Black Sea Fleet Watch

Something very unusual is going on with the remaining elements of the Black Sea Fleet at the moment. Much of the fleet have left their berth's in Novorossiysk, with a formation spotted on Satellite off the coast of Crimea, near Kerch. Kilo's, Ropucha's and patrol ships have seemingly left their positions without warning.

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Formation near Crimea

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous
      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Naval drone operators restrained and kept in cages.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          In several places across the US, ex-Tomcat crews are suddenly feeling an acute agitation deep in their prostates.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          TRAPPED & BETRAYED

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Is that the aircraft carrier or just a normal cloud?

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Significant movements in the bay

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Are they pulling back assets to prepare for da nook?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Looks like the opposite

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      More likely, with Western nations loosening their targeting restrictions the Russians are concerned Novossiysk might become the next Sevastopol.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        .... So they sortie towards Sevastopol, where a jetski drone attack happened last night? topkek

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          everybody knows that a lightning doesn't strike twice.. right?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Then how the frick have I been hit six times, in three different locations, on four separate occasions?

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Have you tried not looking so frickable? Zeus doesn't bother uggos, after all.
              >b-but I'm a guy
              Do you think a Greek god would care?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Will he also get pregnant?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            lightning rods must confuse you.

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    New announcement just released of "Unscheduled Exercises"

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Unscheduled Exercises
      They are going to Caribbean for training

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I'd be extremely doubtful they'd send the Black Sea fleet out to those, and even if they wanted to would Turkey let them out? Unless we're imagining 5D chess where it's supposed to be an evac

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >would Turkey let them out
          I don't really see any reason for Turkey to keep them bottled in? Of course who knows with the melon salesman, but that seems just counterproductive.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Turkey legally cannot let any Russian warship through the straits. One of the clauses in the Montreux Convention bars warships from a nation at war from passing through the strait unless it's to return to their home port.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >return to their home port
              new home port is Murmansk

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >home port is Murmansk
                Would this actually work? How many of those vessels could pass the Rostov channel to Caspian or up north? Whats the furthest they can get within black sea? Would anyone else accept them in port? Force Georgia maybe? What if they just try to exit sea? Will turkey fire?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >"surrender" to belarus
                >strike russian colors and raise Belarus flag
                >flip Turks the bird and sail through the straits without a pilot (don't run aground or collide with anyone: optional)
                >sail into med
                >"mutiny"
                >raise russian flag
                Realistically, what would happen? Russia doesn't have many bridges left to burn with the west and thus really doesn't have much to loose doing this.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >strike russian colors and raise Belarus flag
                I think the Turks would sink them since they could say the crew went rogue and they can't possible know what they will do.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                But then ostensibly they'd be attacking Belarussian flagged ships, an act of war. Silly thought exercise aside, if the BSF tried bum rushing the straits under a different flag, or even the Russian one, would the Turks open fire? Or let them through and then tell them if you do that again we will fire on your sure etc... Guaranteed pizza party night at the Pentagon either way

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                a ship cannot change national affiliation by switching a piece of cloth.
                Russian naval vessels taking down the toothpaste flag and claiming to be the navy of a landlocked nation with no navy makes them pirates, not Belorussians. It would not be an act of war against Belarus to sink them it would be a police against against pirates who had commandeered modern warships on the high seas and thus had no legal standing of any sort anywhere. The turks would sink them without warning and would be legally and morally right for having done so.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You miss the obvious solution that doesn't involve Black person thinking: impounding the ship.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >doesn't involve Black person thinking
                >flip Turks the bird and sail through the straits without a pilot (don't run aground or collide with anyone: optional)
                Too late for that

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Militarily Turkey doesn't have any reason to do anything. It could block all Russian civilian shipping or freely allow Ukraine to pull the exact same shit to get vessels into the Black Sea.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >at war
              SMO tho :^)

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You are about a year out of date, Russia calls it a war now.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Rushed the decision, don't you think?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                its the wests fault please understand sir

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Yes but
              >allow the black sea fleet out
              >don't allow them back in
              >be the only nation with a fleet in the black sea
              >frick a goat and enjoy live

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Which is why Russia has never been "officially" at war with Ukraine.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                you're a bit slow
                they've been calling it a war for over a year now

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        they are locked in the black sea, they aren't going anywhere.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        More likely they are just heading out into open sea to avoid getting targeted in port. Seems like they have concerns about some kind of attack?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Wouldn’t being out in the open be more dangerous?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            No, being out sea at makes you safer from attack because now the enemy has to actively spend resources and time trying to locate and track your fleet. Ships in port have always been vulnerable from air and missile attack on the account of they can't move while they're docked so they're extremely easy targets for missiles and bombs.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >the enemy has to actively spend resources and time trying to locate and track your fleet.

              >FORTE11 goes bippity boop
              >NATO RORSATS go clickety click

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        they wouldn't be able to send them back into the black sea because of Turkey.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >unscheduled exercises
      >during an active war
      lol
      lmao

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Black Sea Scuba Dive Center owners rubbing their hands with glee !

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Are they scuttling the Black Sea Fleet to save face!?!?!

      Is this an honorable death?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Could this be a mutiny? Sailors have had enough and decided to get out on their ships?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Doubt it. Sailors sitting in the docks have little reason to mutiny unless someone has been skimming on the vages again

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          In 1918 it was the sailors of the Hochseeflotte that hadn't seen action in years that mutinied first.The submarine crews that were in port didn't join.Bored soldiers are more likely to start shit than ones that are kept busy.But I don't think this is going to be a mutiny.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        If it was a mutiny, they'd be heading for a neutral port.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Black Sea fleet defects to Ukraine just like in 2014 some of the Ukraine Black Sea fleet defected to Russia

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >We surrender

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Russian navy feeling so wienerblocked by Putin they start screaming for SALVATION

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >battleship potemkin and hunt for red october all in one
        K-kino

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          a man can pray

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          >the cook measures the eggs and realizes something is up
          >goes to the captain
          >captain raises his eyebrow and the cook understands

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >the cook meashuresh the eggsh and realizesh shomething ish up
            >goes to the captain
            >captain raishesh his eyebrow and the cook undershtandsh
            ftfy

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              >I want to move to montana oblast with big titty american woman

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Was the Black Sea Fleet was ever useful?

    If the Cold War went hot and Turkey held Istanbul, running the Dardanelles would be suicide. Hell, they'd probably stay in the northern Black Sea or Sea of Azov to avoid missiles and planes from the Turkish coast

    Even if they took Istanbul, the Aegean Sea with all its islands and possible missiles on them would be a gauntlet. Even if they make it past the Aegean, they'd just run into several NATO carrier battle groups in the Mediterranean

    Fast forward to today, the BSF got slapped by a country with no navy and the best they can do is occasionally launching missiles at civilian targets

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The Black Sea Fleet was always about securing local dominance of the Black Sea and bullying all the other Black Sea nations. But the fall of the USSR has rendered pretty much all of Russia's navy impotent.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      NATO would have to fight them for any black sea landings. While not much of a threat it was still something they would have to account for.
      I have always imagined it as a fleet in being, akin to Italy in WW2

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It was kinda useful for the Soviets during WWII. One of the least known parts of the eastern front.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Was the Black Sea Fleet was ever useful?
      There's some theory of Russian expansion called the warm water ports theory. It suggests Russia has historically expanded because its own ports are only open part of the year.
      So it seeks out ports that are warm water, open year round which it can then use for shipping.

      So the port is more important for civilian reasons than necessarily naval one.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You know that old adage, "The poor in America are temporarily embarrassed millionaires"?
      Russia is a temporarily embarrassed Mediterranean power.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Their Job was to get into the Med before the war begin and then suicidally take an island of importance to NATO to literally be a suicide decoy.

      Like they'd seize Crete if only so NATO would have to waste their time bombing Crete instead of Russia.

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Discount D-Day is happening!

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_order_of_24_October_1918

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It *ALMOST* happened in 2022.

      We were robbed!

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        if i remember right, they were ordered to storm the beaches of odessa, but the naval infantry refused because they knew they'd be massacred

        why did this have to be the one time vatniks grew balls and opposed monke?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          IIRC there were 10k or less Russian marines for the landing. When the Axis besieged Odessa back in WW2 they needed 350k for just that city. My guess is that the naval infantry assault was only intended to be a photo-op to dab on HATO after Ukraine had been decapitated in the first 48-72 hours of the war, if the FSB's plan had actually worked.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            if i remember right, they were ordered to storm the beaches of odessa, but the naval infantry refused because they knew they'd be massacred

            why did this have to be the one time vatniks grew balls and opposed monke?

            at this point in the war they had three district commanders all enacting their own plans. when the southern chap whose job it was to launch the amphibious assault saw the failure of Hostomel and that the northern chap's drive for Kyiv had stalled, he knew it was no go and called off the attack

            so the cancellation was both a little more organised and a little less organised than that; they weren't exactly cowardly enough to just call it off, it was tactically the right decision; at the same time however, perhaps the assault should have gone in, if it was well-coordinated it might have ruptured the Ukrainian defence. we might never know.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >dollar store d-day ending in thrift store dunkirk
              would’ve been nice

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You mean Alibaba dieppe, right?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >russians
          >saying no to their master
          russians are the most cucked people in the world so that never happened

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >amphibious assault on 1 million city with hundreds kilometers of limestone tunnels below its surface
        >no logistics to support landing forces even if the harbor is secured
        >no capability to bring second wave of troops within first 24 hours

        We were robbed
        of naval equivalent of Hostomel. I hate Cuckin so much bros.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        wtf I hate putin now

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Imagine the humiliation kino, but no, Putin had no balls to deliver.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      god please let it happen its going to be so funny

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Russia did perform a landing to surround Mariupol in the beginning of the war and were successful

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Didn’t that stall the invasion for months?

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Yes and no. It was a standard siege. I wouldn't say it affected the regular frontline, which was stalled due to logistical reasons.

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The only thing I can think of that makes sense is that they expected an imminent attack and evacuated so as not to be sitting ducks. Of course, now they're prey to sea drones so we'll see how that works out for them.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >The only thing I can think of that makes sense is that they expected an imminent attack and evacuated so as not to be sitting ducks.
      I think it's this. Telegram doomers were posting about Neptune missiles over Rostov last night.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous
      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        but the air defenses around the port and on the ships would easily defend against cruise missiles

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous
          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            cruise missiles are easily to take down because they don't maneuver and travel slow (for a missile)

            even russian AD can handle it

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Then why hasnt it?

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Anon, an S-400 site was already shat on by a Neptune in Crimea last year.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >cruise missiles
              >don't maneuver
              ???

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                russia military small, please understand

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >cruise missiles are easily to take down because they don't maneuver and travel slow (for a missile)
              Cruise missiles are hard to take down because they fly so low to the ground it's often too late for AD to detect, track, generate a firing solution, and launch enough interceptors to counter the entire salvo. This of course isn't an issue if you aren't Russia and have AWACS networked into your AD screen like white people.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Well shit.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >russia
                >AWACS
                oof

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Yeah

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous
        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          [...]
          cruise missiles are easily to take down because they don't maneuver and travel slow (for a missile)

          even russian AD can handle it

          Njet

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Would they really?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Air defenses?

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          [...]
          cruise missiles are easily to take down because they don't maneuver and travel slow (for a missile)

          even russian AD can handle it

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I suppose the idea is that it's better to have everything in Sevastopol and concentrate the defences there, rather than splitting their AA cover. Maybe those SEAD/DEAD strikes are having an impact? Its the only logic I can see atleast.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          But won't Ukraine have a bunch of suicide drones over there?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            They do. But I guess Vatninks are willing to risk it and put all their eggs into one basket under Crimea's AA defences.

            Might be sign that Russia is getting desperate to hold Crimea at all cost.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Naval assets moving on the 6th of June
        >In case of the threat of missiles called Neptune
        Some Dugin-esque schizoposting is responsible for this I swear.
        Holy shit imagine if they got hit

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I think there's a possibility that Putin (in a fit of politically motivated stupidity) has ordered "our own D-Day" as a "Take that" to Ukraine and the West while they're commemorating Normandy. Here's hoping.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Oh man I would be so demoralized if the russians did a bigger d-day on d-day.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            He's just mad enough to try. Their armor support will be that one T-34 from last year's Victory Day parade flanked by the only two T-14s they could get started.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Please God let this happen.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              The boss is pissed everybody look busy! Furiously rearranging deck chairs on some future salvage scrap destined for the bottom.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Please let Operation Gopnipoli become reality

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          06/06 would also play into Putin's schizo numerology beliefs.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        A shame, I was hoping for a Russian Hail Mary where they stuffed the ships full of troops and tried to beach them on Odessa in a desperate amphibious assault. The footage would have been golden and it would also be on D-Day as well.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >have to flee because of anti ship missiles
        >lose your navy against a country with no navy
        it always amazes me, someone post that image showing how many ships remains of the blackfleet

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Whats the master plan behind doing surprise exercises in drone infested waters?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Ensuring extreme motivation during anti-drone practive, due to the risks involved with failing to intercept?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous
    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Exploding their ships with no survivors

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Sounds like a good time to attack the port infrastructure. Leave them no home to return to.

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They are moving out off range of Ukraine new munition supply and to as an AA boost for the bridge

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      > They are moving out off range of Ukraine new munition supply
      But they seem to be moving closer to Ukraine

  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I've heard chatter that the ukies finally got their submersible drones working

    so maybe Russia got wind of an imminent attack by them and think their ships are safer out at sea instead of in port

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      No way the ukies have submersible drones. Getting a wireless connection under water is a nightmare, and I doubt they managed to build autonomous drones.
      >t. shitposter

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I believe the proposed designs had the body submersed but had a tall antenna that would remain above water.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        the thing is supposed to be right under the surface with an antenna that stays above the surface

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        One of the concepts was to have 90% of the drone underwater with a very small communication mast sticking out of the water
        Sounds easily feasible though its not truely 100% submerged

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          https://i.imgur.com/rHrvwXg.png

          What about small floatie with antena, conected to drone?

          You don't need it to be fully submersible, just mostly, with just the top partially surfaced. Cartels have been using those same types of boats to smuggle drugs for years now and even the USMC is looking to develop their own versions as stealthy supply carriers.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          [...]
          You don't need it to be fully submersible, just mostly, with just the top partially surfaced. Cartels have been using those same types of boats to smuggle drugs for years now and even the USMC is looking to develop their own versions as stealthy supply carriers.

          Hello, no-shipz here, what is the advantage of having a 99% submersible drone?
          Is it just because it's less visible and/or vulnerable to being shot? Or is it about exploding under the waterline?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Hello, no-shipz here, what is the advantage of having a 99% submersible drone?
            Less visible and it's harder to intercept because projectiles lose energy very quickly in water. For example AK round remains lethal in water for only like 6 feet or something until it has slowed to a stop.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          So... essentially a remote controlled Torpedo Ram? This fricking war man...

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        What about small floatie with antena, conected to drone?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          benis :DDDDD

  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They might be going out to shoot at something and do so as an actual fighting force for once — but I dunno. Maybe they’ve been planning this op for a while getting everything ready for an all-hands-on-deck sortie but it’s unclear for what reason.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >but it’s unclear for what reason.
      massive missle chimpout

  13. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Also it could be the beginning of the Black Sea Fleet redemption arc.

  14. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It is an F-16 trap. They are baiting with the fleet to draw them out.

  15. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Strategic bombers just took off from Murmansk, sasneed drones are flying over Central Ukraine, so BSF are going to launch another set of missiles too

  16. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You can use unmanned navigation systems to takecrewless boats to naval targets, but to prarphrase as my good friend Slavoj Zizek always says "What if the opposite is (also) true?".

  17. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    they won't do shit
    nothing ever happens.
    >inb4 angry replies
    you're angry because it's true

  18. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You're not that guy, pal

  19. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Ukraine started targeting tugs
    It doesn't look like the formation will be able to return to the port.

  20. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    A ha! So, this is the reason for the dozens of semi-off topic threads on /k/ this past few days. They are afraid of the F-16s doing a Pearl Harbor.

  21. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    h

  22. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    WELL WELL WELL

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Who the frick warned them?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Ukraine, and here's why. They need those ships closer to Crimea for their drones to hit. Or if they really want to be funny, they'll capture the black sea fleet.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Who the frick warned them?

      They must have decided to just hit the port infrastructure itself if the ships are no longer there. What I wonder is, where is the Black Sea Fleet going to do now? Go back to Sevastopol?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        What black Sea fleet? There never was a black Sea fleet. Purely HATO propaganda. Russia only has Caribbean fleet

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        They'll just sail around in circles in the Black Sea until they run out of fuel.

        >Ukraine: a country without a navy
        >vatnikstan: a navy without a port

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Rostov on Don is the oldest port in Russia. They'll be fine. Of course it is much closer to the front lines...

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            They can refuel there, but Rostiv isn't really a naval base.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        good question, it must be Crimea, likely Sevastopol, it's the only harbour they have left.

        They'll just sail around in circles in the Black Sea until they run out of fuel.

        >Ukraine: a country without a navy
        >vatnikstan: a navy without a port

        with Ukraine's naval drones that would be disastrous.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >with Ukraine's naval drones that would be disastrous.
          It has begun

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Hmm

  23. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Did we ever figure it out? They could’ve just been leaving to shoot some missiles no? Don’t these shoot caliber?

  24. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Things are happening

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Great way to turn all civilian ships and trains into valid targets

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Russia designs container missiles
      >causes a Russian shipping vessels to be sunk on suspicion of carrying them
      What bunch of idiots. Just because it was in Ace Combat does NOT make it a good idea.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Belka did nothing wrong

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You will soon be EVEN MORE MAD

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          do it
          i look forward to seeing their potemkin navy get evaporated by JASSM

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >gives the west an excuse to exterminate all russian vessels
          please do it.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            This is such a weird stance. Any passenger ship could be full of Russian soldiers. Does the west sink every passenger ship, just in case? Any RORO could be full of Russian tanks (if they had any left lol), does the west sink every RORO just in case? Any bulk carrier could be full of Russian ANFO, does the west sink every bulk carrier just in case? If any container ship could be full of missiles, why would that suddenly cause the west to sink every container ship just in case?

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Were the west at war with Russia any ship barring hospital ships that with good evidence is carrying active troops for war is a fair target yes.
              That's typically why escort fleets exist so attacking transports is something of a chore.
              Russia won't have the problem of needing to transport active troops by ship unless they legitimately want a go at the dollar store d-day though.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                https://i.imgur.com/cuXEHZO.png

                >Does the west sink every passenger ship, just in case? Any RORO could be full of Russian tanks (if they had any left lol), does the west sink every RORO just in case? Any bulk carrier could be full of Russian ANFO, does the west sink every bulk carrier just in case?
                Yes.

                So how are containerized missile launchers going to make "the west" go to war with Russia again?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Russians being stupid enough to use them

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Russians are using lots of weapons right now, what's special about using a containerized missile launcher?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >what's special about using a containerized missile launcher?
                Case study: the Falklands War.
                The British declared a Total Exclusion Zone around the islands, meaning that it was open season on anything flying or floating in that zone, no matter what flag it was flying. Red Cross vessels were pre-designated, confined to a specific sector, and had to broadcast their identities clearly and make scheduled trips only.

                However, the British not being totally callous murderous bastards, did exercise discretion and allow obviously non-combatant vessels IF they could be identified as such to proceed on their way. This included obviously Argentinian vessels, on the principle of a limited or restrained war that Thatcher's Government was still pursuing even at that point. Nonetheless, it was within their asserted rights to destroy any vessel within the TEZ or not. Furthermore, this did not apply to Argentinian military ships and aircraft, on which it was announced that any vessel outside Argentinian territorial waters would be destroyed without warning. This was the fate of the General Belgrano cruiser, because the surface action group it led was armed with Exocet missiles, and also the Learjet used to gather reconnaissance data for air-launched Exocet strikes on the task force.

                The applicable point here is that it is established practice for a major NATO military to assert the right to destroy any suspect vessel in an area of operations, and particularly that no quarter will be given to anything suspected of launching or targeting anti-ship missiles. If the latter suspicion is extended to anything capable of carrying a shipping container, when it is shown that said container can house anti-ship missiles, those rights will be exercised in full.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Does the west sink every passenger ship, just in case? Any RORO could be full of Russian tanks (if they had any left lol), does the west sink every RORO just in case? Any bulk carrier could be full of Russian ANFO, does the west sink every bulk carrier just in case?
              Yes.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              If the nation in question is proven to use civilian ships for military purposes, yes. That's how it has worked in the past.
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unrestricted_submarine_warfare
              Now that long range missiles and drones are the main anti-ship weapon the whole naval warfare would go by those kill rules if you try to do something funny with civilian ships.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Dahir Insaat strikes again.

  25. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Be hopeful

  26. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Last time ziggers tried to play chicken with roaches they had their jet shot down. Those ships would get sunk the moment they stopped responding to radio

  27. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    any news?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      OSINT people who initially noticed this are saying many of the ships have been moved into the Sea of Azov. Which is what some predicted even in this thread.

      Seem unwise given Ukrainian drone and missiles have traversed the sea before, but I suppose it means USV attacks are much less likely.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        any news?

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/bcjTdRL.png

        [...]

        inb4 they move them up the Don where they can't be sunk because it's too shallow

  28. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Launch a wave of cruise missiles at the front?

  29. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    They are simply raising the eyebrow to Gunther

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *