Comments by "Miriam Weller" (@miriamweller812) on "Huge explosion as Ukraine strikes Russian warship | BBC News" video.

The ship was out of service before. It was also an inactive landing ship that played exactly NO role at all. Again NATO attacked the only thing they were able to a random ship with zero worth, instead of going after the actual warships.
2
@mrwong8584 The explosions makes more than clear that there was not ammunition on board at all. That was the warhead of the missiles plus some fuel, that's how you get such a cloud. Look at how thermobaric detonations lookos like with much smaller warheads. Those are also fuel explosions. When you hit a bigger ship with some fuel on boad, you get such a big fire cloud. If you would hit ammunition, you would have many smaller explosions, not one big cloud.
2
@stream2watch And their anti air has a range of 400km, so what?
2
@vlada9595 It looks like a fuel explosions. Ships tend to have some fuel on board to move around. A vast ammount of ammunition wouldn't detonate like that in one big cloud.
2
That ship wasn't in usage at all and why should a LANDING ship be loaded with soldiers at night to begin with? The sole reason NATO (and of course it's NATO, it's NATO weapons, NATO surveillance, if not even NATO personell that is doing such strikes, the Ukrainian coup regime got nothing of that) is able to hit such targets is that they are not used and by that not under special protection nor able to defend themselves. Try to actually hit one of the active warships. Why would you attack a landing ship in the harbour, when none of these were ever use the whole two years, instead of going for the missile cruiser and alike? Because you can't.
1
Called "fuel". You people are so full of shit, it's ridiculous. You got zero clue and are not even smart enough to admit that, instead you go full cheering for fascism and war, like some crazy german in the 1940th.
1
@mrwong8584 Try to sink the actual warships, Nazi. You know, the ones with the missiles which destroy billions of NATO equipment month by month. If your NATO shit is so good, why not go for the real targets? Pretty odd and stupid.
1
@applepie58 Since the Banderites use NATO weapons and NATO surveillance, no, that's a 100% NATO attack, hiding behind Ukraine those Nazis use as human shield for their usual fascism. They openly admit, that it's awesome how they can burn Ukraine to the ground without NATO soldiers dying. They openly admit, that they see Ukrainians as subhumans.
1
@paulos9900 That's no big explosion and for sure no ammunition explosions. An why should they have drones on board? Makes no sense. Look on a map. Utterlys pointless. That's simply a cruise missile and some fuel. If that would have been a hit against ammunition, you would have many secondars explosions, not a big one. As usual, the Nazis lie, as they always do.
1
@-_-dontcare-_- No, they didn't. And if you say tha Moskva was hit by NATO, then NATO is stupid, because that good half a century old ship wasn't even part of the SMO, so what attack it? Why not use that ONE strike you got to go against the active warships which blow up all your stuff over and over again? You people don't even get how stupid your own propaganda makes you look.
1