Litwin
Diamond Member
So, the Black Sea, the Med, and now the Baltic Sea. Still going according to plan,
Dwarf?


Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
whenivan, when ?
bs, yourWho knows? Pretty soon, I believe.
Russian ships can't even leave their ports. The Baltic fleet isn't any better than the Black Sea fleet. The only "pirates" in the Baltic are the illegal Russian tankers trying to evade the UN and USA sanctions.As if Russia can't eliminate Baltic piracy.
Anyway, its a game for two.
Of course they can, and they do.Russian ships can't even leave their ports.
They don't need better than Black Sea fleet, especially if we are talking not about "special operation", but abour "regional war". It's not a big deal to burn down some European military bases by tactical nukes.The Baltic fleet isn't any better than the Black Sea fleet.
They are not pirates, not yet.Those, who attacked civilian cargo ships in the open sea - they are. But a private military company, registered somewhere in Singapore with Russian Letter of Marque - can easily attack Baltic cargo ships, military ships (who are in the list of pirates), ports and other infrastructure and not only in Baltic. Why not (especially if we are talking about "operations", not "wars")?The only "pirates" in the Baltic are the illegal Russian tankers trying to evade the UN and USA sanctions.
Letters of Marque and Reprisal have been illegal since the Paris Declaration of 1856. That's why the Confederacy didn't use privateers in the ACW. As usual you are making yourself look stupid. Letters OF Marque were only protection for the privateer if he captured a ship of a nation AT WAR with the issuing nation. You go on and on that the "special operation" is NOT a war. Your PMC would be actual pirates and subject to execution by any nation that captured them.Of course they can, and they do.
They don't need better than Black Sea fleet, especially if we are talking not about "special operation", but abour "regional war". It's not a big deal to burn down some European military bases by tactical nukes.
They are not pirates, not yet.Those, who attacked civilian cargo ships in the open sea - they are. But a private military company, registered somewhere in Singapore with Russian Letter of Marque - can easily attack Baltic cargo ships, military ships (who are in the list of pirates), ports and other infrastructure and not only in Baltic. Why not (especially if we are talking about "operations", not "wars")?
So is interception of neutral cargo ships in neutral waters. If one side violate Naval laws - the other easily can do either. As I said - officially supported piracy is the game for two.Letters of Marque and Reprisal have been illegal since the Paris Declaration of 1856.
One key difference is that the western powers have the power to enforce the embargo and Russia doesn't. Once a couple of PMC crews are hung for piracy, no one will take Moscow's money. That's the reason Khruschev backed down about putting missiles in Cuba, the USA had the naval power to enforce the blockade, and Russia lacked the power to force passage. The USA is a naval power and Russia isn't.So is interception of neutral cargo ships in neutral waters. If one side violate Naval laws - the other easily can do either. As I said - officially supported piracy is the game for two.
But, as I've read, Western decision-makers intended to make few steps back. They more or less officially declared that all those dameges were "accidents". Nobody to blame.
One key difference is that the western powers have the power to enforce the embargo and Russia doesn't. Once a couple of PMC crews are hung for piracy, no one will take Moscow's money. That's the reason Khruschev backed down about putting missiles in Cuba, the USA had the naval power to enforce the blockade, and Russia lacked the power to force passage. The USA is a naval power and Russia isn't.
+1,Russian ships can't even leave their ports. The Baltic fleet isn't any better than the Black Sea fleet. The only "pirates" in the Baltic are the illegal Russian tankers trying to evade the UN and USA sanctions.
Embargo means war. And the war means that many western ports will be destroyed by nukes.One key difference is that the western powers have the power to enforce the embargo and Russia doesn't.
People love money, and the risk is pretty small (especially if we are talking about "operation", not "war").Once a couple of PMC crews are hung for piracy, no one will take Moscow's money.
No. There were two main reasons - Russia didn't delivered all R-14s necessary for reliable counter-force strike against the US nuclear forces. And the USA suggested mutually acceptable solution - Russia remove missiles from Cuba, the USA remove missiles from Turkey and Europe.That's the reason Khruschev backed down about putting missiles in Cuba, the USA had the naval power to enforce the blockade, and Russia lacked the power to force passage.
Any naval power depends on the land. And, what is even more important in the XXI century - Russia has upper hand in missiles and nukes.The USA is a naval power and Russia isn't.
Russia has been under an embargo for three years now and hasn't been able to do a damned thing about it. Putin and his kleptocratic oligarchical friends have had their properties, yachts and money seized by the west.Embargo means war. And the war means that many western ports will be destroyed by nukes.
People love money, and the risk is pretty small (especially if we are talking about "operation", not "war").
No. There were two main reasons - Russia didn't delivered all R-14s necessary for reliable counter-force strike against the US nuclear forces. And the USA suggested mutually acceptable solution - Russia remove missiles from Cuba, the USA remove missiles from Turkey and Europe.
Any naval power depends on the land. And, what is even more important in the XXI century - Russia has upper hand in missiles and nukes.
1.13–2.4 km (0.70–1.49 mi) CEP[2][5]" They were city busters carrying a single one megaton warhead. Both the US Thor and Jupiter carried warheads nearly twice as powerful, and their CEP dropped right in the middle of the CEP claimed by Russia. Based upon historical evidence that Russia always overpromoted it's weapons the R-14 CEP was probably two or three time as large as claimed. |
Oh, Russia didn't deliver ANY R-14s to Cuba, just the warheads. The blockade prevented the missiled from being anded. It was SA-2 SAMs that caught the CIA's eye on recon overflights of Cuba. Their launcher/command unit arrangement was both obvious and distinctive.Embargo means war. And the war means that many western ports will be destroyed by nukes.
People love money, and the risk is pretty small (especially if we are talking about "operation", not "war").
No. There were two main reasons - Russia didn't delivered all R-14s necessary for reliable counter-force strike against the US nuclear forces. And the USA suggested mutually acceptable solution - Russia remove missiles from Cuba, the USA remove missiles from Turkey and Europe.
Any naval power depends on the land. And, what is even more important in the XXI century - Russia has upper hand in missiles and nukes.
In fact, Russia wasn't embargoed by anybody significant.Russia has been under an embargo for three years now and hasn't been able to do a damned thing about it.
Not seized, but borrowed, and, I'm almost sure they will return it all with excuses. I myself have some property freezed in Italy, and I know, that the first thing I'll do in the case of more or less normalisation of Russia-Italian relationships - I'll send the person responsible for it to make a swim in concrete flippers (and then his heirs will return it to me at least with double price fine and excuses).Putin and his kleptocratic oligarchical friends have had their properties, yachts and money seized by the west.
Not so because of blockade per se, but because of being too slow. But Carribbean and Baltics are two pretty different seas.If you think Khruschev didn't fail to deliver all the needed missiles because of the blockade you are an idiot.
Yep. May be, Trump will be smart enough to withdraw American forces from Eastern Europe, too. But more likely he won't, and, hence, there will be a war.Yes, Kennedy compromised by removing the missiles from Turkey rather than fight a war.
American missile bases those days were pretty soft and vulnerable targets. Thats why R-14 had that powerful warheads. 5 km from 1 megaton burst is pretty inside the radius of total destruction for non-siloed, liquid fuelled missiles. And we don't need to speculate about it. We have their orders unclassified now.Another item of your idiocy, the MRBM R-14s WERE NOT a counter force missile their CEP was too large "
1.13–2.4 km (0.70–1.49 mi) CEP[2][5]"
They were city busters carrying a single one megaton warhead. Both the US Thor and Jupiter carried warheads nearly twice as powerful, and their CEP dropped right in the middle of the CEP claimed by Russia. Based upon historical evidence that Russia always overpromoted it's weapons the R-14 CEP was probably two or three time as large as claimed.
The American ICBM bases were in the middle of the continent far out of range of Russian missiles based in Cuba.In fact, Russia wasn't embargoed by anybody significant.
Not seized, but borrowed, and, I'm almost sure they will return it all with excuses. I myself have some property freezed in Italy, and I know, that the first thing I'll do in the case of more or less normalisation of Russia-Italian relationships - I'll send the person responsible for it to make a swim in concrete flippers (and then his heirs will return it to me at least with double price fine and excuses).
Not so because of blockade per se, but because of being too slow. But Carribbean and Baltics are two pretty different seas.
Yep. May be, Trump will be smart enough to withdraw American forces from Eastern Europe, too. But more likely he won't, and, hence, there will be a war.
American missile bases those days were pretty soft and vulnerable targets. Thats why R-14 had that powerful warheads. 5 km from 1 megaton burst is pretty inside the radius of total destruction for non-siloed, liquid fuelled missiles. And we don't need to speculate about it. We have their orders unclassified now.
So, the Black Sea, the Med, and now the Baltic Sea. Still going according to plan,![]()
Dwarf?
The only Russian Oligarchs are the ones living in the West.Russia has been under an embargo for three years now and hasn't been able to do a damned thing about it. Putin and his kleptocratic oligarchical friends have had their properties, yachts and money seized by the west.
If you think Khruschev didn't fail to deliver all the needed missiles because of the blockade you are an idiot. Yes, Kennedy compromised by removing the missiles from Turkey rather than fight a war. Another item of your idiocy, the MRBM R-14s WERE NOT a counter force missile their CEP was too large "
1.13–2.4 km (0.70–1.49 mi) CEP[2][5]"
They were city busters carrying a single one megaton warhead. Both the US Thor and Jupiter carried warheads nearly twice as powerful, and their CEP dropped right in the middle of the CEP claimed by Russia. Based upon historical evidence that Russia always overpromoted it's weapons the R-14 CEP was probably two or three time as large as claimed.