China told why the US does not attack Russia

The United States does not even consider the possibility of an attack on Russia because of the full combat readiness of the Russian nuclear deterrence forces (SNF). This is reported to readers by the Chinese edition of Sohu (Sohu), which is one of the leading media in the Middle Kingdom, a search engine, and also the largest information brand in the local Internet space.




In the modern world, if a country has strategic nuclear forces, it is considered a hegemon, and therefore they (SNF - ed.) Are also called the "secret to peace

- says Sohu.

The material notes that after the collapse of the USSR, Russia continues to build up its nuclear potential. The strategic arsenal and mine-based ICBMs make up the core of the arsenal. In addition, Russia has an impressive arsenal of sea and air based facilities. This "forces Americans to keep the powder dry."

It is emphasized that the Armed Forces of Russia regularly conduct large-scale exercises. So they improve their skills, work out various tasks and check the reliability of their systems.

The Russian army can improve its strengths, namely strategic nuclear forces, and ensure the reliability of a retaliatory strike. Thus, in the coming decades, the United States will not even dare to glance towards Russia

- summarized in the publication.

Necessary to remindthat recently in Russia the next major training of forces and means of strategic deterrence in the framework of the command and staff exercises "Thunder-2019", which was conducted by the Supreme Commander-in-Chief Vladimir Putin, has ended.
Photos used: https://wallbox.ru/
Ctrl Enter

Noticed oshЫbku Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

9 comments
Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.
I have an account? Sign in

  1. A.Lex Offline
    A.Lex (Secret information) 25 October 2019 16: 56
    +1
    • 2
    • 1
    In general, amers have enough and enough fools at all times ...
  2. master3 Offline
    master3 (Vitali) 25 October 2019 17: 24
    0
    • 1
    • 1
    Interestingly, who decided that the United States wants to attack Russia? Why do they need it? These are scarecrows for narrow-minded people who have a TV instead of a head.
    1. akarfoxhound Offline
      akarfoxhound 26 October 2019 08: 42
      0
      • 1
      • 1
      Do not want to remember the same Condoleezza Rise with her:

      The riches of Russia should not belong only to her.

      And what’s most funny for your “thought” - it’s far from the first with this idea. For a "distant" person - they do not need nafig, everything is right! laughing That's what we live on - everything is exactly the opposite.
      1. Arkharov Offline
        Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov) 26 October 2019 12: 57
        0
        • 0
        • 0
        A link to this statement is possible, only better English? And then it is not clear, then Albright, then Condoleezza, then something and no trace can be found about this?
        A search on the English-language Internet does not allow you to find a single link to an attribution attributed to Albright. Other results can be found in Runet. Enter in Yandex the request “Albright of Siberia’s wealth” and get 96 thousand answers. Enter Madeleine Albright about Russia in Google’s Russian-language Google and get more than 219 thousand answers, a significant part of which is devoted to the discussion of the notorious quote.
        The phrase, however, appears in different forms. Albright is "quoted", for example, as follows:

        The greatest injustice is when Russia owns such lands as Siberia.

        Or so:

        What kind of world justice can we talk about when such a rich territory as Siberia belongs to one country?

        There are other variations. So, the site Neftegaz.ru, which publishes analytical information on the state of the oil and gas industry in Russia, attributes the notorious phrase to another US secretary of state:

        In particular, Russia's "sworn friend" Condoleezza Rice said that "Siberia is too large and cannot belong to only one state.

        The fake quote came to the main Russian media, probably due to the Postscript program of the TV Center channel and its host Alexei Pushkov. On July 14, 2005, Pushkov noted:

        As Madeline Albright is credited with the words that "Siberia is too large a territory to belong to one state." Even if she didn’t say exactly that, she thought - probably, or someone out there thought of not stupid people in America.

        However, a little later the source was discovered. Major General Boris Ratnikov, who, according to the Rossiyskaya Gazeta in the Federal Security Service, "oversaw a special unit that worked on the secrets of the subconscious," gave an interview to the main state newspaper in Russia.
        The interview, published December 22, 2006, was published under the heading "Chekists scanned Madeleine Albright’s thoughts." In it, Ratnikov says:

        A couple of weeks before the start of the bombing of Yugoslavia by US aircraft, we conducted a session of connecting Secretary of State Albright to the subconscious. (...) In the thoughts of Madame Albright, we found a pathological hatred of the Slavs. She was also outraged by the fact that Russia possesses the largest mineral reserves in the world. In her opinion, in the future, not one country should dispose of Russian reserves, but all of humanity under the supervision of, of course, the United States.
        1. akarfoxhound Offline
          akarfoxhound 26 October 2019 19: 07
          0
          • 0
          • 0
          But you have nothing to do, no, well, you really are a busy person. For example, I have extremely rare breaks to get into the phone to see the news, and you have a directly re-dug "analytics". wink For links via a small phone, I won’t get to you, sorry. He drove “friends” 26 calendars from our air borders, even in the 90s at EBN, probably to us all the time on the RC-135, R-3 and B-52 with the ALCM set on the “revolvers” from a friendly location ? And missile defense with the Tomahawks "against rebellious zusuls" in Przekia and Madyaria 10 years ago, too, from an unearthly love stuck in us? Well, yes, now I believe you, chesslovo, and I don’t need links anymore. wink I just believe that's all.
          1. Arkharov Offline
            Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov) 26 October 2019 19: 23
            0
            • 0
            • 0
            Really on the 31st, judging by some signs? Well, have we not reciprocated in terms of friendliness and are not responding? And as for “analytics,” you can’t believe everything that is written on the fence, sometimes it’s useful to check it yourself, it’s been too much propaganda lately has been generating fakes.
            1. akarfoxhound Offline
              akarfoxhound 26 October 2019 21: 18
              +1
              • 1
              • 0
              At 31m, on it native. repeat Colleague? For who else would define it by "secondary sexual characteristics"!
              Or did my partial nickname pass? winked I already forgot how I call here (the phone screen leaves up, it is not visible).
              Do you want Hochma? In the year 15, during the first “withdrawal” of people from the “sandbox”, many of our media corps gathered, from everywhere you remember (ORT, NTV, RT and TED), about 40 people (imagine such a herd with microphones), “cruise” to the points where the sides with people left. Well, the military roads brought me with this crowd "behind the scenes", outside the reports. And here such a military man shies away, suddenly temporarily unoccupied with nothing, with wings on LTO. And a question was raised with a puff of cigarette: "Is it really all that we are talking about the army?" I almost choked on that cigarette before answering. Here is a story ... fellow
              Tired of finger in phone, poking, chesslovo. Have a good weekend!
      2. master3 Offline
        master3 (Vitali) 30 October 2019 17: 46
        -1
        • 0
        • 1
        Listen to what Zhirinovsky, Kiselev with his radioactive ashes, Soloviev, Skabeeva, etc. say. Here, even evidence is not necessary to bring, just turn on the TV and the question will be - who wants to attack anyone?
    2. hourly Offline
      hourly (Oleg Duvanayev) 26 October 2019 10: 05
      0
      • 2
      • 2
      Well, of course, scarecrows. And the bases in Poland in Europe, and where possible around the perimeter, are, of course, resorts for NATO forces.