Comments by "peabase" (@peabase) on "MS Estonia: Europe's worst shipping disaster 'caused by Baltic submarine collision'" video.

  1.  Post Post  I'm not interested in your olfactory sensations. If you want to contribute to the discussion, address the questions I posed.
    2
  2. You haven't uncovered a conspiracy, but launched (or more likely, copied) a conspiracy theory. There are other plausible explanations. It wouldn't be the first time that a sub collides with a ship. Why the need for a cover-up?
    1
  3.  @borisjohnson2606  Yes, you're betting -- that makes it a conspiracy t h e o r y. I believe the decision not to salvage and to cover up the wreck had to do with respecting the graves of the victims. There, another explanation. Please try to establish motive. Like I wrote previously, collisions between subs and ships aren't unheard of, so why would such an incident warrant extreme secrecy? I think you owe an attribution to whoever concocted the conspiracy theory first -- if it wasn't your doing. Or is it so that there's no honour among conspiracy theorists?
    1
  4.  @duhni4551  Your highly-theoretical motive has glaring holes in it. Estonia, under whose flag MS Estonia sailed, and who, therefore, were placed in charge of the investigation into the sinking, has no subs. So, in the light of this fact, are you expecting us to believe that Sweden or Russia had one of their subs collide with MS Estonia, and all parties in the joint investigation committee unanimously agreed to a cover-up? I find it very hard to believe that the Estonians, who'd just been freed from five decades of Russian occupation, would even contemplate doing their erstwhile occupier such a service. Also, the Swedes, who've had more than their fair share of trouble with Russian subs (Whiskey on the rocks, anyone?), would not agree to Russian involvement being kept under wraps. A Swedish sub, perhaps? It's just not in the Swedes' nature, with their high morals bordering on arrogance, to conceal their involvement had there been any. Mind you, the newly-discovered hole may very well be the work of a submarine, but a massive cover-up by everyone involved? Your (plagiarised) conspiracy theory is stretching the imagination.
    1
  5.  @duhni4551  Nope. The investigation was conducted by the so-called JAIC, a joint commission made up of Estonian, Swedish and Finnish investigators. In accordance with maritime law, Estonia acted as the chair. Also, it was a Norwegian company that inspected the wreck, which implies that the Norwegians, too, are in on your mythical cover-up. And it wasn't just Sweden, but Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Denmark, Poland, the United Kingdom and Russia, too, signed the agreement which declared sanctity over the grave site. Your conspiracy grows bigger and bigger, doesn't it? Where exactly did I claim that the collision -- if indeed there was one -- was intentional? Moreover, a modern sub with a sturdy pressure hull is likely to survive such a collision, especially if it rams a ship head-on. It does become a surface ship after that, but there's a recorded incident of a Russian sub ramming a freighter in the Kattegat, after which it quietly limped back to Murmansk for repairs. But I see you're introducing new aspects, stolen Soviet weapons technology and smuggling, to your conspiracy theory, or is it plagiarism again? It's a public secret that a lot Russian weaponry ended up in the West after the Soviet Union collapsed. It's an unsavoury business, but again, it doesn't warrant a cover-up of this magnitude.
    1
  6.  @zoom5024  OK, you're upping the ante and suggesting that the alleged collision was intentional and that the Russians practically admitted to it. You conspiracy theorists. Your imagination is always in overdrive. Yes, a lot of Soviet military kit ended up in the West. I've seen some with my own eyes, being used for target practice at a tank firing range. Transporting arms is not illegal by definition. Secretive -- that's another matter. If the Russians were foolish enough to abandon weapons in Estonia (their military certainly took their time leaving their bases there), they became Estonian property and, therefore, theirs to sell. Mostly, I presume, as scrap metal.
    1