Why Russia is too tough for Western warriors

4
Recently, one of the most popular topics for discussion in the American and European media has become the nightmares that can await any of the Western armies in case of invasion of the territory of the Russian Federation. "General Frost", ferocious partisans and weapons of unprecedented power - this is not a complete list of those "horror stories" with which the Western press intimidates the townsfolk.





Most of Russia has very difficult climatic and geographical conditions. The frozen tundra and impenetrable taiga, high mountains and endless steppes with a continental climate are Russia. Over the centuries, the West has repeatedly tried to fight on Russian lands and each time suffered crushing defeats. Even when luck at first accompanied the conquerors, their plans for the conquest of Russia sooner or later were broken up against the resistance of the Russian people. What is the fate of the most powerful armies of Europe of different times - the Swedish troops of Charles XII, the French army of Napoleon Bonaparte, countless hordes of Adolf Hitler.

Now is the time of the latest and very powerful weapons. But victory over Russia alone will not be achieved by air and missile strikes. If we exclude the scenario of a total nuclear war, which will inevitably lead to the destruction of not only Russia, but also many other countries, and maybe the planet, then we will have to act using conventional weapons.

Now in Europe modernize the motorways leading east, to adapt them to move the overall American military equipment. But in Russia, tank armies will not be able to operate. Any tank attack will choke on Russian territory. Heavy tanks of the American, British or German armies simply will not pass in the vast forests of the country.

Military experts believe that a war with the United States, if any, will inevitably grow into a nuclear plane. If the Americans manage to act with the wrong hands, having pitted Russia and the European countries of NATO, then the latter, using conventional weapons, will not be able to defeat the Russian army. Most likely, they will be defeated in the territory of Eastern Europe.

It is no coincidence that Russia pays great attention to the development of conventional weapons. The entire territory of the country is covered by modern air defense systems, and more and more models of military equipment are coming into service. And the Russian army is equipped with very high quality, far from what it was twenty years ago, in the "dashing nineties."

Now the Russian army has a very high level of combat training. But in the event of a foreign invasion, many civilians will stand shoulder to shoulder with the military. As the practice of the war in the Donbass has shown, in the post-Soviet space, a civilian who did not even have experience in military service quickly turns into a brave and professional soldier. Such soldiers are too tough for NATO members.
4 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +3
    20 May 2018 22: 18
    A good "shapkozakidatelskaya", such a relaxing article, I liked it very much, I would add rhythm to the text and you can even meditate, the topic is almost "life-affirming"! good
    These wonderful-minded statements sound especially "piercing": "But tank armies will not be able to operate in Russia." and, about the European armies of the satellites of Washington, "Most likely, they will be defeated in Eastern Europe." Bravo! fellow Although some fool @ tskie analogies from recent history suggest themselves, but it was "a long time ago", and now, for sure, "on foreign territory, we will defeat" the adversaries ?!
    So I want to believe in all this "charm"!
    By the way, tanks in modern warfare, by no means the main tool, are the first to strike aircraft and rocket troops, and special forces reconnoitre targets for subsequent strikes and in every possible way "confuse" the enemy's rear communications ... however, the Hitlerite Wehrmacht fought on our territory - all sorts of "Brandenburgs" are ahead (they seize bridges in advance, cut communications and commanders), reconnaissance on motorcycles and light armored personnel carriers, above reconnaissance aircraft under the cover of fighters, and behind them bombers are already carrying their deadly cargo to their targets, infantry, tanks and artillery, move .. Only where the reconnaissance met resistance, immediately a radio call with coordinates, and dive bombers attack from the air, artillery from the ground, grind pockets of resistance, and only then the infantry and tanks crush the remnants of the defense, surround-bypass our too stubborn and tenacious fighters, and, hiding behind barriers from possible flank attacks of our troops, rushing to the operational space ...
    In order to "defeat the enemy on his own territory," as the entire Russian history of the Swedish-French-German "pan-European" attacks on our Russian Fatherland shows, Russia needs to attack first, as the pan-European aggressors have always done!
    Russia (RI, the Soviet Union), on the other hand, defending itself, always beat the occupiers (regularly organizing "drang nah Ost" with their colonialist "universal values" - "new ordnung" or, as now, with "democratization") on its own territory, carrying large loss in human and material resources! Everyone should be ready for such a heavy, not lightweight course of war!
    I liked and encouraged Vladimir Putin's answer to a Western journalist's question about a nuclear retaliation strike, I expound as I remembered, not literally: “Of course we will answer a nuclear attack, because they want to destroy our state with this strike, they want Russia not to become,” why do we need a world without Russia ?! " good
    1. +1
      26 May 2018 15: 26
      why do we need a world without Russia ?!

      I also liked it .... I think this is the foreign policy and foreign economic policy of the Russian Federation ...
    2. +1
      26 May 2018 15: 30

      A world without Russia is not needed ...
  2. +1
    1 June 2018 15: 55
    The neocolonial approach does not imply a direct military invasion and occupation of the country. It is long and expensive, especially in Russia. It is enough to conduct an economic occupation with the help of so-called foreign investments and a political occupation by bribing the so-called elite. Apparently, this happened during the years of perestroika, it was politically fixed by the collapse of the USSR in 1991, and continues to this day. Something like this...