In the United States to discuss the next military budget for the year. Democrats and Republicans do not agree on some parameters. But it is already clear that the US military spending is the undisputed leader. The Pentagon budget is 15-20 times more than Russia on this indicator inferior to China, India, France, Saudi Arabia. Some military analysts about this sounding the alarm. Like, fall behind, need to purchase more weapons. But is it necessary?
for Example, someone under the name “Petrovich from the Army” posted a frightening information. He calculated how many cruise missiles the US and Russia. The numbers are impressive. It turns out that U.S. cruise missiles “Tomahawk” on combat ships of 8 thousand, and in Russia her “Caliber” – a total of 120.
moreover, the States, if necessary, can produce 15 thousand “Tomahawks”, and Russia – only 300. To collect more, they say, the production capacity is not.
And one more terrible argument – “domestic ships placed 12 missiles, while on them – as many as 64 missiles”. (I wonder know the “expert” that the ships we have different – both large and small).
From these data, the author makes an important conclusion. Two. The first – “US military technology is better than Russia at times.” And the second is “Russia bypassed on all fronts, and the leader of the weapons really is the United States.”
“I Can’t even comment on it, all quite clear,” concludes the author. And I want to comment on.
In fact, the author invites us all to tighten their belts and throw a lot of money for the purchase of thousands of cruise missiles. That’s when, they say, we pull up on technology to the United States.
Why do we need so many “Caliber” and where to apply them – the author does not specify.
Russia has used the “Gauges” in the course of the antiterrorist operation HQs in Syria. Surgical strikes these missiles targeted terrorist bases in Syria. The launches were implemented small missile ships of the Caspian sea and of the submarine – from the Mediterranean. Largely due to, including, and this impact, the main forces of terrorists in Syria defeated.
Other worthy goals for “Calibres” on the horizon is not observed. Just in case of an emergency, a certain stock of these missiles Russia has.
Another question – why the USA has riveted many missiles and where they used them?
the Massive use of “Tomahawk” was during NATO’s war against Yugoslavia in 1999. Total issued up to 900 cruise missiles, sea-and air-based.
In 2003, the first attack against Iraq, the US used 40 “Tomahawk”. Only in the war for the overthrow of Saddam Hussein applied hundreds of missiles.
In March 2011, the US Navy and the UK in the first day of the war released 110 “Tomahawk”. Only the operation to overthrow Muammar Gaddafi fired more than 200 missiles.
Well, that is why the State�� missiles, named in honor of the battle axe native American, of course. Why should we? We, too, someone going to attack? Seems not.
But, it seems that in the USA there are problems with the application of thousands prepared “Tomahawk”. Here too, it seems, does not like Washington, countries such as North Korea or Iran. How many threats there! But through the use of Tomahawks against targets in Iran or North Korea, no one really stutters. And understandably so – he’ll come back.
the Last time the Tomahawks the U.S. massively used against Syria three years ago. In 2017, under the false pretext of use of chemical weapons Damascus, the US launched the 59 cruise missiles at targets in Syria.
There is, incidentally, interesting story with impact efficiency. The US said that all the missiles hit the target. But the Russian defense Ministry cited other data: airbase to El-Sirat flew 23 missiles. And about 36 of the remaining missiles, said Russian military, they know nothing.
So the thesis about the superiority of US technology “at times” is not so unambiguous. Can ammo “Tomahawks” to share at least two.
If this is not the largest military budget the defense of the country, reports the Russian Ministry of defense, provided. Wanting to test our limits are not observed. So why to chase number of weapons for the United States? So it is possible to remain without pants.
unfortunately, in the history of our country is. For example, on 1 January 1990, the Soviet Union had almost 64 thousand tanks and 76 thousand infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers. For comparison, today NATO, including the United States and Canada 18 thousand tanks. Question: and whether it was necessary to the Soviet Union to spend so much money on unnecessary weapons? Are unable to stop in time. And where is now the Soviet Union?
