Videos and images of the burning flagship of the Russian fleet in the Black Sea are proliferating on social media, making increasingly unconvincing the Russian side's explanations of how the cruiser Moscow was lost. The more insistent the Russians are in denying that the ship was fatally hit by Ukrainian Neptune missiles, the more desperate their attempt to save face about the heavy losses they suffered during the invasion seems.
Beyond the Russian explanations, it seems that it is the name of the ship that makes the difference: Because Vladimir Putin and his top staff could never admit that in Ukraine they went on a wholesome military jaunt and instead of taking over the country without meeting the slightest resistance, they ended up losing even the "Moscow".
The Moskva sank on 14 April, in the Black Sea and, as the relevant footage (the authenticity of which is no longer disputed) attests, in the body of the ship, apart from a large fire attested by the thick black smoke emanating from it, there are visible openings, probably due to the hits inflicted by Ukrainian missiles.
The Russian side, albeit reluctantly, simply admits that the Moskva sank. The cause of the wreck is attributed to a fire that broke out in an ammunition depot, without further analysis. In an incomprehensible, jerky propaganda move, the Russian military staff released a short video on Sunday showing officials inspecting the crew. But while the sailors' relatives are screaming and clamoring to know the fate of their children, the Russian military leadership is avoiding revealing details of what happened to the more than 500 sailors who served on the cruiser.
According to Carl Schuster, a retired U.S. Navy captain, who made relevant statements to CNN, "assuming the photos have not been doctored, it appears that the missiles hit the Moskva in the forward section, which is not unexpected. Missiles of this class (anti-ship missiles) tend to fall right in the center of the radar return signal. Which is usually at the front of the superstructure of the surface ship in question."
Other experts are more sceptical about the exact diagnosis, referring to further analyses, which will definitively certify the Moskva missile attack and rule out a coincidental explosion."
Other experts are more sceptical about the exact diagnosis, referring to further analyses, which will definitively certify the Moskva missile attack and rule out a coincidental explosion.
In any case, however, a loss of such magnitude shatters the prestige of the Russian war machine and partly justifies the subsequent escalation of the attack on Ukraine in retaliation and revenge. However, one wonders, on the basis of common sense, why the Russians prefer to blame the fire rather than the deliberate destruction of Moskva by Ukrainian missiles. The former version exposes the Russian forces even more than a surprise attack by the Ukrainians, betraying criminal incompetence and inefficiency.
After all, the Moskva's sinking is the heaviest material loss the Russians have suffered since the invasion began and the largest involving a warship, regardless of nationality, in 40 years.
Source: protothema.gr
Contents of this article including associated images are belongs Cyprus Times
Views & opinions expressed are those of the author and/or Cyprus Times
Source
