If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Trident I C-4 is damaged at US naval base
Missile damaged at naval base 12.03.2004 [19:20] If the same thing happened in Russia, they would first claim an American caused the accident. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Krztalizer" wrote in message ... Missile damaged at naval base 12.03.2004 [19:20] If the same thing happened in Russia, they would first claim an American caused the accident. And then the US members of the news group would point out that it showed the total incompetance of the Russian military! |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Stinky Pete wrote:
The difference is that when the Russians damage a missile, a sub sinks and its crew is lost (Kursk). But if you recall, the Kursk was actually sunk by collision with a US or possibly UK submarine. Sat photos showed the damaged sub at a NATO base in Norway where it had limped off to. SMH |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 07:26:34 -0500, Stephen Harding wrote:
Stinky Pete wrote: The difference is that when the Russians damage a missile, a sub sinks and its crew is lost (Kursk). But if you recall, the Kursk was actually sunk by collision with a US or possibly UK submarine. Sat photos showed the damaged sub at a NATO base in Norway where it had limped off to. SMH That is utter BS, and you either know, or should know, it. Al Minyard |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
The difference is that when the Russians damage a missile, a sub sinks and
its crew is lost (Kursk). But if you recall, the Kursk was actually sunk by collision with a US or possibly UK submarine. Sat photos showed the damaged sub at a NATO base in Norway where it had limped off to. Is Petukhov posting under a nom de troll? 1) 99.99% of the people familiar with the event know that it occurred due to a weapons malfunction on the Kursk. Those that know the facts and refuse to accept them are not ignorant, just foolish. 2) The "damaged" US sub was apparently not worked on in any way, it made a port visit and then left, as subs do - the white canopy cover, pointed at as evidence of damage, is in its normal place over the entrance hatch at the Quarterdeck - and if the damage WAS located there, it would mean the two submarines collided with one of the subs upside down (or both laying on their sides!); patently impossible, let alone in waters as shallow as the Kursk disaster. There are only about six conspiracy theorists left on earth that believe, in the absense of any evidence at all, the US played a hand in the Kursk loss - are you claiming to be one of them? Gordon |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Second wing activated at Ramstein Air Base | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 5 | January 17th 04 05:23 PM |
U.S. military leaving Kuwaiti air base ~ Associated Press | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | October 21st 03 10:39 PM |
Base Closure List- 2005 | Phineas Pinkham | Military Aviation | 1 | September 9th 03 11:06 PM |
Yokota Air Base bids fond farewell to C-9s | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | September 8th 03 08:55 PM |
Erosion of U.S. Industrial Base Is Troubling | The Enlightenment | Military Aviation | 1 | July 29th 03 06:57 AM |