Will there be a war between Russia and the United States? Is nuclear war possible in the modern world? Was there an atomic war

We live terribly, now the words nuclear war in 2018 are heard very often, naturally, will it be interesting to many. Not so long ago, Putin spoke about nuclear war as a real fact, this video excited many. Let's see what the latest news has to say about this issue today.

For the fifteenth time, Sochi hosted a forum, a discussion club of international status, Valdai. V. Putin was present and spoke at it. This time he not only outlined foreign policy, but also touched on the topic of nuclear war.

The military conflict, which affects all countries of the world, has been repeatedly covered by all sorts of soothsayers and predictors. It will be nuclear in nature, as has been mentioned many times. However, if earlier it was possible to brush aside such a dark future, now the threat of conflict is quite palpable.

There is palpable tension between America and Russia, and other states are not inferior in this. The UN resolution, which concerns the ban on the use of nuclear weapons, it is quite possible that the signing stage will not pass. Indeed, for adoption, fifty countries must leave their consent.

Public response

There was a certain expectation at the forum: it seems that many believed that the Russian president would speak out rudely, threatening the world community with nuclear weapons. However, Putin spoke peacefully. He said that Russia is not going to strike anyone the first blow, but will be ready to respond harshly if someone decides to attack it.

At the same time, society started talking about a specific statement by the president, in which he rather roughly describes the situation with the expectation of aggression from other states and emphasizes that Russia will respond to aggression by destroying the enemy, while calling the country's population martyrs.

The phrase quickly turned into a storehouse for memes, in which Russians who went to heaven were drawn, and the words expressed in different ways were interpreted. Dmitry Peskov tried to stop the growing noise, emphasizing that attention should be paid to another part of the statement, which specifically expresses the position of the state. Russia is not going to attack first.

In the same speech, Putin quite openly hinted that Russia is not afraid of a military conflict with other countries, because it has the necessary resources to defend itself.

Will there be a total military conflict

One way or another, a nuclear war seems to be an increasingly real development of events. At the same time, North Korea and the Americans are among the first preparing to unleash such a massacre. The leaders of both states have repeatedly said things that made many experts feel uneasy. If the countries unleash a military conflict, this will affect the entire world community.

Despite the fact that relations seem to have begun to improve, the possibility of a military conflict still remains.

In addition to these states, Pakistan and India can threaten a nuclear war, and the countries are most likely ready to strike each other. In total, they have about two hundred and twenty nuclear warheads, and if they do decide to strike, it will be explosions over populated areas.

Of course, experts recognize the exchange of "nuclear" courtesies between our country and the Americans as the worst scenario, because in this case most of the planet could be affected. The economies of all countries will find themselves in an extremely difficult situation, if, of course, we forget that a nuclear war of this magnitude will be able to put all of humanity on the brink of survival.

Expert forecast

At the same time, experts are cautious about the successful outcome of the situation. The heads of states capable of delivering nuclear strikes are nevertheless perfectly aware that a nuclear war will not do anything good to anyone on the planet. And first of all, it is ordinary citizens who will suffer.

We can only hope that the past taught at least something to all of humanity. Ordinary citizens want to believe that their elected leaders will be able to take responsibility for their decisions and will not endanger innocent lives.

The consequences of a nuclear war can be catastrophic for the entire planet, they are difficult to describe, and the scale is almost impossible to predict. The best way is to avoid such drastic decisions. This is exactly what all experts are counting on, who in one way or another continue to think about the third world war.

Video with Putin on nuclear war

Well, who told you that our civilization is the first on Earth ?! Have you ever thought that there was a human civilization on our planet that burned out in a nuclear war? There are grounds for such a version.

We can easily find echoes of a terrible catastrophe in the myths and legends of any people living on our planet. The legends of the African pygmies tell of "a great fire that descended from the sky." The Mayan records tell of a terrible fire that raged for "three days and three nights" and describes surviving dogs that have lost their fur and claws. (Any veterinarian, seeing such a dog, will, among other diagnoses, mention the possibility of radioactive damage.)

At the moment of testing the atomic bomb, the German scientist Oppenheimer read an excerpt from the ancient Indian epic "Mahabharata": "And a flash brighter than a thousand suns burned the city," - this is how the death of the capital of the Harrap civilization, the city of Mohenjo-Daro, was described in the "Mahabharata".

Is there anything else besides oral tradition? There is.

A city destroyed by an atomic explosion

The mentioned Mohenjo-Daro is not a fabulous city. It was discovered in 1922 and still remains a mystery to archaeologists. The city did not die like others for centuries, but died instantly and for an unknown reason. It was not captured by the army, and it was not destroyed by the flood - it burned down. Moreover, the power of the fire was so great that the stones melted (and this is not less than 1500 degrees!). The epicenter of destruction is the city center, towards the periphery the destruction decreases - a classic picture of the consequences of an atomic bomb. And if only that!

The radioactivity of dozens of skeletons found on the ruins of Mohenjo-Daro exceeds the norm by 50 times! Scattered throughout the city are the so-called. tektites - lumps of sand sintered into a glass mass. (In the 20th century, when tektites began to be found en masse at nuclear test sites, mankind revealed the secret of their origin.)

Nuclear bombardment of the planet

Simultaneously with Mohenjo-Daro, other cities located nearby died as a result of the same strange and terrible fire. Cities burnt in nuclear flames are not only found in India. The ancient Hittite capital Hattus, Babylon, the cities of England, Ireland, Scotland, Turkey, and France have melted walls.

Entire tektite fields have been found in Southeast Asia (Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos), Australia, Europe (in the Czech Republic), Africa, America (Georgia and Texas), Northwest Asia (Aral Sea region, Kazakhstan), the Gobi desert (that's why it is a desert).

On Earth, scientists have found more than 100 craters with a diameter of 2 to 3 km. There are 30 funnels ranging in size from 20 to 50 km, 12 - from 50 to 100 km, the diameter of the Mexican Chicxulub - 170 km, Canadian Sudbury - 250 km, South African Vredefort - 300 km. The question is: are they all natural? Did comets or something else fall there?

Radiation results?

In the course of training astronauts, American scientists encountered a strange phenomenon: if the subjects were not told information about the passage of time, they switched to a 36-hour rhythm. Apparently, earlier the Earth rotated more slowly, but as a result of some cataclysm, the Earth's day shrank to 24 hours. A person has rebuilt, but the information is still stored in his memory at the genetic level and the body at the first opportunity rebuilds to the usual rhythm.

Archaeologists constantly find the remains of people who can hardly be called people: giants, people with teeth in two rows, giants, cyclops and other mutants appear in legends. Yes, mutants. The massive appearance of such "unique" is quite understandable as a result of the impact on humanity of radioactive radiation. Over time, of course, nature took its toll, and the anomalous manifestations gradually faded away. (Here's a clue where all these "monsters" have gone.)

Epitaph of a civilization that killed itself

The past nuclear war literally wiped out the existing civilization from the face of the Earth. We will never know what it was like, who fought with whom, what caused a nuclear war, etc. One thing is certain, if our predecessors fought with nuclear weapons, then in all other respects they reached a very high level of development. Most likely even higher than humanity has today.

And the last thing: Alexander Koltypin, Candidate of Geological and Mineralogical Sciences, believes that the Earth has survived not one, but 5-6 nuclear wars. So, everything is repeated. And more than once.

A large number of geological, paleontological and archaeological evidence indicates that about 13,000 years ago something terrible happened on the entire planet, which destroyed not only many representatives of the animal world, but also the developed civilization that existed at that time, and almost led humanity to death.

The fact that Plato attributed death to the same time is clearly not a coincidence ... Many attribute the famous Flood to approximately the same period. A total of about 200 animal species die out at this time. At the same time, when there is a mass extinction of such animals as mammoths, saber-toothed tigers, woolly rhinos, etc., there is evidence of various geological cataclysms - the strongest earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, giant tidal waves, rapid melting of glaciers and, as a result, a rise in the level oceans.

The finds of a huge number of quickly frozen corpses of animals in, in the west of Alaska and in the eastern regions of Siberia, belong to the same time. This suggests that something terrible has happened on the planet, while the Northern Hemisphere has suffered more than the Southern one appears to be.

In the 40s of the last century, American archaeologist Frank Hibben led a scientific expedition to Alaska to search for human fossils. He did not find them, but he found them in the permafrost vast spacesfilled with the corpses of mammoths, mastodons, bison, horses, wolves, and lions. Many animal corpses were literally torn to pieces. And such fields of permafrost with the remains of animals spread for hundreds of kilometers around ... There were trees, animals, layers of peat and moss, mixed together, as if some giant space mixer had sucked them all 13,000 years ago, and then instantly froze. turning into a solid mass.

North of Siberia whole islands are formed from animal bonescarried from the continent into the Arctic Ocean. According to some estimates, 10 million animals could be buried along the rivers of northern Siberia. This indicates that a huge tsunami swept through these lands, mixing animals and plants, which then quickly froze.

But animal extinction was not limited to the Arctic. Huge piles of mixed mammoth and saber-toothed tiger bones are found in Florida. Mastodons and other animals were found quickly frozen also in mountain glaciers.

It was a global event. Siberian mammoths and bison disappeared at the same time as giant rhinos in Europe, mastodons in Alaska, and American camels. It is fairly obvious that the cause of all this extinction was a common one, and it did not happen gradually.

What could have caused such a global cataclysm?

The theory of "glacial floods" was proposed by Graham Hankock ... What could have caused such a catastrophically rapid melting of glaciers? According to American scientists Richard Firestone and William Topping, the entire Great Lakes region of North America was the site of a "nuclear catastrophe" about 12,500 years ago.

Dr. Paul LaViolette, in his book Earth Under Fire, states that he has found evidence of a different kind of cataclysm caused by the stream of high-energy particles that hit the Earth as a result of an explosion in the core of our Galaxy. This is another attempt to explain the cause of the "nuclear catastrophe" in North America.

There are also suggestions that the collision of the Earth with a sufficiently large celestial body (called the figure - at least 50 meters) at a "critical angle" can also lead to a catastrophically rapid shift of the earth's crust.

The fall of the ancient Moon to the Earth led to a displacement of its axis. Otto Mack in his book "The Secret of Atlantis" (Muck, Otto, The Secret of Atlantis) writes about the numerous mysterious bays in the states of North and South Carolina, which, in his opinion, are the remnants of meteorite craters. They are oval in shape and oriented in the same direction. Some researchers believe that these craters are the result of a "meteor shower" that happened about 13 thousand years ago. Amazes the number of such craters is more than 500 thousandlocated on the coastal plain from Georgia to Delaware.

But could even such a massive "shelling" of the Earth cause a global catastrophe with a kilometer tsunami, etc.? Of course, if this was in fact a consequence of the disintegration of a satellite, even not too large compared to the present Moon, then debris and larger ones must have come across ...

On the ground found over a hundred craters with a diameter of 2-3 kilometers, among which there are two huge ones: in South America (diameter - 40 km) and in South Africa (diameter - 120 km). If they had formed in the Paleozoic era (350 million years ago), then nothing would have remained of them long ago, since the thickness of the Earth's upper layer increases by about a meter in a hundred years.

And the funnels are still intact. This suggests that the nuclear strike occurred 25-35 thousand years ago. Taking 100 craters for 3 km, we get that 5000 Mt of bombs were detonated during the war. These facts confirm that it was. The fire blazed for "three days and three nights" (as the "Code of Rio" of the Mayan people narrates) and caused a nuclear rain - where the bombs did not fall, radiation fell. Another terrible phenomenon caused by radiation is light burns to the body. They are explained by the fact that the shock wave propagates not only along the ground, but also upward. When it reaches the stratosphere, it destroys the ozone layer that protects the Earth from harmful ultraviolet radiation. Ultraviolet light is known to burn unprotected skin. Nuclear explosions have resulted in a significant drop in pressure and gas poisoning of the atmosphere, killing the survivors.

People tried to escape from death in their underground cities, but downpours and earthquakes destroyed shelters and drove the inhabitants back to the surface of the earth. Previously, scientists believed that the "pipes" operating in our time, going from caves to the surface of the earth, are of natural origin. In fact, they are made with. These "pipes" have the correct rounded shape, which is unusual for funnels of natural origin (there are many of them in the caves of the Perm region, including in the vicinity of the city of Kungur).

In Antarctica, high in the mountains, the American scientist Joseph Skipper discovered a mysterious hole. Where it leads is unknown. According to legend, inside Antarctica there are warm cavities in which the remains of aliens or extinct advanced civilizations are located. Other legends claim that Antarctica was once Atlantis.

Of course, it's hard to believe in it, but how to explain then the entrance and the oases uncovered by ice with non-freezing lakes and a rather mild climate? A team of scientists from Japan, China, and illuminated the 5-kilometer layer of ice with radars. It turned out that in the past, in the place of permafrost, there were mountains and plains with flowering meadows. Frozen plants and trees are still hidden under the ice. But it's almost impossible to get to them.

Atlantis before the catastrophe was a huge state, which is why traces of this country are found on different continents. It is often mistakenly attributed to it the artifacts left over from, of which Atlantis was once a part. This is directly stated in the records of Plato, in a dialogue with the Egyptian priest.

One of the cities of Atlantis was recently discovered in Spain

The group of researchers claims that it was possible to finally establish the location of one of the Atlantean cities. He, scientists suggested, was buried under the water column as a result of the devastating tsunami. The data obtained from radar, digital mapping and other technical innovations allowed specialists to identify an entire city hidden under the swamps of Dona Ana Park, a place north of Cadiz. The complex of structures is built in the form of concentric rings - in exact accordance with the description of the ancient Greek philosopher Plato.

Historical records dating back to 360 BC became the main guide from which scientists started in their research. The Greek philosopher Plato 2.6 thousand years ago described Atlantis as "an island located opposite the Pillars of Hercules." According to him, civilization was destroyed in just one day, and the city of Atlantis disappeared forever under the water column. According to these descriptions, a group of archaeologists and geologists focused their attention on the Atlantic and the Mediterranean Sea - and, in the end, they were lucky. According to the representatives of the research group, a natural disaster led to the death of Atlantis. An important piece of the historical puzzle is the elevated methane gas over the ancient ruins. The gas release, scientists said, indicates that a huge number of people died at this place overnight.

7. The victorious side saved many of the red race and resettled them to the American continent.

8. After eliminating most of the environmental consequences of nuclear war, representatives of the white race began to actively help other peoples in raising their evolutionary levels of development, through the transfer of some knowledge and training.

Nikolai Levashov: Antlan, Atlantis. Thermonuclear war 13 thousand years ago.

To answer this question, one must first understand what such a war might look like. Today, there are 9 states in the world that have nuclear weapons and, accordingly, the ability to wage a nuclear war. These are five official nuclear states: Russia, the United States, China, Britain, France - and four unofficial (not signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty) - India, Pakistan, Israel, North Korea.

The next step is to understand under what conditions states are ready to use their nuclear weapons. Since nuclear weapons were used in war only once, seventy years ago, it can be assumed that the threshold for their use is quite high. A nuclear war can lead to catastrophic consequences both for an individual country and on a global scale; this understanding has actually led to a "taboo" on the use of nuclear weapons or even on the threat of their use.

For example, according to its military doctrine, Russia can use nuclear weapons only in response to the use of nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction - chemical or biological - against it or its allies, or in the event of an attack on Russia with the help of conventional weapons, when itself is threatened. the existence of the state. The rest of the nuclear powers have a similar approach.

This is confirmed by historical examples. Nuclear states have repeatedly fought wars with non-nuclear ones, as in the case of the Sino-Vietnamese War of 1979 or the Falklands War of 1982 between Britain and Argentina. Nuclear weapons were not used in this case. According to some accounts, during the first phase of the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Israel considered the use of nuclear weapons, but Israeli victories on the battlefield eliminated this need. As for a full-scale war between two nuclear states, there has never been anything like this in history, largely due to the deterrent effect of nuclear weapons.

Thus, we can conclude that the risk of a planned nuclear war today is quite low.

At the same time, one cannot exclude a sharp, unplanned escalation of tension between nuclear-weapon states to the level when it comes to the use of nuclear weapons (the best illustration of this is the Cuban missile crisis) or a human or technical error (for example, the failure of the warning system of the USSR missile attack on September 26, 1983) ). To prevent the first option, there are special communication lines (for example, Russia - USA, Pakistan - India). Major nuclear states also claim that their nuclear weapons target uninhabited territories, reducing the risks of an accidental launch.

Summing up, I want to say that the risk of a nuclear war in the modern world is very low, but as long as nuclear weapons are in service, it is not zero.

Describing the facts of the redeployment of NATO troops in order to increase the concentration of personnel and equipment along our borders, I often encounter misunderstandings from my readers. A certain part of Russians considers all these publications to be nothing more than whipping up passions and exaggerating colors, aimed at introducing confusion into the minds of our gullible population. The main argument is that Russia has nuclear weapons. According to some of my readers, the nuclear potential is a kind of guarantee against direct aggression. A clash of two or more nuclear powers is impossible - like a mantra, our skeptical compatriots repeat. The maximum that threatens us is a hybrid war, and since it is already underway, there is nothing more to be afraid of.

Everything seems logical. An exchange of nuclear strikes, which in theory is inevitable in an open conflict between two nuclear powers, will make any territorial disputes meaningless. After such a duel, there will be nothing to capture, and most likely, there is no one. It's good that we Russians understand this! But what about Europeans and Americans? Don't they know these common truths? Why are they spending colossal budgets on building up groups along our borders? Why have the military contingent on the territory of Moldova and the Baltics increased 19 times?

In order to get answers to the above questions, I suggest you return to another period. The period preceding the outbreak of World War II. Germany, which first used chemical agents on the battlefield in 1915, ushered in a new era of the arms race. The leading tacticians and strategists of warfare were able to see with their own eyes that victory now depends not on the number of soldiers, tanks and guns. The concept of "mustard gas" has become a part of military use. This name was given to the gas, which is capable of killing soldiers regardless of where they were. Neither armored vehicles, nor trenches and fortifications saved from this insidious weapon.

After the defeat in the First World War, Germany was deprived of the right to produce toxic substances and chemical weapons. The only thing that German chemists could develop in their laboratories were poisons for agriculture. But other countries, realizing the potential of the new weapon, in a very short time launched the production of chemical warfare agents and soon were able to produce a new generation of ammunition. Most of the European countries, the United States of America, Great Britain and the Soviet Union filled their warehouses with chemical munitions and improved their means of delivery to the positions and settlements of a potential enemy. Mortar mines, artillery and tank shells, and aerial bombs were filled with toxic agents. Moreover, special planes appeared that were capable of spraying toxic substances over a fairly large territory, destroying all living things on it. Millions and millions of shells, toxic substances, termites, mixtures that give a temperature of 4000 degrees during combustion, gases - it would seem that the next war will be definitely the last for the world's population. Plus also Germany, which in 1934 also joined the arms race and "presented" the world with such poisons as "herd" and "sarin". I cannot say, but I sincerely suspect that each of the countries filling their arsenals with poisons believed that it was this deterrent weapon that would protect them from external aggression. However…

The outbreak of World War II once again split the world into two poles, and again in the center of one of them was Germany, the ancestor of the use of chemical warfare agents on the battlefields. It would seem that this is the moment to open arsenals and envelop the aggressor country in a chemical cloud, once and for all suppressing the obsessive German aggressiveness. But Germany seizes one after another European country, and mustard gas, sarin, phosgene and termites are in no hurry to leave the military warehouses of the Western powers. And the aggressor country itself is conquering new territories in an exclusively old-fashioned way, as if forgetting about the millions of shells filled with quick and inevitable death.

Great Britain was the first to think about the use of toxic substances, which allowed the landing of German troops on its coast. Mustard gas was seen as a means of displacing the Germans from their occupied positions on the coast. But Germany abandoned Operation Sea Lion and the mustard gas never left the British military arsenals. It would seem that the USSR, which was subjected to direct aggression from Germany, had a good reason for using chemical weapons and chemical warfare agents. In the summer of 1941, near Kerch, Soviet troops fired RZS-132 incendiary shells when firing at German positions. This ammunition was loaded with 36 incendiary elements of the “6” termite, weighing 4.2 kg each, and was intended for firing from the BM-13-16 multiple launch rocket launcher, better known as “Katyusha”. In one salvo, the Katyusha fired 1,500 incendiary elements. The combustion temperature of the thermite mixture reached 4000 ° C. When a termite hit the armor of tanks and gun barrels, the alloy steel changed its properties and the military equipment could no longer be used. People, "marked" with termite, died a terrible and painful death. In response, the Germans fired chemical shells at the Soviet positions with Nebelwerfer-41 rocket launchers. Thus, Germany demonstrated to the Soviet Union its readiness to violate the terms of the 1925 Geneva Protocol, if the use of RZS-132 shells continues. More these shells for shelling the Germans by Soviet troops were not used, and the Germans did not seek to use chemical warfare agents. In 1935, the Soviet capacity for the production of mustard gas a year was 35 thousand tons, for phosgene - 13 thousand tons, for diphosgene - 1.9 thousand tons. On December 1, 1936, the Soviet Air Force was armed with 90 thousand chemical aerial bombs, and the mobilization capacity of the industry was designed to release 796 thousand chemical bombs during the year. An equally impressive arsenal of chemical weapons, the most powerful at that time, had Germany and other countries participating in the World War. But almost all of it remained gathering dust in the warehouses ...

The main factor that stopped the countries participating in the military conflict from using chemical weapons is, of course, the realization that an equally monstrous retaliatory strike would follow. Plus an understanding of the responsibility that the party that lost in the conflict will inevitably bear. In 1945, America used nuclear weapons in Japan on the understanding that the war had already ended and the United States was in the camp of victors, who, as a rule, are not judged. And in 1941 and even in 1942 it was impossible to predict who would be the winner in the conflict. Germany did not yet believe in her victory and did not believe in her defeat to the USSR.

Today nuclear weapons are in the arsenal of nine countries: Russia, the United States, Great Britain, France, China, Pakistan, India, Israel and North Korea. Only Russia, the United States, Britain and France have nuclear weapons suitable for immediate use. According to SIPRI, these nuclear warheads are already installed on missiles or are stored at military bases, from where they can be launched. Are these countries ready to use nuclear weapons in the event of a conflict between nuclear powers? I very much doubt it. Most likely, nuclear weapons will suffer the same fate that befell the huge stockpiles of chemical weapons. It will simply gather dust in a warehouse or be on alert until one of the countries nevertheless crosses the barrier and uses the Doomsday weapon. But this is unlikely. The inevitability of a retaliatory strike, the inevitability of punishment in case of loss, will stop the leadership of any of the above-mentioned powers. Nuclear weapons are more of a psychological factor, nothing more. Nobody dares to use it for its intended purpose today. It is with this that the high concentration of NATO troops on our border is connected, which is assigned a decisive role in the planned conflict. It is with this that the creation of new divisions and strike groups on the territory of Russia is connected, which, in principle, does not need a power that is determined to respond to any aggression with a nuclear strike.

In general, one should not rely heavily on nuclear potential and regard the increase in the concentration of NATO troops on our border as a banal muscle play. Apparently, the West is preparing for a direct clash with Russia. Our country is also preparing for this conflict. When thunder breaks out and whether it breaks out at all, the question is extremely difficult. But the fact that preparations for war are in full swing is hard not to notice. You just need to open the English-language press and look at the analysts' notes. The pumping of the local population, which day after day is drummed with information that Russia is preparing aggression either against the Baltic states, or against another state, is in full swing. And this is no accident. The Europeans are being convinced of the inevitability of a military conflict, not only naming the approximate dates of its beginning.

What are we? Are we ready for conflict? I do not mean the army of the Russian Federation, which by itself is in full combat readiness, but the population of Russia. Judging by the fact that VTsIOM has already begun to conduct polls that describe our actions in the event of a war, it is still worth preparing. Even if and just in case, it doesn't hurt. But how to prepare if the Civil Defense system is completely destroyed, and the population is in a state of sweet delusion that we are a nuclear power, which means that any aggression in our direction is excluded? Where are the bomb shelters filled with gas masks and first aid equipment? When was the last time a civil defense exercise was conducted with the population? Do you know what to do and where to go in case of an air raid alert? A real air raid? The Soviet Union was also a nuclear power. Superpower. But at the same time, we practiced evacuation and extinguishing fires, studied chemical protection equipment and knew how to provide first aid. What changed? We received 100% guarantees that Russia will have an exceptionally peaceful life, since there are only friends around and aggression is in principle excluded? Stupid. It is foolish and rash to think so! If Russia does fall, then it will not fall defeated on the battlefields, but falling victim to the betrayal and carelessness of its own citizens, who so believed in their invincibility that they forgot even about elementary security measures.