NATO:s executive secretary Stoltenberg said. "‘Missile hit to Poland likely caused by Ukraine. But it's not Ukraine’s fault" .

The fact is that even if the shooter of those missiles were Ukraine, that doesn't change the situation that Russia is the attacker. And without a Russian attack, nobody even launched those missiles. 

The fact is that Russian troops can launch those missiles even if they were not in Russian territory. And here I mean that the launchers of those missiles could be in Belarus. The thing is that the Russian attacks are serious things. And we must follow how the situation advances in Ukraine. 

But there is always the possibility that some agent or infiltrator will launch missiles from Ukraine. And the motive for those strikes could be simple: stop the weapon aid to Ukraine. Here I mean that even if those missiles were launched by Ukrainians the order for those actions could come from Russian high commanders. 

China rejected Russia in the G-20 meeting. But China said that "China says Russia cannot be expelled from G20". (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10643219/China-says-Russia-expelled-G20-suggested-excluded.html)

Frenship between Russia and China is breaking. The thing is that sooner or later the support for Russia would cause very big costs for China. If the economic sanctions on Russia will escalate to China. That causes very big problems for that state. Things like China's policy with Taiwan causes also political pressure on Chinese products.  China is not Western-style democracy and there are many internal problems. 

The Chinese government does not tolerate opposition or ethnic minorities. And that causes pressure on Western political leaders who always highlight how democratic countries we are. The problem is that even if we are democratic and very tolerant in our countries we are supporting governments that are not following the Western way to make things. And now we pay price because of that policy, 

But even if China might see Putin otherwise very comfortable the big losses in Ukraine show that the Russian war machine is something wrong. And the reason for that is that the position of V. Putin is uncertain. The fact is that even if Putin continues in his office there could be changes in his cabinet. 

And if the contact person in Putin's cabinet falls into disfavor it can cause problems for all actors in the value chain. So even if Putin continues in office there are very windy times in Russia during and after the Ukrainian conflict. 

If China would give pressure Putin. That thing can make peace or demarcation in Ukraine closer. 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10643219/China-says-Russia-expelled-G20-suggested-excluded.html

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1697389/nato-Jens-Stoltenberg-poland-missile-attack-russia-ukraine-putin-war

https://www.mtvuutiset.fi/artikkeli/ukraina-vaatii-kumppaneiltaan-selitysta-siita-miksi-ne-epailevat-puolassa-ukrainalaisohjusta-itse-valmis-todistamaan-ohjuksen-venalaisjaljista/8572780#gs.idzyzu

https://www.mtvuutiset.fi/artikkeli/professori-g20-maiden-lausunto-paljastaa-etta-kiina-hylkasi-venajan-merkittava-lapimurto/8572680

https://www.mtvuutiset.fi/artikkeli/mika-aaltola-puolan-ohjusrajahdyksen-kaltaisia-sodan-ylilaikkymisia-saatetaan-nahda-lisaa/8571708

https://www.mtvuutiset.fi/artikkeli/suora-lahetys-klo-13-30-nain-nato-kommentoi-puolan-ohjusrajahdysta/8572574#gs.idy7dk

https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2022/nov/16/polish-missile-strike-likely-caused-by-ukraine-but-not-ukraines-fault-says-stoltenberg-video

http://curiosityanddarkmatter.home.blog/2022/11/16/natos-executive-secretary-stoltenberg-said-missile-hit-to-poland-likely-caused-by-ukraine-but-its-not-ukraines-fault/

What causes the failure of the Russian air war in Ukraine?

One reason for the failure of Russian air combat in the Ukrainian conflict is found in the article below this text. At the beginning of the war, Russian Su-30 SM, Su-34, and Su-35S jet fighters made multiple air-to-air and -air-to-ground missions. 

And especially the attacks whose target was log-range radar-station and other high-priority targets. Russians made those attacks by using single aircraft. And then they didn't confirm was the target destroyed. Or was the radar just shut down for protecting it against anti-radar missiles? 

They might believe that the tank regiments take those targets in the hands of Russian troops very soon after the attack anyway. So the Russian pilots or some people in the command chain thought that the confirmation of the effect of the strike was somehow unnecessary. 

And then the radars were not destroyed and continued their operations. Another reason for the failure of air combat is probably between the chair and the dashboard. If those pilots didn't get enough practice for that kind of operation. 

AN-12 "Cub"

They cannot make their duty as they should. The fact is, at least these Su-34 and Su-35 planes are much better than MiG-29 and Su-27. But the problem is that there is the possibility that some of those Russian fighters were not what they should be. If the microchips or some other things were not properly working. That causes the accuracy of those missions decreases. 

Also, if Russians must end their ECM operations. That leaves aircraft without full protection. There is a possibility that Russian ECM systems caused problems for their own troop's communication. And that's why air vehicles are left without protection. When Russian troops didn't get information that the air defense was still operational they sent cargo helicopters and troop-transport aircraft to Ukraine's airfield. And those vehicles were easy targets even for older war machines. 

Did VDV troops that attacked Kyiv's airfield protected by combat helicopters?  

Or what those helicopters and landing heavy transport aircraft could do? They were easy targets for rapid-firing AA guns and shoulder-launched missiles. And if the heavy cargo aircraft is just touching the airfield when Javelin or Stinger hits it. That causes a situation where aircraft cannot make any maneuvers. 

Or what was their target? There are two airfields in Kyiv. Was predicted to target Antonov's airfield. Or was it Kyiv international? If the pilots attacked against wrong targets and then troop transporters started to land at that airfield whose defense was untouchable they were easy to destroy. 

https://www.uusisuomi.fi/uutiset/raportissa-uutta-tietoa-venajan-ilmahyokkayksesta-elektroninen-sodankaynti-hairitsi-omia-joukkoja/e06df833-f4f2-4457-af39-8cdf6c33917c

https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/su-30sm-multirole-fighter-aircraft/

https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/su34/

https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/su-35/

https://www.uusisuomi.fi/uutiset/raportissa-uutta-tietoa-venajan-ilmahyokkayksesta-elektroninen-sodankaynti-hairitsi-omia-joukkoja/e06df833-f4f2-4457-af39-8cdf6c33917c

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-29

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-27

Image: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-35

https://www.avionslegendaires.net/avion-militaire/antonov-an-12-cub/

https://www.avionslegendaires.net/avion-militaire/antonov-an-12-cub/

Why Saudi-Arabian air defense is ineffective against drones?

Why Saudi-Arabian air defense is ineffective against drones?

Saudi-Arabian air defense was ineffective against drones, and that means that the military specialists must take drones more serious than ever before. Even a child can buy small-size RC-aircraft, and then put the gas bottle and explosive in it. The thing what makes drones very effective is that they can slip near targets, and then launch against it from close range. Those home-made cruise missiles can flight to target in a couple of seconds, and then cause very bad damages in the places like oil refineries.

In worst scenarios commando- or terrorist team would slip drones near the airfields and use them against aircraft. The thermobaric explosives, what is installed in the jet-engined RC-planes can cause serious damages to airplanes and their support systems, and the reaction time against that kind of attacks might be the only couple of seconds.

The thing is that in that kind of target even small-size explosive can cause extreme bad damages if the explosive is destroying the gas line when the entire plant can blow away. So this is one point to see things, and the problem with this kind of systems is that they are so cheap and small-sized. Those drones are hard to detect even in daylight, and if the target is some kind of factory, the noise of the engines can be covered by the noise of machines.

So in those cases, when the target is a chemical factory, fuel or explosives storage or something like that, the explosive, what hits the target must not be big. And that will cause serious problems with security. When we are thinking about air defense systems, the missiles what costs millions of dollars are ineffective against drone swarms, and one target for small drones can be the anti-aircraft missiles themselves.

The thing is that drone is easy to destroy even by using a shotgun if that thing is noticed and located. But the drone, what length is about 50 cm is not very easy to see, and they can use as the swarms. And here we must say that drone-swarms might be used in many ways. One version is that the drone is pulling the aluminum banderols behind it, and this way it can play normal airplane.

Along with holographic systems that drone might look like the strategic bomber and that forces enemy shoot their missiles against that drone, what costs about 200 euros. If we are thinking drones as the new kind of cruise missiles, the mission of those weapons might destroy the radars and missiles. In the worst scenarios, thousands of drones would drop in the operational area, and their mission would destroy the radars and missile batteries, and cheat enemy to shoot off their missiles.

That will open the skies for heavy bombers and traditional airplanes. So drones can operate as the pathfinders, what mission is to suppress enemy air defense and cause false alarms. When we are thinking about drones as the element of the battlefield, they are only one system, what operates in that field.

Of course, traditional air defense systems are needed, but the thing is that the target drones, what are aircraft which are removed from service and ordered to destroy by missiles can be used in nasty purposes. Those drones can send to the hostile airspace and they can be equipped with the systems, what are recording the radar and communication signals and transmit them to opposite side headquarters, what can benefit that data for adjusting systems and develop tactics against enemy systems and targets. Also, those drones can be used in operations against radar stations and other heavily defended targets. That means those drones can make kamikaze-attacks against targets, and the loss of those planes means nothing.

What was the real reason for the Iraqi war?

What was the real reason for the Iraqi war?

One of the reasons for the invasion of Iraq was that Saddam Hussein didn't predict that some people would make suicide attack against the World Trade Center. But that thing was only the last thing of the series of actions, what caused the allied invasion to Iraq, or at least gave the reason for the attack.

Many times I have written that there were many, so-called real reasons for that war. One of those reasons was that Saddam Hussein openly opposed the resolution of the United Nations Security Council, what was under the scrip by all members of the Security Council, what has the veto right. And that was a very bad thing for the authority of the United Nations and so-called superpowers. Also, the acts of formed Yugoslavia military forces in the Yugoslavian war forced the United Nations to authorize the military actions against Iraqi.

But there were also many other reasons, and one was that the United States wanted to demonstrate the effects of its weapons and that means that the international weapons trade was the major reason why allied forces attacked Iraq. The thing is that if we are thinking about what was the so-called real reasons for that operations, we must say that the war was the quantum of solace. When Saddam Hussein simultaneously broke the orders, what came from the United Nations, and then the political atmosphere in the United States turned to support the military actions because of the 9/11 attacks.

The thing that Saddam Hussein gave support for Osama Bin Laden along with the actions, what that man ordered before those suicide attacks against the World Trade Center and Pentagon justified the USA offensive military action against Iraqi. The thing was that Saddam Hussein miscalculated the U.S government and the nations will of attack against Iraq caused the attack. The thing is that maybe Saddam didn't know what were the plans of the Al Qaida, and he believed that the Al Qaida was followed the orders of the Taliban and mullah Muammar Omar.

And if Saddam Hussein discussed only with Omar, that attack to the USA would come as surprise. The demonstrations, where people show support for those terrorists caused hate and then the political atmosphere turned for supporting the attack against Saddam Hussein, and because the money for the war would get back from Iraq by the contracts of rebuilding and benefiting the oil of that country, the political support for the offensive military action for Iraq were guaranteed.

Because of the anti-militaristic movement of the USA Saddam Hussein thought, that he could deny the United Nations inspections to the chemical plants and nuclear laboratories. And then the world would forget that Iraq attacked against Kuwait about ten years before the second Iraqi war. Saddam Hussein thought that being silent, and playing some games, the flight prohibition zones in the Iraqi airspace have not stayed longer, and then that man wanted to take his revenge.

Or this is how normal people believe that the road went to the second conflict. But the thing is that the problem in that area is that it has been a very good zone for introducing military equipment, and also the money feels good in the pockets of Russia, what also wants to sell weapons to that area. And also if the Russian missiles and aircraft would be effective, the success against Western aircraft and other equipment would be good marketing for those products.

And also otherwise Western military manufacturers want to sell their products for the nations, who are attacked by the Russian equipment. The problem is that even the weapon selling to the countries, what are at war, the thing is that those orders are simultaneously broken, and if the orders are not followed by some military exporters, they have not to effect at all. The thing is that the Middle East is the area, where military manufacturers can test their newest and deadliest technology against real targets. That thing is causing the civilian casualties, but the truth is that in countries like Jemen, the actors are Arabs, and that makes difficult to justify somebody.

The weapons that are used are American made, but the users were Arabs and that thing causes many problems in the justification. The Russian military has used very strong firepower in Syria, and that thing is a little bit embarrassing for many people, who normally blame the USA because of the actors in the conflicts are other countries. And that makes impossible to justify the USA alone, even if the weapons that are used were made in the USA, the thing is that the enemies are justified as terrorists.

This thing is really bad, and embarrassing also for the coalition and weapon sellers, what are looking at the civilian victims from the TV. And the thing is that many Arab nations like Saudi-Arabia use mercenary soldiers for flying their aircraft, which is effective, but the thing who gives orders to those pilots is hidden from the public audience.

Writing about the politics in the Crimean peninsula and in the world of nuclear forces

Writing about the politics in the Crimean peninsula and in the world of nuclear forces


The dream of control Crimean peninsula and the traffic in the Black Sea has turned against Russia. The influence of that kind of international acts is that other nations have started to keep Russia as the aggressive and provocative neighbor, and this kind of things are forcing the western nations to go together in military cooperation, and another thing is that the Russian way to talk about their weapons as the strike-equipment, and aggressive way to speak, we must realize that this kind of things are justifying the ABM (Anti Ballistic Missile) bases in East Europe.

Those ABM missiles are meant for the protection the NATO, but actually, many writers forget the thing that the same weapons can use against ground targets, as well they can strike against ballistic missiles. When we are thinking about the missiles like THAAD, what has the kinetic energy warhead, those missiles can give the iron projectiles very high speed, and when the steel ball hits the ground with the speed of 15 000 kilometers per hour, the impact energy would terminate the target.

The metal melts as the drop, which consists the melted steel, and that thing could be very devastating against the point targets. The benefit of the THAAD system is that it would not consist the radioactive material, and that means that if those missiles would go in the hands of terrorists, they can use the fuel in the bombs, but the thing is that the destruction is more limited than the use of the nuclear bomb. So the thing is that THAAD cannot use against its creators.

The developing of those missiles started in the 1980s when the MGM-131 Pershing  II missiles wanted to equip with conventional strike capacity. The suitable system for that purpose seemed the iron nails, which would launch against the target. The idea of that weapon was to create the "shotgun-type" system, what can use against enemy airfields and missiles. The system was planned to launch to the opposite direction of the trajectory of the enemy missiles, and the iron projectiles would hit the target with very high speed. That system could be the tactical version of the ballistic missile, which cannot use against its owners. The problem with highly mobilized battlefield systems is that they are good targets for the terrorists, and that's why the military commanders have been searching the replacement options for the highly radioactive isotopes.

The system what was used before THAAD was SPRINT, the ABM system, what was equipped with high yield thermonuclear warhead, what had 5 mt destructive power. The mission of that warhead was to cause the large fireball and powerful EMP pulse, what would damage and vaporize the incoming missiles. But those warheads can be used also against ground troops. The thing was that the nuclear warhead could be dangerous in the wrong hands even if the detonation of the nuclear system would fail, because of the radioactive material would be used in the radioactive bombs. And that's why the military is looking for replacements for those weapons.

When we are talking about the contract, what denies the developing and producing the intermediate range ballistic- and cruise missiles, we must say that the contract does not have an effect if it would just break by every nation, what are involving it. In the real world, the thing is that IRBM missiles and the highly mobile nuclear missile systems need sharp location system if those missiles would be used against hardener silos and other targets.

For the operation, the missile needs two coordinates the beginning coordinate of the flight and the coordinate where to fly. And the GPS would give the first coordinate, where the launcher is, and the second coordinate or the end of the trajectory would come from the intelligence or reconnaissance systems, what are giving the coordinates to the warheads of the missile.

The beginning point of the trajectory is important because that point is used to calculate, how missile must fly to the second point. The GPS is a very effective tool for that purpose because it can give the location to the missile in seconds, and after that, the unit can continue the trip. The entire operation would take only a couple of seconds, and that's why the destroying those missiles would be very difficult, and after the nuclear missiles have flown away, the targets would be destroyed even if the launching vehicles would be destroyed.

And many people think that NATO has more advanced technology in that area than Russia and things like multi-channel communication with packed data packages makes the jamming of that kind of systems very difficult, because of the communication between location satellite and receiving system is happening in very short time periods. Those computerized and highly secured systems are hard to locate because entire communication would be done in a couple of nanoseconds, what is the time for the transmitting the coded data package, that contains the packed and coded location information. And the biometric safety systems makes them useless in the wrong hands. That means if the wrong person takes the device, would the information about that send to the command center.

Why China is building artificial islands in the South China Sea?

The answer to that question is not very difficult to find out even without training of intelligence specialist. The problem of China is the lack of aircraft carriers and that's why China must build the artificial islands for making the support bases for the long-range bombers and refueling aircraft. Artificial islands are technically easier to produce than aircraft carriers. And those islands offer cheaper and also an effective way to operate the new cruise missiles of China. The idea is that the truck-mounted system needs on to drive out from cargo planes, and they are ready to operate.

Those bases are necessary for the fighter escorts for bombers and refueling aircraft because without that support those things could be quite easy targets for the jet fighters. Even if China would place their new cruise missiles to those islands that system needs support, even if they would be high-mobile truck-mounted systems. Those highly mobile systems can drive in the cargo plane, and send to the South China Sea for treating the U.S task force and especially it's aircraft carriers, what have the key element in the global operations in the U.S task force.

Those very high-speed systems are really deadly. They can be equipped with a conventional or nuclear warhead. And in the future, that kind of systems would allow getting hypersonic speed are suitable for making the secured areas in the South China Sea. When they are taken to the operational area the biggest threat will be that somebody steals that kind of weapon. That means that there must be the evacuation plan for the cases that the base will be under attack of the enemy and the launching of those missiles is impossible. Also, there is a possibility that somebody will be rebellious, and because of that kind of threats those missiles must be driven in the cargo planes immediately when they are under the threat, and those big aircraft need long runways.

Those systems need support and spare parts, and this means that the cargo-planes must have runways, where they can be operated. China can have two strategies to operate those weapons. Another is that cruise missiles would stay in the central bases until the political and military situation needs that those weapons must take to the operational area. And another is that those systems would be placed to the artificial islands.

Those islands have one benefit for an aircraft carrier, and that is that they would stay in certain places. And if the cruise missiles would put in there, the system must be protected by protective units, because there is a risk that somebody will shoot them against own targets. But the main reason for making those islands is that they offer a stable place to set the cruise missiles. When the missiles have been shot, the base can be destroyed, and there is no influence for the flight of those missiles.