2021 Black Sea incident with professional liars (Royal Navy)

"While I am not going to get into our tactic and procedures, I can say that we operate in accordance with international law and expect Russia to do the same," Kafka added when asked about whether or not U.S. military forces issued any warnings to the Russian ships or otherwise communicated with them as they sailed past Hawaii. "U.S. military forces are present and active in and around the Western Pacific on a daily basis in support of the homeland and to ensure a Free and Open Indo-Pacific."

Actually the USN violates the exclusive waters of countries all the time, including the Soviet Union, and more recently both Russia and India.

The proximity of these Russian warships to Hawaii during these drills, even if it was only for a relatively short period of time, could easily be described as highly unusual and provocative.

And if they had sailed 3km into US waters what would it be then?

While the Russians did not say any actual bombers took part in the Pacific exercise, Tu-142 Bear long-range maritime patrol planes, a design derived from the Tu-95 Bear strategic bomber, did participate, along with Il-38 May maritime patrol planes and MiG-31BM Foxhound interceptors.

Americans are idiots and constantly misidentify the Tu-142 as being a bomber because it is useful to do so.

"No intercepts were conducted with the Russian planes likely turning away from the path toward the state," the Star-Advertiser reported. At the same time, this could indicate that the Russian planes appeared to be flying mock attack profiles at targets in Hawaii when the decisions were made to launch the F-22s.

Hahahaha... those Russian planes were not there for sight seeing, but the F-22s clearly could not find them either so that is pretty amusing... but understandable because the F-22 is not Americas best aircraft and the Tu-142s are very stealthy and hard to find...

However, a significant Russian naval flotilla operating so close to American territory and so far away from home is a radically different show of force that is clearly meant to send a signal to the United States.

Yeah, after all these years of HATO expansion and HATO exercises in the Arctic and the Baltic and the Black Sea, they decided to so the same and you don't seem to like that.

Let's be real, the Russians won't do sh*t as it's just not worth the consequences.

They are expanding their navy, how much of this sort of shit will the UK and US put up with when their turn comes?

I swear to God if they don't show us a nice 1080p video of KH-32 or Kinzhal in action the next time it happens I'll..

I am sure they are planning exercises for the next few years that will be in places the US and UK are not going to be happy about...

This is all part of the law breaking the UK and US Navies engage in, which is so funny when they talk about international law...

Russia appears to have responded like for like by conducting its own exercises off Hawaii, but clearly they are being pushed to respond ever more forcefully as the US and the UK continue to push the boundaries of reason and sanity.

Russian exercises of Hawaii were likely planned a rather long time ago and likely in response the HATO exercises in the Black Sea and Arctic ocean.

This is just fuel for a fire and it will keep... they will need to plan a fitting out voyage for the Kuznetsov which will likely involve at least one Kirov as well and it will likely be for a year or more so plenty of opportunity and scope there for getting into everyones backyard...

Warning shots being fired at that failed UK ship which can be seen in the background.

The angle of the gun suggests max range ballistic shots, but HE rounds would explode on impact with the sea so even from 6-7km away if the impacts of rounds is within 1-2km people on the target ship would hear.

Pussyfooting with 30mm at 3 km away just invites more trespassers as we have just seen

3 miles away... almost 5km.

The British were fuming not so long ago because there was a Russian submarine in the Irish Sea. Just a tit for that for continued British meddling in the Black Sea area.

But no violation of territorial waters. The Brits claim the Crimea is Ukrainian but that corner is Sevastopol and is Russian controlled normally anyway.

Russia did shoot at the limey ship and the limeys scurried away. Russia shot something this time. Don't buy into the propaganda bullshit that it wasn't close enough or any of that BS.

BTW. The Oxford Atlas shows Crimea as Russian territory. Because it's not a matter of opinion. Russia is in control of Crimea. So anything the limeys say about not recognizing it is a total red herring.

There are lots of territories Russia could question British control of... Gibralta, Falklands Islands, etc etc.... you could create quite a long list very easily.

That huge NATO exercise coming up later in the summer better stay away on the other side of the Black Sea, but even so, I would've blame Russia for being royally pissed off about these things so close to its borders.

The US and UK wrote the book on being total dicks... that is not going to change any time soon.. but opportunities will come in the future and Russia can take advantage of the situation when they do.

Russia should have sent a flight of 4 SU-24s to do a low level supersonic pass.

Double post removed.

I would say better to add a danger fee for the next lot of Russian gas they buy... to cover costs...

lancelot wrote:The British were fuming not so long ago because there was a Russian submarine in the Irish Sea. Just a tit for that for continued British meddling in the Black Sea area.
Now the British are escalating once more. Pretty pathetic really. Perhaps China and Russia need to conduct a joint freedom of navigation circumnavigation of Great Britain.

Maybe, whilst the Baltic Fleet should continue transiting North/South via the Channel, the Northern Fleet should change to transiting via the Irish Sea with a route just off the territorial limits of the Firth of Clyde. A simultaneous trip to start. Could create an interesting 'panic' as most of the Royal Navy is on a 'show the flag, stir dissent on the way' trip to China.

As this action was probably US/NATO planned/authorised and maybe didn't go exactly to plan, an unintended consequence, apart from the above, could be an increase in Russian activity in the Caribbean. The obvious first move could be regular Tu-142M sorties out of Cuba and/or Venezuela as that can be done with little notice. Followed by a group of ships on a 'follow the territorial limit plus 5 miles' cruise down both US seaboards.

Crazy, whichever way you look at it.

Sometimes you guys are terrifying me
Simultaneously, you are expressing the warm feelings toward the British provocation, and demand Russia stand up to the same level of idiocy ...
Warmongering.
Yeah. That is the right word I guess.

Just Britain pretending to be relevant... and failing sadly.

If they try it again then use bigger ships and get right up close and do what they did to the Americans trying the same shit in the 1980s....

Craig Murray comments on this event

Sometimes it is worth stating the obvious. The United Kingdom does not have a coast in the Black Sea. British warships are not infesting the Black Sea out of a peaceful intent, and there is no cause for them to be entering disputed waters close to anybody’s coast. This is not a question of freedom of navigation under the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea. There is nowhere that a British warship can be heading from the UK under the right of innocent passage that would require it to pass through coastal waters by Crimea. The Black Sea is famously a cul-de-sac.

I expect we will now be in for a mad frenzy of Russophobia, yet again. I shall comment further once I have more details of why and exactly where Russia was firing warning shots. But just remember this, it was not Russian warships near the British coast, it was British warships in an area where they had no business other than ludicrous, British nationalist, sabre-rattling.

The UK needs to lose its imperial delusions. Sending gunboats to the Crimea is as mad as – well, sailing an aircraft carrier expressly to threaten the Chinese. There are those who see this activity as evidence of the UK’s continued great power status. I see it as evidence of lunacy.

https://katehon.com/en/news/black-ops-black-sea

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-57624942.amp

Arrow wrote:https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-57624942.amp

You are not supposed to put up bare links here!

This is what it is all about. You couldn't make it up. Classified documents describing what the Royal Navy would be doing were found at a bus stop in London last Monday, before the event. Good job they weren't handed in to the Russian Embassy.

Top secret MoD dossier is found at BUS STOP: Member of public finds 50 classified pages about Russian threat to HMS Defender ahead of Black Sea trip and military plans for Afghanistan - sparking urgent government inquiry

Top-secret MoD dossier containing 50 classified pages has been found by member of public at Kent bus stop
Dossier contains sensitive information about HMS Defender's provocative passage through the Black Sea
Emails and PowerPoints show that journey was calculated decision to mark a show of support to Ukraine
Officials knew voyage was being conducted in the expectation that Russia might respond with aggression
Dossier also contains documents about a possible British military presence in Afghanistan post-withdrawal
Urgent government inquiry has been launched, with MoD insisting that HMS Defender's trip was legal

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9729659/MoD-dossier-BUS-STOP-Public-finds-classified-pages-Russian-threat-HMS-Defender.html

Yes, if memory serves me right, they had over 160 nuclear warheads on Cuban soil. That's a serious number at that time!

Yes, the bean counters focused on the SS-4 and SS-5 missiles  (MRBM and IRBM respectively), and totally ignored the large number of FROG short range ballistic rockets that would be used to deliver tactical nuclear warheads against any landing ships the US might have used for an invasion.

And USSR didn't have any nuclear warheads in Cuba, the ships that were supposed to deliver them turned around and ran away when faced with more determined US Navy

The rest is history

The nuclear warheads for the medium and intermediate range missiles had not arrived but those FROG were there are ready to be used...

Do what? Admit that their Navy is as valuable as Icelandic fishing fleet? Followed by admission of defeat and dissolution of Russian Federation?

This is a coast guard issue, not a Russian Navy issue... though the Russian Navy is there for support if needed... hence the Su-24s...

If you have​ a warship and enemy vessel enters your territorial waters you open fire not play bumper cars like some carnival bitch

US sailors have fond memories of those ramming incidents, it was a proof that their enemy has no stomach for a fight and that American victory is assured beyond any doubt

The Royal navy is not the US Navy, only an American shoots when someone steps on its yard.

When Iran opened fire on the US Navy, the US Navy shot down an airliner...

Since the Lider class destroyers proposed S-500 air defense systems what other ships propose S-500 air defenses?

They mentioned that any new CVN would need to be able to defend from threats under water, surface water and land, in the air, and from space... and you would need a large vessel for the necessary sensors and equipment anyway.

One of the more curious idiocies is the claim that the Su-24s weren't armed, right below this photo of one of them clearly showing it carrying 4* 250kg bombs (1 under each wing & 2 under centre fuselage)

The British also claimed no warning shots were fired even though the reporters on the ships said they heard gunfire, but then these people told the stories about Polonium and Novachok so lets just wait till Washington tells them what the real story is.

Ok - so if those US sailors were so tough, why didn't they start WWIII?

The ramming didn't just come from the Soviets side. This is just a way to send a very clear message "Game over - stop fucking with us".

Indeed, after being rammed they left Soviet waters... so mission accomplished...

Both Kirovs should be candidates.

It all depends on the S-500 and how big they are and if they will fit in UKSK launch tubes or if they need UKSK-M launch tubes or if they have their own special launch tubes... but to have a radar that can see a minimum of 2,500km including up into space it is going to need to be a big ship.

A series of slides prepared at PJHQ shows two routeing options, one described as "a safe and professional direct transit from Odessa to Batumi", including a short stretch through a "Traffic Separation Scheme" (TSS) close to the south-west tip of Crimea.

This route, one slide concluded, would "provide an opportunity to engage with the Ukrainian government… in what the UK recognises as Ukrainian territorial waters."

Three potential Russian responses were outlined, from "safe and professional" to "neither safe nor professional".

In the event, Russia chose to react aggressively, with radio warnings, coastguard vessels closing to within 100 metres and repeated buzzing by warplanes.

An alternative route was considered, which would have kept HMS Defender well away from contested waters.

This would have avoided confrontation, the presentation noted, but ran the risk of being portrayed by Russia as evidence of "the UK being scared/running away", allowing Russia to claim that the UK had belatedly accepted Moscow's claim to Crimean territorial waters.

Hahahaha... so the British did this because they were afraid of PD calling them pussies... hilarious... what a bunch of pussies...

And it clearly shows their claims of innocent passage to be totally false...

You are not supposed to put up bare links here!

This is what it is all about. You couldn't make it up. Classified documents describing what the Royal Navy would be doing were found at a bus stop in London last Monday, before the event. Good job they weren't handed in to the Russian Embassy.

Thank you John... Arrow, you and several others need to get into the habit of including a summary of what any link you might be posting is about or it may just be deleted and you will not get another warning.

My patience is not infinite... soon deletions will be followed up with a few time outs for not following the rules or instructions of a mod.

It is not hard what I am asking members to do...

JohninMK wrote:
This is what it is all about.

I find it hard to believe.
Such a coincidence ...
And what a marvelous picture we have there ...
It is not a provocation, God forbid!
The RN lords used to discuss the issue before it happened, and imagine what they discovered?
Yes! Ze Evil Russkies would act in such an unprofessional manner ...
Still, the Lord needs to be the Lord, and that request the proper posture. A professional one, of course.
That is with guns lock&loaded, and all sensor set turned on, widely reported that to the onboard correspondents, still, it is an "innocent passage"
Ze Evil Russkies are always such an unprofessionally ... They unprofessionally travel from Kaliningrad to Pete, buzzing all that professional fighters from Spain or Italy
Remember how unprofessionally they denied The Freedom Fighters to say hello to Schoigu? How dare them. Unproffesionalls. All over there.

Sensitive UK MoD Docs Reportedly Suggest London Planned HMS Defender Provocation as Media Stunt, by Tim Korso for Sputniknews. 27.06.2021.

A Royal Navy warship entered the waters near the Crimean Peninsula on 23 June and sailed through them despite demands by Russian forces to leave the area. Moscow considers these waters part of its territory since a 2014 referendum in which Crimean residents voted to join Russia. The UK, however, does not recognise the results of the vote.

A bundle of sensitive British Ministry of Defence documents, found by a member of the public at a bus stop, contained information about the 23 June HMS Defender incident near the shores of the Crimea, as well as other sensitive military information, the BBC has reported, citing the obtained papers.

The documents, dated 21 June, reportedly contained an analysis of the potential consequences of the warship's passage through the waters, deemed by Russia as part of its territory. They also purportedly included information regarding the UK's operations in Afghanistan amid the US withdrawal from the country and London's thoughts on new US President Joe Biden and his administration.

The British Ministry of Defence did not explicitly confirm the authenticity of the documents cited by the BBC. However, the ministry did admit that an employee had reported the loss of sensitive papers, refusing to delve into detail about the matter.

The papers, cited by the British broadcaster, suggested that London expects increased threats towards its military personnel in Afghanistan, should the country decide to leave individuals behind following the US pull-out. The troops are reportedly already lacking awareness about the situation on the ground and even though they haven't faced Taliban attacks for over a year, this could change in the future. According to the papers, London isn't ruling out a complete withdrawal of its own forces.

The 50-page treasure trove of documents, which include emails and presentations, also contains notes on a session of the UK-US Defence Dialogue that took place on 21 June. The briefing notes suggested that the new US administration has "much continuity" with the previous one in terms of its focus on China and the Indo-Pacific region in general. Furthermore, London apparently doubts that Washington's policy towards its allies has changed with the arrival of Joe Biden and seeks confirmation of promised greater US engagement with Europe, the documents claim.

"We should use the meeting to see how much the administration is prepared to share, or whether its stated ambition of consulting more with allies is truer in principle than in practice", a portion of the briefing notes reportedly said.

London Planned Provocation Near Crimea, Expected Harsh Reaction From Moscow

The BBC report also goes into detail about the UK's deliberations on HMS Defender's passage from the Ukrainian port of Odessa to Batumi, Georgia. Per the obtained documents, two plans were on the table: a longer route around the Crimean Peninsula, and a shorter one where the warship would pass as close as 19 kilometres off Crimea's coast.

The second plan meant that Defender would sail right through the waters that Moscow considers its territory since a 2014 referendum during which the overwhelming majority of the peninsula's residents voted in favour of joining Russia. However, western countries do not recognise the results of the referendum (and apparently Crimeans' rights to self-determination), and thus the UK described the second route as crossing "Ukrainian territorial waters".

The same documents, cited by the BBC, show the UK realised it would be Moscow, not Kiev, who would react harshly to HMS Defender's "innocent passage". In international maritime law the term "innocent passage" is used to describe the peaceful movement of a military vessel through another country's territorial waters, which is only acceptable if this country does not object to it. Yet, international law does not permit this in cases where the status of waters is disputed – as is true with the waters off Crimea.

Still, London apparently did not bother itself with the peculiarities of international maritime law in this case, but rather with the potential response by Moscow to its actions:

"Following the transition from defence engagement activity to operational activity, it is highly likely that RFN (Russian Navy) and VKS (Russian Air Force) interactions will become more frequent and assertive", the documents obtained by the BBC said.

Even understanding that Russia's response might range from "safe and professional" to "neither safe nor professional" (according to the documents), Britain chose to send HMS Defender right into the waters off of the Crimean Peninsula. The papers cited by the BBC offer an insight behind the two motives for this decision.

First, London reportedly believed that taking a safer route for the HMS Defender would be understood by Moscow as a sign of the UK "being scared/running away". The papers also suggested the British government thought it would allow Russia to say that London had "belatedly accepted Moscow's claim to Crimean territorial waters".

Second, the UK apparently sought to make a PR stunt out of the bold passage of its warship through the Russian-controlled waters, the documents show. According to the report, London believed the journalists from the BBC and Daily Mail, who were on board the warship on the day of the incident, 23 June, would provide an "independent verification of HMS Defender's action".

Instead, the journalists witnessed how a Russian military vessel and a group of Su-24M fighter jets steered the HMS Defender away from Crimea's waters. The Russian Defence Ministry said the Russian warship had to fire a warning shot and that one of the jets had to drop bombs in the British destroyer's path because of the HMS Defender's refusal to heed warnings demanding it leave Russian territorial waters immediately. The Kremlin strongly condemned the UK's actions and summoned the country's envoy to deliver a note of protest.

London initially dismissed Russia's statements about its military firing warning shots as "Russian disinformation", claiming that Moscow had simply carried out "gunnery exercises" nearby. Yet later, the chief of Britain's defence staff, General Nick Carter admitted that the 23 June incident near Crimea could create the risk of an "unwarranted escalation".

https://sputniknews.com/uk/202106271083252621-sensitive-uk-mod-docs-reportedly-suggest-london-planned-hms-defender-provocation-as-media-stunt/

Mir wrote:@Gary. Your title is WAAAYY too flattering - It should read "Border patrol incident agression with by compulsive liars (Royal Navy)

Corrected for you.