2021 Black Sea incident with professional liars (Royal Navy)

You overestimate desire of modern day Americans to burn in nuclear fire for some Eurotrash

You underestimate the insanity of the people who run the US.

Simply kicking out intruders would be enough, as this Krivak frigate did with a Ticonderoga cruiser during the Cold War.

I would say ramming is more thug like than firing warning shots and then firing warning shots into a target and then using something more powerful if there is no response.

My advice would be to design the ships with a reinforced bow to charge against NATO ships.

No need... 30mm cannon shells will do the trick... the threat will either have to return fire or leave... if they return fire... sink them... there are dozens of anti ship missile batteries in that location...

Then would come the complaints about "Russian aggression" and blah, blah, blah, blah ... but I don't think it matters too much

The complaints came with the warning shots... they would come with shots on target and with ramming incidents... who listens to western European complaints any more?

Personally I like the fact that they said further incidents would result in shots that are not warning shots that miss and even in the absolute worse case scenario they are not afraid to sink a Royal Navy ship... what were they supposed to say... partners don't act like this?

Well partners don't so there is no point in using terms like partners or countries that don't respect international law.

The people of the Crimea voted to join the Russian Federation... Ukraine never voted to join HATO or the EU and even if they did they wouldn't be allowed to... just the same way the people of Iraq and Afghanistan will never be allowed to join the first world... scum to be used is how you treat them.

Russians made morons of themselves now with that salute shot in honour of Royal Navy and they will be waiting for decades for a chance to make it right, Brits walked away from the table while they were ahead and will be living off this for a very long time

The release of secret papers at a bus stop suggests they couldn't even agree on what they did and I suspect the people who disagreed with this stupid and actually rather pointless provocation clearly wanted to make clear to the Russians and the British people that this was all Johnson...

Which suggests they think it was a failure.

They promised to do it again, but then they also said there were no warning shots so what to think.

Russians just allowed themselves to be made a bitch by a middle management

The British ship left their waters without scratching the paint on their nice new patrol boats... the lack of support from their allies suggests the UK did this on their own and were hung out to dry. There was no widespread condemnation of Russian Aggression like there was when Georgia invaded South Ossetia, or the Crimea voted to join the Russian Federation.

In the meantime they will have a whole parade of Bulgarian, Romanian and ships from other nobodies running trough that same route and every time they do something about it everyone will say that they are bullying small navies because they don't have the balls to take on the tougher enemy

Not paying attention were we... a dutch ship tried to do the same and ran away...

Those Russian candy-ass bitches need to get it in their heads that this is not Faroe/Islandic fishing dispute and stop acting like 2$ whores

Ahhhh please... a $2 whore would kick your arse...

Seems to me that the British politicians made a stupid miscalculation and embarrassed their navy... Ironically considering their previous history in that region... but even more so because of the history in that region.

Can't remember where it was, but there was an article from an old American newspaper about the Crimean War... which the Russians essentially suffered terribly because their weapons were obsolete muskets while the British and French and others had rifles... there were plenty of American soldiers and civilians volunteering to go an fight on the side of the Russians to get a chance to shoot some British and some French soldiers in battle... imagine if they had been given that chance...

You underestimate the insanity of the people who run the US.

You might be confusing the people who get elected president or to the senate or congress with the people who run the US.

Typical anglo-saxon behaviour. Loose. Run away. Declare victory.

Talking after is useless...

JohninMK wrote:As a Brit I really can't understand this attitude, doubling down in a game of chicken  

MOSCOW (Sputnik) – UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said on Tuesday that the country’s vessels would keep the route through Crimean waters despite a recent incident involving the UK’s HMS Defender destroyer.

   "HMS Defender was taking the shortest and most direct route. It is an internationally recognised traffic route. We've got every right to conduct innocent passage through Ukrainian territorial waters, according to international law. That's what we'll continue to do", Raab told a parliamentary committee.

For its part, the UK Defence Ministry said the destroyer was en route from Ukraine's Odessa to Georgia, and there were no warning shots at all. According to the footage published by the Russian security service FSB, the ship ignored warnings about the use of weapons and only left the waters near Crimea after warning shots.

The warship entered what Moscow considers a Russian maritime area near Cape Fiolent in Crimea on 23 June. The Russian navy had to fire warning shots to divert the vessel.

.

They will have to explain to the taxpayers when a British ship will be sunk there.

Probably that would be the only lesson they understand. Maybe a Russian ship could ram there as a second warning before actually sinking them, but that would also cause damage to the Russian ship.

Admiral Essen and Moskva cruiser is headed back to their black Sea base. Probably waiting for England's next adventure.

Next time UK tries this, the Russians should block the British ship, then go onboard with the FSB and arrest the sailors and the captain. Then force the ship to dock in Russia.

As a Brit I really can't understand this attitude, doubling down in a game of chicken

Bewildering...

Claiming there were no warning shots when the reporters they had on board to corroberate their story said there were and that they heard them is more than embarrassing.

The fact that they have stated they will do the same is so stupid... unless it means they never intend to visit both places again, in which case it does not matter, but saying this publicly means the Russians will be incompetent to not expect it to happen again and when it does those warning shots are going to be much closer so they get the message... which increases the danger.

The fact that they were spoken to by Russian authorities at the time is enough to know what they did could get them shot even if per say the British captain of the ship didn't personally hear the warning shots.

BTW the video showed the British ship had its air defence radars operating and by their own admission the weapons were loaded and ready to fire which on its own breaks the rules of innocent passage and invalidates the entire British Navy case.

From the article a few pages back:

It is no secret that Boris Johnson's office is heterogeneous and is constantly shaken by internal scandals. The conflict between Defense Secretary Ben Wallace and Foreign Office head Dominic Raab is one of the most difficult issues within the Kingdom's current government. According to other leaks, it was Ben Wallace who insisted on the passage of the ship through Russian territorial waters at Cape Fiolent, while Raab allegedly opposed it.

The two towers of Westminster Palace had a bit of an argument. The British Department of Defense believes that it is possible to knock on the nose of the Russian bear for the sake of the political interests of the head of this department. Foreign Office says that one should not behave like that, because the bear is still dangerous.

So Ben Wallace had the idea which Johnson obviously backed and approved and Raab was against it... but now that it has happened:

"HMS Defender was taking the shortest and most direct route. It is an internationally recognised traffic route. We've got every right to conduct innocent passage through Ukrainian territorial waters, according to international law. That's what we'll continue to do", Raab told a parliamentary committee.

It is Raab that is having to defend the actions, and he is clearly doubling down.

After their first sailing through these waters the UK claimed was Ukrainian and therefore they were allowed to be in, they were challenged by Russian authorities... did that not strike them as odd.

Perhaps when they try it again and 30mm cannon shells strike the side of their ship they might have been old stock made in the Ukraine...

Probably that would be the only lesson they understand. Maybe a Russian ship could ram there as a second warning before actually sinking them, but that would also cause damage to the Russian ship.

That is the problem... the Russian patrol ships are much smaller than these British ships, so ramming makes less sense than warning shots and then just shots on target.

Next time UK tries this, the Russians should block the British ship, then go onboard with the FSB and arrest the sailors and the captain. Then force the ship to dock in Russia.

Or just scuttle it...

GarryB wrote:It is Raab that is having to defend the actions, and he is clearly doubling down.

Further proof, if it was needed, that our leaders are psychopaths. This retard should care about the life of UK sailors and not use them as collateral so he can appear tough and "double down". It is simply disgusting

"Following British warship incident, Moscow warns next foreign power to violate Black Sea borders ‘will get a punch in the nose’"

https://www.rt.com/russia/528495-warship-incident-sea-borders/

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:...Maybe a Russian ship could ram there as a second warning before actually sinking them...

Or maybe Russia should just surrender and dissolve like those before them who also thought that ramming is not a pussy bitch move?

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

LMFS wrote:

mavaff wrote:Point is: some folks consider Crimea still Ukranian soil so technically that ship was not in Russian waters LOL

Good to know, next time they do that they can ask Ukraine for compensation when their ship is sent to the bottom

Technically those are Ukrainian waters, yes they are controlled by the Russians and Ukraine will never get it back but that doesn't change the fact those are Ukrainian waters.

So if Russia sunk the vessel in those waters that would be a defacto declaration of war and would trigger a NATO response.

Facts don't care about your feelings, Crimea is NOT formal Russian territory it was annexed yes and the Russians control and they won't give it up but that doesn't change the fact legally speaking it's not their territorial waters. I know this will trigger fanboys but nothing I said is factually wrong.

We'd all be dead by Nuclear War if the idiots in this forum had their way I swear.

I believe there was a referendum where about 95% of the population voted in favour of integration with the RF. I don't think that will ever change.

Any aggressive annexation normally coincides with some form of armed resistance that ends in bloodshed - none of that was ever reported.

Russia moved troops into the area to protect it's strategic assets - again, no shots were fired.

If Ukraine decides to re-take the Crimea, I believe a lot of blood will flow and Ukraine will at the very least end with the loss of Odessa and Mariupol.

The US of A has already made it perfectly clear in typical diplomatic language - basically saying "You are on your own" when it comes to war with Russia.

I think this map below more or less says it all. Even in the lighter shades of red the majority speaks Russian, but I am 100% sure you know that already.

There was no attack from the RF. Just moved it's troops into the area to secure Sevastopol as well as the Russians.

Do you really believe Russia would just sit and watch when your NATO "friends" move into Sevastopol?

Maybe Ukraine and NATO believes the referendum was illegal, but I bet the people in Crimea doesn't, and that is all that really matters.

I just checked - there is a very long list of countries that recognize Kosovo as an independent state. Including NATO!

Mir wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

LMFS wrote:

mavaff wrote:Point is: some folks consider Crimea still Ukranian soil so technically that ship was not in Russian waters LOL

Good to know, next time they do that they can ask Ukraine for compensation when their ship is sent to the bottom

Technically those are Ukrainian waters, yes they are controlled by the Russians and Ukraine will never get it back but that doesn't change the fact those are Ukrainian waters.

So if Russia sunk the vessel in those waters that would be a defacto declaration of war and would trigger a NATO response.

Facts don't care about your feelings, Crimea is NOT formal Russian territory it was annexed yes and the Russians control and they won't give it up but that doesn't change the fact legally speaking it's not their territorial waters. I know this will trigger fanboys but nothing I said is factually wrong.

We'd all be dead by Nuclear War if the idiots in this forum had their way I swear.

I believe there was a referendum where about 95% of the population voted in favour of integration with the RF. I don't think that will ever change.

Any aggressive annexation normally coincides with some form of armed resistance that ends in bloodshed - none of that was ever reported.

Russia moved troops into the area to protect it's strategic assets - again, no shots were fired.

If Ukraine decides to re-take the Crimea, I believe a lot of blood will flow and Ukraine will at the very least end with the loss of Odessa and Mariupol.

The US of A has already made it perfectly clear in typical diplomatic language - basically saying "You are on your own" when it comes to war with Russia.

I think this map below more or less says it all. Even in the lighter shades of red the majority speaks Russian, but I am 100% sure you know that already.

I'm not sure how accurate that map is. There's also the issue of it being 3 dialects. Russian, Surzhik and silly hohol "Ukrainian".
Plus the Eastern 45% by distance inc Kiev and the Southern 25? by distance % are basically former Party of the Regions/pro Russia.
"True Ukrainian" would prob be shitholes like Lvov and around 20% of the Ukraine. The exact opposite of Crimea, Lugansk and Donetsk.

Personally I think Russia needs to send in the tanks, kill the Nazis and be done with it all.
Atleast demographically it would change voting patterns. Which is what the Nazis did in the Gr Patriotic War.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Mir wrote:There was no attack from the RF. Just moved it's troops into the area to secure Sevastopol as well as the Russians.

Do you really believe Russia would just sit and watch when your NATO "friends" move into Sevastopol?

Maybe Ukraine and NATO believes the referendum was illegal, but I bet the people in Crimea doesn't, and that is all that really matters.

I just checked - there is a very long list of countries that recognize Kosovo as an independent state. Including NATO!

They might recognize it as such but it was illegal, Facts are facts.

I never said there was an attack....Just if they sunk it, Keyword here "IF"

Also no, I said we'd all die in Nuclear war for a reason after all.

Apologies if I misunderstood you, but yes the US and NATO are not really known to operate within internationally excepted legal laws - they are above such laws (much like my own ex-president )

That particular list of illegal wars is just as long as the one giving recognition to Kosovo.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:Technically those are Ukrainian waters, yes they are controlled by the Russians and Ukraine will never get it back but that doesn't change the fact those are Ukrainian waters.

So if Russia sunk the vessel in those waters that would be a defacto declaration of war and would trigger a NATO response.

Facts don't care about your feelings, Crimea is NOT formal Russian territory it was annexed yes and the Russians control and they won't give it up but that doesn't change the fact legally speaking it's not their territorial waters. I know this will trigger fanboys but nothing I said is factually wrong.

We'd all be dead by Nuclear War if the idiots in this forum had their way I swear.

What a pretentious load of crap, you super expert in international law

Firebird wrote:

I'm not sure how accurate that map is. There's also the issue of it being 3 dialects. Russian, Surzhik and silly hohol "Ukrainian".
Plus the Eastern 45%  by distance inc Kiev and the Southern 25?  by distance % are basically former Party of the Regions/pro Russia.
"True Ukrainian" would prob be shitholes like Lvov and around 20% of the Ukraine. The exact opposite of Crimea, Lugansk and Donetsk.

Personally I think Russia needs to send in the tanks, kill the Nazis and be done with it all.
Atleast demographically it would change voting patterns. Which is what the Nazis did in the Gr Patriotic War.

I can't vouch for the map either but it more or less represents similar maps but I'm sure it's within the general idea.

As far as war with Ukraine: NATO would love to see that happening - don't give them that satisfaction!

Putin just recently spoke of Ukraine as "our people" giving the Nazis the assurance that Russia will protect and fight for the Russians in Ukraine, but the RF is not going to start any wars.

Erdogan also wanted NATO to back him up in Syria and they did not.
What makes anyone think if that British ship was sunk WWIII would start immediately?
It is one thing to make an attack on NATO soil, quite another for a NATO member to stick its nose where it doesn't belong and get it stuck.
Perhaps the British need to relearn the lesson they forgot with the Suez Crisis.

Think "scuttle" is the wrong word as it would mean the Brits deliberately sinking their own ship by themselves.

Well I think Fred Scuttle came to mind when I saw Boris Johnson, but in this case, yes, Scuttle... after the Royal Navy crew had been taken off of course.

"Following British warship incident, Moscow warns next foreign power to violate Black Sea borders ‘will get a punch in the nose’"

What else can they do?

Say... whoops, no, the Crimean is Ukrainian... we will hand it back immediately and just screw the entire population who rejected being Ukrainian by open and legal vote... you know... the way democracies do it...

The next time will involve less ambigious warning shots... they will know they are being fired upon... and if they ignore that then those shells are going to be directed at the stern of the ship or perhaps those expensive radar antenna or the tip of the bow... efforts will be made to minimise the risk of injury or death, but at the end of the day gatling guns are not precision sniper rifles... and nor are the super soaker water pistols.

Or maybe Russia should just surrender and dissolve like those before them who also thought that ramming is not a pussy bitch move?

Both sides have had their say, and it is pretty clear who the pussies are.

Technically those are Ukrainian waters, yes they are controlled by the Russians and Ukraine will never get it back but that doesn't change the fact those are Ukrainian waters.

No they are not, the Ukraine makes no efforts themselves to police them, or manage them.

Those waters are legally Crimean waters and the Crimean waters are Russian.

So if Russia sunk the vessel in those waters that would be a defacto declaration of war and would trigger a NATO response.

I am sure even the British are not stupid enough to stick around taking fire... even assuming they didn't recognise the warning shots they turned and left Ukrainian waters this time... if those cannon shells were actually hitting their ship I doubt they would remain.

They might claim to be defending themselves and try to sink a patrol craft in which case multiple anti ship missiles would be the response... and probably a few torpedos as well.

Facts don't care about your feelings, Crimea is NOT formal Russian territory it was annexed yes and the Russians control and they won't give it up but that doesn't change the fact legally speaking it's not their territorial waters. I know this will trigger fanboys but nothing I said is factually wrong.

The fact that you think the people in Kiev or London or Washington have any say in the ownership of the Crimea is amusing, facts do not care about feelings... you are totally correct, and the military forces in the Crimea that will defend violations of their waters are Russian, and Britain can try to start WWIII so it can sail 3km inside Russian waters but I doubt they would get much support from anywhere except Kiev.

We'd all be dead by Nuclear War if the idiots in this forum had their way I swear.

Hilarious... so you are saying the UK sailing 3km inside Russian waters is a smart thing to do... fortunately they are not going to back that up... it will be years before they visit the Ukraine again and when the do they will visit Roumania or Bulgaria next and not go anywhere near Russian waters when they then go to Georgia.

Or they will start a fight they can't win.

The vote isn't legally binding, just like Kosovo's wasn't to be technical.

They are integrated into the Russian Federation... that is legally binding.

Kosovos vote was a parliamentary vote... no public vote was done.

We have said if you attack the Russians you are on your own yes, difference if the Russians attack first.

Dude... your guys pissed your pants when the Russians moved a few troops around in their own territory and had a few exercises... what exactly will they do?

Will it be as much as they did in Georgia or less?

They might recognize it as such but it was illegal, Facts are facts.

Of course it was illegal, the people didn't vote, it was just politicians...

I never said there was an attack....Just if they sunk it, Keyword here "IF"

It will leave Russian waters before it gets to anything sinking.

It is one thing to make an attack on NATO soil, quite another for a NATO member to stick its nose where it doesn't belong and get it stuck.

HATO does not require unflinching support for any stupid military adventure... when the US wanted to attack Iraq for Iraqs invasion of Kuwaite, or more accurately the risk of Iraq invading and occupying and unifying many of the arab states, Turkey was not obliged to indulge them and become a target for Scud missiles by allowing the Americans to base their attack there to allow a proper invasion of Iraq, so it had to be based in Saudi Arabia and ended up being just push Iraqi troops out of Kuwaite... and US and allied troops in Saudi was what bent Osama Bin Laden out of shape and led to 11/9...

If the UK wants to pick a fight with Russia only the most rabid anti Russian members will consider supporting that and they are the weakest members... the US certainly wont help.