Man who saved the world: #Soviet submariner single-handedly averted #WWIII at height of #CubanMissileCrisis

The man who saved the world: The Soviet submariner who single-handedly averted WWIII at height of the Cuban Missile Crisis | LEON WATSON and MARK DUELL | MAILONLINE | 26 September 2012

  • U.S.S.R. and U.S. stood on brink of nuclear war during Cuban Missile Crisis

  • Four Russian submarines secretly set sail to Cuba, with nuclear weapons

  • Vasili Arkhipov, who died in 1998, used last veto against firing sub’s torpedo

  • The Russians instead surrendered and his action avoided World War Three

He was the man who saved the world by single-handedly averting World War Three five decades ago, yet he died humiliated, outcast and an unknown. Only now has his story has come to light.

A documentary shown tonight told how for 13 days during the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962, the world held its breath as the U.S.S.R. and the U.S. stood on the brink of nuclear war.

At the height of the Cold War, when paranoia on both sides meant the slightest provocation could spark nuclear war, four submarines secretly set sail from Russia to communist Cuba.

vasili-arkhipov.jpg
VASILY ARKHIPOV

Averted war: Vasili Arkhipoy (pictured left, and right aboard a submarine), saved the world by single-handedly averting World War Three with one decision 50 years ago, yet he died humiliated, outcast and an unknown

Only a handful of the submariners on board knew that their ships carried nuclear weapons, each with the strength of the bombs dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima in 1945.

Vasili Arkhipov, aboard the sub B59, was one of them. As his craft neared Cuba, U.S. helicopters, aeroplanes and battleships were scouring the ocean for Russian subs.

‘At that period of time it was called “special weapon”, not “nuclear torpedo”,’ said Viktor Mikhailov, junior navigator on Sub B-59. ‘At that time we couldn’t even imagine a nuclear torpedo.’

In a game of high stakes cat and mouse it wasn’t long before the Russians were spotted. Arkhipov’s sub was forced to make an emergency dive.

Man Who Saved the World. Vasili and wife Olga in 1957
Man Who Saved the World Vasili with his daughter Yelena three years before he died

Remembered: Arkhipov is pictured left with his wife Olga in 1957, and right with his daughter Yelena, three years before he died in 1998

Tense:  For 13 days during the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962, the world held its breath as the USSR and the U.S. stood on the brink of nuclear war

Tense: For 13 days during the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962, the world held its breath as the USSR and the U.S. stood on the brink of nuclear war

As the submariners tried to stay hidden from their US hunters, conditions in the sub deteriorated. For a week they stayed underwater, in sweltering 60C heat, rationed to just one glass of water a day.

‘Basically what we were trying to do was apply passive torture. Frankly I don’t think we felt any sympathy for them at all. They were the enemy’

Gary Slaughter, USS Cony signalman

Above them, the U.S. navy were ‘hunting by exhaustion’ – trying to force the Soviet sub to come to the surface to recharge its batteries.

They had no idea that on board the submarines were weapons capable of destroying the entire American fleet.

Gary Slaughter, a signalman on board the USS Cony battleship, said: ‘We knew they were probably having trouble breathing. It was hot as hell in there, they were miserable.

Mr President: John F. Kennedy was in office in the U.S. between 1961 and 1963, at the height of the crisis

Mr President: John F. Kennedy was in office in the U.S. between 1961 and 1963, at the height of the crisis

Tense: The documentary recreated the dramatic moment when Soviet sailors decided not to fire the weapon

Tense: The documentary recreated the dramatic moment when Soviet sailors decided not to fire the weapon

‘They were cramped together and they had been under great stress for a long time. Basically what we were trying to do was apply passive torture.

‘They said that the person who prevented a nuclear war was the Russian submariner Vasili Arkhipov. I was proud and I am proud of my husband always’

Olga Arkipov, widow of Vasili Arkhipov

‘Frankly I don’t think we felt any sympathy for them at all. They were the enemy.’

The Americans decided to ratchet up the pressure, and dropped warning grenades into the sea. Inside the sub, the Soviet submariners thought they were under attack.

Valentin Savitsky, the captain of B59, was convinced the nuclear war had already started.

He demanded that the submariners launch their torpedo to save some of Russia’s pride.

The programme on Channel 5 revealed how in any normal circumstances Savitsky’s orders would have been followed, and World War Three would have been unleashed.

'Close friend': Ryurik Ketov, commander of Sub B-4, said Arkhipov was 'cool-headed' and 'in control'

‘Close friend’: Ryurik Ketov, commander of Sub B-4, said Arkhipov was ‘cool-headed’ and ‘in control’

Memories: Viktor Mikhailov, junior navigator on Sub B-59, said they had a 'special weapon' on board, which was not even referred to as a 'nuclear weapon'

Memories: Viktor Mikhailov, junior navigator on Sub B-59, said they had a ‘special weapon’ on board, which was not even referred to as a ‘nuclear weapon’

Ryurik Ketov, commander of another sub, Sub B-4, said: ‘Vasili Arkhipov was a submariner and a close friend of mine. He was a family friend. He stood out for being cool-headed. He was in control.’

‘One of the Russian admirals told the submariners: “It would have been better if you’d gone down with your ship”. Extraordinary’

Thomas Blanton, historian

Savitsky hadn’t counted on Arkhipov. As commander of the fleet, Arkhipov had the last veto. And although his men were against him, he insisted that they must not fire – and instead surrender.

It was a humiliating move – but one that saved the world. The Soviet submariners were forced to return to their native Russia, where they were given the opposite of a hero’s welcome.

Historian Thomas Blanton told the Sun: ‘What heroism, what duty, they fulfilled to go halfway across the world and come back, and survive.

Covert mission: In a game of high stakes cat and mouse it wasn't long before the Russian's were spotted

Covert mission: In a game of high stakes cat and mouse it wasn’t long before the Russian’s were spotted

Proud: Arkopov's widow Olga said: 'I was proud and I am proud of my husband, always'widow Olga said: 'I was proud and I am proud of my husband, always.'

Proud: Arkopov’s widow Olga said: ‘I was proud and I am proud of my husband, always’

‘But in fact, one of the Russian admirals told the submariners; “It would have been better if you’d gone down with your ship.” Extraordinary.’

‘Vasili Arkhipov was a submariner and a close friend of mine. He was a family friend. He stood out for being cool-headed. He was in control’

Ryurik Ketov, commander of Sub B-4

Four decades passed before the story of what really happened on the B59 sub was discovered. It was after Arkipov had died in 1998 from radiation poisoning.

But to his widow Olga, he was always a hero.

She said: ‘He knew that it was madness to fire the nuclear torpedo. In Cuba, in honour of the 40th anniversary of the crisis, people gathered.

‘They said that the person who prevented a nuclear war was the Russian submariner Vasili Arkhipov. I was proud and I am proud of my husband always.’

______________________________________________________________________

 

Advertisements

#Jove ‘I, for one, am glad that Boris #Johnson and Michael #Gove are now de facto running the country. What could possibly go wrong?’

I, for one, am glad that Boris Johnson and Michael Gove are now de facto running the country. What could possibly go wrong?Matthew Norman | @IndyVoices | THE INDEPENDENT | 12 November 2017

It isn’t so much that Theresa May is the hostage of two politicians she knows have no place in the Cabinet. It is that Britain’s future might also be their hostage 

 

boris-gove-no10.jpg

Guess who’s back, back again Getty 

If you had come to doubt Boris Johnson’s competence as Foreign Secretary, you must be feeling a proper Charlie now.

I know I am.

I am not about to make excuses. Sometimes, you have to take the shame. But somehow I got bamboozled into confusing Boris’s diplomatic masterstrokes – joking about Libya’s tourist potential once the streets are cleansed of the corpses; risking a British woman’s freedom with false claims about the purpose of her visit to Iran; reciting a colonialist Kipling poem and mocking Buddha in a Myanmar temple; that sort of caper – with monumental unforced errors. The kind of howlers that would ordinarily disqualify someone, for life, from the lowest rung of the Toytown government.

What a relief, then, to find out that Boris is doing a bang-up job after all. We know this because Michael Gove said on Sunday on The Andrew Marr Show that “Boris is doing a great job as Foreign Secretary”, and no one speaks with more authority on the matter than him.

The last time he shared his insights on Boris, as if anyone needs reminding, was in late June 2016, when the latter was trying to replace David Cameron as prime minister. As his loyal friend, Brexit-Pinocchio compadre and leadership campaign manager rolled into one, Gove was uniquely well placed to appraise Boris’s fitness for high office. As indeed he did.

Boris simply lacked the grip and focus, he said then. Excruciating as it was – oh, the agonies to which his selfless compulsion to do the right thing exposed him – he had to save Britain from disaster. So it was, in accord with his interminably repeated insistence that under no circumstances would he ever run for PM himself, that Govey announced he would be running for PM himself.

It was a tragedy that he had no more luck there than the dear, dear friend he knifed in the back without a thought for the personal ambition he proved he never had by running for PM in his place. But less than 18 months later, rejoice, rejoice! The two halves of everyone’s favourite political pantomime horse are back in harness.

With Boris at the front and Govey cast to type as his hind quarters, this adorable creature seems to have seized control of Brexit via a genteel coup d’état.

Michael Gove says he doesn’t know what Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe was doing in Iran

How long this alliance will last is not guessable given the personal history, let alone the context of a rapidly disintegrating government. But for now, the Boris-Govey axis appears to have Theresa May in its power, and is dictating the ultra-hard Brexit that occupies the very wettest of its dreams.

On Marr’s sofa, Gove confirmed by not denying that the pair recently sent May a “secret” letter laying out her actions on this minor matter of national interest. Delivered by hand to May’s chief of staff Gavin Barwell by Postman Boris, and explicitly for their eyes only, the missive constitutes something between an ultimatum, a ransom note and a power grab. After receiving it, May hardened her Brexit stance accordingly.

How her obedience could stretch to following their orders to impose a unified Brexit line on the entire Cabinet is hard to imagine when she is too weak to move Boris, let alone sack him.

Yet the significant point is not that she lacks the authority to bully Philip Hammond and others on speaking terms with Brexit realism into parroting a blatantly false line. The point is that these two clowns felt emboldened to fill the power vacuum and take charge.

And it isn’t so much that Theresa May is the hostage of two politicians she knows better than anyone have no place in the Cabinet. It is that Britain’s future might also be their hostage.

There is still time for the doomsday scenario of the nightmare pair engineering a formal putsch and divvying up the posts of PM and Chancellor between them. My hunch, which any regular reader will value at a fair bit less than zero, is that the next leader will be someone younger and less tainted by cabinet office, who will burst out of the pack in the closing furlings in the usual Tory style.

Yet at this moment, in this borderline anarchy, all things are possible. One of those is that the Johnson-Gove partnership – possibly to become known as Jove by those who like their celeb lovers’ portmanteau shorter than Brangelina – will be leading us inexorably, cockily and abrasively towards a “F*** the filthy foreigners (aka no deal) Brexit”.

Without wishing to alarm you further, these two very different personalities have one gigantic thing to bind them. They are Rupert Murdoch’s placemen in the Cabinet. They’re the lads Rupert dines with in Mayfair whenever he graces us with a state visit. They are the boys he could rely on to ensure that his troubled bid for a 100 per cent stake in BSkyB is permitted.

How close Murdoch is to riding to victory upon his trusty panto steed is difficult to gauge in the midst of the chaos. But however wonderful it is to see Boris doing such a splendid job at the Foreign Office, wouldn’t it be even more splendid to watch us “get our country back” by facilitating the commercial wishes of an Australian-born naturalised American whose sovereign powers extend way beyond the right to hack mobile phones with long term impunity?

Debunking Two American Myths

“Keep in mind that, unlike their US counterparts, the Russians typically like to under-evaluate Russian military capabilities. You will find the Russia media bragging about how “totally awesome and best in the world” Russian weapons systems are, but military personnel in Russia still has a corporate culture of secrecy and under-reporting your real capabilities to the enemy. Furthermore, while junior officers can say pretty much anything they want, senior officers are held to very strict rules and they have to carefully weigh every word they say, especially acting officers. So when the Chief of Staff officially declares that Russia now has a conventional strategic deterrence capability – you can take that to the bank. It’s real.

Alas, the western media is still stuck in the “full idiot” mode we saw during the transit of the Russian aircraft carrier from the North Atlantic to the Mediterranean: on one hand, the Admiral Kuznetsov was presented as a rusty old bucket while on the other NATO forces constantly shadowed it as if it was about to strike London. Likewise, US politicians present Russia as a “gas station” while, at the same time, stating that this “gas station” has the capability to decide who lives in the White House. This kind of reporting is not only unhelpful but outright dangerous. One one hand the “the Russians are backward brutes” fosters an arrogant and cocky attitude. On the other hand, constantly speaking about fake Russian threats results in a very dangerous case of “cry wolf” in which all possible Russian threats (including very real ones) are dismissed as pure propaganda. The reality is, of course, very different and simple in a binary way: Russia represents absolutely no threat to the United States or anybody else (including the three Baltic statelets). But if some western politician decides that he is smarter and stronger than Napoleon or Hitler and that he will finally bring the Russians to their knees, then he and his country will be destroyed. It is really that simple.”
Source URL: http://thesaker.is/the-two-great-us-american-myths-which-can-result-in-a-war-with-russia/

Astute News

There are two myths which are deeply imprinted in the minds of most US Americans which are extremely dangerous and which can result in a war with Russia.

  • The first myth is the myth of the US military superiority.
  • The second myth is the myth about the US invulnerability.

I believe that it is therefore crucial to debunk these myths before they end up costing us millions of lives and untold suffering.

In my latest piece for the Unz Review I discussed the reasons why the US armed forces are nowhere nearly as advanced as the US propaganda machine would have us believe. And even though the article was a discussion of Russian military technologies I only gave one example, in passing, of Russian military technologies by comparing the T-50 PAKFA to the US F-35 (if you want to truly get a feel for the F-35 disaster, please read this

View original post 3,941 more words

What Craziness Is Going on in Saudi Arabia?

“The Saudis appear to be planning military provocations against bad neighbour Iran. These may include attacks in Lebanon against Hezbollah – which might open the way for US attacks on Iran and its allies. The Saudis are enraged over their defeat in Syria and want revenge.

Is this the beginning of the collapse of the House of Saud? Or a Saudi renaissance led by Prince Mohammed as he claims? Stay tuned.”

Astute News

What’s going on in Saudi Arabia? Over 200 bigwigs detained and ‘illegal profits’ of some $800 billion confiscated.

The kingdom is in an uproar. The Saudi regime of King Salman and his ambitious 32-year old son, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, claim it was all part of an ‘anti-corruption’ drive that has Washington’s full backing.

Utter nonsense. I’ve done business in Saudi Arabia since 1976 and can attest that the entire kingdom, with its thousands of pampered princes and princesses, is one vast swamp of corruption. In Saudi, the entire nation and its vast oil revenues are considered property of the extended Saudi royal family and its hangers-on. A giant piggy bank.

The late Libyan leader Muammar Khadaffi told me the Saudis are ‘an incredibly rich bunch of Bedouins living behind high walls and scared to death of their poorer neighbors.’

We have just witnessed a palace coup in Riyadh…

View original post 683 more words

Even Prince Bandar Gets Caught In Prince’s Net

“Many of Mohammed bin Salman’s colleagues must now be asking themselves how long they have before the ambitious prince turns on them.

By hitting the foundations of the unity of the family, as well as the oligarchs, and targeting independent Islamic scholars and public figures, MBS is turning his guns on the traditional pillars of the Saudi state, one analyst said.

“So far, the Saudi kingdom has used chaos as a policy in its near abroad, either in Iraq, Syria or in Yemen. However, it is now implementing the chaos theory at home too, and no one, least of all the prince himself, can be sure of what will now happen,” an informed person in Riyadh said last night.

“The stability of the kingdom was built on three pillars: the unity of the al-Saud family, the Islamic character of the state and the flourishing loyal domestic business community. By hitting all three simultaneously, the risk of the kingdom sinking into the sand is very high,” he said.”

ThereAreNoSunglasses

Several detainees taken to hospital with torture injuries, while sources tell MEE scale of crackdown is bigger than authorities have revealed

Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has overseen arrest of hundreds of people, including senior royals, ministers and tycoons (AFP)

Some senior figures detained in last Saturday’s purge in Saudi Arabia were beaten and tortured so badly during their arrest or subsequent interrogations that they required hospital treatment, Middle East Eye can reveal.

People inside the royal court also told MEE that the scale of the crackdown, which has brought new arrests each day, is much bigger than Saudi authorities have admitted, with more than 500 people detained and double that number questioned.

Members of the royal family, government ministers and business tycoons were caught up in the sudden wave of arrests orchestrated by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, known…

View original post 1,302 more words

Guantánamo Bay victim sues Ottawa for $50 million

“Whitling has said that Ameziane’s case calls for a full-scale public inquiry into Canada’s alleged role in the treatment of innocent detainees held in Guantanamo Bay.

Earlier Whitling represented Canadian teenage prisoner at Guantanamo Bay for 15 years, Omar Khadr, who was paid Canadian $10 million out-of-court by Canadian government and a written apology earlier this year.

Listen below experiences of three British Muslims kept at Guantanamo Bay for years without taking them to court for the alleged terrorist activities.”

Rehmat's World

Djamel Ameziane, an Algerian-born technician, who took refuge in Canada in 1995, sues Canadian government for $50 million as compensation for the detention, and the physical abuse his suffered during his eleven years imprisonment (2002-2013) at the Guantánamo Bay Zionist torture camp.

Djamel Ameziane was deported to his native country by US authorities in 2013. Ameziane, 50, was never charged or prosecuted for the alleged terrorist activities by the US authorities during his eleven years at the Guantánamo Bay.

Nate Whitling, an Edmonton lawyer has filed the petition in Ontario Superior Court on Monday last week – claiming $50 million in damages, alleging the Canadian government co-operated with the United States while his client was being arbitrarily detained without cause in the notorious American military prison in Cuba.

The lawsuit alleges that after being tortured and detained in Kandahar, he was transferred to Guantanamo Bay in February 2002, and that the Americans’ decision to…

View original post 158 more words

#MidEastAnalysis #Geopolitics #Patriot #S400 On the brink of another war?

On the Brink of War | Abdel Bari Atwan | Raialyoum | 10 November 2017

Muhammd Bin-Salman’s purge in Saudi Arabia is the prelude to something bigger.

bin salamn cc.jpg666

Our region stands on the brink of war. We should not let small details — such as the resignation of Lebanese Prime Minister Saad al-Hariri’s resignation or the detention of princes and former ministers in Saudi Arabia — divert us from the big picture and the real developments taking place behind the scenes. The really dangerous phase is the one that will follow Crown Prince Muhammad Bin-Salman’s purge on the domestic Saudi front. It may be the precursor to scenarios for a regional war that could, without exaggeration, end up being the most devastating in its modern history.

 

All that is currently happening is part of a carefully planned and crafted scheme, and the prelude to a sectarian war waged in  ‘Arab nationalist’ guise against the growing power of ‘Shia’ Iran and its surrogates in Yemen, Lebanon and Iraq with American, regional and Israeli backing.

The old Saudi Arabia is no more. Wahhabism is breathing its last, has been all but buried and is in the process of becoming history. A fourth Saudi state, dressed in the garb of modernity and based on different alliances, is being born.

When its would-be founder and man of the moment, Muhammad Bin-Salman, accuses Iran of mounting a ‘direct military attack that may amount to an act of war’ against his country by allegedly supplying missiles to factions in Yemen, and his stance is endorsed and supported by the US, it is clear that a new American-led alliance is taking shape in the region.

Muhammad Bin-Salman’s domestic purge, including the detention of 11 princes and scores of businessmen and former officials under the banner of fighting corruption, is only a first phase. It seems to haves proceeded smoothly so far, without encountering any serious obstacles.

The man now has now brought the four major pillars of state power – the economy, the security and military forces, the media and the religious establishment (both the official Council of Senior Ulema and the unofficial ‘awakening’ clerics) — totally under his control. He has thrown all his opponents, and anyone who uttered any criticism of his rule, behind bars (or, in the case of the princes and other high-ranking figures, incarcerated them in a luxury hotel for now). The latest round of detentions is unlikely to be the last, for we are dealing here with a bulldozer that levels everything that stands in its path.

In due course, Muhammad Bin-Salman will move on to what we believe will be the second and more serious phase, that of military confrontation.

This could include the following steps:

— First, precipitating a military confrontation with Iran against the backdrop of the crushing siege on Yemen, after imposing a total land, air, and sea blockade of the country on the pretext of preventing Iranian missiles from reaching the Houthis.

– Secondly, forming a new alliance along the lines of the Desert Storm coalition formed in 1990 to expel Iraqi forces from Kuwait. Candidates for membership in addition to Saudi Arabia and the UAE include UAE, Jordan, Egypt, Sudan and Morocco. (The King of Morocco has, coincidentally, been in the UAE capital Abu-Dhabi reportedly seeking to mediate with Saudi Arabia over the recent detentions: but he was sent a clear message from Riyadh not to interfere in what is happening inside Saudi Arabia, according reliable sources).

– Third, the bombardment of Lebanon and destruction of its infrastructure on the pretext of trying to eradicate Hezbollah. Such an assault would prompt the party to retaliate with intensive missile strikes against Israel, and would be more likely than ever before to drag in Iran and Syria.

– Fourth, an invasion of Qatar by Egyptian, Emirati and Saudi forces aimed at overthrowing its regime, precipitating a clash with the 30,000-strong Turkish force deployed there.

– Fifth, an American-Saudi-Israeli counteroffensive in Syria aimed at recapturing the areas lost by the US and its allies’ rebel proxies such as Aleppo, Homs and Deir az-Zour.  The US cannot easily stomach its defeat in Syria at the hands of Russia and Iran, even at the risk of causing a collision with Russia. It deliberately foiled the Syrian national dialogue conference in Sochi which Moscow had called for by getting the Syrian opposition to boycott it.

– Sixth, mobilizing the Kurdish militias in northern Iraq and Syria as US proxies in these wars with the aim of weakening and destabilizing Iran, Turkey, and Iraq.

These are just the most obvious of the steps that may be taken by the new US-led alliance – whatever it chooses to call itself.

But none of this means that it is assured of success in achieving its aims and reshaping the region to its specifications.

The counter-scenario may be that of the consolidation of an Iranian-Syrian-Turkish-Iraqi alliance with which Russia would sympathize to begin with, and which it may eventually end up leading. These countries combined possess formidable missile arsenals which would mostly be aimed at Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Israel. The targeted states’ much-vaunted US-made Patriot anti-missile systems would be ineffective in the face of intensive strikes by thousands of missiles fired simultaneously.

The gauge of success in this anticipated and possibly imminent regional war would be the destruction of Iran, regime-change in Qatar and the eradication of Hezbollah. But its failure would mean devastation for Saudi Arabia, Israel and the UAE and the dismemberment of the Saudi kingdom into fragments.

We are neither soothsayers nor fortune-tellers. Nevertheless, this may prove to be the last war that transforms the region, changing its states, its borders, and perhaps its populations as well. The Arabs and Iranians will certainly survive such a cataclysm. But can Israel in its current form survive it too?

________________________________________________________________

 

 

S-400 vs Patriot: One-on-One Comparison of the Missile Defense Systems of Russia and US | SPUTNIK | 11 November 2017

Above: S-400 © Photo: Sputnik, Mikhail Voskresenskiy
Below: Patriot © Photo: AFP, Bernd Wustneck / DPA

The S-400 air defense system
According to the codification of the US Defense Ministry and NATO – SA-21 Growler, the Russian anti-aircraft medium- and long-range missile system, designed to destroy all modern and long-term means of air and space attack

The Patriot air defense system
The American missile system which is on service at the US Army and the armies of the Allied countries. Designed to protect large administrative and industrial centers, as well as naval and air bases from an air attack
ENTRY INTO SERVICE
2007

The S-400 air defense system entered service with the Russian army
1982

The Patriot air defense system entered service with the US Army
COMPANIES-MANUFACTURERS
S-400
Almaz-Antey
Patriot
Raytheon
Left: © Photo: Dmitri Vinogradov/Sputnik
Right: © Photo: AP Photo/Czarek Sokolowski
ON SERVICE IN COUNTRIES
Russia
S-400
Russia
Advance payment: Turkey
At the stage of delivery: China
Possible buyers: Saudi Arabia, India, Bahrain

Patriot
the United States, Germany, Japan, the United Arab Emirates, Taiwan, the Netherlands, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Greece, Israel, Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan
Top: S-400 © Photo: Sputnik, Grigoriy Sisoev
Underneath: Patriot © Photo: AFP, Bulent Kilic
THE AIR DEFENSE SYSTEMS INCLUDE
The S-400

• Up to eight anti-aircraft missile systems, each equipped with up to 12 launchers

• A system command post, a radar center, a mobile tower for antenna post, anti-aircraft guided missiles

• A technical support system, means of providing technical maintenance for the missiles
S-400 © Photos: Dmitri Vinogradov, Sergey Malgavko, Grigoriy Sisoev (Sputnik)
The PATRIOT

• A radar station, a fire control point, power supply sources

• Communication facilities, technical equipment, camouflage for radio engineering and engineering.

• Launchers, anti-aircraft guided missiles
Patriot © Photos: Igor Zarembo (Sputnik); Janek Skarzynski, John MacDougall (AFP)
COMPARISON OF CHARACTERISTICS OF THE S-400 AND THE PATRIOT

S-400:

Patriot:
Range of damage of aerial targets:

>250 km

160 km

Range of destruction of ballistic missiles:
60 km

<45 km

Target elimination height:
max — 27 km
min — 0,01 km

max — 24 km
min — 0,06 km

Range of radar coverage:
600 km

>150 km

Deployment time:
5 minutes

30 minutes

Maximum speed of targets for successful elimination:
up to 4,800 meters per second

at least 2,200 meters per second

System reaction time:
10 seconds

15 seconds

Launch angle of missile:
90 degrees

38 degrees

MODIFICATIONS OF THE PATRIOT SYSTEM
PAC-1

Improved radar scanning angles, software and effectiveness with regard to tactical ballistic missiles
PAC 2
Improvements to the software and combat functionality of the missile, which had its strike capability upgraded and was equipped with a new fuse. There is also a GEM-T modification similar to the PAC-3
PAC-3
Designed for intercepting the warheads of tactical ballistic and cruise missiles, including those equipped with stealth technology
PAC-3 MSE
Features a more powerful engine, improved fin assembly and guidance system. The damage radius is increased by 1.5 times in comparison with PAC-3 (the exact characteristics of the missiles are classified)
Patriot © Photo: Sputnik, Igor Zarembo
MODIFICATION OF THE S-400
The S-500 Prometey Air Defense System
Mobile long-range anti-aircraft missile system which is designed for destroying any aerial and ballistic targets
Interception range
exceeds the American analogue THAAD by 2-3 times

From space…
The S-500 is mainly designed for destroying objects in outer space

…to ultra-low altitudes
The targets include Tomahawk cruise missiles which fly at an altitude of five meters from the Earth’s surface
Multitasking
The system will combine the capabilities of operational-tactical and strategic missile defense systems
Versatility
The system integrates all Russian air defenses into a single information space
Rapidity
According to the assigned task, the response time of the system should not exceed four seconds

 

S-400 © Photo: Sputnik, Alexei Danichev

Safeguarding in practice?

“”

Michaela Movement

Today I had a three-hour lecture on safeguarding children. It was hard, emotional and thought provoking. A three-hour lecture hardly makes me an expert, I know. Nevertheless, it has enabled me to broaden my thinking, my questioning and my understanding of safeguarding, what it means in practice and times in my life that it has failed. We hear of child protection scandals, when cases like Baby P are publicised widely in the media, and rightly so. What we don’t hear about is how so many agencies miss so many issues and for what reasons and how as a society we have so many systems that should have child safeguarding at the forefront of their work, but don’t. From personal experience, this is my take on it….
We touched on interventions from local authorities for children in need. When I was born, I was a child in need. My parents were…

View original post 1,075 more words

#Incompetence: ‘Boris #Johnson has been embarrassing #Britain for long enough. It’s time for him to go’ Jeremy #Corbyn

Boris Johnson has been embarrassing Britain for long enough. It’s time for him to go | THE GUARDIAN | 11 November 2017

The foreign secretary has been damaging Britain’s standing in the world for 16 months, and has now put Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s future liberty under threat.

Boris Johnson at the Conservative party conference

Boris Johnson at the Conservative party conference, where he said the Libyan city of Sirte could become a tourist destination once ‘they clear the dead bodies away’. Photograph: Paul Ellis/AFP/Getty Images

Theresa May should never have appointed someone as Britain’s top diplomat who had accused Barack Obama of being anti-British because he’s “part-Kenyan”, and notoriously wrote about “flag-waving piccaninnies”.

Now, after 16 months of the foreign secretary damaging Britain’s standing in the world, she should sack him.

With shocking callousness, Boris Johnson caused outrage last month by declaring that the Libyan city of Sirte could become “the next Dubai” once they “clear the dead bodies away”.

Making jokes about people killed in a civil war, (in which the Conservative-led government intervened militarily and which has made us less safe), is breathtakingly crass and was rightly condemned by Tory MPs as well as Libyan leaders.

His colonial throwback take on the world is completely out of step with the reality of our diverse and modern country and the views of our people. We should embrace the 21st century, not hanker after the 19th.

In his first conference speech as foreign secretary, Johnson referred to Africa, a continent of more than 50 states as “that country”. He claimed that life expectancy in Africa “has risen astonishingly” as it “has entered the global economic system”. Sadly, life expectancy has not risen astonishingly across the continent in the last 30 years and has fallen in several countries.

Britain’s top diplomat needs to be a leader in cultural sensitivity, but he repeatedly lets our country down.

He thought a Sikh gurdwara the appropriate place to discuss Indian whisky tariffs. Johnson was forced to apologise when it was pointed out that alcohol is prohibited in Sikhism.

Johnson has not learned how to be diplomatic or represent our country.

And now we have the heartbreaking case of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, whose future liberty is under threat because of Johnson’s serial bungling. The foreign secretary should have the decency to say clearly and unequivocally that he was wrong and do everything possible to make sure she isn’t punished for his cavalier mistake.

With growing tensions on the Korean peninsula, we need serious diplomacy and nuclear armed states to re-engage with the process of meaningful multilateral disarmament. Johnson has failed to provide it, ducking our international obligations under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

We’ve put up with him embarrassing and undermining our country through his incompetence and putting our citizens at risk for long enough. It’s time for Boris Johnson to go.

__________________________________________________________________________________

 

Occupational Stealth – Be wary of revealing mental health issues at work .

“Whilst an employer has a duty to ensure that an individual’s work does not adversely affect his health, which was why the Occupational Health Service was created, this should not be subverted and then used against an employee.

Many people’s livelihood can be destroyed by the present use of Occupational Health as it can be made a tool of management to control workers present and future employability.”

finolamoss

Mental-Health-PIC

A review commissioned by our Prime Minister revealed 300,000 workers lose their jobs annually due to mental health.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/oct/26/thriving-work-report-uk-mental-health-problems-forcing-thousands-out

But why are so many losing their jobs and what would be the effect of ridding the workplace of the mental health taboo?

Could it be an employer’s increased use of Occupational Health Services ?

70 years ago Clement Atlee set up a committee which concluded the Ministry of Health as a public independent body should be the provider for British Occupational Health Services.

But this was ignored, and today Occupation Health is a multi million pound private industry.

With the Department of Work and Pensions alone spending over £3,147 m on it annually.

The Committee’s wish was for the services to be completely independent of employers.

But they are still today paid for and commissioned by an employer, and such services owe their paramount duty to that employer, and this…

View original post 1,114 more words