Hacker News Reader

Comment by lost_soul | Hacker News Reader

Will this be reported on Russian media?

It has already been reported by Russian media. The loss part, not the "by Ukraine" part.

Although some of their news shows seem to be vowing for revenge against Ukraine while still parroting the Kremlin line about how the cause is being investigated.

https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/151476606277187585...

Sidenote: Russian state TV is absolutely batshit crazy, and I say that with no exaggeration. Holy mother of Christ.

https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/151481135717821236...

https://twitter.com/carlbildt/status/1514600448728002565

https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/tvc9kq/russian_sta...

Love that first link; cognitive dissonance on display: We must bomb Kyiv for the Moscova! ...that somehow spontaneously exploded.

This is the same playbook they are using for the Bucha murders - "it didn't happen" plays right alongside "it did happen but was perpetrated by the Ukranians". I've read it described as a scattergun approach: the lies don't have to be consistent, or even stand up to the slightest critical scrutiny, you just spew out as many as possible trusting that one will stick.

Exactly. The goal behind propaganda isn't to lead you to believe something that isn't true, it's to lead you to believe nothing.

At that point, the lies and indoctrination become effortless.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kettle_logic

https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/151433922211888333...

It was. I was fully expecting them to stick with their hilarious choice of words and say that "the ship had undergone unexpected exothermic oxidation and then took tactical depth" tho. What a disappointment that they did say "there was a fire" and "it sunk", they just didn't specify the cause of the fire.

The front fell off...

It was officially confirmed by the Russian defence department this morning. The official version: it sunk while it was being towed due to a storm (spoiler: there were no storms in the black sea at that time.)

My version: it sunk right away and they lied to save the face.

As I understand it, the Russian aircraft carrier gets towed all the time. So that might not be so far fetched.

I looked at the nautical charts for Black sea[0]. It looks like the area near Odessa is quite shallow (less than 100m (~300ft) deep). I'll hazard that it was a total loss from a get go, but they towed it just far enough to be able to let it sink to deeper waters (like 1000+ m deep (~ 3000ft)).

[0] https://www.oceangrafix.com/chart/zoom?chart=55001

What would be the reason for that?

To make it more complicated for the west to recover intelligence and equipment from the ship. And of course this: https://www.thedailybeast.com/ukraine-trolls-russia-over-sun...

Ah, reminds me of the "Moscow residents please stay indoors, there will be a storm tonight" news bulletin after an officially not a nuclear incident: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyonoksa_radiation_accident

If you can access RT:

https://www.rt.com/russia/553902-flagship-sank/

Russian flagship sinks – military

The missile cruiser Moskva went down in the Black Sea while being towed to port, the Russian Defense Ministry said

The Russian missile cruiser Moskva, the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet, sank while being towed into port amid stormy sea conditions, the Defense Ministry said on Thursday. According to the Russian military, the warship’s hull had been damaged by an ammunition explosion, itself caused by a fire on board, on Wednesday.

Ukrainian officials claimed their forces had struck the vessel with anti-ship missiles. The Pentagon said it could not confirm the claim. A US drone circled above the cruiser on Thursday, monitoring its progress towards Sevastopol.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com