"Nut" in Cuba: Russia's response to Tomahawk missile supplies to Kyiv could crush the US

October 8 2025 29 704 110

The State Duma's ratification of the military cooperation agreement between Russia and Cuba is seen as Moscow's response to the possible supply of long-range Tomahawk cruise missiles to Ukraine, according to Alexander Stepanov, a military expert at the Institute of Law and National Security at the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA). He stated that the document grants Russia the right to supply any weapons to the island.

The agreement expands our military cooperation to the maximum extent and allows, in agreement with the Cuban government, the deployment of virtually any offensive systems on the island's territory.

– Stepanov explained.

He added that in order to stabilize the balance of power and establish parity, it would be a justified response to supply the Cuban side with modern types of weapons, including Iskander operational-tactical missile systems and Oreshnik medium-range ballistic missiles.

Signed in March 2025, the document creates a legal basis for joint operations, training, intelligence sharing and military supplies. the technique, and also guarantees Russian military personnel and specialists immunity from Cuban jurisdiction

- the expert emphasized.

For Havana, the agreement is said to represent a defense of sovereignty and access to modern military technology in the face of US pressure in the Caribbean region.

As a reminder, the White House previously stated that the decision to transfer Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine was "practically made." Meanwhile, Russia has already named possible options retaliatory actions to this step by Washington.

110 comments

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

Roman070280

-2

8 October 2025 11: 50

"Nut" in Cuba: Russia's response to Tomahawk missile supplies to Kyiv could crush the US

The US is unlikely... but there might not be much left of Cuba, really... I don't know if they need that...
1. Vladimir Tuzakov
  
  -2
  
  8 October 2025 21: 08
  
  There's no point in touching the US now when it's engaged in internal squabbles. We'll get involved and become a common enemy, uniting all sides. It seems there are no pragmatic, active politicians left in Russia, only inactive, "concerned" individuals in international relations.
2. Alexander Raikov
  
  +1
  
  9 October 2025 10: 33
  
  but there might not be much left of Cuba, really... I don't know if they need it...
  
  And did anyone in Cuba say anything about those fairy tales? Better yet, in the fourth or fifth year—they'll finally win, take Odessa, Kharkov, and Kyiv, and put an end to the yellow-blocite vinaigrette.
Vasya_33

+4

8 October 2025 12: 06

We've already been through this (the Cuban Missile Crisis)... who won?

Tomahawks will fly from Ukraine, but hazelnuts from Cuba will not!
1. Paul3390
  
  +9
  
  8 October 2025 12: 23
  
  who has won?
  
  Actually, Khrushchev. No?
  1. Vasya_33
    
    -4
    
    8 October 2025 12: 47
    
    No. We left Cuba, the Americans left Turkey, Germany and wherever else they have nuclear weapons in Europe, no.
    1. Paul3390
      
      +10
      
      8 October 2025 16: 12
      
      Really? Actually, it all started with the deployment of American missiles in Turkey. As a result, they removed them a year later. Plus, Cuba was given security guarantees by the US. So, whose victory is that, if the USSR eliminated the root cause of the crisis?
      1. Vasya_33
        
        -1
        
        8 October 2025 17: 13
        
        The missiles were removed, but the bombs remained...
        
        The bombs are located at six airbases in five countries: Germany (Büchel), Italy (Aviano and Ghedi), Belgium (Kleine Brogel), the Netherlands (Volkel) and Turkey (Incirlik).
        
        According to nuclear weapons expert Hans Kristensen, each European base stores about 20 bombs, and Turkey stores 50.
        
        ...Spangdahlem in Germany, Lakenheath in Britain, Araxos in Greece, and Mürted and Balikesir in Turkey. All of these locations still have nuclear bomb storage facilities, and in theory, they could be reused.
      2. Vasya_33
        
        0
        
        8 October 2025 17: 24
        
        I don't know, maybe they were brought in later, but:
        If there are nuclear weapons, then there is infrastructure, personnel (US Army), carriers and all that...
        
        Thus, Air Force squadrons stationed at the Italian air base of Aviano regularly fly to Syria and Libya; it was from here that NATO aircraft took off to bomb Yugoslavia, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
    2. Nikolay Volkov
      
      +2
      
      9 October 2025 09: 15
      
      Well, it was a draw.
      
      The USSR didn't seem to be trying to destroy other countries...
      
      But he also knew how to defend his own interests for a time.
      1. Dormidontov_Dormidont
        
        -1
        
        10 October 2025 11: 13
        
        Quote: Nikolai Volkov
        Well, it was a draw.
        
        The USSR didn't seem to be trying to destroy other countries...
        
        But he also knew how to defend his own interests for a time.
        
        The USSR has been gone for a long time, however
  2. Brother
    
    +7
    
    8 October 2025 14: 25
    
    Hmm... yes, the USSR won!
    It simply won't work today; the current Tsar and his "brothers" with their closest relatives are in Miami, France, and London!
    Will not dare.
    And he doesn’t need it, he just wants to live with the “brothers” in power!
2. vitgusin
  
  -8
  
  8 October 2025 13: 36
  
  Quote: Vasya_33
  and there are no hazelnuts from Cuba
  
  There aren't many flights from Russia, though. There are a few prototypes. Where does the money come from for such luxury? Read what some people who aren't completely stupid are writing:
  
  Mass production of the Oreshnik faces economic and technological constraints. Western sanctions have limited Russia's access to critical components, such as German and Japanese equipment, necessary for the missile's production.
  1. Vasya_33
    
    +3
    
    8 October 2025 13: 53
    
    Yes, we know. The author is just daydreaming here...
  2. begemot20091
    
    -3
    
    8 October 2025 13: 58
    
    No, the f...s won't sell, the Chinese or Indians will.
    1. Vasya_33
      
      -1
      
      8 October 2025 14: 02
      
      Is the equipment disposable?
      1. begemot20091
        
        0
        
        8 October 2025 14: 12
        
        Many factories have machines that were taken out of Germany as reparations. I had machines. 21999
        
        Azimutt
        
        0
        
        8 October 2025 14: 53
        
        These factories probably went bankrupt a long time ago.
        
        begemot20091
        
        0
        
        10 October 2025 10: 24
        
        Oh, come on. I saw them just a week ago.
      2. vitgusin
        
        0
        
        8 October 2025 14: 28
        
        Quote: Vasya_33
        Is the equipment disposable?
        
        But this depends on the supplier; he can close the program on the equipment from home.
    2. vitgusin
      
      0
      
      8 October 2025 14: 25
      
      Quote: begemot20091
      the Chinese or Indians will sell
      
      Yes, of course, you can buy it in Mozambique.
      In 2024, China sold approximately $439 billion in goods to the United States. India, on the other hand, sold approximately $90 billion.
      And this is the lifeblood of their economy.
  3. Ales
    
    +4
    
    8 October 2025 14: 58
    
    It's absurd to think that Russian missiles could contain Western components. There's no need to take the government's stupidity to the extreme.
    1. vitgusin
      
      -1
      
      8 October 2025 15: 23
      
      Quote: Ales
      Western components on Russian missiles
      
      Google Translation
      Royal United Services Institute (RUSI)
      RUSI staff and partners inspected 27 Russian weapons systems and military equipment units that were lost or expended.
      In collaboration with Reuters, RUSI identified at least 450 unique microelectronic components within these systems, which were produced by companies from the United States, Europe, and East Asia.
      
      Please don't write Vysvsrete!
      1. Ales
        
        -2
        
        8 October 2025 15: 52
        
        Where, among —
        
        …27 Russian weapons systems and military equipment units lost or expended…
        
        You saw the mention of "Iskander," "Oreshnik," and even with this fact—450 (imported) resistors, diodes, capacitors, etc.—do not indicate the military-industrial complex's dependence on the West, but only indicate that these components are not considered critical by our specialists.
        
        Ales
        
        -1
        
        8 October 2025 16: 20
        
        This has the same impact on the finished product (for which the manufacturer is responsible for its quality characteristics) as making a tin can from stockpiled tinplate, whether domestic or imported—it has no effect on the end result. The taste of the stew depends on the quality of the meat and the processing technology, not on the manufacturer of the tinplate (which, naturally, is suitable for such use). The point is that components whose substitution (by production location or manufacturer) has negligible impact on the end result do not require the same attention as the study by the "British scientists" cited in your objection.
        And please, don't panic - Everything is lost!
        
        vitgusin
        
        0
        
        8 October 2025 17: 11
        
        Quote: Ales
        And please, don't panic - Everything is lost!
        
        Oh, come on. Everything's going well.
        With what I congratulate you!
        
        nznz
        
        0
        
        8 October 2025 20: 35
        
        How was the US origin of the components determined? I bought a Russian Zubr drill (for example). It's Chinese. Of course, it was developed in Russia, but it was made in China.
        How much is the US involved in China in this regard?
        
        vitgusin
        
        +1
        
        8 October 2025 20: 57
        
        Quote: nznz
        How much is the US involved in China in this regard?
        
        Yes, of course, he'll get out of it just as quickly as he gets in. Trump wants to bring all American companies back home.
        
        nznz
        
        0
        
        17 October 2025 02: 03
        
        Between "he wants" and "he returned"...you know what I mean.
        
        vitgusin
        
        0
        
        17 October 2025 13: 49
        
        Quote: nznz
        Between "he wants" and "he returned"...you know what I mean.
        
        So let's drink to the fact that our desires coincide with our possibilities.
        
        vitgusin
        
        -2
        
        8 October 2025 17: 18
        
        Quote: Ales
        even with this fact - 450 (imported) resistors, diodes, capacitors
        
        With a light press of the keyboard
        however 450 unique microelectronics components
        Turned into
        
        Quote: Ales
        450 (imported) resistors, diodes, capacitors
        
        Ales
        
        0
        
        9 October 2025 19: 25
        
        Viktor, excuse me, but if you're the one who wants the final say in this debate, then I'll let you have it with your "unique" argument. You're unique, Viktor, but you're human, and your uniqueness doesn't transform you from a human to another physical being, just like any electronic component. What do foreign researchers write about the concept of "uniqueness"? Does the article you cited explain what makes the components unique? Perhaps in the timeframe from when they rolled off the assembly line, or in their custom-made, one-off production, with the destruction of the design documentation?
        
        vitgusin
        
        0
        
        9 October 2025 19: 51
        
        Quote: Ales
        Victor, I'm sorry, but if the most important thing for you in a debate is that you have the last word,
        
        No need to apologize! The main thing is to convey the truth! I can't go into more detail for reasons you know.
  4. Pasha_Kosse
    
    0
    
    9 October 2025 10: 57
    
    Dear Victor, I'm glad for you that you have access to the foreign press, but I assure you, trusting the "bourgeoisie" is like disrespecting yourself. I can't speak for NBC—I haven't watched it—but the British BBC is a liar by nature. Take it from someone who spent 11 years in the foggy Albion. Regarding the content of the paragraph you quoted, I can say one thing: if our defense industry relied on their supplies at all, there wouldn't be any modern weapons. Mostly Chinese. Perhaps some came from South Korea. It's possible that even now some supplies are being shipped in bypassing sanctions or through third countries, but in any case, the impact of their sanctions on our defense industry is greatly exaggerated. Besides, the article you quoted was written for their audience. And if at the end of this article it is further written that we live in impassable mud and bears want to roam the streets of our cities - will you quote that too?)
    1. vitgusin
      
      +1
      
      9 October 2025 19: 10
      
      Quote: Pasha_Kosse
      I can say one thing: if our defense industry relied on their supplies at all, there would be no trace of any modern weapons.
      
      If you're writing about the USSR, I agree with you.
      The main models of modern weapons are designed and developed from there, but there is a problem with electronics.
      
      Quote: Pasha_Kosse
      We live in impassable mud and bears want to walk the streets of our cities
      
      Unfortunately, there are still such places.
3. Grancer81
  
  +1
  
  8 October 2025 18: 53
  
  Or maybe build a "Cuban" military base somewhere in Kamchatka?
4. Botrops
  
  0
  
  10 October 2025 07: 44
  
  Well, the USSR profited during the Cuban Missile Crisis. They removed US missiles from Turkey. And that's what all the fuss was about.
  1. Vasya_33
    
    0
    
    10 October 2025 10: 34
    
    At first, but in the long term, it turns out, no!
    1. Botrops
      
      0
      
      10 October 2025 18: 49
      
      In the long run, how did the Cuban Missile Crisis work out in America's favor?
Nick. WITH

+4

8 October 2025 12: 18

Do they want to plant hazelnuts in Cuba or not? It's simple in the States: if you don't want it our way, we put pressure on the economy and change the government. In the newly created European Union, they should also act the same way, and if you're against it, they'll change it or put pressure on you.
1. Dormidontov_Dormidont
  
  -2
  
  8 October 2025 23: 42
  
  Quote: Nick. WITH
  Do they want to plant hazelnuts in Cuba or not? It's simple in the States: if you don't want it our way, we put pressure on the economy and change the government. In the newly created European Union, they should also act the same way, and if you're against it, they'll change it or put pressure on you.
  
  Cuba wants money, so if they are offered something interesting and material, Russia will receive permission to deploy missiles.
  1. Nick. WITH
    
    +2
    
    9 October 2025 04: 25
    
    Everyone wants money. Then we'll place a hazel grove for money, and the US will place intelligence or something else, because they can also offer money.
2. Nikolay Volkov
  
  +3
  
  9 October 2025 09: 18
  
  Why would Cuba even bother with someone they openly call a "paper tiger," and the tiger cub meows in response that the trump is good and almost cuddly...
  
  The tiger cub will then run away, as he is accustomed to doing, and the proximity of Cuba and the United States will not go away.
  1. Nick. WITH
    
    0
    
    9 October 2025 10: 09
    
    A game of big, smart men is underway between Russia and the West, and the outcome will determine who emerges as the paper tiger. We want it to be quick and immediate, but it's all much more complicated than we think. It's not just about completing the SVO that matters here.
Botrops

+11

8 October 2025 12: 50

Deploying Oreshnik missiles in Cuba isn't the answer. Tomahawks will hit Russia, but will they launch Oreshnik missiles at the US if they still can't launch them at Rzeszow? Buzhinsky proposed a more effective option: deorbiting American reconnaissance and control satellites in response to a Tomahawk strike. The pretext is obvious: they will be the ones guiding the Tomahawks to targets in Russia. This will be painful (these devices are very expensive), and the US will slowly go blind. Because the presence of a satellite constellation is even more critical for them than for Russia. And we'll check the "nodola" too.
1. vitgusin
  
  +3
  
  8 October 2025 13: 50
  
  Quote: Botrops
  remove American reconnaissance satellites from orbit
  
  But he didn't ask if there was anything that could deorbit America's 300 to 450 (nobody knows for sure) military satellites? That's a fact.
  Before the 12-day war with Israel, Iran faced serious problems in the space sector: the country's communication with its Kosar and Khodkhod satellites was completely cut off two weeks before the conflict.
  Hossein Shahrabi, CEO of Iran's Omid Phase, a space company, said the shutdown was due to "a series of events" and "receiving an unwanted command outside of control."
  1. Botrops
    
    -2
    
    8 October 2025 16: 47
    
    I think a former general, even retired, knows better than us that such weapons exist. Besides, there was publicly available information on the subject.
    
    The final test of this new system was the interception of a satellite at an altitude of over 500 km and flying at cosmic velocity.
    With this fact, Russia demonstrated to the entire world that it had completed all tests of the A-235 Nudol system.
    
    Well, in terms of altitude, everything below the 2000 km orbit is generally accessible to the "nudoli".
    And there are currently 247 American military satellites in orbit compared to 110 Russian ones. Furthermore, the number of those with orbits capable of monitoring Russian territory is even smaller.
    1. vitgusin
      
      +1
      
      8 October 2025 17: 08
      
      Quote: Botrops
      With this fact, Russia demonstrated to the entire world that it had completed all tests of the A-235 Nudol system.
      
      Yes, everything you wrote is almost true. But it needs to go on combat duty and shoot down about 400 satellites. How many years would it take for that to happen? And "A spoon is dear to dinner."
      1. Botrops
        
        0
        
        8 October 2025 17: 17
        
        Learn the ropes. Nudol has been on combat alert since 2019, more than five years now. Where do you get the figure of 400 American satellites? The US has 247 military satellites, and the Russian Federation has 110 as of 25.
        https://translated.turbopages.org/proxy_u/en-ru.ru.9f5e6a1c-68e67178-88ce2e76-74722d776562/https/worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/military-satellite-by-country
        
        Moreover, even older ones, launched back in the late 1970s, are taken into account. Plus, I'll repeat for you: the orbits of a significant number of satellites don't allow for monitoring Russian territory. In other words, up to a hundred satellites would need to be decommissioned. And considering that Nudol has been on combat alert for over five years, there's no doubt there are a hundred or so missiles in stock. And that's the bare minimum.
        
        vitgusin
        
        -1
        
        8 October 2025 18: 02
        
        Quote: Botrops
        Learn the ropes. Nudol has been on combat duty since 2019.
        
        17 April 2020 city
        The US military said Russia conducted a military operation on Wednesday. Test anti-satellite missile,
        Now let's read about combat duty in 2019.
        And this is about the site that was written:
        (WPR)website providing available, current data
        And this is something else:
        Sandboxx — Military Platform
        https://www.sandboxx.us/news/spy-satellites-arent-nearly-as-all-seeing-as-you-think/
        While exact figures are tough to nail down, it's been reported that the United States government currently operates somewhere between 339 and 485 satellites with some degree of military use, including at least 49 satellites operated specifically by the National Reconnaissance Office. That number far surpasses the orbital fleets of adversary nations like Russia, which has 71, or China with a reported 63.
        Google to the rescue
        
        Botrops
        
        +1
        
        8 October 2025 18: 42
        
        Well, your website mentions an approximate number of satellites. And, I emphasize again, you need to look at those that, based on their orbits, operate over Russia. Their number will undoubtedly be cut in half.
        What's the contradiction between Nudol's deployment on combat alert and the fact that an anti-satellite missile was tested? It's likely that Nudol was also tested in 21, when Tselina-D deorbited. It's quite possible it was tested with the new A-929 missile. Testing a new missile doesn't change the fact that it was deployed on combat alert.
        
        vitgusin
        
        0
        
        8 October 2025 19: 04
        
        Quote: Botrops
        And what contradiction is there with the fact that Nudol has gone on combat duty?
        
        "Water, water, water all around" (c)
        Let's read about combat duty since 2019.
        
        Quote: Botrops
        The approximate number of satellites is given.
        
        Well, who can give you an exact number, but the quantity is not what you wrote, but 339-485
        And they look where they're given the command. I wrote that there won't be enough Nudels and that whether they're standing or not doesn't matter.
        Well, in conclusion
        Amazon's US factory produces 5 satellites per day.
        
        Botrops
        
        -1
        
        8 October 2025 19: 46
        
        Water? What do you want? Should I provide you with an order signed by the Ministry of Defense placing Nudoli on combat duty?)) At least back in 2018, there was information citing the Ministry of Defense.
        
        By the end of 2018, the Ministry of Defense will upgrade Moscow's missile defense system with ultra-fast and highly maneuverable 53T6M Nudoli interceptor missiles, deployed in the Moscow region. This was reported today by the Izvestia newspaper, citing information from the ministry.
        
        According to the Ministry of Defense, the 53T6M missiles, which will be placed on combat duty, are designed for missile defense and anti-satellite defense of Moscow and the central industrial region. This month, the military department announced successful testing at the Sary Shagan test site in Kazakhstan.
        
        The two-stage solid-fuel 53T6M interceptor missile is a modernized version of the currently used 53T6 long-range interceptor missile. The missiles are deployed at 11 launch sites in silos near Naro-Fominsk, Sergiev Posad, Lyktarino, Skhodnya, Korolev, Vnukovo, and Sofrino. 51T6 medium-range interceptor missiles are also in use. In total, approximately 100 interceptor missiles are deployed to protect Moscow's airspace.
        
        And they look where they are given the command
        
        Let me repeat: learn the basics. A satellite can only move in a specific orbit. Moreover, satellites, for example, optical or radar, are launched in such a way that they track a specific area. And that's not all—they'll only track a given area of the Earth for a few hours. Then they'll disappear over the horizon. For continuous tracking, several satellites are needed in specific geostationary orbits. Before you spout nonsense about someone looking somewhere, read up on satellites. That's not all. Satellites come in different types. There are electronic reconnaissance satellites, which detect radioactivity during the operations of certain units or air strike groups, and optical satellites, which are used for optical surveillance of specific areas of the planet. Telescopes similar to Hubble are designed for this purpose, only oriented toward the Earth rather than the stars. Now use your brain and answer this question for yourself: how can a satellite monitoring the Pacific Ocean, for example, deploy a telescope and survey areas of Novosibirsk "on command"? Its orbit could be such that even the mirrors of an optical satellite wouldn't be able to see anything clearly. Each reconnaissance satellite is designed exclusively for its own region, and at a strictly defined time while in orbit above that region. Sorry for being a literalist, but I can't spout such nonsense at you.
        A US factory produces five satellites? And Elon Musk produces even more. But satellites are not all the same. Let me repeat: an optical reconnaissance satellite, for example, is comparable to Hubble. If your Amazon churns out satellites like hotcakes, why is Hubble still in orbit? Because just polishing the mirror would take months, not to mention everything else. Cheap Starlinks can be churned out like hotcakes. But what does that have to do with reconnaissance?
        
        vitgusin
        
        -2
        
        8 October 2025 20: 11
        
        Quote: Botrops
        Water?
        
        Of course. Who needs a report?
        We need the most important thing.
        
        Quote: Botrops
        53T6M, which will be delivered to experimental combat duty, intended for anti-missile and anti-satellite defense Moscow and the central industrial region.
        
        Well, this is correct, but not for Russia.
        
        Quote: Botrops
        And Elon Musk is even more so. But satellites are not all the same.
        
        Of course, it's water. I'm writing about the order for the Ministry of Defense, and you're talking about Max with simple low-orbit communication satellites.
        I understand you. Thank you!
        
        Botrops
        
        -1
        
        8 October 2025 22: 34
        
        Well, this is correct, but not for Russia.
        
        What's the difference? The most important thing is that Nudol exists. Whether it's in Moscow or Russia—it doesn't matter. If Nudol exists, it can take down satellites from orbit.
        
        Of course, it's water. I'm writing about the order for the Ministry of Defense, and you're talking about Max with simple low-orbit communication satellites.
        I understand you. Thank you!
        
        I'll try to get this simple idea across again. Satellites come in all shapes and sizes. Optical reconnaissance satellites are rare and expensive. And you can't have many of them. They're akin to space telescopes, and they need to have the appropriate resolution. Read up on how they're made and how long it takes to produce them. It's clear there aren't just three hundred of them in orbit. Then there are communications satellites, for example. Similar to the masked ones. The Pentagon also needs to be connected. And most of them are, because reception needs to be stable anywhere on Earth. And the cost and time to build them are significantly lower. Where did you get the information about the five satellites? Provide a link to the source.
        
        Nikolay Volkov
        
        +2
        
        9 October 2025 09: 21
        
        Listen, you and Armata and the coalition are stationed somewhere...
        
        And on the SVO T-55...
        
        Maybe it's time to take off the rose-colored glasses and lashes?
        
        Botrops
        
        0
        
        9 October 2025 10: 40
        
        Well, if you think about it that way, then there are no Avangards, Zircons, or S-500s. And I believe facts more than empty words. And the facts are that in 21, our Tselina-D satellite was taken offline at an altitude of 550 km. The story received widespread publicity, and the US shouted to the world that by destroying satellites, we were multiplying space debris and debris in orbit. For us, the main thing is the fact that something like this happened in orbit above 500 km. And if you think this is all just a product of rose-colored glasses, then explain to us how this was possible, since "Nudol" is nothing more than a fairy tale character.
        As for the SVO and the T-55, well, it's good that it's in demand. It's a cheap workhorse. It may have poor armor, but it still protects the crew, and the gun moves, so to speak, as part of the vehicle. What year have the Americans been flying the B-52? And it's doing just fine. It's still in service.
  2. golden knowledge
    
    -2
    
    8 October 2025 20: 22
    
    Any number of satellites can be removed from orbit in 5 minutes using a pulse weapon (a nuclear detonation at an altitude of 300 km) and all NATO spyware will burn up in the atmosphere and there will be nothing left to spy with and to guide Tomahawks with.
    1. vitgusin
      
      +2
      
      8 October 2025 20: 54
      
      Quote from Golden Knowledge
      pulse weapon (nuclear detonation at an altitude of 300 km)
      
      A Soviet pulsed nuclear weapon was detonated at an altitude of 300 km over Kazakhstan on October 22, 1962. The electromagnetic pulse (EMP) spread far beyond the detonation site, causing significant disruption to ground-based infrastructure. The EMP melted 570 km of overhead telephone lines, damaged a power plant, and knocked out 1000 km of shallow power cables.
      Do you want this?
      1. Ten canarias
        
        +1
        
        9 October 2025 00: 24
        
        The EMP melted 570 km of overhead telephone lines, damaged a power plant and knocked out 1000 km of shallow power cables.
        
        One impulse melted...damaged...disabled...
        Ha, to melt anything at all from 300 km away! Super! My friend, you not only don't know physics, you've probably never even heard of it...
        
        alexandre II
        
        -4
        
        9 October 2025 04: 49
        
        Why are you arguing with him? Read all his statements, he's a typical Russian working off handouts.
        
        vitgusin
        
        +2
        
        9 October 2025 18: 58
        
        Quote from: alexandre
        Read all his statements
        
        If you didn't write stupid things, you would pass for smart.
        But now it won't work.
        
        vitgusin
        
        +1
        
        9 October 2025 18: 56
        
        Quote from Ten Canarias
        Father, you not only don’t know physics,
        
        On October 22, 1962, the Soviet Union conducted one of the most little-known yet largest nuclear tests in history—K-3. It was a thermonuclear explosion at an altitude of approximately 290 kilometers.
        https://el.kz/ru/kak-yadernyy-vzryv-v-kosmose-unichtozhil-vsyu-elektroniku-v-radiuse-500-kilometrov-letopis-ulytau_400028541/
        In 1962, the United States conducted an atmospheric test of a 1,45-megaton thermonuclear weapon, codenamed Starfish Prime, 250 miles above Johnston Island in the Pacific Ocean. The explosion, more than 1000 miles away, knocked out power in parts of Hawaii and temporarily disrupted telephone service. Furthermore, radiation from the test damaged several satellites in low Earth orbit, rendering them inoperable.
        https://spectrum.ieee.org/one-atmospheric-nuclear-explosion-could-take-out-the-power-grid
        
        Ten canarias
        
        0
        
        19 October 2025 09: 34
        
        Don't confuse the effect of an electromagnetic pulse on highly sensitive electronic components, especially semiconductors, with the ability to melt metal, especially underground at a distance of 300 km. The power flux density (of any energy) decreases proportionally to the square of the distance from the source. At one kilometer, the density is, say, 1 kWt/m², at two kilometers, it's 4 times less, at ten, 100 times less, and so on. At 100 km, you can't even warm up a cup of coffee...
        
        vitgusin
        
        0
        
        19 October 2025 10: 19
        
        Quote from Ten Canarias
        You can't even warm up a cup of coffee at 100 km...
        
        I have provided a link, you can contact the publication and refute this article.
  3. nznz
    
    -1
    
    8 October 2025 20: 38
    
    I want to ask...everyone has Kaspersky (many do), it's omnipresent...what if it has some other function that hasn't been implemented yet...and the satellite receives a command...
    This is a conspiracy theory, but reality sometimes surpasses fiction.
    1. vitgusin
      
      +2
      
      8 October 2025 20: 47
      
      Quote: nznz
      once and the satellite received the command...
      
      How did hundreds of Hezbollah communication devices explode in Lebanon? How did Iran's entire top military leadership gather in a bunker on a false alarm? Perhaps they didn't know about Kaspersky, or maybe Kaspersky existed back in the 20th century?
prior

+7

8 October 2025 12: 56

Putin's statement that Russia will not be the first to use nuclear weapons effectively nullifies and devalues Russia's possession of these very weapons.
Threatening to respond after you have been hit with nuclear weapons is pointless.
1. Roman070280
  
  0
  
  8 October 2025 13: 33
  
  Well, he thought that we would win anyway.
  Time is working for us, the economy is working for us... we're grinding something out there...
  And the nuclear weapons were initially always considered exclusively as a weapon of deterrence. It’s hard to even imagine anything else.
  Then any country with nuclear weapons would be able to dictate its terms to any of its neighbors, with the wording: "otherwise we'll crush you."
  1. Vox Populi
    
    -3
    
    8 October 2025 16: 23
    
    General information on the topic:
    https://t.me/HUhmuroeutro/55060
2. Botrops
  
  -2
  
  8 October 2025 17: 06
  
  Why is that? It's enough to recall the Perimeter system, which was actually designed to guarantee a nuclear retaliatory strike, even if the entire Russian leadership were killed and a nuclear strike were launched against Russia. Such a guaranteed retaliatory strike is a truly sobering one.
  1. prior
    
    +6
    
    8 October 2025 17: 16
    
    Some people believe in Perimeter, others in aliens.
    It's like with kidneys and Borjomi.
    It seems the West is no longer impressed by the presence of nuclear weapons and the possibility of retaliation. Otherwise, they wouldn't have allowed themselves to steal $300 billion worth of gold and foreign exchange reserves.
    1. Botrops
      
      0
      
      8 October 2025 17: 19
      
      I wouldn't believe in Perimeter either, but there's a catch. At the Naval Academy, where I graduated, they taught us cadets lectures on this system back in the late 80s. And a classmate of mine, after graduating, was directly involved in maintaining this system. So, excuse me, but it does exist.
      1. prior
        
        +4
        
        8 October 2025 17: 25
        
        Whether it exists and is operational will only be known by the survivors of a nuclear strike, if there are any.
        If everyone, including a potential adversary, knows about the system, he will certainly take measures to neutralize it.
        However, we are assured that we will all go to heaven. With or without the Perimeter.
        
        Botrops
        
        -2
        
        8 October 2025 17: 35
        
        Let me repeat: I have no doubt about its existence. Neutralization? The system consists of a large number of seismic sensors and sensors that monitor radiation levels. The sensors are located throughout the Russian Federation. In the event of a nuclear strike, even without a command from the commanding officer to activate the system, several missiles are launched over Russian territory. While flying over Russia, their purpose is to transmit a control signal to the launch vehicles included in this system (and some, for example, silo-based ICBMs, are also included in this system as an optional extra, although they may also be on combat alert). To neutralize the perimeter, we must shoot down the missiles transmitting the activation signal as quickly as possible. And this must be done over Russian territory. An extremely difficult task. As for the missiles that will be activated, the task is even more difficult. Considering that, according to the Supreme Commander, 95% of our ICBM fleet are new systems, the Americans simply don't have the means to shoot down the same Avangard with its Mach 28.
        
        Sarcastic realist
        
        -1
        
        8 October 2025 20: 58
        
        I repeat once again - I have no doubts about its existence.
        
        Many have no doubt about the existence of an old man with a beard, sitting on a cloud and controlling the Universe...
        
        Botrops
        
        +1
        
        8 October 2025 22: 45
        
        Yes, but the problem is that no one saw this old man. Well, except for Moses. And even he saw a burning thorn bush.))) For me, however, sufficient proof, even if my classmate hadn't worked in this field, as I wrote above, is that we were given lectures on the subject. Fairy tales aren't taught in higher military schools.
        And in 2011, the then-Commander of the Strategic Missile Forces, Lieutenant General S. Karakayev, confirmed in a comment to Komsomolskaya Pravda that the system exists and is on combat alert. Or do you not believe him either, and are asking us to believe you? By the way, your friends overseas have no doubt about its existence and call it the "Dead Hand."
        
        Alexzn
        
        0
        
        9 October 2025 09: 14
        
        The Perimeter system certainly exists. Its capabilities can be debated, but denying its existence is foolish.
    2. Botrops
      
      -2
      
      8 October 2025 17: 27
      
      Regarding the stolen billions. The fact that the foolish West took the bait for 300 billion is only a profit for Russia. Firstly, both Volodin and Siluanov said that Western assets in Russia are worth 500 billion. Secondly, this move by the West allowed Russia to nationalize the defense industry and introduce external management over foreign firms operating in sectors critical to our interests. Thirdly, it dealt a severe blow to the dollar, in terms of trust. And fourthly, it allowed Russia to switch to national currencies when transacting with the BRICS countries. And considering that Russia is the largest oil exporter in the world (up to 30%), the blow to the West's petrodollar revenues was even greater. And what did the West get? A suitcase without a handle? They still don't know what to do with those 300 billion to avoid getting caught. And they only use the proceeds from them. A mere drop in the bucket compared to how much Russia benefited.
      1. prior
        
        +1
        
        8 October 2025 17: 32
        
        It's like that.
        
        There would be no happiness, but misfortune helped
        
        Regarding the stolen money, it turns out that if more had been stolen, we would have been even better off?
        Sound logic... It turns out we made a mistake by not placing all our savings in Western banks.
        
        Botrops
        
        0
        
        8 October 2025 17: 37
        
        No, they didn't miscalculate))) I think everyone remembered this money perfectly well, both the Supreme Leader and Nabiullina. But they also knew the greed of the West, which, for example, had already frozen Iran's assets. And so they played a long-shot game. And now Russia is in an exceptionally advantageous position—having received everything, it's attacking the West and calling them thieves.
        
        prior
        
        0
        
        8 October 2025 17: 40
        
        Okay. Thanks for chatting. Our half-joking debate is very reminiscent of the plot from "Carnival Night" – is there life on Mars? All the best.
      2. Roman070280
        
        -2
        
        8 October 2025 17: 34
        
        You studied at a military school...
        You write such things that it's unclear whether to laugh or cry... Russia is in profit... Siluanov...
        
        Botrops
        
        0
        
        8 October 2025 17: 40
        
        Exactly. Because both Siluanov and Volodin are Russian officials. And their words are scrutinized around the world. And if they'd lied about 500 billion rubles in Western investment in Russia, there would have been an immediate uproar. Has anyone in the West even said it was a lie? And economic experts (Baibakov, for example) confirm this information.
        
        Roman070280
        
        -1
        
        8 October 2025 17: 45
        
        If they had lied about 500 billion in Western investment in Russia, there would have been an outcry immediately. Did anyone in the West even say it was a lie?
        
        That's it, I'm silent, I'm silent.
      3. Alexzn
        
        +1
        
        9 October 2025 09: 18
        
        The Lards are frozen, and ongoing talk of their confiscation has been ongoing for three years. With further normalization of relations, Russia will partially compensate the West for its losses, and the West will unfreeze Russian assets – this will be the subject of negotiations for full normalization of relations in the future.
3. nznz
  
  +2
  
  8 October 2025 20: 40
  
  You're interpreting it too shallowly. The first one won't use it without obvious reasons. But the doctrine includes a preemptive strike. If there's evidence, they'll just slap you and that's it.
4. Dormidontov_Dormidont
  
  -1
  
  8 October 2025 23: 37
  
  Quote: prior
  Putin's statement that Russia will not be the first to use nuclear weapons effectively nullifies and devalues Russia's possession of these very weapons.
  Threatening to respond after you have been hit with nuclear weapons is pointless.
  
  When a nuclear strike on the Ukrainian Reich is carried out, the railway Bandera propagandists will definitely not be asked about it.
  1. prior
    
    +2
    
    9 October 2025 09: 34
    
    The drunk will sober up, Dormidont will never give up the term "railway Bandera propagandists".
    With your "patriotism," we don't need any railway Bandera propagandists. You're doing a better job.
Ivan1978

+5

8 October 2025 13: 29

Firstly, Cuba doesn't need our hazelnuts. After being abandoned by Hunchback, Yebn, and Grandmaster in 2004, they're barely surviving on their own resources and capabilities. And how are we going to transport this hazelnut, essentially a Soviet pioneer? We don't even have a navy left, and there's a blockade. Americans They'll give the Cubans a run for their money. All this nonsense and wishful thinking has long been abandoned by our elite, who want to be friends with the West no matter what.
1. AndrK72
  
  +3
  
  8 October 2025 14: 01
  
  I completely agree! Propaganda for the cattle that the government considers its people to be.
  1. Ivan1978
    
    0
    
    8 October 2025 14: 03
    
    Greetings 🤝
  2. Dormidontov_Dormidont
    
    -1
    
    8 October 2025 23: 33
    
    Quote: AndrK72
    I completely agree! Propaganda for the cattle that the government considers its people to be.
    
    This Bandera "cattle" is posing as Russian people and spreading its propaganda on Russian social media.
AndrK72

+6

8 October 2025 13: 59

There's no harm in dreaming...stupid propaganda slogans! Who will let us into Cuba now??? We've already betrayed everyone we could and couldn't.
Shelest2000

+6

8 October 2025 16: 50

"Nut" in Cuba: Russia's response to Tomahawk missile supplies to Kyiv could crush the US

Wow, what a turbo-patriotic headline! I almost cried with pride!
But in reality, nothing will happen. The insipid old men in the Kremlin will continue to whine, "Guys, let's live in peace!" and draw another pretty red line, instead of responding sharply, harshly, and even brutally to their Western "partners" right from the start of arms deliveries to the Ukrainians.
Relax, these old guys will continue to ruin Russia. (further swearing) )
Alexpan

+3

8 October 2025 17: 28

Is this the plot of a new Mosfilm movie? The Yankees will never allow this; they'll sink those Oreshniki and other ships on their way to Cuba, giving Lavrov a chance to regret it.
1. Dormidontov_Dormidont
  
  -1
  
  8 October 2025 23: 35
  
  Quote: Alexpan
  Is this the plot of a new Mosfilm movie? The Yankees will never allow this; they'll sink those Oreshniki and other ships on their way to Cuba, giving Lavrov a chance to regret it.
  
  Is this the official opinion of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs?
Alex_Kraus

+2

8 October 2025 19: 29

There will be no Oreshnik anywhere in Cuba. Everyone knows that. It's an axiom. There's nothing to prove here.
Sarcastic realist

+1

8 October 2025 20: 54

The document gives the Russian Federation the right to supply any weapons to the island.

A delusional fairy tale for suckers. Even the USSR couldn't supply it with "any" weapons in sufficient quantities, and its current successor can only dream of it. However, the hooray-minded people will be throwing moldy caps to the ceiling with joyful shouts and vigorously burning through their combat couches...
GN

+2

8 October 2025 21: 22

When you write: it seems like you're delusional!! Hazelnut, the red line, "we haven't started yet," etc., etc.—these are all "fairy tales" for the red electorate to keep them in good shape! All normal, adequate people have long since figured out who's who! In our distant childhoods, we were read K. Chukovsky's tale about the "terrible mustachioed cockroach." All these threats against the fascists over the past four years remind me of this cockroach! Ugh, a wimp and a weakling, in a word! Hundreds of thousands of Slavic souls were destroyed by "super-duper" weapons? A lie from beginning to end!
AC130 Gunship

+2

8 October 2025 22: 03

In the mid-2000s, around 40 new Il-76s were sold to China using exactly the same scheme, which were supposed to be produced in Tashkent. However, Tashkent itself was not informed about this.
Why does Cuba need these missiles, one wonders, if it dreams of improving relations with the US? Communism has long since ceased to interest anyone in Cuba.
1. Vasya_33
  
  +1
  
  8 October 2025 23: 38
  
  wow...they could use some bread.
  
  https://t.me/svezhesti/147075
Ten canarias

+4

8 October 2025 23: 38

What Cuba? What Venezuela? Nonsense! We're counting down the weeks! There are almost no options left. Almost... But it's unlikely that VVP will resort to extreme measures. He's a master of multi-move maneuvers, not decisive ones. And those multi-move maneuvers always end with the muttering, "We were deceived... we were led by the nose..."
Avtandil

+4

9 October 2025 02: 16

First, ask Cuba if it wants to be a US target. It's more profitable for it to be an American resort.
Pasha_Kosse

-2

9 October 2025 11: 04

It's a perfectly reasonable idea to deploy our Iskander-Nut missiles in Cuba. And, by the way, we apparently have a similar strategic partnership agreement with Venezuela. What matters here isn't intentions, but capabilities. If a missile can reach their territory in a couple of minutes, then it can.
Following the Cuban Missile Crisis, no one fired at anyone. They simply deployed missiles symmetrically: we from Cuba, they from Turkey. It worked then, and it might work now.
1. PVV22121922
  
  0
  
  9 October 2025 11: 22
  
  It won't work because the West isn't fighting in Ukraine with its own hands.
PVV22121922

+1

9 October 2025 11: 21

Stupid nonsense. First of all, we need to reunite Russian territory. The hazelnut tree in Cuba is symbolic.
rotkiv04

+4

9 October 2025 12: 11

When missiles were deployed in Cuba, the USSR could have really intervened on behalf of the Cubans. Now Putin, with his perpetually preoccupied and red-lined team, can't protect Cuba, let alone even the Belgorod and Kursk regions. So the Cubans should think a hundred times before agreeing to such an adventure, even for money.
Storm_2022

0

9 October 2025 17: 24

Before sending a brigade of Oreshnik IRBMs to Cuba or Venezuela, ten brigades must first be deployed in the European part of Russia, similar to the Iskander-M OTRK.
Alexpan

0

17 October 2025 16: 39

Quote: Dormidontov_Dormidont
Quote: Alexpan
Is this the plot of a new Mosfilm movie? The Yankees will never allow this; they'll sink those Oreshniki and other ships on their way to Cuba, giving Lavrov a chance to regret it.

Is this the official opinion of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs?

I don't know. Think about it yourself.