Win / Conspiracies
Conspiracies
Communities Topics Log In Sign Up
Sign In
Hot
All Posts
Settings
All
Profile
Saved
Upvoted
Hidden
Messages

Your Communities

General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
News
Changelogs

More Communities

frenworld
OhTwitter
MillionDollarExtreme
NoNewNormal
Ladies
Conspiracies
GreatAwakening
IP2Always
GameDev
ParallelSociety
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service
Content Policy
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES • All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
Conspiracies Conspiracy Theories & Facts
hot new rising top

Sign In or Create an Account

7
Moskva broken arrow, radiation warning (www.veteranstoday.com)
posted 3 years ago by DavidColeIntrepid 3 years ago by DavidColeIntrepid +6 / --1
54 comments share
54 comments share save hide report block hide replies
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (54)
sorted by:
▲ 2 ▼
– DavidColeIntrepid [S] 2 points 3 years ago +2 / -0

We're talking about pools of plutonium in the ocean. I'm unsure what you're asking about

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 0 ▼
– Ep0ch 0 points 3 years ago +1 / -1

You're talking about nuclear weapons onboard a ship which had no reason to carry them in this immediate conflict. In escalation perhaps. If it needed them it would dock and fit them. Sevastapol is right there, it takes about a day to Dock off the Ukrainian coastline. Where it would be actively resupplying in a conflict. If a Nato ship or threat went through the Bosphorus Strait, it would have time to rearm. At what point did it need nukes onboard for this conflict? The nuke tips it carried were supposedly an antiship based supersonic. Are they for ground based targets. It has planes and silos and mobile launchers for that. Or even other ships and subs.

The Bosphorus strait is closed to Russian ships. It might not be to Nato, but it could provoke all out war, if other threatening navy went through it. The Black Sea has largely non threatening navies nearby like Bulgaria and Romania. There is Turkey and Greece with far more battleships, not much match to Russia navy, more than Ukraine, but I didn't think they're sailing up the Black Sea through the Black Sea Fleet. At what point did the Moskva need supersonic antiship nukes?

Or do tell me they're for land targets. Now you're claiming they're leaking, because its nukes were hit. What are you talking about?

Do you understand the odds of your claim they're marginal. Highly improbable. Because of its range, and the active demand for them in this conflict. It test fired that weapon of a range of more than 900km recently. Okay perhaps rather than resupply it carries. But if a strike group went through the Bosphorus, would it race there to face, or would it shell? It would shell next to its Sams at Svestapol, firing from range. In which case wouldn't it rearm. Strike group would also use planes. It's hypothetical. Speculation. More erratic claims of OMG Russia's nuking the ocean.

It's laughable because when nukes fly they aren't flying like that either. That ship didn't have much immunity regardless. Nevermind to a squadron of planes.

I am drinking reading a tabloid, remembering the exocets.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– DavidColeIntrepid [S] 1 point 3 years ago +1 / -0

weapons on board a ship which had no reason to carry them in this immediate conflict

That's a gigantic supposition. I don't think you're in a position to dictate what is and what isn't necessary to anyone in this conflict. Have you seen the biolabs?

If it needed them it would dock and fit them

Speculative

The nuke tips it carried were supposedly an antiship based supersonic.

Where are you getting this? From the post?

It has planes and silos and mobile launchers for that. Or even other ships and subs.

I have no idea what point you're trying to make. Are you trying to "debunk" this report? That's what it seems like you're doing.

Now you're claiming they're leaking,

That's what is being reported, yes. Im all for speculation of troop movements based on what facts we have. I would ask you to be more clear about what you're saying because I have no idea

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ -1 ▼
– Ep0ch -1 points 3 years ago +1 / -2

Stop repeating my words and filling in the blanks with your nonsense.

I shouldn't need to link. You're grown up and can use Google yourself.

You've created a supposition that they're nuclear tipped. P-1000 antiship missiles. Vulcans.

At what point did it need nuclear tipped supersonic antiship missiles. Read the past wiki and the paper with its armaments. Find it on Google if you need too.

Because you're claiming they were for ground targets. You're claiming they got hit. And now Russia has created a nuclear disaster. On par with all the other chemical weapons it uses. See the profile you're parroting. See why you're parroting it. Now do you understand that it is practically baseless? But it makes a good tabloid. OMG the irradiation is going to be killing fishermen for years. Better get the UN hazmats to broken arrow them first.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– DavidColeIntrepid [S] 1 point 3 years ago +1 / -0

I shouldn't need to link.

So I can't scream whatever you post is "fAkE nEwS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

You've created a supposition

How the fuck do you figure, princess?

they're nuclear tipped. P-1000 antiship missiles. Vulcans.

Where was that in the full on 2 paragraph post? And you're complaining about YOU not having a fucking source? Lol cope harder

At what point did it need nuclear tipped

MAYBE WHEN THEY FOUND THE FUCKING BIOLABS. I'm not Putin, ass face. And neither are you. You aren't in a position to dictate what's necessary to the Russian military. Pull your head out of your ass.

Because you're claiming they were for ground targets

No I didnt. Nobody made that claim, stupid

You're claiming they got hit.

No, asshole. I posted a report. I posted what's being reported and you aren't "debunking" any of it

And now Russia has created a nuclear disaster. On par with all the other chemical weapons it uses.

Who uses chemical Weapons? Who uses chemical weapons you Rachel maddow ass shill cunt? Who the fuck has been using white phosphorus for decades, asshole? Riddle me that, stupid. Go ahead. Cope harder shill.

Now do you understand that it is practically baseless?

I don't understand any of the bullshit you say. It comes from our of nowhere and you refuse to source anything.

permalink parent save report block reply
... continue reading thread?
▲ -1 ▼
– ZyklonBen -1 points 3 years ago +1 / -2

pools of plutonium

Do you think that Plutonium is a liquid?

permalink parent save report block reply

GIFs

Conspiracies Wiki & Links

Conspiracies Book List

External Digital Book Libraries

Mod Logs

Honor Roll

Conspiracies.win: This is a forum for free thinking and for discussing issues which have captured your imagination. Please respect other views and opinions, and keep an open mind. Our goal is to create a fairer and more transparent world for a better future.

Community Rules: <click this link for a detailed explanation of the rules

Rule 1: Be respectful. Attack the argument, not the person.

Rule 2: Don't abuse the report function.

Rule 3: No excessive, unnecessary and/or bullying "meta" posts.

To prevent SPAM, posts from accounts younger than 4 days old, and/or with <50 points, wont appear in the feed until approved by a mod.

Disclaimer: Submissions/comments of exceptionally low quality, trolling, stalking, spam, and those submissions/comments determined to be intentionally misleading, calls to violence and/or abuse of other users here, may all be removed at moderator's discretion.

Moderators

  • Doggos
  • axolotl_peyotl
  • trinadin
  • PutinLovesCats
  • clemaneuverers
  • C
Message the Moderators

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

2025.03.01 - ptjlq (status)

Copyright © 2024.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy