Georgia Crisis

[Molon Labe]

Originally Posted by Kazuaki Shimazaki II

It is also funny how all the translators of that sailor's testimony so far seem to show a complete misunderstanding of Russian terminology. Or maybe the Russians need to come up with a better term for "Damage Control".

Despite the sailor explicitly stating the damage to the Moskva was "small", the translations acted like the ship was about to sink: "fearing for seaworthiness" and the like abound, and headlines rumble about "heavily damaged". And all because of these words: борясь за живучесть. It literally translates to struggle for vitality, but what it really means is damage control - nothing to get excited about...

Thanks, that's very helpful.

[To be]

This was the setting for suBBs missions if I remember correctly. Molon, can you back be up on that?

[Molon Labe]

Originally Posted by To be

This was the setting for suBBs missions if I remember correctly. Molon, can you back be up on that?

It was in the Black Sea, but I haven't been able to recall (or locate a post on) the nature of the underlying conflict. Also as far as I know he only released the first two of three parts.

[GrayOwl]

Originally Posted by Dr.Sid

This war is really confusing. Even journalist who are there in person often give contradicting information. Involved leaders are expected to give confusing information. All together I don't understand how anyone can have clear opinion about the war.
My general idea is that separatists should be allowed to separate. But there is many 'buts' about it and many may apply in this case. Really confusing, I'm not surprised that many states did not take firm attitude in this case. And those who did were often forced to change it second day.
As long as they don't shoot it's fine. I hope they can 'divorce' in peace as we did with Slovakia.

Georgia intends to receive TERRITORY South Ossetia.
Let even it will be territory without the population - Ossetian's of the population.
Which besides are the citizens of Russia.

To the Georgians is not necessary ossetian the people, the territory is necessary only to them.

[Molon Labe]

Originally Posted by Dr.Sid

This war is really confusing. Even journalist who are there in person often give contradicting information. Involved leaders are expected to give confusing information. All together I don't understand how anyone can have clear opinion about the war.
My general idea is that separatists should be allowed to separate. But there is many 'buts' about it and many may apply in this case. Really confusing, I'm not surprised that many states did not take firm attitude in this case. And those who did were often forced to change it second day.
As long as they don't shoot it's fine. I hope they can 'divorce' in peace as we did with Slovakia.

It's a bit late a peaceful separation, don't you think?

It's a dead issue anyways. Russia has both rebel provinces in their possession. The Russian government has stated Georgia can "give up any hope of their territorial integrity" being intact, signalling that they do not intend to give them back. The Russians continued to send in reinforcements after the ceasefire was signed, so they are prepared to back up their words. All the talk in the world isn't going to budge the tanks in Shkinvali--and no one is going to risk starting a major war by getting rid of them by force. Abkhazia and S.Ossetia are part of Russia now.

[irregular]

It is in fact close to impossible to sneak a sub into the black sea, although it can be done. The waterway into the black sea (The Bosporus) is an extremely narrow channel and kind of shallow for a sub to get through. Any ship has to get permission way in advance to get through. And going underwater at periscope depth I think is the deepest you can go, you must stay behind a rather large ship in order to keep your wake trail out of vision. Not only this, but you gotta have the latest charts and information available to avoid wrecks, rocks, etc to get through successfully, not to mention a pro commander .

All of this was outlined in a great book about Naval Warfare and politics I read, its called Nimitz Class. (Its about a Russian Kilo that sneaked through the Bosporus and sunk most of a US carrier battle group with a nuclear torpedo.) Very cool book I thought.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Originally Posted by irregular

All of this was outlined in a great book about Naval Warfare and politics I read, its called Nimitz Class. (Its about a Russian Kilo that sneaked through the Bosporus and sunk most of a US carrier battle group with a nuclear torpedo.) Very cool book I thought.

Aah, Nimitz-class, the only book that Robinson ever wrote that doesn't manage to make you root for the bad guys...

[irregular]

Ha, the only one I read. Any others of his good?

[SandyCaesar]

Well...the only I've read was Ghost Force. Honestly, I wasn't very impressed; regardless of plot reasons, Type 45s should not lose to Skyhawk fighters. I felt that his writing style just wasn't up to the standard set by Tom Clancy or Fred Forsyth.

But that's just my opinion; I understand that Robinson's a popular author around these parts.

[orco]

Just because you are talking about russina forces and about a DW mission in the black sea....and molon labe had a look to google earth.... I just have a look to the Polyarnyy, "the red october base", and I could distinguish some surface ships and 5 subs docked there, but I can't tell the type of none. Maybe you also want to have a look to it.