[000:00:00;00] oil stop for those who do not stop such that paying online made you remember where your card is now button benefit has never been so convenient. pay for purchases using the sbp button at promotional partners and get benefits. it turns out that tomatoes it is difficult to even call tomatoes tomatoes an eco-culture of accidents. no eco-culture, there are delicious tomatoes. living with prostatitis is hard helps reduce

fibrosis inflammation. stickers stick a joke new stickers only in magnet collect the entire collection and don't miss the dessert dobryanka 4499 for business the first 3 months for free rosbank real opportunities, or maybe for the weekend in st. petersburg

an apartment to conquer the off-road of the city of hands with a badge price below the market buy new tires more profitable on avito moscow -minsk agreed to place russian nuclear weapons on the territory of belarus, a bright step, because in the mid-90s, domestic ammunition was located only

in the home field of the americans, who continued store charges in europe russian diplomacy has criticized the environment by calling for the missiles to be taken home. however, it changed dramatically, but alexander lukashenko still in the ninety-fourth year only headed the state and tried to achieve the cancellation of the decision on the withdrawal. so i waited for the president to be a long time. let's talk about how the nuclear balance of power has changed with our good friend konstantin bogdanov from mmo kostya hello. let's immediately dispel some kind of misunderstanding that is now hovering, especially it is active in minsk they are developing russia, because nuclear weapons are not transferring everything to anyone, russia remains under our control; it has not transferred, does not transfer nuclear weapons. this is a question of finding nuclear weapons on the territory of belarus, and again. it is a fact that has not yet taken place that in the future it will be possible to do it after the

corresponding storage facilities are in operation, because nuclear weapons are under the bush, but require rather complex and live technical support. including for everyday, like the first of july they promise that july 1 it was officially announced that such a repository would be created. that is, after that, technically , nuclear weapons can be deployed on the territory of belarus and there is no violation of any provisions of the day, as some argue, too . well, with interpretations, especially a violation. everything is very funny, because in fact, if we approach this issue with everything e in an everyday way, then naturally there is no violation, because this is an absolutely symmetrical practice of the cold war, when both sides e declared. well no i know that they announced, but planned, uh, to transfer part of the nuclear weapons to their allies for joint time. in peacetime, this and weapons, including, if it was on the territory of the allies, it was in storage facilities e at military bases belonging to the main, so to speak , hegemon, that is, either the states or

the soviet union e, under his control and only in wartime was supposed to be transmitted here, so to speak , the question arises of legal, so to speak, so to speak, purism, or what? yes in this legal purity of interpretation. here is the wording of the treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons does not say under what conditions it is forbidden to transfer for exploitation. but from a practical point of view, everyone understands perfectly well that at a time when the superpowers that name nuclear war are in the hands of the issues of compliance with one of the articles of the day, few people will care, therefore, and in peacetime, of course. uh, the personnel of the relevant armed forces did not receive. uh, access to those nuclear weapons had nothing to do with him. all. it was in warehouses and storage facilities that belonged to the armed forces. strictly speaking, the powers of patrons. but staff training is about this or what it is also talking about, well, in staff training - this is another slippery interpretation, that is, on the one hand, as it were, yes. uh, it seems like people

are being trained to use these weapons on occasion from the other side. again , a direct violation can be seen here. well, it’s possible , probably, but again, the thin kessoyuz was silent on this topic until the ninety-first year, until it brought out all of russia, no longer brought it out, how rule. successor to all nuclear weapons within national territory. after us came a good leverage, yes. the influence on the americans, who have nuclear weapons , has not been removed from europe. well, like some amount, they left it, because there was 7,000 at the peak. i would charge, but there were 150 neutral ones left. ah, well, it was a convenient pressure to solve, because we have all nuclear weapons within the national territory. so you can, on occasion , put this button on the table, or, so to speak , on this very cross in other things now e position has leveled off, we are in approximately equal conditions. and what, by the way, is emphasized with the president's statement that we are doing everything that nato is doing , they do not consider it a violation of the day. well, we don't consider it a violation of the day either, er. well, that's the cold war you mention. it was such a heyday of all this whole

business, one might say, first of all, the first question. i have a sense of what was 7.000 e charges and in europe it had some kind of military significance. after the second world war , the sole owner of nuclear weapons in the united states became the air force at the same time they turned into a separate branch of the military. prior to this, aviation was part of the army and navy, nuclear strikes were supposed to be carried out by bombers, but the bombs themselves were expensive and in limited quantities, so it was believed that one was enough for city-type targets. although this is not always the case, the korean war showed that not all aircraft would reach goals, and to return generally units in europe , the soviet union had an advantage in conventional weapons as

technologies for the production and delivery of nuclear weapons in the west, they started talking about their asymmetrical use in the event of a large-scale conflict in europe, as a result, in the fifty-fourth year, the strategic concept of nato appears. shield and sword , nuclear weapons are deployed in member countries, and at the end of the path of the soviet troops it is germany, the netherlands, belgium, greece, italy and turkey. in the end, the deployment of medium-range missiles around the world provoked the caribbean crisis, but did not lead to its final withdrawal from europe, opposite the military personnel of nato countries began to be involved in nuclear strike training. this was called nuclear responsibility sharing or nucle sharing by the 1970s , the number of warheads reached about 7,000 pieces in response to the emergence of the soviet pioneer complex. washington undertook to deploy missiles to europe. pershing two are magicians, but in the eighties, when detente began and an agreement was signed on the elimination

of medium-range short-range missiles, the number of charges began to decrease in the two thousandth and there were already about 500 of them stopped. less and less. the us is not officially confirm, but face the presence of nuclear weapons in europe, it is officially known that trider missiles are on british nuclear submarines. however, in 2019, nato accidentally shared a document that later disappeared from public access. the canadian senator in the report openly named the number of nuclear charges, according to according to this data , there are about 150 of them in europe and they are still stored in belgium, germany, the netherlands, italy and turkey. well, if we talk about the feasibility of the strategy, one can argue here, but how would the strategic plan be the americans held back in this way, but

how they represented. a conflict with the soviet union could develop, that is, a major offensive of the warsaw pact by conventional armed forces, in which the warsaw pact has surpassed nato since the fifties and deploys tactical nuclear weapons in terms of personnel and technology. at first, they proceeded from the fact that, in principle, a military war is atomic, therefore, the means of reinforcement allows you to defend yourself without deploying huge ones. uh, masses of people, then the idea arose that in fact, probably, the atomic war was on the battlefield. somehow not very well managed. and in principle , it is not very correct to conduct it in this way , ours also came to this conclusion by the end of the sixties, for example, well, these 7,000 warheads were already starting to play more in the containment option, that is. uh, the thought was such that the russians would think and attack western europe . and if we don’t have anything there, we can hold them back. and so there they will think of 7,200 warheads, but i won’t get up to attack. and suddenly we 7.000 of them are applicable - this is, well, some kind of absurdity, so to speak, just a few are enough. in fact, the truth is enough

at that time the parties had several tens of thousands. and so to speak, e application plans were drawn very generously. there are hundreds in the first waves, therefore, well, listen, as they say, an entrance is not needed, as in that joke, that's why it looked. so at that time, even this sharing, that is, i was justified in a joint nuclear mission to a certain extent, because there were many allies. and there were a lot of these weapons and his possible and even, probably, from the point of view of that war strategy. it was necessary to apply jointly, so there was a sharing. with strange projects inside the nato country, there were corresponding projects inside your contract expense, but with such a huge number of charges. uh, how, in general, was the management carried out, say , by the americans, how they built relations with allies or allies, in fact, no matter how it was, well, as i said. it was none of their business, they did not interfere in the management of the us nuclear arsenal, which was also located on their territory, then there is a repository located on the territory

of the country, how they disappeared is located on these gears here in five countries, for example. and uh, they just had nothing to do with it. they had trained personnel , which, if necessary, if necessary , these ammunition would be handed over to wear ready-made, and then in accordance with the protocols. as they have already been taught, they will use them on combat missions, everything was controlled by the americans by their nuclear-technical support soloist, the storage facilities are completely american on the territory territorial american military bases only american personnel we had a similar situation in the warsaw pact in the storage facilities that were in the territory of the gdr poland czechoslovakia in the year 61 , the united states deployed 15 jupiter medium-range missiles in turkey, their flight time to moscow was only 10 minutes in response on this in may 62nd nikita khrushchev fidel's consent. castro decided to deploy soviet medium -range missiles with nuclear warheads in cuba from july to

october, civilian ships of the ussr navy 40 launchers were transported to the island, but on october 14, an american reconnaissance aircraft discovered and photographed their crisis; on october 27, an american u2 reconnaissance aircraft was shot down over cuba. john f. kennedy announced the decision to start bombing soviet missile bases on the island in two days . found on the night of october 27-28 during a meeting of ministers of justice robert find by the soviet ambassador dobrynin from november 5 to 9, soviet missiles were removed from cuba and washington removed some time later missiles from turkey in the seventies , high-precision missile guidance systems appeared on the target, and then there was talk. that with one precise nuclear strike it is possible to destroy

the enemy's leadership before he decides to retaliate secretary of defense james schlesinger unveiled the concept of a headless strike as the basis of us nuclear policy. and the following year, the tava declaration was signed between britain and france, which in at that time it was no longer part of nato, but now abandoned the independent defense policy and planned close cooperation with the alliance in the nuclear field in response to a new threat in the fifty-seventh year, the soviet union installed pioneer nuclear tactical missiles on the territory of the gdr and czechoslovakia in response to this advice nato decided that if moscow does not abandon its decision , the first two american missiles and the tomahawk will appear in europe by 83 over the next two

years, the united states managed to deploy almost a thousand missiles , their flight time was a maximum of 10 minutes, the events of 83 years went down in history as the eurokit crisis, but in 84 yuri died from shots, and then konstantin chernenko gorbachev became the new leader, who in 87 signed the cis deir agreement on the elimination of a whole class of medium-range missiles . the soviet union destroyed not only installations of the pioneers and the aka complex the united states , for its part, refused the complex and ground missiles tomahawk the ussr abandoned nuclear weapons in eastern europe here are the allies, both american in the west and soviet warsaw pact. uh, they were not at all embarrassed by the fact that they did not control, but in case of what exactly, they are fields of a nuclear storm,

well, uh, these are two questions, because they are not embarrassed that they do not control, because they even this headache was not enough, because nuclear-technical support. this is a very complicated procedure. i just need to get up. and secondly, as if, if we talk about the fact that they become a nuclear battlefield, well , it was embarrassing, and even a well-known case, when a team of staff games of the seventies. uh, german military-political leadership. just slamming doors. let's say here you are playing the nuclear annihilation of west germany. why were your american nuclear weapons running out of reasons? well, yes, russians, tuesday is here, something must be done about it. in principle, they were embarrassed by this even if you look at some documents of the same warsaw pact, for example, hungarian or polish, which were speeches after the ninety-first year. there is quite a heavy reflection on the topic of what will be done with the country that will become. uh, the very first target of retaliatory nuclear strikes. so to speak, this is up to the export of the population already completely to the east, and so on the remnants of violence. well,

such was the epoch, but everything happened then for obvious reasons in europe now. eh, you can probably already state that this is the idea that we keep our national territory, it is no longer relevant. and where else can some charges appear? here are the americans in asia who are officially declared the main, so to speak tvd for the future, where they can place something. well, here is a subtle question. will they post it? because, so to speak, a discussion on this topic. there is practically no other question that if there is a question of pressure from the main allies , which are the threshold primarily from south korea, then they can go for an exchange, we provide you with clumsiness in response to the fact that you give up your nuclear program , such a variant is technically possible, especially. if the americans have too many, then there are some more pots in the kitchen that it is necessary to work simultaneously in europe and in asia , south asia, and so on.

uh, american tactical nuclear weapons were in south korea during the cold war, and how would it be possible to return them there if the question of china's containment is already at this level, but so far it's a little far from that, but from my point of view, the main main uh, the logic by which it can appear there is the exclusion of the development of nuclear programs of the threshold state. that is, this is south korea, this is theoretically japan in no way , because both are literally six months away. maybe to assemble not only what the operating device, but japan, with their plutonium reserves, can mass -produce. well, china is traditionally known much less than china does not like to dedicate their strategic issues to anyone , but still, if you fantasize , you can imagine that china will also think about placing something somewhere, i can’t imagine. such a scenario, firstly , china does not have a lot of nuclear weapons, apparently, there will be more time, but not so much,

and secondly, and this is more important, china does not have a military as such, he has specific relations with some states, they have here our strategic partnership with russia , which is not a military alliance . there are no allies in the version of american extended deterrence. that is, or both also does not fit. no, it doesn’t fit, there, again, a special relationship, but also that e chinese nuclear weapons could do e in north korea they already have nuclear weapons, that is, if again hypothetically thinking about replacing one with another. but how is it political? i don't know, that is. well, there is absolutely no need for things and the chinese are very careful about this kind of things, because their image in the international arena is still vital. they understand what they will look like if they go up a notch in this discussion and move away from specific, which means placements. is the perception of nuclear weapons somewhere in our country changing now in this turbulent situation? either in america in china. i mean, to what

extent do we start to think that this is, in general, just another weapon, well, about just another weapon. i would say that this is still a long way off, because all the things that have been said there over the past year on this topic, for example, they came down to nuclear risks. that is, to the fact that the risks of using nuclear weapons. grew up is seen and on western rhetoric. this is actually seen in russian rhetoric. although in some cases, it is deployed, so to speak, i will choose a little inside out. this is, in principle, also a perception of high risk. there we are talking about the fact that if anything, it arrives, and to perceive, uh, nuclear weapons, as another weapon, it still doesn’t work, because if you look at the calculations on those studies that were born of the cold war, and those studies that were made for the indo-pakistani theater, for example, at one time, where the number of nuclear weapons is comparable to the european one now. that is a paradoxical conclusion. uh nuclear weapons as

a means of the battlefield is starting to really mean something only with massive application. well, actually, the seventies. we remember that all these here are 80-100 strikes in the zone of one advancing army. further. sort it out for yourself well, our greatest military theorists, they are the late gaev a said that at the beginning of 70 he considered this hmm and came to the conclusion. what this war is simply uncontrollable. there, for almost three days, after the first wave of the war of nuclear strikes, there were waves of nuclear strikes. it will just be necessary to find out who where is who what does which the americans were on the offensive there, came directly to the same conclusion and , by and large, considered all these means as a means of deterrence, if we move to the level of insignificant use, that is, there are a few dozen, then there is no military value, all the more. and in particular, it was considered at one time for the scheme for the use of pakistani tactical nuclear weapons against indian

mechanized troops, that is , it does not give a clear stopping effect, cardinal , only the deterrence effect when we use it on the field. boya tactical nuclear weapons. this is the penultimate, maybe the last step before the warning that strategic exchanges will go on, including in cities. this is precisely the element of deterrence. and in the current version, it only looks like this, because, well, what are 100 american nuclear bombs in these e, that means six storage facilities on the territory of nato countries. but in fact, there are more than 18 storage facilities there . they're just empty yet. and it has no military significance, as such, that is, it can be used, well, it is very effective enough, but just as an element of deterrence in the theater, the same applies to our weapons by and large. thank you, konstantin bogdanov was with us china brazil signed an agreement on the transition to trading in national currencies. the united states

tripled the supply of oil to the european union on the sale of russian oil to india increased 22 times scattered facts. the built-in jigsaw puzzle is being put together this week as the world is rapidly realigning itself towards a new system partition and politically discarding the desire for one-size-fits-all approaches and economically shred. even those markets that remained more or less united during the cold war are what we are seeing. this is a very rapid restoration of the division of the world into east and west , the largest russian energy companies are almost completely reorienting themselves to customers in asia. the time when europe begins to receive raw materials from any other sources. nothing like this, we have not seen before both the large-scale and furcation of the market that determines the trends. if we look back a hundred years ago, the parallel, not the most radiant, then the structuring of associations also took place, which quickly

went from ideological economic to military-political and turned out to be ready for a fight, which thereby became inevitable . history never literally repeats itself, but it never passes without a trace. it was an international review. goodbye. deposit the best interest in sberbank is a reliable investment let's make repairs more profitable to do it on credit let's do nothing. arrange settled sabantuy will be something to remember, justice and lie correctly open a deposit in sberbank and everything will be fine deposit the best interest in sberbank up to 9.5%

per annum buy new tires. it’s hard to live with prostatitis, and if fibrosis is added to prostatitis, it’s even harder , the smart enzyme langidase helps reduce inflammation and break down fibrosis foci so that the symptoms don’t turn longidase’s life just against fibrosis with prostatitis cashback up to thirty percent. this is a reason to rejoice in every purchase, to please someone else to turn ordinary coffee into a pleasant acquaintance and the opportunity to change plans, as it is beneficial for you. get a free card for life at vtb and every day will become better. switch to vtb and everything will work out in business. everything should work like freshly ground, like a competitor, like a clock on

the wall, like an electronic signature, like a counteragent’s accounting product, a turnover ecosystem for a business circuit that works at work. there is everything that you love up to twenty percent discount on chilled pork from the sberbank meter , order profitably. great pitch great taste with brand new sauces. i like to cook brighter taste brighter mood at bigfest. choose a hamburger or

a chickenburger for only 35 rubles. find out more transparently the truth about car accident repairs. it’s easy to go beautifully into the sunset because there is a scooter. believe me, good luck, register on the site, order your favorite products and participate in the drawing of thousands of prizes details. a favorable loan is much closer to the post office banks 4.5% per annum with a guaranteed rate service in each post

bank at every step along the land of the post bank. we watch to know everything about russia , we watch the best historical series for free without

registration. pay special attention to expanding ties with