Russian Navy "On Verge of Collapse"

Well you can´t trust politicians can you ? Also WHO shot this airliner down ? This isn´t clear at all, certainly not Putin

Also note in the video is the chamber of commerce NOT a political institution.

But guess it makes no sense to post in these kinds of threads anymore, as most of you seem to have incomplete information over certain todays world-politic-economic situations judging from many posts. However this forum is grand for WW2 and weapons/tanks knowledge....and this is why I came here in the first place anyway

 

Are you? and how relevant is nationality in to this topic in any case?

So people who were investing in or thinking about it don't like the sanctions. Hardly surprising. The history of appeasement in such cases makes it pretty clear that it is a very bad option. It's hardly jsutifyable morally either.

???? If that's the best you can do you'd be better off just not trying.

Some times outsiders can be more objective sometimes not. Of course I didn't claim that either.

Alternately when the cause is right (and IMO it is in this case) they should be the first to take a principled stand. If you are not familiar with Kipling you really should read "Danegeld" it is quite pertinant to this situation. The fact that you are closer to Russia and conduct more trade with her actually makes it more important to take such a stand. Perhaps more difficult as well but that's antoher matter.

 

No, you can't trust Putin.

No, it is not, but it is inextricably linked to politics. I believe we would call them lobbyists.

Said the pot to the kettle.

 

Not clear? Well it was either Russian forces or seperatist under their control. Doesn't make much difference does it. Since both were essentially following Putin's orders that rather makes him responsible in any case.

Of course it is, such an organization can't help but be.

Looks to me like a case of the pot calling the kettle (or perhaps the flatware in this case) black.

 

But Russia did nothing to us, so why should we stand vs. them. Cause our US - masters tell us so, right.

I only know that Russia took "back" the crimea quite peacefully, compared to the chaos the puppet regime in Kiev has started.... Also the Crimea belonged to Russia earlier and there are a lot of Russians anyway. Kiev wanted to ban Russian language, so hardly very friendy to the Russians.

There is no proof that Russia had anythin to do with the airliner shot down.

Of what other things is Russia accused of ? Do not forget Nato did widen it´s influence ever more eastwards, I think naturally Russia would feel threated by this.

Sometimes it is good, to see things from the others perspective too.


"not clear? Well it was either Russian forces or seperatist under their control. Doesn't make much difference does it. Since both were essentially following Putin's orders that rather makes him responsible in any case."

Proooooof`?

I have not seen any proof except politicians statements, which present no proof at all. I also read the DUTCH report regarding MH17 btw. In the report there is not one word that says the Russian have anything to do with it. They report in reality says.........nothing. Only that it needs more investigation.


To make it clear once again, I need proof when people/countries are accused of things. If these aren´t present, the person/country is NOT gulity as long the proof is delivered. That´s the western justice system and I hope it stays that way. Maybe it´s different where you live.

Also its totally unlogical that Russia would shoot down an airliner. What would they gain from it.....

 

Hmmm...but what you're describing is largely a defence force...a navy gives the ability to 'project' military power...include aircraft carriers a you can take a whole war offshore...are you saying that Russia is willing to lose it ability to intimidate internationally?
Bloody French...still selling weapons!

 

Mh, "intimidate internationally" interesting term. Certainly huge ships will impress people. But I think the days of real big ones are numbered. I mean eg. the Kirow class was a monster of missile battlcecruiser. And certainly very hard to kill and dangerous, but even all the escorts might not prevent the sneaky sub to close in, even one torp may be enough to cripple even these modern cold war monsters.

Russia more or less will be back to coastal waters I guess. However the Chinese might think different.

However the 2 French built ships would be proof that I am not correct. I am still wondering WHO pays for these and what happens with them.... will be interesting. Or I am wondering even more WHY did the French built ships for an evil regime like Russia........mh?

 

I doubt they targeted an airliner deliberately. The may have thought, or assumed, that it was a Ukrainian government aircraft, and they clearly preferred to shoot rather than make certain of what their target was. Accidents happen in combat or near-combat situations, like when shot down that Iranian airliner. But once it happens is should be acknowledged honestly, as we did.

 

This month's US Naval Institute Proceedings reports that the Russians are still working on, though near finishing, the LST Ivan Gren which was laid down in 2004! They just started work on a second ship of the class, possibly because of the non-delivery of the Mistrals. Of course the Ivan Gren is a much less capable ship, around 6000 tons.

 

??? Of course they did. Perhaps not a direct attack but they certainly threatened the stability of Eastern Europe which has considerable impact on Western Europe and the world. That same rational by the way would suggest that France and Britain shouldn't have declared war after Germany invaded Poland.

What US masters? Actually you should do it because it is in your long term best interests.

??? They deliberately broke a treaty when they did so. Furthermore it was only peaceful because the Ukraine decided not to stand up to it them. As a result the Russians decided to take more of the Ukraine if they could. The regime in Kiev is not a puppet of anyone as far as I can tell nor did they start the "chaos" . Look to your Russian friends for that "service". The Crimea was also independent and part of the USSR all of which is irrelevant. The Russians have shown they have no consideration for international treaties or law by their actions. Allowing them to get away with it will just encourage them and others to continue in that vein. I'd like to see your sources that Kiev "wanted to ban Russian language" as well. I suspect you have significantly over stated the situation.

Of course there is unless you are doing an ostrich immitation. The system that shot down the airliner was not a simple one to use and then of course there was the statement by the Russian controlled seperatist right after the shoot down that they had done it. The fact that they wouldn't let international investigators onto the scenen until they had plenty of time to clean it up is also rather incriminating. I'll admit it's not clear whehter or not it was the Russian military that actually pulled the trigger or seperatist under their control but it pretty clearly was one or the other.

Nothing NATO did was in violation of international law. And if they were thinking the Russians should actually be reassured by it, at least if they didn't plan on attacking any of the countries that became part of it.

Indeed, and it's something I've done a fair amount of and if I say so myself am pretty good at. What's your point in this regard though?

Well everybody else has been pretty well eliminated haven't they?

You are confusing a couple of things. If you commit a crime you are guilty of it. If there is insufficient proof to convict you in a court of law then you have not legally been convicted of the crime. That doesn't mean that you didn't do it just like if you are convicted of a crime and didn't do it you are still not guilty in the general sense although you may be in the legal sense.

I suspect in this case that the people who actually pulled the trigger thought that the plane was indeed a Ukrainian one just as they announced right after the shoot down. How high up the chain the decision was made is an open question. Attempting to cover it up though makes them (i.e. the chain of command all the way up to Putin) guilty at least as accessories after the fact.

 

So in other words, no EU nations are indeed bankrupt. "Practically" so...which Greece is not...in your opinion - doesn't cut it as an economic, legal or monetary definition.

 

As we are moving down the Political road, rather than the military history, subject moved to Stump.

 

Had read where sometimes a smaller military aircraft would fly (under-maybe over) a scheduled commercial airliner, thereby infiltrating airspace undetected. ..And the altitude would suggest a high tech mobile anti aircraft weapon, which only a few know how to operate vs a shoulder mounted weapon which anyone could use.

 

A smiley face when mentioning the downing of a civilian airliner? Smart, real smart.....

 

While I fully believe Russia is in the wrong and they are getting the punishment that has been a long time coming this has tended to shift away from the main topic, Ie: The Russian navy.

So looking solely at that, Quite simply they are stuffed. Even when the economy was improving the industry just was not up to scratch.

Steregushchy class Corvette - First took 6 years from start to finish, 2nd and 3rd took roughly 8 years each. Ship is around 1,900t.
Admiral Gorshkob class Frigate - First may take 9 years 9 months (yet to be commissioned), next one may take 6 years. Ship around 4,550t.
Admirial Grigorovich class frigate - 4 years 6 months each roughtly. Ships about 3,850t.
Buyan class corvette - 6 ships respectively took 3, 7, 6, 4, 3 and 3 years each, Standard displacement is 550t.

Quite simply they take too bloody long to build the stuff, Ability to pay for it or not aside, If they cant pick up the speed of construction the fleet will constantly be filled with rusted out vessels long past their use by date.

 

Without "help" and credits (from central banks and money printing) severall nations are bankrupt. Eg. Japan and the US, too. But thats too OT here. You can research the numbers yourself...and thre latest developments in Greece´s case more and more point to them leaving the Euro zone. But let´s just wait 2-3 yrs. and we speak again about this.. if you remember this post then, you can acknowledge I am right.

But cause I am a nice guy 2 links for you:
http://www.handelsblatt.com/politik/deutschland/debatte-um-neue-finanzhilfen-griechenland-ist-bankrott/9503506.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ajtFEy92nw ("the worst is yet to come")



Re: Airliner/Crimea: As no one presented a proof of Russia has downed the airliner, Russia is not guitly. But anyway it was Ukrainian airspace and it would be thus KIEW responsible to safeguard it. They should have declare it a warzone and forbid civil planes to the area. Simple. Russia had a treaty with Ukraine that they could use the facilities of Crimea, so Kiew broke this trearty. Also simple. The measure of sending forces to Crimea to safeguard their installations is doubtful form Russian side, admitted. However it was a prudent strategic move to counter the Anti Russian Kiew Junta (which has a lot of Neo Nazis in their ranks).

BUT: LWD maybe you have info that I don´t have, just post it or send it to me, I am happy to solve the MH17 mystery. I just checked the latest news, which show no new developments in the case. So back your claim (as this would be too OT here, send me a PN with your proof/source, thanks). But I doub itt, cause it seems your (and others here,too?) thinking is clouded by dislike of Russians and/or Putin and/or media/politic propaganda.

But OT off here - back to the Navy topic

 

This suggest a lack of understanding of just what the term means but as you say it's OT.

If you are using a strict legal definition perhaps but then it's pretty clear we aren't isn't it? It is quite clear that the forces that shot it down were Russian backed. Their actions post shoot down make it clear that they are the very least accessories after the fact if not directly responsible. Keep your blinders on if you choose.

Or not. Mostly or not. The Russians and Russian backed seperatist had not indicated either the capability or desire to enage aircraft flying at the commercial levels. The airlines also were aware of the conflict there. No one expected them to enage an airliner as it would almost certainly cause them problems. Note again that the seperatist claimed that they had shot the plane down shortly afterwards but thought they had shot down a Ukrainian plane and probably a military one. Looks like no one expected them to be as incompetent as they were. None of this offsets the primary responsiblity being on those who pulled the trigger and those who ordered it. The ones who supplied this capability to them are next on the list.

At what point did the Ukrainians deny the use of such facilities to the Russians? If it is simple PLS source this.

It was more than doubtful it was an act of war. As such it was hardly prudent nor is your description of the Ukrainian government accurate. It's also worth noteing that the Russian takeover of the Ukraine was a violation of a multinational treaty not just one between Russia and the Ukraine.

If you dispute any of the facts on which I based my conclusions I'll be happy to source them if you will point out which ones.

Hardly. I actually find much to admire in Russia. Putin on the other hand is clearly following in the footsteps of a number of dictators of the previous century and is a threat both to world peace and Russian prosperity. That said while I do "dislike" him it does not cloud my thinking at all. Looks to me like this is another case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Perhaps although since the Crimea and Sevastapole have some pretty significant implications with respect to the Russian navy perhpas not. The drain on the Russian military that actions in the Ukraine are producing may also be relevant along with the economic impacts of both these actions and the sanctions. Could it be that you know you are loosing this debate and are thus trying to close it before it becomes clear to all?

 

I meant your statement: "Not clear? Well it was either Russian forces or seperatist under their control. Doesn't make much difference does it. Since both were essentially following Putin's orders that rather makes him responsible in any case." Thanks. Probably your my hero if you have proof, that not even the state authorities have

Btw: Here one of the sources reg. Russian language ban: http://my.firedoglake.com/fairleft/2014/02/25/ukraine-decides-to-fight-the-russian-language/
(But you can google this easily yourself btw. .- also perhaps other topics which maybe won´t be regarded by the media you consume).

But I hope at least you realize that the KIEW Junta has far rights and Neo Nazis and the west supported these (shamefully). Or didn´t your sources report this, too?

I am not afraid to "lose" a debate, can you lose a debate. You regard this as a kind of battle ? I will gladly admit I lose, but stick to my opinion. I simply have not the time or want to explain everything which is quite well know in other places. I didn´t know some ppl. are missing so much info here re. economic/political topics.

I will stick to the WW2 threads and admit I lose this "debate battle" ok ? You win, fine now?

 

Looks to me like you are making assumptions that are unwarrented by the facts at hand. It's far from clear just what proof the "state authorities" have. Indeed it is hard to believe that the Russians don't have a very good handle on exactly what happened but I'm not expecting them to share that with us, at least any time soon. Likewise the various other governmental bodies likely have a fair amount of information that isn't currently being shared although it's more likely to come out in some reasonable time period. However anyone with a logical mind who has looked at the open source data has to admit there is a very damning if circumstantial case against Russia.

As I suspected the law wouldn't have banned the Russian language nor was it even passed according to the article. Of course it's also within the Ukraines rights to pass such laws and certainly not within Russias rights under international law to invade the Ukraine due to such a law. Especially if the law was never passed.

As far as I know there never was a "KIEW Junta" if you have proof pls source it. (Is their some reason you are capitalizing all the letters in "KIEW" normally that indicates and acronym but I've been assuming it meant "Kiev"). As for people on the far right (including Neo Nazis) being in the Ukrainian goverment, that's regrettable but it's withing the rights of the Ukrainians to elect such people. Similarly there are quite a few Communist or sympathizers of the same in the Russian government are there not? Should we invade Russia because of that? For that matter we've got (IMO too many) far right and far left members of our government. Perhaps the Russians are justified in invading us?

If we are missing "so much info" why don't you supply it? From my view point it's you who seems to be lacking the information and not doing a particularly good job of presenting the rational for your position. If you can prove me wrong I would really appreciate it actually. If something I "know" is wrong I very much want to find out what is actually correct. However based on the information I have at hand and the logical conclusions I can draw from them your position seems deeply flawed.

 

An artilcle of at least background relevance:
http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/russia/articles/20150126.aspx