The way conservative theists support Putin, it's clearer as to how people supported Hitler.

(April 15, 2022 at 3:50 am)Deesse23 Wrote:

(April 14, 2022 at 8:24 pm)Nomad Wrote: I'm laughing at Putain's explanation, she supposedly sank in stormy seas, in the Black Sea.  Of course the missile that put a big hole in her had nothing to do with it, in fact said missile never existed!

That missle(s) was, in fact, a western crisis actor

Mind you, a fire aboard ship causing an explosion (especially on an older, poorly maintained ship) is a perfectly reasonable explanation for what happened to the Moskva.  What makes that explanation unlikely to be true is that Russia said that's what happened. So, yeah - it was a missile.

This is part and parcel of Russia's 'The exercise is proceeding exactly as planned' propoganda.

Boru

Boru

(April 15, 2022 at 4:13 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: This is part and parcel of Russia's 'The exercise is proceeding exactly as planned' propaganda.

Boru

Just as the demise of the 6th army ushered in the endsieg, according to Josef G..

In 1976, it was named The Slava.

In 1996, it was re-named The Moskva.

In 2022, it was re-named The Snake Island Memorial Reef.

Boru

I'm reading that the Ukrainians are stating 452 of the Moskva's 510-man crew were killed, including the captain. If that number is accurate, whatever sank that ship did so very quickly.

---

(April 15, 2022 at 5:58 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: In 1976, it was named The Slava.

In 1996, it was re-named The Moskva.

In 2022, it was re-named The Snake Island Memorial Reef.

Boru

You know what sailors say about renaming a ship ...

(April 15, 2022 at 11:36 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: I'm reading that the Ukrainians are stating 452 of the Moskva's 510-man crew were killed, including the captain. If that number is accurate, whatever sank that ship did so very quickly.

---

(April 15, 2022 at 5:58 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: In 1976, it was named The Slava.

In 1996, it was re-named The Moskva.

In 2022, it was re-named The Snake Island Memorial Reef.

Boru

You know what sailors say about renaming a ship ...

It’s possible that more people were killed in the explosion than were lost when the ship sank. Whether it was a missile or the onboard munitions went up on their own (it was a missile), a blast that could sink a ship of that size would have taken more than a few sailors with it.

Boru

(April 15, 2022 at 11:36 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: I'm reading that the Ukrainians are stating 452 of the Moskva's 510-man crew were killed, including the captain. If that number is accurate, whatever sank that ship did so very quickly.

I'm giving Ukrainian reports as much credit as I do with Russian reports: None.

By all accounts, the ship didn't go down instantly, as the Hood or the Bismarck did. So there seems to have been time to evacuate.

Here's a similar incident, closer to home, in my case, and one of the rare footages showing the actual sinking of a large warship. It's the Austro-Hungarian battleship Szent Istvan. It was hit by two torpedoes in June 1918 and kept floating for a number of hours. They also, if the Russians speak the truth, that is, tried to tow it to port, but it capsized on the way. Mind the seemingly calm sailors walking the deck, while the ship already shows an extreme list. Of the 1050 men manning the ship, only 88 perished.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pSiCjfhUUw

(April 15, 2022 at 12:03 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(April 15, 2022 at 11:36 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: I'm reading that the Ukrainians are stating 452 of the Moskva's 510-man crew were killed, including the captain. If that number is accurate, whatever sank that ship did so very quickly.

---

You know what sailors say about renaming a ship ...

It’s possible that more people were killed in the explosion than were lost when the ship sank. Whether it was a missile or the onboard munitions went up on their own (it was a missile), a blast that could sink a ship of that size would have taken more than a few sailors with it.

Boru

Exactly what I'm thinking. And if Russian reports are true that it capsized in a squall, that too can happen very quickly for a badly-damaged ship.

---

(April 15, 2022 at 12:06 pm)abaris Wrote:

(April 15, 2022 at 11:36 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: I'm reading that the Ukrainians are stating 452 of the Moskva's 510-man crew were killed, including the captain. If that number is accurate, whatever sank that ship did so very quickly.

I'm giving Ukrainian reports as much credit as I do with Russian reports: None.

Hence my qualifier "If that report is accurate [...]".

(April 15, 2022 at 12:06 pm)abaris Wrote: By all accounts, the ship didn't go down instantly, as the Hood or the Bismarck did. So there seems to have been time to evacuate.

Yes, it clearly survived for some time after the blast, which is why I give some credence to the Russian report that it sank in a squall after being damaged.

(April 15, 2022 at 12:06 pm)abaris Wrote: Here's a similar incident, closer to home, in my case, and one of the rare footages showing the actual sinking of a large warship. It's the Austro-Hungarian battleship Szent Istvan. It was hit by two torpedoes in June 1918 and kept floating for a number of hours. They also, if the Russians speak the truth, that is, tried to tow it to port, but it capsized on the way. Mind the seemingly calm sailors walking the deck, while the ship already shows an extreme list. Of the 1050 men manning the ship, only 88 perished.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pSiCjfhUUw

And here's one of the HMS Barham, exploding about four minutes after being torpedoed, and taking down over 850 sailors.





We don't know anything. I'm just reporting what I've read in the news, and qualifying what I'm writing with that in mind.

It's actually pretty rare for a big ship to go down quick, missile or not (or go down at all). Some ships have taken so much damage they been reported sunk multiple times in a single battle by the enemy. The ability to tow or salvage a hull shouldn't be taken as an indication that it hadn't suffered extensive damage. In other news, the russians claim to have retaliated against a factory that made anti ship missiles, and made a big deal about it. Obviously just coincidental.

I do like the squall thing, though. It'd have to be a squall, wouldn't it, since nobody else noticed the deluge what sunk the persian fleet that night.

A better comparison might be our own recent naval mishaps. We've had ships get hit by missiles and even collide, too. Didn't lose the boats. I don't recall there being much pushback to the notion that incompetence was the ultimate cause in each case - but I guess that only applies to us forces.

TLDR, the russian navy's problems aren't new or novel. They pumped their subs and ignored their surface fleet. Did the ukrainians hit that ship? It's highly likely. Would it have gone down, even so, if it were any other comparable ship in any other (allegedly) comparable force? Highly unlikely.