Ukraine cries. Everyone is lying. UN expresses 'deep concerns'

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus

Just as it has worked to perfection in getting rid of obsolete and poorly-maintained armored vehicles, and aging Navy surface vessels... The plan also avoids paying retirement benefits to a growing number of senior officers.

I sincerely appreciate the macabre humor.

My biggest concern right now is just how much radioactivity is going to be left distributed because of this conflict?

Edit: My gods... That reads terribly...

What I /mean/ to say is beyond the incredible horror currently being played out using only conventional weapons, I truly pray to any gods who might exist that nukes not be used.

There is already a lot of work to be done cleaning up damage to "hot" sites.

[LaurV]

Originally Posted by chalsall

Two other targets <...snip...>
Hmmm...

yeah, hmmm... you still believe this bullshit... :wonder:

[LaurV]

Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus

The Russians are not confirming that the ship was actually attacked.

Nope, that was no attack. It was just an unfortunate accident, some ammunition took fire. You people don't know what you are talking about. That is why the next day Russians moved all their ships about 60-80 km to the east (out of the Neptune's range), to avoid similar unfortunate situations that the ammunition barns on the other ships take accidental fires too...

[Dr Sardonicus]

Originally Posted by LaurV

Nope, that was no attack. It was just an unfortunate accident, some ammunition took fire. You people don't know what you are talking about. That is why the next day Russians moved all their ships about 60-80 km to the east (out of the Neptune's range), to avoid similar unfortunate situations that the ammunition barns on the other ships take accidental fires too...

From Military Today (my emphasis):

The RK-360MC Neptun (Neptune) is a Ukrainian anti-ship missile system. It was developed by Luch design bureau. It uses R-360 anti-ship cruise missile. It is a Ukrainian version of the Russian Kh-35U. The Ukrainian missile is generally similar to the Kh-35U, but has a longer body with more fuel, larger booster, and some other modifications.
<snip>
Missile
Missile length ~ 4.4 m
Missile length (with booster) 5.05 m
Missile diameter ~ 0.4 m
Wing span ~ 1.3 m
Missile weight 870 kg
Warhead weight 150 kg
Warhead type HE-FRAG
Range of fire up to 280 km
<snip>

That's 168 miles, so the ships are definitely not out of range of the missile itself. But they might be out of range of Ukraine's ability to target them from the shore - at least with the methods they're currently using. As I understand it, the missile uses input from external sources like radar or drones with "eyes on" the target in order to adjust course as needed to home in.

Before the attack that didn't happen, including at the time the missiles that weren't launched were launched, the Ukrainians had been flying drones near the Moskva. News reports speculate that these drones somehow distracted the Russians, or confused or overwhelmed their defenses. I don't buy that. I think the drones were supplying targeting information. But what I find hard to explain is, why the ship's crew didn't simply shoot the drones down as a matter of course. Not to mention shooting down the missiles themselves, which the Moskva was equipped to do. Perhaps, as the Russians running their ships in predictable patterns close to shore indicates, they were utterly complacent. Little did they suspect that such complacency would lead to spontaneous combustion!

[LaurV]

Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus

From Military Today (my emphasis):That's 168 miles, so the ships are definitely not out of range of the missile itself.

They were not ashore before, they were like 80-100km or so away, to keep them safe from other smaller accidental fires on board, and further away to Odessa even, so methink that moving them east 60 to 80 km indeed put them out of the "big accidental fire" range. But you may be right too, related to Ukraine ability to target them from the shore.

[ldesnogu]

I think Russia and Putin have lost all credibility. No matter what they say no one can believe them any more unless it’s been proven by another source. No they don’t target civilians. No woman was raped. No fragmentation bomb was used. Ukrainians killed civilians in Ukraine. Lies again and again.

So when they say it was an accidental fire, I see no reason to believe them. They also said the ship was safe until they had no choice but to admit it had sunk. Anyway even if it was an accidental fire, it would show such an incredible level of incompetence, it would be an incredible embarassment.

[LaurV]

That's what my friends say, along the lines "an accidental fire is even more shameful, if I would have one on my ship I would say that it was hit by an enemy torpedo or something"

[slandrum]

Originally Posted by ldesnogu

I think Russia and Putin have lost all credibility.

Russia and Putin never had any credibility. In fact, that goes for most if not all of the governments on the planet, including the good old USA - especially when a known con man was the president. There are times when it's worse than other times, but all governments want to hide unfortunate truths, and sell spin and propaganda instead. It's just a matter of degree as to how much of what any government says is an out-and-out lie.

You can't trust what's reported from any source until you can find other ways of verifying it. Even the better sources get tricked and duped regularly. Skepticism is important.

[Dr Sardonicus]

It does appear likely that Russia and its separatist allies are about to take control of what is left of the port city of Mariupol. The remaining Ukrainian defenders are running out of ammunition and supplies. Russia issued an ultimatum, surrender or be killed, but the defenders may well believe they'll be murdered if they do surrender, so might as well die fighting.

Securing Mariupol would be a significant military advance for the Russians.

It is said that a revolution really gets going if the citizenry comes to believe that there is no safety to be had in not fighting.

I am wondering at what point the US, its allies, and other countries would take a similar view of Russia.

[ldesnogu]

Originally Posted by slandrum

You can't trust what's reported from any source until you can find other ways of verifying it. Even the better sources get tricked and duped regularly. Skepticism is important.

Sorry, I wasn’t clear. What I meant is when the Russian government claims something, I think they lie until proven otherwise. When officials from other countries speak I actively double check when possible; for Russia, I don’t do that actively, they’ve lied too much.

Lavrov once told (about 10 years ago) to a French minister:

You see this glass as orange, I see it blue. You can argue all you want, I will keep on saying it’s blue.

[a1call]

From a philosophical point of view it's a sin to lie. Other than that there is no justification not to lie if it helps your cause. That is and always has been, the mechanics of what is the Fog-of-War.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fog_of_war

It is always more insightful to read between the lines. Take Putin's long table with void spaces in between him and others and all the conclusions it implied, and the his subsequent meeting with some flight attendants: