GlastonSpur
Also disliked on an Aston Villa forum
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2007
- Messages
- 17,716
- Supports
- Spurs
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
what? Who? When? Gimmeee gimmeee gimmeeeeeee!Calling it a brilliant move for that reason is silly. We’d be more distracted if a fast food chain came out with a new fried chicken sandwich.
It's really depressing to read, especially opinion polls.Russia-Ukraine war: Turkey's talk show generals sway public against Nato:
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/...r-talk-show-generals-sway-public-against-nato
Well, yes, but then Turkey has long been regarded as the least reliable NATO member.It's really depressing to read, especially opinion polls.
But of course they don't mention any missile strikes - that would be too damaging an image for their propaganda to accept - and will probably end up blaming some crew member for carelessly tossing away a lit cigarette.
Assuming they’re attacking a US carrier group, Aegis would have something to say about all that.Main armament of the Moskva are anti-ship missiles with (optionally) nuclear warheads. So yes, firing them at a carrier group would definitely destroy a whole carrier group. Conventional warheads would at least ensure heavy damage to the core of the group.
I think the Ukrainians already used that one when the Belgorod fuel depot went up in smokeBut of course they don't mention any missile strikes - that would be too damaging an image for their propaganda to accept - and will probably end up blaming some crew member for carelessly tossing away a lit cigarette.
It says a lot for the terrible state of the Russian military that a prize flagship that supposedly has multi-layered defence systems has been taken down by two land-based missiles, both of which apparently hit.
Let's just say my trust in the defense systems of US carriers is limited since I know someone who sunk one (at least could have done so, it was simulated during an exercise)Assuming they’re attacking a US carrier group, Aegis would have something to say about all that.
Yeah missiles coming through the air are a little different than a Swedish diesel sub using a sonar silent engine and covered with a sonar absorbing coating and electromagnets sneaking around.Let's just say my trust in the defense systems of US carriers is limited since I know someone who sunk one (at least could have done so, it was simulated during an exercise)
But I admit that Aegis isn't part of the defense against submarines, so that wasn't at fault there.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Haha got emTweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
And a carrier group has an absolute feck ton of defences (not to speak of offensive capability), which is why one has not been sunk before. Last time US lost a carrier was during WW2 against the Japanese. And it hasn't been for lack of trying. Meanwhile this carrier-killer seems to have been killed by a couple of subsonic, land-based, anti-ship missiles based on 80s Soviet tech from a country with no navy. The absolute shambles.This assumes that some or all of the missiles are not destroyed mid-flight. A carrier group does have defences.
Absolutely insane. How do the Russian people react to stuff like this?The looks on the faces of the other panellists whilst she says this:
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
That's not the Moskva. In any case, how would the Ukrainians have a video from a nearby ship?Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
This makes way more sense than actually having a camera that close.That's not the Moskva. It's apparently a video of a Norwegian Navy Test Missile Strike:
After watching it a few times, I started having doubts, namely the sound of the explosion being immediate. I deleted it.That's not the Moskva. In any case, how would the Ukrainians have a video from a nearby ship?
It's apparently a video of a Norwegian Navy Test Missile Strike:
OK. Also, from the video of the Norwegian test as compared to the other video, we can hear the same sound of the engine of the ship that's doing the filming, plus the very same sound of the explosion.After watching it a few times, I started having doubts, namely the sound of the explosion being immediate. I deleted it.
The tweet did say founder though, not leader.Another point about that Norweigian ship clip - Any tweet that claims Andriy Biletsky as the "Azov Leader" is pure propaganda. He was one of the founders of the unit who has far-right views and is therefore constantly used by Russian disinfo ops for their Nazi nonsense. He left the Azov Battalion in 2014 as it was transformed to a regular National Guard unit.
Was sure it said leader... Might have been on a diff tweet I saw.The tweet did say founder though, not leader.