Oof.
Twitter Link
Printable View
Oof.
Twitter Link
The other difference is, for Argentina circa 1982 losing to Britain doesn't really make them look bad, Britain was one of the richest countries in the world, a member of NATO and they were in full cold war mode. The Argentinean military performed at the very least OK, and the air force performed extremely well. Russia getting only token concessions against a much smaller, poorer country and taking such staggering losses does them no favours.Quote:
Originally Posted by BalticSailor
I mean, you may well be right. But the risk is there, which is why it's in their interests to bring their A game.
This was a hack, apparently. It's been removed. I'm actually somewhat inclined to believe that, though it may also have been a disgruntled employee.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
It could also have been either of those things with access to Russian official figures
Twitter Link
Huge if true.
Sorry, yes, I pasted the wrong tweet :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Steely Glint
Couple of interesting numbers in this article:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/22/w...ce-russia.html
The thing is, in Russia, publicly pointing out that Russian military didn't perform as well as expected may earn one up to 15 years in jail, as of early March, so "looking bad" internally is a minor issue; the king is actually clad in a very exquisite clothing, as long as nobody dares suggest otherwise.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Glint
Also, fucking up has gone quite well for Putin so far.
The first noteworthy event that comes to mind is the sinking of submarine Kursk. Shortly put, there was an explosion onboard a submarine during a naval military exercise. It was clear that at least some of the crew were alive at the time. Russian Navy fumbled the early response; Putin was busy getting his suntan in a resort somewhere, and couldn't be bothered. Offers of assistance from other nearby vessels were refused until it was probably way too late anyway. Everyone on the board of the submarine died, of course. Once done with his vacationing, Putin decided to meet the families of the sailors, where one of the mothers was forcibly sedated; in later interview, the question "what happened to the submarine" was answered with "it sank" and a smile from Putin. Not the greatest PR moment, but it didn't cost him much, so, who cares.
Then there's the 2002 Moscow theater siege. Short recap - a number of armed Chechen terrorists took 850 people hostage in a theater in Moscow. The negotiations went rather poorly, although a small number of hostages were released, but over four days, the terrorists killed 5 of them. "Hold my beer," said the leader of special forces unit, then enacted a plan presumably put together by Baldrick from Blackadder and Leeroy Jenkins, and as a result killed (note, *killed*, not *prompted/caused the terrorists to kill*) further 125 or so hostages.
Beslan school siege, 2004. Put shortly, a hostage situation, where thermobaric weapons were used in an attempt to storm the building by the special forces, and that went down about as well as you'd expect from that description.
The world as it is, 2022. Putin is still president of Russia a.k.a. North Korea v2.0, and doesn't appear to be particularly bothered by the current events.
NYT report on intercepted Russian comms:
Twitter Link
This, specifically, was what I was expecting to see:Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/22/hype...n-ukraine.html
All true, but the choices are hard and we're gonna be paying back all that lovely peace dividend. Besides that, we can't ignore the implications of the Sion-Russia bromance any longer.Quote:
Originally Posted by BalticSailor
Yes, Western intelligence agencies likely have some more information available to them about Russian force posture and readiness than available to the open source community + Ukrainian press releases. It is unclear how much they're willing to share, though there's little doubt that the Russian invasion is not going according to plan - which is more or less all that the Pentagon et al are actually saying. They're providing some public estimates about e.g. force numbers and materiel in the theater, but quite high level information at best. So far everyone more or less agrees that this invasion is costing more in lives, $$, and equipment than the Kremlin expected, that logistics were badly mismanaged, and that the air war is somewhere between puzzling and downright shocking. But much detail beyond that is pretty thin, most notably how much remaining resources the Kremlin can realistically bring to bear (irrespective of whether they will or not).Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Glint
I think there's a distinction between arguing they are 'holding back' versus that they were only willing to commit a certain amount of resources to the operation, and have been too slow to recognize that it was inadequate. The Russian military, like any other, has myriad security priorities and balancing one's force posture is tricky to manage. It isn't 'holding back' when the US doesn't commit every uniformed servicemember and the reserves to each conflict - it's a calculation about how much they're willing to risk (and/or spend) to achieve an objective. Clearly Putin and his military leadership miscalculated, badly, and have been very slow to adapt strategy. But it's silly to think that they pulled up every scrap of military force they had for this invasion, especially when it's so obvious they were not prepared for a long campaign.Quote:
Yeah, I've seen the 'Russia is holding back' explanation (frankly, 'excuse' is closer to the mark at this point) a few times and I don't really believe it. Prolonging the war in that way for no real reason is actually a bad thing for Putin:
- It damages the political narrative he's tried to construct domestically to justify the war
- It's obviously very hard to get a clear picture of the true level of support for the war in Russia, but that support is only going to go down when the coffins start showing up.
- The longer the sanctions go on the deeper and more profound the damage they will do the Russian economy
- It will any subsequent occupation much harder
- The longer the war goes on the more damage they inflict on the civilian population the worse the sanctions and international opprobrium get - even China is now making 'hey, maybe war is bad, y'know?' style noises now
- Wars are expensive, one estimate I saw is 20bn dollars a day, and Russia isn't that rich
- The more time it gives NATO supply armaments and other support to Ukraine, the more time it gives the Ukrainians to dig in and prepare to defend their cities. By May, every single man, woman and child in Ukraine will have a MANPAD (probably)
- The longer they take to subdue Ukraine, the weaker it makes them look - probably a serious consideration in the minds of men like Putin, especially since about 90% of Russian foreign policy seems to revolve around making threats.
To me, it makes no sense for them to (essentially) deliberately be shit in Ukraine when they have the ability to achieve their objectives far more smoothly, it seems counterproductive to everything they're trying to achieve with the invasion. Also, they've had four generals KIA because they were near the front trying to unfubar stuff - that hardly speaks to a half-assed effort, or a military that actually knows what it is doing but is holding back for mysterious reasons.
Reports of arrests of high levels members of the FSB and the military suggest Putin is not happy about the way things are proceeding.
The alternate theory - that this is the best the Russian military can do, that they are a paper-tiger hollowed out be decades of corruption, fits far better.
Yes, I was aware that Russia has claimed it, but I have not exactly been taking Russian propaganda as evidence of much of anything. There's no doubt that intelligence sharing has been going on, but it's highly questionable that even if the Ukrainians were getting real time AWACS data from NATO E-3s flying in Poland that they would have a sufficiently well networked and integrated air defense system to take much advantage of the data. I think it's more plausible that the Russian air force is just doing a bad job, though the why is still difficult to understand. I should note that they're still managing some 200-300 sorties a day, often with standoff weapons to avoid Ukrainian SAMs. Not exactly air superiority or effective for CAS, but still a substantial threat compared to the relatively paltry efforts of the rump of the Ukrainian air force.Quote:
Russia has claimed it: https://tass.com/defense/1419223 I don't know if it's true, but it would go some way to explains how the Ukraine has been able to deny air superiority to Russia with outdated air defence systems and far fewer aircraft.
I generally believe Ukraine is getting more support from NATO than is generally public- their ability to ambush Russian columns and general command and control out right uncanny for such a supposedly low tier, underfunded military. But that's just my speculation.
I'm broadly in agreement with your take on this, LF, but I think there's also some additional considerations that factor in here. First off, it's far from clear that Putin is not willing to commit more forces to this effort, it's just clear that he hasn't brought more to the theater yet. There's some evidence of mobilizing units from farther away.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
Furthermore, the existing stalemate near Kyiv and e.g. Chernihiv and Kharkiv (and effectively slowed/stalled efforts toward Odessa and up the Dnieper river), coupled with satellite evidence of units in these fronts digging in for defensive positions, suggest that they're playing a waiting game. The only major effort ongoing at the moment appears to be in Mariupol and the Donbas region, which makes a certain amount of sense - first, it allows Russia to establish their land bridge to Crimea and secures the whole Sea of Azov. Second, they have rail supply in those regions, so their unit logistics are in much better shape, allowing for more offensive operations (non-rail/overland supply from the north is very tricky, especially for the Kyiv salient). Also, reducing the major remaining threats there will free up at least 6 battalion sized elements to push north or west. In the meantime, the northern advances can bide their time while waiting for reinforcements and better supply lines while they continue to pound the major cities with indirect fires.
Waiting may not be a bad option for Russia at the moment - while their economy is hurting from sanctions, their logistics (and morale) are strained, and Ukraine has been getting more help than expected, it's entirely possible that Ukraine can ill afford the kind of stalemate and siege tactics that Russia has used before (notably, in Chechnya). Taking their time, given the alternatives, may make sense to them.
We are used to land campaigns that are super fast, but we should remember that these kinds of issues plague any major offensive. Even in 2003, the invasion of Iraq had huge formations run dangerously ahead of their supplies, and almost ran out of fuel and supplies en route to Baghdad. There were substantial logistics issues during the Gulf War, as well. I will admit, however, that the apparent unwillingness/inability of Russia to resolve these issues in a timely manner is going to make this whole thing longer and uglier than it was going to be already. I expect to see extended sieges/bombardments of major Ukrainian cities for quite some time.
I have no doubt that the effectiveness of the Russian military is far below that of, say, the US military. But that's not really the question here - the question is how they stack up against the Ukrainian military. Clearly the answer so far is 'surprisingly poorly given the mismatch in resources and materiel'. I am not convinced that this is a permanent condition, however, since the resource mismatch gives Russia the opportunity the screw up, bide for time, and adapt. They took their sweet time reducing Grozny to rubble (twice!), and that was against a much smaller and badly resourced opponent (who somehow still managed to inflict something like 10k+ casualties). I continue to believe that in time things will look more and more grim for the Ukrainian defense. It is unlikely that Ukraine can prevail on the military front; I find it much more likely that the combination of economic and political pressure from the rest of the world will result in some sort of resolution short of what Putin wants but still far from a victory for Ukraine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Glint
Did Biden imply he's gonna fly to Kyiv tomorrow?
He may do so but I have to wonder why he's bothering if they do bring them up and commit them. They're not necessary for a settlement that secures Russian minimum objectives now (and Russia and Putin being what they are, a settlement now is just a delay while they set up to do things better later on, which is why they're working so hard to destroy the military-supporting industry in Ukraine right now) and it doesn't matter what they bring up for achieving their main objective because it's clear a puppet regime isn't going to get anywhere with the general population at this point. There needed to be more Russian support or at least apathy for that to ever be militarily achievable and Russia plainly miscalculated there. Intermediate objectives like the destruction of the Ukrainian defensive forces in the JFO are probably still achievable with what's already in theater (securing Kyiv might not be and provides questionable real benefit at this point)Quote:
Originally Posted by wiggin
This is a pretty bonkers ass statement:
https://www.reuters.com/business/aer...ay-2022-03-24/
Operation climb down seems to have started.
”Russian colonel is believed to have been deliberately run over by his troops, Western officials say. LONDON — A Russian brigade commander has been killed by his own forces in another indication of boiling discontent among Russian forces deployed in and around Ukraine, Western officials said.”
Does the Russian army abide by the rules of war, or respect the distinction between military and civilian? No. Do they value the lives of individual soldiers the way western militaries do? No. But... will they achieve their objectives, no matter the cost? Also no.
Putin's pulling troops out of Georgia to send to Ukraine now.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
As for why: Putin's fucked up bad, and he needs to come home with something he can paint as a victory and use to sell the idea that everything the Russian people put up with was worth it. If he can't, he knows his life is in serious danger. He knows that what he's done to so many others can just as easily be done to him. To him, getting that victory is worth it no matter how many Russian conscripts he has to send to die for it.
It's Russia. To achieve the objectives, all you have to do is claim they have been achieved. An example: Main goals of first stage of special military operation in Ukraine accomplished — ShoiguQuote:
Originally Posted by Steely Glint
Apparently, this has not gone down that well with the Make Russia Great Again guysQuote:
Originally Posted by BalticSailor
Op Ed in the Russian Pravda, Google translation:
https://www.pravda.ru/politics/16944...vory_estambul/Quote:
Strategy or shame in Istanbul: everyone is waiting for an explanation from Putin
The announced results of the third stage of the Russian-Ukrainian talks in Istanbul were perceived in Russian society extremely negatively. Everyone is waiting for an explanation from the president.
Medinsky wanted peace with Bandera Kiev
The negotiator from the Russian Federation, Vladimir Medinsky , outlined the results of negotiations with Kiev in Istanbul on March 29 in such a way that it became clear that Russia no longer demands either denazification, or the recognition of Crimea as Russian, or the independence of the LDNR, or even the demilitarization of Ukraine.
The suspension of hostilities in the suburbs of Kiev and near Chernigov was announced, and the negotiations themselves were called constructive and "two huge steps towards peace . "
Medinsky said that Russia does not want to expose Kyiv to military risk, because "there are people who make decisions." This is "our desire to gradually come to a de-escalation of the conflict, at least in these areas," Medinsky said.
Kadyrov is more Russian than Putin
Social networks in RuNet were filled with indignation. The Russians pointed out that "it smells like the first campaign in the Caucasus, when politicians plugged the guns with their crazy statements and prevented the troops from doing their job, forced them to suffer losses and lose morale."
The presence of Roman Abramovich at the talks in Istanbul was compared to the presence of Boris Berezovsky at the signing of Khasavyurt, which led to the second Chechen war.
People pointed out that the head of Chechnya, Ramzan Kadyrov , is more Russian than Vladimir Putin . At the front, those who fight were categorical - we won’t forgive if they don’t let them finish off the Bandera vermin in Ukraine. There were accusations of betrayal by the authorities of the people, of working for the oligarchs. Citizens of Ukraine in the liberated territories were almost hysterical - "we will be given to the Nazis for slaughter."
The situation in the evening of March 29 in the information space was morally exceptionally difficult, even the "temnik" lowered for clarification did not correct it - they say that Medinsky was instructed to be "compliant", this is diplomacy, it is necessary for the "picture" broadcast to the West.
Why flirtations if Russia wins on all fronts?
If we put aside emotions and thoughts of betrayal, it is not clear why Vladimir Putin needs this picture in the conditions of success at the front. Moreover, we are winning the economic confrontation with the West:
the OFZ market was retained, the stock market was retained, the food and fuel markets were retained;
fundamental decisions were made to ban the outflow of capital, which hindered the development of the economy;
the budget rule has been canceled - the money will go to the economy, and not to the NWF;
a requirement for the sale of foreign exchange earnings by exporters was introduced - the ruble strengthened;
a demand was voiced to buy gas for rubles, soon they will sell grain in this way, and so on, this will make the ruble the base world currency;
programs to support and develop the economy were announced;
international support is growing.
Misunderstanding intensifies against the backdrop of permission to ship neon from Odessa so that global production of chips for the West (not for us) does not stop. "Compliance" to create a "picture" led to a decrease in world oil prices by 5%, and now they have nothing to do with our domestic prices.
Kyiv and the West are delighted with their tactics of delaying the military operation of the Russian Federation, this will encourage new sanctions, new arms supplies, and there will be many other new things that are very unpleasant for Russia.
Can you believe that shame is a strategy
Some high-profile Telegram channels were quick to clarify on Wednesday morning, March 30.
According to Inform Bureau-Southern Federal District, citing a "trustworthy" source, negotiations with Kiev are necessary for the country's leadership in order to "formally comply with a number of international rules, since Russia is a state of law."
That is, the results of the negotiations and the negotiations themselves are not a disgrace, but part of the strategy.
"Yes, everyone was shocked. But ... look how events develop further. These negotiators do not have any rights at all. Could it be imagined that Stalin signed some kind of agreement with Hitler. The level of approval of the military special operation for denazification and The demilitarization of Ukraine is growing every day, and there will be no rollback! Putin hears the people. For him, this is the main thing when making meaningful decisions for all citizens," the insider said.
These speeches could be believed if it were not for the statement of Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu , issued simultaneously with the statement of Vladimir Medinsky.
During the conference call, Shoigu said that the main tasks of the special military operation in Ukraine had been completed (?) , and therefore "now there is an opportunity to focus on achieving the main goal (?) - the liberation of Donbass." That is, this is an indirect confirmation of the withdrawal of troops from Kyiv and the rejection of the real main tasks, voiced by the president more than once.
The United States will not let Putin relax
But the West and Ukraine completely killed this attitude of the Russian elite to curtail the operation and preserve Bandera as a phenomenon, and they will force Putin to go until the complete victory over Nazism.
Western capitals said they did not believe in Moscow's compliance, and Zelensky, in another late-night speech, said that there would be no concessions, that there would be only "our conditions", etc.
According to the Legitimny Telegram channel, the Kremlin has received clear signals that the Ukrainian crisis can only be resolved in this way:
"Russia will make concessions, comply with the demands of the West and Ukraine, but the pressure and sanctions will not go anywhere until Russia completely capitulates, recognizing itself as defeated, and then will pay reparations to the Ukrainian authorities, which may further lead to a split in the Russian Federation itself."
It remains to be hammered into the head of our elite, which still hopes to regain friendship with the West, that Russia loves only strong rulers, and if a popular revolt is possible in Russia, it is only because of its weakness and betrayal of national interests.
There are reports of Russian soldiers withdrawing from Chornobyl NPP and the surrounding areas, partially due to a number of soldiers developing symptoms of acute radiation sickness. Which is what you get if you dig trenches in heavily contaminated areas without any PPE. Which they did, because, of course.
Whoever is in charge of coming up with new and exciting ways to fuck up the invasion is working really hard.
We basically have lived without central heat for the last couple of weeks. I must say it's not as difficult as we expected. It just took wearing some warmer clothes inside and very occasionally turning on an electric blanket. I think we used a fraction of what we typically use.
Graphic evidence of atrocities—massacres, mass graves—coming out of Bucha and Irpin.
Expect much more of the same and worse; according to people who have managed to flee from the nearby villages, the reporters haven't yet been allowed access to some of the worst areas.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
Meanwhile, Russian mass media are already working on cover-up, although they can't seem to pick between "staged photos with crisis actors" and "actually Ukrainians killed those people" stories, and are currently producing both.
Is this because of Putin? Gas heating, I'm guessing?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
Russians are told that nothing interesting ever happened at Chernobyl, and if you hear otherwise it's a western myth, and if it's not it was a CIA plot. Here we see the consequences of historical revisionism.Quote:
Originally Posted by BalticSailor
When your country is invaded and the victim of countless war crimes, your government officials are allowed to curse freely.Quote:
Originally Posted by a Ukrainian Official
There was a quote, allegedly from someone in Russian military upper echelons, that the reports of radiation sickness must be false, because the same area was held by the Red Army during WW2 for an even longer time, and no radiation sickness was ever reported.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wraith
I mean, it's probably a parody, but I'm not 100% sure. After seeing Russian "news" reporting on soldiers clearing minefields - with the reporter walking several feet IN FRONT of the soldiers with the mine detectors - I don't think "too stupid to be true" applies to anything there.
EDIT: Not sure if you were joking, but, although the explanations for the reasons may vary, the Chernobyl disaster (namely, the general idea that a NPP blew up there, and the area is contaminated with radioactive waste ever since) is very well known throughout the former USSR - much of the cleanup was carried out by "volunteers" from all over the USSR, and their total number was in hundreds of thousands. Most are still alive, in their 60s or so (around the age of my father, who just happened to be at sea at the time when his kolkhoz was required to send some people over there), and for people around my age, it is common to know someone from either immediate family or their friends, who actually have been involved in the cleanup. And personal data, including year of birth, of the alleged perpetrators of Bucha massacre was leaked today - most of them are around my age or a bit older. Unless that unit was exceptional in this regard, I'd expect every Russian soldier over there to have at least a vague idea that it's possible to get irradiated there.
Yes. It's 100% Putin - related. Heating is usually done by gas, as is cooking and hot water. Basically turning off the heat should cut out most of the usage. Despite gasprices going through the roof we spent €500 less than last year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wraith
I was phrasing it in a joking way but not really joking about the attempts to send it down the memory hole. The soldiers didn't seem to have any idea about it because they were hanging out at Chernobyl and digging trenches to lie in right outside of it. It's one of the bits of propaganda that surprises me at how effective it's been given that everyone in the former Soviet states knows all about it, independent Russian media was making no attempts to lie about it (when that still existed), there are plenty of people still alive who remember when it happened, and the Russian government can't even seem to decide whether the meltdown was a CIA plot or an overblown western lie. As far as I can tell, the attempts to suppress information about it have been a more recent thing - they didn't seem to be making any attempt at burying it until around the time Putin started his war on independent media.Quote:
Originally Posted by BalticSailor
Most of what I know about modern Russian propaganda is sourced from bitter Russian ex-pats, so make of it what you will.
An article was published recently by Russian state-owned news agency RIA News, titled "What should Russia do with Ukraine". The full English translation available here, the contents therein made me check whether Mein Kampf's copyright protection has lapsed (it has).
Slovakia appears to have delivered all of its S-300 installations to Ukraine.
My understanding is that Slovakia had one battery (maybe a dozen launchers?). Given that Ukraine is losing a launcher every day or two (it's hard to know for sure, this is a midpoint between Russian and OSINT claims), this is a band-aid at best.
I wasn't able to quickly find info on the precise version of S-300 that Slovakia is fielding, but it's probably not particularly recent vintage. Then again, Ukraine's own systems aren't much better, and seem to be doing an adequate job of threatening Russian aircraft.
The reality is that there aren't that many NATO countries that have substantial supplies of Soviet era equipment left. What they have is outmoded and often mothballed. Ukraine has asked for PAC-3 batteries as well, but it's obvious that they don't have personnel trained to operate such a different system - this is also why it was obviously silly for them to ask for Iron Dome batteries to be delivered (aside from the fact that those batteries are not very useful for most Russian weapons). It would take months to years to get personnel trained and integrate these systems into the Ukrainian air defense network.
This is why much of the effort has been focused on weapons that can be learned rapidly and are generally man portable (e.g. Stingers, Javelins, Switchblades, other drones, some cheaper antiarmor rockets like the AT4) or at least fire and forget (like some antiship missiles people have been talking about supplying). It's a smart strategy because these weapons can be moved and scaled quickly, while donations of small quantities aging and complex Soviet era systems are likely to have relatively minor effects on the outcome.
I do wonder if there will be lessons people take from this wrt integration of Western 'friends' into the Western family of weapons systems. Some countries (especially Taiwan) have been intentionally limited in their technological integration with Western forces for fear of antagonizing their neighbors. While Taiwan does have some limited numbers of Patriot batteries along with a questionable domestically produced system ('Sky Bow'), but little in the way of an integrated, multilayer air and missile defense system. The missile component here is critical, given the importance in Chinese war planning on salvoes of surface-to-surface missiles across the Taiwan Strait to soften air defenses and target airfields. If we brought Taiwan and countries like it towards closer familiarity with complex Western weapons systems, our ability to rapidly reinforce/complement their capabilities would be greatly enhanced. We were quite cautious in what we supplied to Ukraine after 2014, and it is limiting our strategic options today.
I read today that Russia was warning that Finland and Sweden should not seek to be fast-tracked for NATO membership because it could destabilize the region. Thought, "you know, if the "stability" of the region and keeping NATO out was that important, maybe you shouldn't have made it clear it was the only path toward safety for states bordering you?"
Apparently, the brains behind the Ukraine invasion, and most of Russian foreign policy, is this guy, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksandr_Dugin, the Varg Vinkers of geo-politics. Would like congratulate neo-conservatism on actually being only the second dumbest political theory to have inspired a pointless war in the 21st century.
A couple of hours ago, rumours that the Ukrainians had hit Moskva, flag ship of the Black Sea Fleet and the eponymous 'Russian warship' in the famous phrase, with two anti-ship missiles and that it was burning in the black sea, started appearing. Then it started coming from official Ukrainian military and government sources. OSINT people reckoned they were picking up distress signals and watching rescue boats converge on its last known position.
I was skeptical of this, Ukraine has made claims like this about smaller vassals (Admiral Essen, Vasily Bykov) before and those ships later turned up unharmed, and verifying the effects of an attack on a target 100+ miles away in war time is not so easy.
However, as of just now Russian media are reporting the Russian MOD has confirmed 'a fire' (cause unspecified) on the ship which caused ammunition detonation and that the ship was evacuated.
https://ria.ru/20220414/kreyser-1783435471.html
Unironically big if true.
Dugin doesn't really have any influence. There were rumors he did in the 1990s (not sure how accurate those are), but he certainly hasn't been in Putin's inner circle.
I'm torn, if the Ukrainians pulled this off it would be a great success. However, wouldn't it be funny if the Russian warship indeed went and fucked itself?Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Glint
Moskva has, in fact, sunk. Confirmed by the Russian MOD. Putin in shambles, probably.
More his books and ideas, rather than as an individual.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Russian reports are that it was being towed and sank in a storm. Truly, that part of the Black Sea is known for its dangerous clear-day, calm-water storms.
What is cope if not dignity persevering :downcast:Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
If I read the poseidon info correctly, the see was a bit choppy around the time it went down. Also, if it didn't have its own engine power it could be very vulnerable.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
I heard a claim it's first designation was 'Slava'
And that turns out to be correct.
So that's one Slava down for Ukrayna. .