I hadn't seen claims that Ukraine's neptune battery(ies) were destroyed, nor I have seen any evidence that Ukraine did not use neptunes.
"But the pre-war Ukrainian navy probably possessed just one Neptune battery out of the half-dozen or so it planned to induct this spring.
If the Ukrainians really did hit Moskva with a Neptune or two, it means they first managed to cobble together, man and deploy at least one complete battery with all its supporting systems—all in the middle of a devastating war.
It also means they fed accurate targeting data to the battery, via a drone, land-based radar or some other sensor. None of this is easy, but it’s certainly possible."
-Forbes
"Many experts, however, have questioned whether the Neptune anti-ship cruise missile was employed at all. These views are based on a few factors.
Initially, it was thought that the rocket had been destroyed during the early phase of the invasion. Second, according to recent reports, Ukraine is yet to receive the Neptune ASMs.
The delivery was scheduled for April 2022.
In March 2021, Ukraine’s navy received the first units of the RK-360MC Neptune cruise missile system. These, however, are prototype batteries provided to the Ukrainian military.
Ukraine did not appear to be able to completely employ its new Neptune anti-ship missile before the war stopped production."
-EurasianTimes
I have no idea personally what sank the Moscva, but the Wikipedia entry seems to contradict the 'eurasian times' and seems to say the Neptune has been active for years.
Wikipedia:
The first tests of the system were conducted on 22 March 2016, attended by Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council (NSDC) Oleksandr Turchynov. In mid-2017, Neptune missiles were tested concurrently with trials of the Vilkha missile complex. However, unlike the Vilkha, the test results and capabilities of the Neptune were not made public.[5] According to the press service of the NSDC, the first successful flight tests of the system took place on 30 January 2018.[6] On 17 August 2018, the missile successfully hit a target at a range of 100 kilometres (62 mi) during test firings in southern Odesa Oblast.[7] On 6 April 2019, the missile was again successfully tested, hitting targets during tests near Odesa. According to President Petro Poroshenko, Neptune system would be delivered to the Ukrainian military in December 2019.[8]
"But the pre-war Ukrainian navy probably possessed just one Neptune battery out of the half-dozen or so it planned to induct this spring.
If the Ukrainians really did hit Moskva with a Neptune or two, it means they first managed to cobble together, man and deploy at least one complete battery with all its supporting systems—all in the middle of a devastating war.
It also means they fed accurate targeting data to the battery, via a drone, land-based radar or some other sensor. None of this is easy, but it’s certainly possible."
-Forbes
"Many experts, however, have questioned whether the Neptune anti-ship cruise missile was employed at all. These views are based on a few factors.
Initially, it was thought that the rocket had been destroyed during the early phase of the invasion. Second, according to recent reports, Ukraine is yet to receive the Neptune ASMs.
The delivery was scheduled for April 2022.
In March 2021, Ukraine’s navy received the first units of the RK-360MC Neptune cruise missile system. These, however, are prototype batteries provided to the Ukrainian military.
Ukraine did not appear to be able to completely employ its new Neptune anti-ship missile before the war stopped production."
-EurasianTimes
I have no idea personally what sank the Moscva, but the Wikipedia entry seems to contradict the 'eurasian times' and seems to say the Neptune has been active for years.
Wikipedia:
The first tests of the system were conducted on 22 March 2016, attended by Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council (NSDC) Oleksandr Turchynov. In mid-2017, Neptune missiles were tested concurrently with trials of the Vilkha missile complex. However, unlike the Vilkha, the test results and capabilities of the Neptune were not made public.[5] According to the press service of the NSDC, the first successful flight tests of the system took place on 30 January 2018.[6] On 17 August 2018, the missile successfully hit a target at a range of 100 kilometres (62 mi) during test firings in southern Odesa Oblast.[7] On 6 April 2019, the missile was again successfully tested, hitting targets during tests near Odesa. According to President Petro Poroshenko, Neptune system would be delivered to the Ukrainian military in December 2019.[8]
reading more...I think the discrepancy is this:
The UKR Navy is just getting the missile now. Maybe.
But other branches of the UKR armed forces have had the missile for years.
I'm not aware of anything that proves the Moscva could not have been sunk by the Neptune. It had successful tests, it was an active weapons system.
To the person who thinks all MSM reporting is biased against Russia, which media outlets should we trust please? Provide links to media, not article, we should trust please. Media you trust, links:
The mistake here is thinking media exists without bias. All media is biased.
When the source of your "facts" is from government, particularly a combatant one, that speaks unfavourably to reliability.
We don't trust Russian Times. Similarly, it's folly to blindly trust VOA, Radio Free Europe, or Think-Tanks funded by the Military Complex. They're all grinding axes.
To paraphrase, "If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him."
An objective reader is tasked with piecing together something approximating real events from a sea of half-truths.
^And here we see the time honored debate tactic of waving your hands around and making confused noises...
The mistake here is thinking media exists without bias. All media is biased.
When the source of your "facts" is from government, particularly a combatant one, that speaks unfavourably to reliability.
We don't trust Russian Times. Similarly, it's folly to blindly trust VOA, Radio Free Europe, or Think-Tanks funded by the Military Complex. They're all grinding axes.
To paraphrase, "If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him."
An objective reader is tasked with piecing together something approximating real events from a sea of half-truths.
^And here we see the time honored debate tactic of waving your hands around and making confused noises...
You mean the time-honoured of detracting from facts and arguments by perfunctorily dismissing them as "confused noises"?
A 200-page thread wasted. All we had to do was have you pass unqualified judgment.
Oh I'm definitely saving this prediction - that Finland and Sweden won't become full NATO members.
Bet? $10 to the other person's favorite charity?
You could well be right.
I don't have reason to suspect Sweden and Finland will never be admitted.
Just that they won't be admitted without unanimous assent of existing NATO members - and that one member has adamantly said they won't give it.
While in NATO, Turkey seems more allied with Russia than the US these days.
But everyone has their price - and certainly Turkey's acquiescence can be bought. The question is just how much does the US or another partner want to pay to glove-smack Russia?
My guess is "a lot".
We'd probably have to wait a year or so to find out - but in anticipation of losing a bet I didn't make, I just donated $100 to charity.
Oh I'm definitely saving this prediction - that Finland and Sweden won't become full NATO members.
Bet? $10 to the other person's favorite charity?
You could well be right.
I don't have reason to suspect Sweden and Finland will never be admitted.
Just that they won't be admitted without unanimous assent of existing NATO members - and that one member has adamantly said they won't give it.
While in NATO, Turkey seems more allied with Russia than the US these days.
But everyone has their price - and certainly Turkey's acquiescence can be bought. The question is just how much does the US or another partner want to pay to glove-smack Russia?
My guess is "a lot".
We'd probably have to wait a year or so to find out - but in anticipation of losing a bet I didn't make, I just donated $100 to charity.
Good job on the charity.
why do you use terms like ‘DOA’ when you mean ‘heck I don’t know maybe or maybe not?’
Just a few examples of Ukrainian losses plastered in Western in media. This stuff is easy to find.
In MSM, Ukraine civilian losses are trumpeted - and certainly exaggerated.
No, they are not trumpeted any more than one would expect large and often deliberate civilian killings in an invasion by an enemy of the West would be reported in MSM. I think your bias is that you just don't like being reminded Ukrainian civilians are dying by the thousands. It's important and significant news of a major world event.
Conversely, Ukraine military casualties and losses are grossly under-reported and receive disproportionate prominence.
No, they are not. We are all aware, via Western media reports, of the magnitude of the Ukrainian civilians and troops being killed by Russians. I gave you some examples. They are easy to find and reported often. No one disputes that the Russians are killing Ukrainians by the tens of thousands.
Russian war crimes and civilian casualties are atrocities. Ukraine war crimes and civilian casualties are negligible and excusable.
Untrue. You're misapprehension is that you believe the atrocities must be occurring in equal amounts on either side, hence more reports about Russian war crimes and atrocities can only be attributable to biased media reporting. That type of fallacy -- that a disparity can only be caused by an unfair bias -- is often used by Woke-types in the US regarding racial issues. There are more war crimes and atrocities by Russian soldiers being reported, because they are committing more war crimes and atrocities again Ukrainian civilians than Ukrainians are committing against Russian civilians.
The Russian side and people are de-humanized, vilified, and presented as incompetent.
True. I thought you wanted factual reporting without bias?
The Ukraine side is glorified. Victories attributed to valor and prowess. But surely have more to do with tens of billions in high-tech weaponry, assistance, and intelligence provided.
Untrue. Endless MSM stories about NATO weapons being provided to Ukraine and used by Ukrainians, and how important they are to the Ukraine effort. Zelenskyy says as much all the time, and that gets reported too.
Ukrainians are, by the way, putting up a heroic effort against a disgusting and murderous invading force. They seem willing to risk their lives and die by the thousands for the sovereignty of their country and desire not to be ruled and occupied (and killed) by invaders.
You see spurious allegation routinely selectively presented as fact. "The UDF reports..." "A Ukraine spokesperson said... " and with that disclaimer, any manner of unverified and suspect claim follows.
I haven't seen much of this at all. The Moskva did sink, but people waited until it was confirmed by multiple sources with facts, before it was celebrated. Same with all other events showcasing extreme Russian incompetence -- e.g., cowardly retreat from Kyiv, incompetent attempts by Russian to cross the Siverskyi Donets River.
Instead a link to a destroyed plane and a surrender refusal in Mariupol as posted as if these explain it away.
Cheap comment. I gave you linked examples that defeated your claim (and prefaced the post with the fact that I was giving examples). Obviously, I can't post a comprehensive list, which would involve tens of thousands of links and many days of research. But it's all easy to find. You can do it. I think you even tried to, when you found the MSM powerhouse Time article.
This started when you jumped in supporting carmine9's endless post that anything he doesn't like to read must by some wild, conspiratorial lie by the mainstream media propaganda machine. Nobody denies that the mainstream media is not biased about some things, some of the time. Yet, it is not difficult to determine, reading between the lines (sorting the wheat from the chaff, as you say), that Russia's invasion of Ukraine is a bogus endeavor, a colossal failure that no one expected, run by incompetent leaders with incompetent soldiers, the Moskva is sunk, Russian generals are dead, Russian tanks blow up, and this Russian invasion has destroyed the lives of millions of innocent Ukrainians. I think you could even determine all that from Russian media, if you knew how to sort wheat from chaff.
Russia has just completed the eradication of the nazi Ukranian troops in azovstal and have officially conquered Mariupol, their stronghold.
Apparently "evacuation" is what some call surrender these days.
About 53 of the 264 combatants recently leaving the Azovstal plant were injured, meaning the other 211 weren't.
There must be more still holed up. There were foreign "volunteers" in Mariupol previously - and some may still be there. As non-regular combatants, their status would be more dubious.
Due to heavy bombing, the underground maze at Azovstal is a now a disconnected warren - disparate groups with splintered access.
Any mercenaries and Azov Battalion members holding out may not be keen to march out without security guarantees, or at least having their surrender... sorry... evacuation... officially observed.
At least the UDF is no longer demanding they fight to the death in a hopeless battle.
Those giving up the fight are being held by the Russians - meaning they're prisoners. Negotiations are already underway by the Ukraine side to arrange a swap.
Oh I'm definitely saving this prediction - that Finland and Sweden won't become full NATO members.
Bet? $10 to the other person's favorite charity?
You could well be right.
I don't have reason to suspect Sweden and Finland will never be admitted.
Just that they won't be admitted without unanimous assent of existing NATO members - and that one member has adamantly said they won't give it.
While in NATO, Turkey seems more allied with Russia than the US these days.
But everyone has their price - and certainly Turkey's acquiescence can be bought. The question is just how much does the US or another partner want to pay to glove-smack Russia?
My guess is "a lot".
We'd probably have to wait a year or so to find out - but in anticipation of losing a bet I didn't make, I just donated $100 to charity.
Turkey has already listed their requests for Finland and Sweden to join, and I’m sure there will be some negotiation. However, the UK has already provided written security assurances to both countries, and I believe the US has provided verbal assurances. So, Russia isn’t going to attack either country, whether they are in NATO or not.
No, they are not trumpeted any more than one would expect large and often deliberate civilian killings in an invasion by an enemy of the West would be reported in MSM. I think your bias is that you just don't like being reminded Ukrainian civilians are dying by the thousands. It's important and significant news of a major world event.
No, they are not. We are all aware, via Western media reports, of the magnitude of the Ukrainian civilians and troops being killed by Russians. I gave you some examples. They are easy to find and reported often. No one disputes that the Russians are killing Ukrainians by the tens of thousands.
Untrue. You're misapprehension is that you believe the atrocities must be occurring in equal amounts on either side, hence more reports about Russian war crimes and atrocities can only be attributable to biased media reporting. That type of fallacy -- that a disparity can only be caused by an unfair bias -- is often used by Woke-types in the US regarding racial issues. There are more war crimes and atrocities by Russian soldiers being reported, because they are committing more war crimes and atrocities again Ukrainian civilians than Ukrainians are committing against Russian civilians.
True. I thought you wanted factual reporting without bias?
Untrue. Endless MSM stories about NATO weapons being provided to Ukraine and used by Ukrainians, and how important they are to the Ukraine effort. Zelenskyy says as much all the time, and that gets reported too.
Ukrainians are, by the way, putting up a heroic effort against a disgusting and murderous invading force. They seem willing to risk their lives and die by the thousands for the sovereignty of their country and desire not to be ruled and occupied (and killed) by invaders.
I haven't seen much of this at all. The Moskva did sink, but people waited until it was confirmed by multiple sources with facts, before it was celebrated. Same with all other events showcasing extreme Russian incompetence -- e.g., cowardly retreat from Kyiv, incompetent attempts by Russian to cross the Siverskyi Donets River.
Cheap comment. I gave you linked examples that defeated your claim (and prefaced the post with the fact that I was giving examples). Obviously, I can't post a comprehensive list, which would involve tens of thousands of links and many days of research. But it's all easy to find. You can do it. I think you even tried to, when you found the MSM powerhouse Time article.
This started when you jumped in supporting carmine9's endless post that anything he doesn't like to read must by some wild, conspiratorial lie by the mainstream media propaganda machine. Nobody denies that the mainstream media is not biased about some things, some of the time. Yet, it is not difficult to determine, reading between the lines (sorting the wheat from the chaff, as you say), that Russia's invasion of Ukraine is a bogus endeavor, a colossal failure that no one expected, run by incompetent leaders with incompetent soldiers, the Moskva is sunk, Russian generals are dead, Russian tanks blow up, and this Russian invasion has destroyed the lives of millions of innocent Ukrainians. I think you could even determine all that from Russian media, if you knew how to sort wheat from chaff.
Where to start? Anywhere and everywhere.
You argue that because some MSM reporting is factual, it must mostly be accurate and complete.
You argue that in calling out bent and filtered truth serving propaganda objectives, one can only abet a Russian war of aggression.
You also post an estimate of 3000 Ukraine casualties as being reported by Ukraine, and noted in MSM - as if admission and reporting of any Ukraine casualties must be proof of being forthcoming. The real casualty figure is reliably assessed at something like 10 times that.
You've picked a side. But doing so should not make you blithe, indifferent, or turn a blind eye when it suits. Facts which don't fit narrative or drive agenda should not be discounted, trivialized, or ignored. Truth is not an enemy of virtue.
At least you admit bias. I suppose there's that.
But if you want to pop a bottle of 'righteous champagne' every time a Russian is killed, what does that make you? Someone who celebrates death. That passes for hate in most parts.
Russia has just completed the eradication of the nazi Ukranian troops in azovstal and have officially conquered Mariupol, their stronghold.
It's a headshot to the woke!
Huge day for Russia fans. VM day: Victory in Mariupol day. On day 82 of the Special Military Operation (SMO), Russia displayed formidable forward projection of power (ForPOP), capturing a city over 30 miles from its border. Russian soldiers conducted themselves professionally throughout the seige of Mariupol, taking extra precautions not to completely obliterate civilian infrastructure like homes, apartments and hospitals.
But other than CNN, Fox, ABC, NBC, CBS, Reuters, BBC, USA Today, WSJ and a dozen others, you won't find the incredible Russian victory in Mariupol reported anywhere in the goddam MSM!
The mistake here is thinking media exists without bias. All media is biased.
When the source of your "facts" is from government, particularly a combatant one, that speaks unfavourably to reliability.
We don't trust Russian Times. Similarly, it's folly to blindly trust VOA, Radio Free Europe, or Think-Tanks funded by the Military Complex. They're all grinding axes.
To paraphrase, "If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him."
An objective reader is tasked with piecing together something approximating real events from a sea of half-truths.
^And here we see the time honored debate tactic of waving your hands around and making confused noises...
We've updated our BetterRunningShoes.com web site to make it easier to find good deals on the best shoes. To keep it great we need new shoe reviews from you.
Fill out a review to be entered into a drawing to win a free pair of shoes.
