UK forces escort passing Russian 'ship of shame' returning from Syria

[webfact]

UK forces escort passing Russian 'ship of shame' returning from Syria

REUTERS

 

A RAF Typhoon monitors Russian warships Pyotr Velikiy and the Admiral Kuznetsov (rear) as they pass close to UK territorial waters, in this photograph released in London on January 25, 2017. Ministry of Defence/Crown Copyright 2017/Handout via REUTERS

 

LONDON (Reuters) - British armed forces escorted a Russian aircraft carrier dubbed "the ship of shame" by Defence Secretary Michael Fallon as it passed through waters close to the English coast on its way back from bombing raids in Syria.

 

Images released by the British defence ministry showed RAF Typhoon jets and the Royal Navy's HMS St. Albans frigate escorting the Admiral Kuznetsov and its support vessels in the English Channel on Wednesday as they headed towards the North Sea.

 

"We will keep a close eye on the Admiral Kuznetsov as it skulks back to Russia; a ship of shame whose mission has only extended the suffering of the Syrian people," said Fallon in a statement.

 

"We are man-marking these vessels every step of the way around the UK as part of our steadfast commitment to keep Britain safe," he added.

 

Planes on the ageing carrier had been taking part in Russian bombing of rebel forces in Syria's civil war, a campaign which was widely accused in the West of indiscriminately targeting civilians.

 

The Kuznetsov, Russia's only aircraft carrier, had passed through the English Channel on its way to Syria last October.

 

(Reporting by Ritvik Carvalho; editing by Stephen Addison)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-01-26

[IMA_FARANG]

Quote

can EXPLAIN it to you, but I can't UNDERSTAND it for you.

I borrowed this quote from another poster.

It explains a lot of things that happen in the world, Thailand included

[colinneil]

There was a time when Russia was so scared of the Royal navy, that they would not dare to sail through the English channel.

That was in 1906, how times have changed.

[evadgib]

20 minutes ago, colinneil said:

There was a time when Russia was so scared of the Royal navy, that they would not dare to sail through the English channel.

That was in 1906, how times have changed.

Its an international shipping lan rather than say the Spratly islands.

 

Related link: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-38748941

 

As for the RN: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/2017-is-the-year-of-the-navy

[fasteddie]

Ha Ha, "ship of shamed the west" more like. Took 9 months to rout ISIS while America and her poodles spent 4 yrs doing nothing.

[craigt3365]

1 minute ago, fasteddie said:

Ha Ha, "ship of shamed the west" more like. Took 9 months to rout ISIS while America and her poodles spent 4 yrs doing nothing.

Perhaps best to do some research before posting too fast, eddie. LOL

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-12-05/putin-shows-off-russia-s-embarrassing-aircraft-carrier

Putin Shows Off Russia's Embarrassing Aircraft Carrier

Quote

 

Second, the ship is simply embarrassing to look at. It lumbers along belching black smoke, accompanied by tugboats standing ready to tow because of frequent breakdowns. Its distinctive "ski jump" prow is an admission of technological defeat -- because the deck lacks the catapults found on U.S. carriers, jets need the extra boost of the ramp to avoid toppling into the ocean.

 

According to media reports, problems with freezing pipes have reduced it to just 25 latrines for a crew of 2,000. In 2012 it broke down in the Bay of Biscay and had to be towed thousands of miles to its home port near Murmansk. It had a particularly bad year in 2009, spilling hundreds of metric tons of oil off the coast of Ireland and catching fire near Turkey, an accident in which one sailor died.

 

Now the Kuznetsov Curse has struck again. According to the trade website the Aviationist, on Saturday an Su-33 Flanker returning to the carrier crashed into the sea after failing to hook onto the deck-top "arrestor cables" that slow the jets upon landing. A similar thing happened last month with a Mig-29 fighter. (In both cases the pilots were able to eject before impact.)

 

 

As far as the coalition doing nothing, perhaps some research would also be good.  At least they didn't displace millions of innocent civilians and kill hundreds of thousands of the same.  It would have been better if they did nothing. LOL

[johna]

7 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Perhaps best to do some research before posting too fast, eddie. LOL

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-12-05/putin-shows-off-russia-s-embarrassing-aircraft-carrier

Putin Shows Off Russia's Embarrassing Aircraft Carrier

 

As far as the coalition doing nothing, perhaps some research would also be good.  At least they didn't displace millions of innocent civilians and kill hundreds of thousands of the same.  It would have been better if they did nothing. LOL

What evidence do you have that the Russians displaced millions of refugees, and killed hundreds of thousands civilians??

Russian warplanes began bombing ISIS strongholds in September 2015, Angela Merkel invited millions of Syrian refugees into Europe 6 months earlier.

[mikebike]

23 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Perhaps best to do some research before posting too fast, eddie. LOL

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-12-05/putin-shows-off-russia-s-embarrassing-aircraft-carrier

Putin Shows Off Russia's Embarrassing Aircraft Carrier

 

As far as the coalition doing nothing, perhaps some research would also be good.  At least they didn't displace millions of innocent civilians and kill hundreds of thousands of the same.  It would have been better if they did nothing. LOL

Strange how that embarrassing vessel seemed to successfully carry out its mission, whether you agree with that mission or not.

 

I have an embarrassing car which cost me 100,000 baht ten years ago (300,000 kms ago) and still keeps going keeping me dry and cool when not on my bike.

[craigt3365]

12 minutes ago, johna said:

What evidence do you have that the Russians displaced millions of refugees, and killed hundreds of thousands civilians??

Russian warplanes began bombing ISIS strongholds in September 2015, Angela Merkel invited millions of Syrian refugees into Europe 6 months earlier.

Easy to research this.  It's well documented.

[craigt3365]

1 minute ago, mikebike said:

Strange how that embarrassing vessel seemed to successfully carry out its mission, whether you agree with that mission or not.

 

I have an embarrassing car which cost me 100,000 baht ten years ago (300,000 kms ago) and still keeps going keeping me dry and cool when not on my bike.

What was it's mission?  It had one place crash on take off and after that all were transferred to a nearby base.  Perhaps a few missiles were shot off, but other than that, I'm not sure it provided a significant role in the Syrian civil war.

 

From the Bloomberg link:

Quote

 

Now the Kuznetsov Curse has struck again. According to the trade website the Aviationist, on Saturday an Su-33 Flanker returning to the carrier crashed into the sea after failing to hook onto the deck-top "arrestor cables" that slow the jets upon landing. A similar thing happened last month with a Mig-29 fighter. (In both cases the pilots were able to eject before impact.)

 

Perhaps the Russian navy had been anticipating such problems. According to the military information service IHS Janes, the Russians have for weeks been moving planes off the flattop to an airfield in Syria.

 

 

[timbothaivisa]

2 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

As far as the coalition doing nothing, perhaps some research would also be good.  At least they didn't displace millions of innocent civilians and kill hundreds of thousands of the same.  It would have been better if they did nothing. LOL

Your understanding of world events is woeful. Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria & Libya all took place well before the Russians got involved, with many millions dead & displaced. In fact the crises in these areas have all decelerated since Russia re-asserted its global influence last year.

 

Observing thus does not make a person a "commie", a Putin-lover or an American-hater. Partisan thinking is what allows the chaos to continue unchallenged

[evadgib]

5 hours ago, colinneil said:

There was a time when Russia was so scared of the Royal navy, that they would not dare to sail through the English channel.

That was in 1906, how times have changed.

RN were first to enter the Kursk!

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/1367318/British-team-hits-at-Russian-Cold-War-deceit.html 

[Gillyflower]

It is NOT the English Channel.  England doesn't own the Channel.  It has it's territorial waters and that is all.

[fasteddie]

6 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Perhaps best to do some research before posting too fast, eddie. LOL

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-12-05/putin-shows-off-russia-s-embarrassing-aircraft-carrier

Putin Shows Off Russia's Embarrassing Aircraft Carrier

 

As far as the coalition doing nothing, perhaps some research would also be good.  At least they didn't displace millions of innocent civilians and kill hundreds of thousands of the same.  It would have been better if they did nothing. LOL

He He, you do embarrass yourself, " As far as the coalition doing nothing, perhaps some research would also be good.  At least they didn't displace millions of innocent civilians and kill hundreds of thousands of the same".....Oh really, so not in Iraq? or Afghanistan? or Libya? and you tell me to do the research!

[craigt3365]

3 hours ago, timbothaivisa said:

Your understanding of world events is woeful. Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria & Libya all took place well before the Russians got involved, with many millions dead & displaced. In fact the crises in these areas have all decelerated since Russia re-asserted its global influence last year.

 

Observing thus does not make a person a "commie", a Putin-lover or an American-hater. Partisan thinking is what allows the chaos to continue unchallenged

Perhaps you need to re-read the OP.  It's about Syria.  None of the other countries you've mentioned.  There are other threads out there dedicated to these countries.

[wwest5829]

7 hours ago, colinneil said:

There was a time when Russia was so scared of the Royal navy, that they would not dare to sail through the English channel.

That was in 1906, how times have changed.

If its international waters, then I say encourage them to utilize. Am I concerned about this sailing? No, but I want to hold their feet to the fire in recognizing free sailing in the Black Sea and the South China Sea...

[craigt3365]

1 minute ago, wwest5829 said:

If its international waters, then I say encourage them to utilize. Am I concerned about this sailing? No, but I want to hold their feet to the fire in recognizing free sailing in the Black Sea and the South China Sea...

Well put.  Russia sent several navy vessels very close to Alaska, through some of the Aleutian chain.  No fuss by the US.  Do the same in return and they buzz the ships with "fake" attacks.  What's fair is fair.

[craigt3365]

11 minutes ago, fasteddie said:

He He, you do embarrass yourself, " As far as the coalition doing nothing, perhaps some research would also be good.  At least they didn't displace millions of innocent civilians and kill hundreds of thousands of the same".....Oh really, so not in Iraq? or Afghanistan? or Libya? and you tell me to do the research!

Ummmm...this is about Russia, a ship, Syria.  Not any other country.  That would be off topic.

[optad]

Correct me, but the Chinese have the sister ship to the  Admiral Kuznetsov, the Liaoning?

[fasteddie]

24 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Ummmm...this is about Russia, a ship, Syria.  Not any other country.  That would be off topic.

You do have a point, it is about Syria where the Russians were invited by the legitimate government, as opposed to "the coalition" which is an illegal invading force.

[Baerboxer]

5 hours ago, timbothaivisa said:

Your understanding of world events is woeful. Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria & Libya all took place well before the Russians got involved, with many millions dead & displaced. In fact the crises in these areas have all decelerated since Russia re-asserted its global influence last year.

 

Observing thus does not make a person a "commie", a Putin-lover or an American-hater. Partisan thinking is what allows the chaos to continue unchallenged

 

Fair point. The Western coalition, AFAICS, were bogged down because of Obama's insistence Assad had to go and had somewhat lost the plot, possible from loosing track who was financing who, overtly and covertly.

 

Regardless of reasons the Russian intervention has brought the parties to the table. 

 

 

[Baerboxer]

40 minutes ago, fasteddie said:

You do have a point, it is about Syria where the Russians were invited by the legitimate government, as opposed to "the coalition" which is an illegal invading force.

 

Again fair point. Obama kept insisting the legitimate President of Syria had to go. Just has he helped force the legitimate President of Ukraine out.

 

If a government, elected democratically or not, doesn't suit the US they have been shown to work to distabilize that government, to support oppositions they do like, and if necessary to directly support insurgency.

 

It's easy to always think our side is right and therefore the others must be wrong - but sorry no longer black and white like that.

[JAG]

3 hours ago, Gillyflower said:

It is NOT the English Channel.  England doesn't own the Channel.  It has it's territorial waters and that is all.

No it doesn't belong to England, but it is called The English Channel (unless you're French, they call it La Manche - The Sleeve) .

 

But then Ireland doesn't own the Irish Sea, Mozambique the Mozambique Channel, India the Indian Ocean,  Mexico the Gulf of Mexico and so on.

 

They're geographical names  you see, not signs of Imperialist expansion.

[stag4]

CraigT3365

No more embarrassing than the Royal Navy's 6 modern type 45 deystroyers with their propulsion system reliability and at least they have a working carrier complete with aircraft!

 

[Srikcir]

8 hours ago, colinneil said:

how times have changed.

Yep, Britain is no longer an empire to be feared.

[JAG]

7 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

Yep, Britain is no longer an empire to be feared.

We don't have much of a fishing fleet either - that was what spooked the Russian Fleet in 1904 at The battle of The Dogger Bank...

[JAG]

14 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

Yep, Britain is no longer an empire to be feared.

 

True, But Argentina did find out in 1982 that when we're pissed off we can still make a point...

[KBsinter]

2 hours ago, JAG said:

We don't have much of a fishing fleet either - 

 

Thanks to the European union, who gave all or most of our shipping rights

to SPAIN, WHO NOW HAVE ONE OF THE BIGGEST FISHING FLEETS IN THE

WORLD, and Maggie could do nothing it was disgraceful...........

[rabas]

3 hours ago, fasteddie said:

You do have a point, it is about Syria where the Russians were invited by the legitimate government, as opposed to "the coalition" which is an illegal invading force.

The Russians were invited by the legitimate government to help kill the legitimate government's own citizens. Barrel  bombs and chemical weapons were not working well  for Assad.

[hawker9000]

China, Russia - please note how the UK Typhoons are performing a peaceful, non-provocative, non-threatening, non-belligerant surveillance, keeping a safe distance, and NOT doing barrel rolls and hi-speed low-altitude passes over the Russian warships...