Harrowing story of the sexual violence perpetrated by Russian soldiers in Bucha. It's really just pathetic at this stage and totally pointless. I think we all fear the worst for the weeks ahead. How anyone can defend Russian actions I cannot understand. They really are the bad guys in all of this and will be for decades to come I think.
Russian Foreign Policy
- Thread starter Purple
- Start date
Ukraine seem to have sunk \ severely damaged (TBD) the flagship cruiser of the Russian Black Sea fleet using a Ukranian produced 'Neptune' anti ship missile attack. This was the ship that attacked Snake Island at the start of the war.
A drone may have been used to distract the ship's defence systems.
Update according to Turkish sources it has sunk.
correction - Pentagon spokesman John Kirby just said on CNN that the warship Moskva is still afloat but clearly damaged. He said it remains unclear whether the damage was caused by Ukraine missile attack. Russia claims that a fire onboard caused ammunition to explode.
news.sky.com
A drone may have been used to distract the ship's defence systems.
Update according to Turkish sources it has sunk.
correction - Pentagon spokesman John Kirby just said on CNN that the warship Moskva is still afloat but clearly damaged. He said it remains unclear whether the damage was caused by Ukraine missile attack. Russia claims that a fire onboard caused ammunition to explode.
Ukraine war: Russia tows Black Sea flagship back to port as Ukrainians claim missile attack
Russia says the missile cruiser was badly damaged after a fire sparked ammunition to detonate, but did not give details on the cause of the flames.
Last edited:
Yeah rightUkraine seem to have sunk \ severely damaged (TBD) the flagship cruiser of the Russian Black Sea fleet using a Ukranian produced 'Neptune' anti ship missile attack. This was the ship that attacked Snake Island at the start of the war.
Russia claims that a fire onboard caused ammunition to explode.
Ukraine war: Russia tows Black Sea flagship back to port as Ukrainians claim missile attack
Russia says the missile cruiser was badly damaged after a fire sparked ammunition to detonate, but did not give details on the cause of the flames.
There was a fire onboard... but what started it
Seems confirmed to have sunk - if it hadnt been for a pesky storm!
"Russia's defence ministry said the missile cruiser Moskva, the flagship of Russia's Black Sea fleet, sank as it was towed back to port in stormy weather following an explosion and fire, Russian news agencies reported have reported."
www.rte.ie
"Russia's defence ministry said the missile cruiser Moskva, the flagship of Russia's Black Sea fleet, sank as it was towed back to port in stormy weather following an explosion and fire, Russian news agencies reported have reported."
Russia says flagship missile warship Moskva has sunk
Russia's guided missile cruiser Moskva has sunk in the Black Sea after being damaged during the military operation in Ukraine, Russia's defence ministry said.
Baby boomer
Registered User
- Messages
- 735
Why are the Russians telling the truth for once? Standard operating procedure would be to deny that the ship had even been hit and dismiss any reports to the contrary as misinformation and propaganda. Any video of a sinking or burning ship would of course be a product of US/NATO/Hollywood special effects.
Yes amazing really first major warship sunk since the falklands and the first russian warship sunk since WW2. Putin is getting his legacy alright but for all the wrong reasons . The repurcussions for Russia when this is over , maybe Belarus will try to topple Lukashenko and break free from Russia encouraged by the successes happening in Ukraine, also possibly Georgia and Chechnia will agitate again
It is strange but maybe this one is hard to cover up...
I'm reading reports online that a civilian ship (Romania or Turkish) rescued some of the crew... dunno whether to believe that.
Baby boomer
Registered User
- Messages
- 735
The ship didn't sink. It was a special military submersion.
The Russians can't just send in new ships as Turkey have closed access to warships entering the Black Sea (or any nation)
www.forbes.com
How Turkey Blocking Russia From The Black Sea Harms Neutral States
Turkey has implemented an international law to block Russian warships from entering the Black Sea. But it's blocking neutral warships too—and its actions could ignite tensions in the region.
www.forbes.com
johnwilliams
Registered User
- Messages
- 244
will turkey fire on a russian warship that try's to enter the black sea?
They shot down a Russian warplane that strayed into its airspace few years back, so I think yes they would.
2015 Russian Sukhoi Su-24 shootdown - Wikipedia
Baby boomer
Registered User
- Messages
- 735
How Clare Daly and Mick Wallace became stars of authoritarian state media (via @IrishTimes) https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/...-stars-of-authoritarian-state-media-1.4854028
More muppetry from Ireland's leading muppets. Are there no depths left to plumb?
More muppetry from Ireland's leading muppets. Are there no depths left to plumb?
It does mean that the justification for any war must be such that it justifies the deaths of children which will result from it. However I agree that not all wars are equally immoral.
The WMD, which Sadam didn't have, didn't justify the bombing in which civilians were accidentally killed.
Iraq's support for Al Qaeda, Iraq never supported Al Qaeda, didn't justify the bombing in which civilians were accidentally killed.
Did Bush Jr's need to finish what his father started, or the war industries profits justify the bombing in which civilians were accidentally killed.
But hey the killings were accidental.
The point of this is that Russia's horrors in Ukraine should not prompt Ireland to join NATO, which also has an appalling record of war crimes.
Sophrosyne
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,577
Is there some political party advocating full membership of NATO for Ireland?
Is it enough to remove Russia’s veto over the deployment of our army?
Is it enough for us to actually have a proper army?
Is it enough for us to have ground based radar and actually know who is in our airspace?
Is it enough for us to stop making a virtue of a 70 year old policy that was based on local politics and economics and was never based on morality?
What makes you think we would be given any choice in the matter?
21 EU members States are also members of NATO. Four EU Candidate states are members of NATO. 2 European states (Iceland and Norway) are members of NATO and not the EU, but participate in the EU Single Market. Austria, Cyprus, Finland, Ireland, Malta, and Sweden are the 6 EU member states that are not members of NATO. Both Finland and Sweden have jointly announced they are considering joining NATO. Finland and Sweden take major step towards joining Nato | Nato | The Guardian Of these, Sweden is the key player. It has massive military forces but has had a long standing policy of neutrality. If SE joins NATO, NATO will become the de facto organization for the provision of collective security and territorial defence in Europe. It's a short step from there to expect / require each member state to participate actively in EU defence, most likely by joining NATO. After all, if you believe in something, i.e. the EU, and profit from being a member of it, why would you not defend it?
Sophrosyne
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,577
Perhaps you are right, though I thought application for full membership would involve some sort of plebiscite.
@Purple is right in that our neutrality had more to do with UK relations rather than any moral imperative.
It is self-satisfying to take the high moral ground living in the ivory tower of neutrality, while at the same time expecting the free ride of protection by so-called “war criminals”.
I am not sure who is trying to take taking the moral high ground. I believe that Ireland's decision making should be informed by Ireland's self-interest. As far as I can see there is no moral high ground.
Ireland's self interest is best served by staying as far as possible from any and all military entanglements.
Building a military defence capability would be meaningless, who would we attack? whose attack could we defend against.
The one attack that has occurred here recently was the cyberattack against the HSE. I would certainly like to see us improving our cyber defences. We could conceivably become world leaders in that. It is something that we might be able to do adequately, and we would not have to build a war machine to do it.
Baby boomer
Registered User
- Messages
- 735
A neutral country has been invaded without just cause, civilians are being deliberately slaughtered, towns and cities are being levelled, women are being raped and you think there's no moral high ground. Right, fair enough so. As a matter of interest, what exactly would it take to establish a moral high ground in your eyes?
I'm sure Ukraine thought that too. Problem is it's not up to Ireland. Military entanglements might not stay away from us.
As Finland has amply demonstrated, a country of our size and wealth can build a defence capability against any potential aggressor. In their case, Russia; in our case, take your pick from a range of potential aggressors.
How would that world-leading cyber defence fair against an aggressor who used submarines to cut every fibre optic cable that comes into this island? As Russia, for instance, could easily do. Instead of trying to reinvent the wheel and become a world leader in cyber defence, might it not be better to cooperate with a range of countries and together build the world's leading cyber defence system. Now, if only there was an alliance of like minded democracies, led and chiefly funded by the world's richest country, which already has the best resourced IT capability, that we could join.......
Oh, wait!