Read on Twitter
A little bit about the nuclear arsenal.
Let's briefly see if this arsenal is the same myth as the myth of the second army of the world and the "great" russian army.
Nuclear charges, unlike conventional bombs and shells, cannot be put in a warehouse and forgotten until they are needed. The reason is the process constantly going inside nuclear charges, as a result of which the isotopic composition of the charge changes and it degrades quickly.
In russia ,not only has the service life of old Soviet nuclear warheads for missile warheads expired,but there is also no plutonium to make new ones.They cannot be made of old Soviet plutonium,as in it,as well as plutonium in warheads,the isotopic composition has irreversibly changed.
Since the early 1990s, weapons-grade plutonium has ceased to be produced in Russia, the reserves of which need to be changed every 15-20 years for use in missiles. Not changing weapon plutonium in rocket detonators is the same as using wet gunpowder with a pistol.
A few years ago, a retired GRU colonel who inspected the mines said: half of mine-based missiles in Russia will never take off again; and those missiles that take off are likely to fall on the territory of Russia itself or will be shot down by NATO air defense systems.
Undoubtedly, Russia still has warheads that could become a potential threat. I am in no way suggesting that Russia's nuclear arsenal poses no threat at all. As in general, their missile systems, even those that do not carry nuclear weapons, still pose a threat to the world. Unfortunately it is so. But their quantity and quality leave much to be desired. And if you take into account the incredible corruption of the Russian army, many nuclear warheads are in rather poor condition.
Most of the developments were made by the Ukrainian enterprise Yuzhmash, whose specialists played an important role in the program of extending the service life of these missiles before the annexation of Crimea. The fact is that the guaranteed 20-year safe operation period ends.
However,as you know,in 2014, all programs of military cooperation between Ukraine and Russia were terminated.The task was transferred to the State Rocket Makeev,which specializes in ballistic missiles for submarines and has neither sufficient experience nor qualified specialist.
Therefore, in recent years, the extension of the resource of missiles has occurred, as they say, in fact - that is, one or two missiles are fired, the technical condition of the rest is assessed and decides whether to extend the shelf life.
Americans are aware of the state of the Russian nuclear shield. Therefore, the doctrine of "Quick Global Strike" has now been adopted, according to which in order to neutralize 80% of the nuclear potential of the Russian Federation, it is enough to strike four critical points.
In addition, if we are talking about strategic nuclear weapons. We are dealing with a whole chain of commands to run it. Putin himself can't just press the button and launch missiles. Other people participate in this system.
And no matter what kind of people loyal to Putin sit at the command posts. They understand that nuclear war is the end of everything. To them and their families. I don't think they'll want to engage in self-destruction for Putin's sake and for the whim of a madman.
The world must stop being afraid of Russian threats and blackmail. And no matter how crazy and murderous the Russians are. But the instinct of self-preservation will work. They understand that at the first launch of a nuclear missile. They'll get a hundred in return.
Therefore, as I said. Nuclear threats are part of the psychological impact. They are only trying to intimidate. But as we see, some in the world succumb to this blackmail.
If the world continues to show weakness in the face of fascism, terrorism, dictatorship. This will only provoke chains of irreversible events, and untie these criminals' hands.
🧵⬇️
Let's briefly see if this arsenal is the same myth as the myth of the second army of the world and the "great" russian army.
Nuclear charges, unlike conventional bombs and shells, cannot be put in a warehouse and forgotten until they are needed. The reason is the process constantly going inside nuclear charges, as a result of which the isotopic composition of the charge changes and it degrades quickly.
In russia ,not only has the service life of old Soviet nuclear warheads for missile warheads expired,but there is also no plutonium to make new ones.They cannot be made of old Soviet plutonium,as in it,as well as plutonium in warheads,the isotopic composition has irreversibly changed.
Since the early 1990s, weapons-grade plutonium has ceased to be produced in Russia, the reserves of which need to be changed every 15-20 years for use in missiles. Not changing weapon plutonium in rocket detonators is the same as using wet gunpowder with a pistol.
A few years ago, a retired GRU colonel who inspected the mines said: half of mine-based missiles in Russia will never take off again; and those missiles that take off are likely to fall on the territory of Russia itself or will be shot down by NATO air defense systems.
Undoubtedly, Russia still has warheads that could become a potential threat. I am in no way suggesting that Russia's nuclear arsenal poses no threat at all. As in general, their missile systems, even those that do not carry nuclear weapons, still pose a threat to the world. Unfortunately it is so. But their quantity and quality leave much to be desired. And if you take into account the incredible corruption of the Russian army, many nuclear warheads are in rather poor condition.
Most of the developments were made by the Ukrainian enterprise Yuzhmash, whose specialists played an important role in the program of extending the service life of these missiles before the annexation of Crimea. The fact is that the guaranteed 20-year safe operation period ends.
However,as you know,in 2014, all programs of military cooperation between Ukraine and Russia were terminated.The task was transferred to the State Rocket Makeev,which specializes in ballistic missiles for submarines and has neither sufficient experience nor qualified specialist.
Therefore, in recent years, the extension of the resource of missiles has occurred, as they say, in fact - that is, one or two missiles are fired, the technical condition of the rest is assessed and decides whether to extend the shelf life.
Americans are aware of the state of the Russian nuclear shield. Therefore, the doctrine of "Quick Global Strike" has now been adopted, according to which in order to neutralize 80% of the nuclear potential of the Russian Federation, it is enough to strike four critical points.
In addition, if we are talking about strategic nuclear weapons. We are dealing with a whole chain of commands to run it. Putin himself can't just press the button and launch missiles. Other people participate in this system.
And no matter what kind of people loyal to Putin sit at the command posts. They understand that nuclear war is the end of everything. To them and their families. I don't think they'll want to engage in self-destruction for Putin's sake and for the whim of a madman.
The world must stop being afraid of Russian threats and blackmail. And no matter how crazy and murderous the Russians are. But the instinct of self-preservation will work. They understand that at the first launch of a nuclear missile. They'll get a hundred in return.
Therefore, as I said. Nuclear threats are part of the psychological impact. They are only trying to intimidate. But as we see, some in the world succumb to this blackmail.
If the world continues to show weakness in the face of fascism, terrorism, dictatorship. This will only provoke chains of irreversible events, and untie these criminals' hands.
🧵⬇️
Treaties with Russia are not worth the paper on which they are signed. These liars, hypocrites and murderers will violate all agreements when it is beneficial to them. And the first ones will stab a knife in the back. The Budapest memorandum confirms this.
Ukraine has abandoned the world's 3rd largest nuclear arsenal. In exchange for guarantees of security and territorial integrity from the United States,Great Britain and Russia.And one of the guarantor countries, Russia, cynically and meanly violated all guarantees and agreements
Now think about how the example of Ukraine will affect world security. When the country voluntarily renounced nuclear weapons and was attacked by one of the guarantor countries, to whom Ukraine gave these weapons. Now all countries that want a nuclear arsenal will do it?
Ukraine has abandoned nuclear weapons, the third largest in the world. But in return: we were attacked by one of the "guarantor 🇷🇺" countries. And now we need to constantly ask the second guarantor to give missiles with a range of 300 km to protect ourselves from "guarantors 🇷🇺".
Personally, I am against nuclear weapons and their use in general. There will be no winner in this war. And if you refuse, then everyone. But when countries like Russia, North Korea etc have these weapons, having nuclear weapons as a deterrent against a terrorist nuclear country like Russia is a must. And so that these countries always understand that any use of nuclear weapons by them will receive a mirror response.
Ukraine has abandoned the world's 3rd largest nuclear arsenal. In exchange for guarantees of security and territorial integrity from the United States,Great Britain and Russia.And one of the guarantor countries, Russia, cynically and meanly violated all guarantees and agreements
Now think about how the example of Ukraine will affect world security. When the country voluntarily renounced nuclear weapons and was attacked by one of the guarantor countries, to whom Ukraine gave these weapons. Now all countries that want a nuclear arsenal will do it?
Ukraine has abandoned nuclear weapons, the third largest in the world. But in return: we were attacked by one of the "guarantor 🇷🇺" countries. And now we need to constantly ask the second guarantor to give missiles with a range of 300 km to protect ourselves from "guarantors 🇷🇺".
Personally, I am against nuclear weapons and their use in general. There will be no winner in this war. And if you refuse, then everyone. But when countries like Russia, North Korea etc have these weapons, having nuclear weapons as a deterrent against a terrorist nuclear country like Russia is a must. And so that these countries always understand that any use of nuclear weapons by them will receive a mirror response.
Paragraphs of the Budapest Memorandum. In addition to guaranteeing the security and territorial integrity of Ukraine. It has one more point (5). I want to pay special attention to it. According to paragraph 5, after Ukraine's renunciation of nuclear weapons.
The guarantor countries did not have the right to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine, even if Ukraine was the aggressor and attacked one of these countries. The exceptions are if Ukraine has nuclear weapons, or if it does so in alliance with a country that has such weapons.
In any other case, it is prohibited.But what do we see from the terrorist country of🇷🇺? Right.After an act of aggression and attempts at occupation.After violating all international rights and war crimes.They are also simultaneously blackmailing the world with nuclear weapons.
At the same time, Russia, as an aggressor country that violates all international rules. Which invades sovereign states. A country of international terrorism, including nuclear blackmail. Continues to occupy a place in intercity organizations (UN, etc.)
How to distinguish nuclear war from nuclear terrorism?
Nuclear war is when both sides have nuclear weapons.
Nuclear terrorism.This is when a country renounces nuclear weapons in exchange for guarantees.And then this"guarantor 🇷🇺"attacks with war and blackmails with this very weapon.
The guarantor countries did not have the right to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine, even if Ukraine was the aggressor and attacked one of these countries. The exceptions are if Ukraine has nuclear weapons, or if it does so in alliance with a country that has such weapons.
In any other case, it is prohibited.But what do we see from the terrorist country of🇷🇺? Right.After an act of aggression and attempts at occupation.After violating all international rights and war crimes.They are also simultaneously blackmailing the world with nuclear weapons.
At the same time, Russia, as an aggressor country that violates all international rules. Which invades sovereign states. A country of international terrorism, including nuclear blackmail. Continues to occupy a place in intercity organizations (UN, etc.)
How to distinguish nuclear war from nuclear terrorism?
Nuclear war is when both sides have nuclear weapons.
Nuclear terrorism.This is when a country renounces nuclear weapons in exchange for guarantees.And then this"guarantor 🇷🇺"attacks with war and blackmails with this very weapon.
At the time of Independence, there were 2,321 nuclear warheads in Ukraine, which is six times more than China now.
Ukraine has renounced nuclear weapons in exchange for guarantees of security and territorial integrity. What did it lead to...
Some media figures and citizens criticize American and European politicians who advocate assistance to Ukraine. Let's figure it out a little bit.
🔽🔽🔽
Ukraine voluntarily gave up the world's third-largest nuclear arsenal. The USA, Russia and Great Britain, in exchange for the renunciation of nuclear weapons, guaranteed Ukraine the inviolability of its borders and assistance.
The value of weapons (strategic missiles, tactical shells, etc.) that Ukraine has eliminated or transferred to Russia is about $250 billion. Not counting the launch silos, as well as strategic bombers, which were also either destroyed or given to Russia. And all this also costs billions of dollars.
According to U.S. Department of Defense data provided to Ukraine's counterparts, when Ukraine had a nuclear weapon on its territory, the United States spent about $16 billion annually to deter nuclear weapons deployed on its territory. Thus, over the past 27 years, Ukraine, by eliminating nuclear weapons, has saved American taxpayers about $430+ billion. And these savings are growing every year.
Now there is a choice: to fulfill its obligations and help Ukraine, or to return nuclear weapons to it.
If Ukraine loses, many countries that want nuclear weapons will understand that renounceing nuclear weapons is a bad idea.
In addition, it will provoke a chain reaction. Other countries, seeing Russia's impunity. They will also want to capture foreign countries with war. And we will get new wars and chaos.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
