had “rose from its knees.” Hence such “decisive” actions in Syria, Crimea and Donbass. In Syria, we protect the whole world from ISIS, in Crimea, Russians from Bandera, in Donbass, the Russian-speaking population from Ukrainian punitive forces.

In fact, an invisible confrontation has already begun between the United States and Russia. America does not want to share its dominance in the world with the Russian Federation. Direct proof of this is present-day Syria.

Tension in different parts of the world, where the interests of the two countries come into contact, will only increase.

There are experts who believe that tension with America is caused by the fact that the latter is aware of the loss of its leading position against the backdrop of a strengthening China and wants to destroy Russia in order to take possession of its natural resources. Various methods are being used to weaken the Russian Federation:

• EU sanctions;
• decline in oil prices;
• involvement of the Russian Federation in the arms race;
• support for protest sentiments in Russia.

America is doing everything to ensure that the situation of 1991, when the Soviet Union collapsed, is repeated.

War in Russia is inevitable in 2018

This point of view is shared by the American political analyst I. Hagopian. He posted his thoughts on this matter on the GlobalResears website. He noted that there are all signs of the US and Russia preparing for war. The author notes that America will be supported:

• NATO countries;
• Israel;
• Australia;
• all US satellites around the world.

Russia's allies include China and India. The expert believes that the United States is facing bankruptcy and will therefore make an attempt to seize the riches of the Russian Federation. He also emphasized that some states may disappear as a result of this conflict.

Former NATO leader A. Shirreff makes similar forecasts. For this purpose, he even wrote a book about the war with Russia. In it, he notes the inevitability of a military confrontation with America. According to the plot of the book, Russia is seizing the Baltic states. NATO countries are coming to its defense. As a result, World War III begins. On the one hand, the plot looks frivolous and implausible, but on the other hand, considering that the work was written by a retired general, the script looks quite plausible.

Who will win America or Russia

To answer this question it is necessary to compare the military power of the two powers:

Success in war depends not only on superiority in weapons. As stated by military expert J. Shields, the Third World War will not be like the two previous wars. Combat operations will be carried out using computer technology. They will become more short-term, but the number of victims will be in the thousands. Nuclear weapons are unlikely to be used, but chemical and bacteriological weapons as an auxiliary means are not excluded.

Attacks will be launched not only on the battlefield, but also in:

• areas of communications;
• Internet;
• television;
• economics;
• finance;
• politics;
• space.

Something similar is now happening in Ukraine. The offensive is on all fronts. Blatant disinformation, hacker attacks on financial servers, sabotage in the economic field, discrediting politicians, diplomats, terrorist attacks, shutting down broadcast satellites and much more can cause irreparable damage to the enemy along with military operations at the front.

Psychic predictions

Throughout history there have been many prophets who predicted the end of humanity. One of them is Nostradamus. As for world wars, he accurately predicted the first two. Regarding the Third World War, he said that it would happen due to the fault of the Antichrist, who will stop at nothing and will be terribly merciless.

The next psychic whose prophecies came true is Vanga. She told future generations that World War III would begin with a small state in Asia. The fastest is Syria. The reason for military action will be an attack on four heads of state. The consequences of the war will be terrifying.

The famous psychic P. Globa also said his words regarding the Third World War. His forecasts can be called optimistic. He said that humanity will end World War III if it prevents military action in Iran.

The psychics listed above are not the only ones who predicted World War III. Similar predictions were made by:

• A. Ilmayer;
• Mulhiazl;
• Edgar Cayce;
• G. Rasputin;
• Bishop Anthony;
• Saint Hilarion and others