Russian, English Channel, EU posturing

[John145]

Seeing footage and news articles like this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37725327

Really makes you think! Russian warships in the English channel and then cuts to footage of the EU bureaucracy.

This is a perfect catalyst for the EU to decide that they need an army but to what end? Further escalation and expansionism seems the EU's only response.

When you compare Aleppo to Mosul, what are the differences? State is attacking a city within its own country that has been overtaken by rebels and being supported by an outside superpower with air support, weapons and specialists on the ground. The level of spin is astonishing! I can't believe that the deaths of civilians will be significantly different in proportions between the two battles being fought. The only difference is Russia won't be supplying ISIS with weapons to defend Mosul...

[FredClogs]

John145 said:

The only difference is Russia won't be supplying ISIS with weapons to defend Mosul...

I wouldn't bet on that, stranger things have happened.

[TheRainMaker]

Wow is that old heap powered by coal?

[FN2TypeR]

TheRainMaker said:

Wow is that old heap powered by coal?

Steam turbines, but it smokes like a right old wrecker doesn't it?

Still, it's better than our three quarters finished one!

[Europa1]

TheRainMaker said:

Wow is that old heap powered by coal?

I did see an article which said it's normally accompanied by an ocean going tug for when it breaks down.

[Esseesse]

TheRainMaker said:

Wow is that old heap powered by coal?

Admiral Kuznetsov has steam turbine propulsion, so apparently that probably means fuel oil.

Still, currently do we have any carriers with planes on them?

[FN2TypeR]

Europa1 said:

TheRainMaker said:

Wow is that old heap powered by coal?

I did see an article which said it's normally accompanied by an ocean going tug for when it breaks down.

The BBC article mentions a tug come to think of it!

[eyebeebe]

Knowing very little about sea law...

Can the Russians just pass through our territorial waters like this?
If they were flying planes into our airspace without permission we'd be (threatening to) shoot them down.

[Borghetto]

Esseesse said:

Still, currently do we have any carriers with planes on them?

Yes it's called the HMS RAF and is completely land based. Probably adequate to protect the English Channel.

[PositronicRay]

eyebeebe said:

Knowing very little about sea law...

Can the Russians just pass through our territorial waters like this?
If they were flying planes into our airspace without permission we'd be (threatening to) shoot them down.

I expect we'll send them a strongly worded memo, or maybe a twitter complaint or something.

[matsoc]

eyebeebe said:

Knowing very little about sea law...

Can the Russians just pass through our territorial waters like this?
If they were flying planes into our airspace without permission we'd be (threatening to) shoot them down.

The carrier is surely passing in international waters, if I well remember territorial waters are just 12 nautical miles from the coast.

[Europa1]

Borghetto said:

Esseesse said:

Still, currently do we have any carriers with planes on them?

Yes it's called the HMS RAF and is completely land based. Probably adequate to protect the English Channel.

And in the Med we have HMS Akrotiri.

[eyebeebe]

matsoc said:

The carrier is surely passing in international waters, if I well remember territorial waters are just 12 nautical miles from the coast.

The British territorial waters map I just looked at suggests that the boundary in the straits of Dover is almost France. So the carrier must be in our or French waters at some point?

[essayer]

Foreign ships are allowed to sail in our waters, surely? Doesn't mean WW3 is about to start.

[FN2TypeR]

essayer said:

Foreign ships are allowed to sail in our waters, surely? Doesn't mean WW3 is about to start.

Tell that to the daily mail, their leading article yesterday was a total meltdown on the subject, pure conjecture, abject ste.

[Digga]

Perhaps I'm the only one who's slightly amused by this insouciant Naval cruise past. IMHO there's enough hyped 'tension' between Russia and the West at the moment, the very fact they're casually cruising through the channel with a big old clunker of an aircraft carrier, on their way to kick ISIS even further back into history is quite good - it proves everyone can co-exist, even if we don't always agree.

[DMN]

TheRainMaker said:

Wow is that old heap powered by coal?

Its not a suprise that their "fleet" includes a couple of ocean going tugs.

Even the partly built POW is in better state.

[eyebeebe]

essayer said:

Foreign ships are allowed to sail in our waters, surely? Doesn't mean WW3 is about to start.

Armed foreign warships are allowed within a few miles of our coast? Seems a little risky to me. We sure as hell don't like Russian bombers entering our airspace. What is different about warships?

[pim]

Yes they are allowed near our coast.We are not at war with Russia.

Our nuclear submarines will be sailing near their coast if needed and be monitored by the Russians.

[randlemarcus]

eyebeebe said:

Armed foreign warships are allowed within a few miles of our coast? Seems a little risky to me. We sure as hell don't like Russian bombers entering our airspace. What is different about warships?

There's a teeny tiny difference between something that can be well inside the line within seconds, and something that may or may not be able to do anything at snails pace, when we have had a week's warning, so have propositioned plenty of fireworks