First sinking of a military ship since the Belgrano in the falklands war

[Gil Boyd]

Totally take that on board and the views, but of course, where were we all when he took Crimea..................he was left to establish his Navy base and assets, and is simply building on the access to it from Russia. We never said boo to the goose!!

If "we" wanted to rattle the Lions cage, we should get Ukraine signed up to NATO ASAP and then see what happens, otherwise what you say will inevitably happen, he will not stop, until he has ALL of the old states back under his control. Ukraine appears to have delayed joining, but clearly not all their fault they had to meet certain criteria and sadly it didn't happen in the last 8 years.
There are so many countries literally at the same crucial point!
Strong leadership from FREE countries is what is needed, but this is hell of a subject matter to get right, when you have a mindless thug in charge who cares not about Russian or Slav lives.

[#1oilman]

hopefully the first of many Russian ships providing artificial reefs!

[Flying10uk]

If Ukraine had been a member of NATO prior to February of this year I do not believe that it would have made any difference in stopping President Putin invading. If Russia were to be successful in it's invasion of Ukraine, all the former Warsaw Pact countries that are now members of NATO are likely to be at the top of President Putin's "shopping list" and that is one of the reasons why I believe that it is imperative that he is stopped in Ukraine.

The case of Russia seizing Crimea in 2014 illustrates my previous post perfectly about dictators "wanting more". To us in the UK it would feel something like France seizing Devon and then stationing half the French fleet at Devonport.

[ssgross]

where were we all when he took Crimea.....

If "we" wanted to rattle the Lions cage,

Strong leadership from FREE countries is what is needed

get Ukraine signed up to NATO ASAP and then see what happens

I yanked out the above not to debate it...lest we run afoul of our no politics rules - but I did want to point out the key differences between the present events, and the Sudetenland/Crimea analogy that is so obvious. Certainly history tells us appeasing dictators doesn't work. Ok. So where to from there?
The first, and maybe only thing relevant to point out is that that Hitler met little to no real resistance in his first real military conquests. Not that Poland didn't try to fight, but it was all over almost as soon as it started, making the movement west possible.
So, here is the question to distinguish today from then. What may have happened if Poland put up a real fight on their own...say like Ukraine is now? and stagnated the German attempts at invasion and conquest, caught with no way out and no real way forward? Would there have been any need for any later involvement from Britain? the US? Likely not.
One could argue that Poland may have been prevented with a strong stance at the meetings in Munich, and likewise one could argue that today's invasion of Ukraine could have been prevented with a strong stance at Crimea. Certainly valid arguments, but I think they are irrelevant, because the parallel stops with how the initial invasion is going. What is happening in Ukraine is nothing like the Blitzkrieg in Poland. No politics, just facts.

[CINDERS]

Beatty actually said "There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today".
Also the real cause as to why was documented a few years ago with surveys of the wrecks it was poor munitions storage and open fire doors as the fleet had been prepped for a full scale surface engagement thus crammed extra shells and cordite into the lower levels so yes they did blow up quite well.

Its good to see the Ukranians taking out that ship as it posed a real threat but also the response from Snake Isl to that ship "Go eff yourself" Putins a gangster in fact the biggest one in the world actually a bit worrying is China's stance on this as well as India.
Whether Putin will lob nukes or chemical/bio weapons remains to be seen but it is a concern the west must consider, I saw somewhere on the net that a country is sending T-72 tanks to them plus a 100-200 Abrams tanks but crew training on the latter type will take time, though time is in short supply for Ukraine.
I know one thing all the soviet troops who went on air saying how they were duped/conscripted into this Special exercise and spoke out against the invasion need not bother going home to Russia as the KGB will most certainly make sure they don't take another breath.
Such is the sad state of affairs in Europe at present.

[Gil Boyd]

As you say without getting into Politics.........the whole thing is a bag of nails, which if the new weaponry supplied by the West works, and works well.................the cornered wounded animal will go even further to keep face!

[Bob Womack]

So, here is the question to distinguish today from then. What may have happened if Poland put up a real fight on their own...say like Ukraine is now? and stagnated the German attempts at invasion and conquest, caught with no way out and no real way forward? Would there have been any need for any later involvement from Britain? the US? Likely not.
One could argue that Poland may have been prevented with a strong stance at the meetings in Munich, and likewise one could argue that today's invasion of Ukraine could have been prevented with a strong stance at Crimea. Certainly valid arguments, but I think they are irrelevant, because the parallel stops with how the initial invasion is going. What is happening in Ukraine is nothing like the Blitzkrieg in Poland. No politics, just facts.

Poland fought valiantly. Their big problem was that their military was hopelessly antiquated. Observers noted that besides being inferior to their German opponents, their interceptor aircraft lacked any form of organized command and control system. In many cases they literally sat on their airfields waiting until they were attacked before they took off to defend themselves because there was no early warning system in place. While being complimentary of their pilots, Lindbergh noted the lack of central control when he visited just before the breakout.

And that oft referred to horse-based cavalry charge that they executed against tanks? It could actually have succeeded with good command and control. They actually did what cavalry is supposed to do: they broke through the front line on the flanks and swept through the rear area wreaking havoc. They just couldn't coordinate the relief effort that was required against a highly coordinated opponent.

Bob

[fjruple]

Cinders-- Duly noted. I just wanted to keep it a bit cleaner. I did see documentary on the battle which surfaced several years ago especially the tests that were done to indicate that possible flash fire through the ships when hit. When I saw the Moskov burning it reminded me of that documentary, granted the Moskov did not have cordite and shells parked on the desks but the water tight doors were certainly opened and a flash fire ran through the open areas of the ship. If the ship was properly secured for battle and water tight doors dogged down, the loss of life and the ship would have been significantly less. If I remember correctly one of the other British battle cruisers was hit in the Battle of Jutland and did not sink as one of the Chief Petty Officers insisted the munitions be properly stored and secured during the battle. It is amazing how history sometimes repeats itself.

[Gil Boyd]

Interesting factual read on the whole thing:

Turbulent Times: Ukraine: from the horse’s mouth | Turbulent Times

[ssgross]

Poland fought valiantly.

Certainly they did. But my point was it was over very quickly, with a decisive victory for the Germans, which is the exact opposite of what we see in Ukraine today. I'm just saying that the analogy stops with Sudetenland/Crimea, and does not continue to Poland/Ukraine.