Comments by "Nattygsbord" (@nattygsbord) on "Grain deal stand-off shows Russia's maritime weakness" video.

  1. The deal also benefitted Russia. Ukraine could ship out its food to sell and get some cash. But Russia could also do the same and also get some well needed money in the same way by this deal. Furthermore did it get some of the economic sanctions lifted by lifting the blockade of Ukraines wheat. Russia had also lost the grip of southern Ukraine when this deal was struck. The arrival of Nato anti-ship missiles to this area such as Harpoon, Robot 17, Brimstone and others also made it impossible for Russia to keep up the naval blockade in the western black sea. Ukraines land forces also held the momentum in this area, and the loss of the cruiser Moscow, and the painful pyrrhic victory of taking snake island and the shaky control of the western black sea coast made life very dangerous for the Russian marine. The original plan of occupying the east and south of Ukraine, blockading all the ports and thereby strangle Ukraines economy had failed. Ukraine got money from the west to stay alive. The landmass was contested, the control over the western black sea would probably have been impossible to upheld in the long run without danger of suffering heavy losses due to new anti-ship missiles and drones. And the west was angry on Russia. Blocking the ports and cutting off 800 million people from their food source would have caused riots, revoultions, chaos and gigantic refugee waves around the world. This shows what a terrorist nation Russia is, that is prepared to deliberatly starve 800 million innocent people to death. Putin is prepared then to kill more people than Hitler, Stalin and Mao combined. But that is another topic for itself, so lets go back to the grain deal... A refugee wave of a tens of millions of north africans coming to Europe would create large problems for the EU and thereby the war effort in Ukraine. This destabilization of Africa, the middle east and the EU made governments worried and angry. So much so that the west even considered direct military intervention into the black sea if the Russians continued to try to sabotage the grain shipments and cause global starvation. Those problems were avoided with the grain deal. Russia and Ukraine was allowed to ship their grain. The Russian terrorist state gained concessions by some lifted sanctions by the EU - which for example provided them with some spare parts for all those 500 passanger planes that Russia had stolen from western countries. Global starvation was avoided and Ukraine got some cash. Russian terrorists had won a small victory. But Putin had probably hoped for much more sanctions to be lifted, but to his dissapointment was there not much change. As the typical liars and terrorists russians are did they fire missiles on Ukrainian ships the day after the deal was struck. The purpose was probably to drive up insurance premiums for western ships that transported Ukraines grain to make it economically unprofitable to ship all that grain from Ukraine and to ruin the country. Had the war turned in Russia's favor again, and the control of southern Ukraine been taken back by Russia, then do I not feel any doubts that Russia would break all its promises - like it always done in the past - and started to attack Ukrainian ships again to try to strangle Ukraines economy to death again. But now since Russias navy is weakened and the Russian army is losing, do Russia not yet dare to do anything about this Black sea shipping deal. If Russia moves to the west of the Crimea with their ships they will get in range of Ukrainian anti-ship missiles and get wiped out. So they are therefore unable to effectivly make a naval blockade as I sees it.
    3
  2. Battleships ruled the seas. Then came the torpedos and ruined everything, and having ships with big guns and thick armor was no longer fun. Battleships like Repulse, Prince of Wales, Yamato, Bismarck, Tirpitz, USS Arizona, USS Oklahoma were sunk by submarines and airplanes. By 1945 was no country interested in building any more battleships because torpedos on planes and submarines have made them worthless. Instead did countries build smaller ships instead like motor torpedo boats, destroyers and light cruisers. And if the torpedos had not yet killed all dreams of big warships, would the next disaster soon come to them that would cause their final extinction: The cruise missile. From now on would no navy in their right mind keep on wasting money on building new battleships or even upkeep old ones. The battleship was a dinosaur that was going extinct. The Soviet union was first out with mass producing 200 new small fast boats equipped with nothing but anti-ship missiles. And thus had a new class of warships been born: The missile boat. And since the 1960s have that meant the end of all big warships like Battleships, and Cruisers. At least when it comes to try to gaining naval dominance in the small Baltic Sea. Now it seems like stealth and a clever use of the terrain are more important for the survival of a warship than what thick armor is.
    3
  3. I do not think it is a coincidence that the grain deal happened after a series of Russian military setbacks. Their offensive towards Kyiv had failed and their flagship Moscow had been sunk, and russian losses had been pileing up while western aid was flowing into the country, while russias economy was under stress. A lifting of the economic sanctions on Russia plus extra money from exporting Russian grain and stolen grain from Ukraine more and more seemed an attractive option for Russia which seemed less and less capable of blockading the black sea, and the ever increasing threat of international military intervention to stop a global famine from killing hundreds of millions of people started to become dangerous to russia. If Nato and Africa joined forces against the Russian black sea fleet there would be zero chance that Russia could win such a fight. So they did choose to back down before it was too late.
    2
  4. Objects for bragging and prestige for a country that pretends to be a military equal to the USA. They were build during the Soviet age.. and old upgraded ships are expensive to keep in service while new ships can be cheaper to operate and pack more punch. Having a big ship also allows you to leave coastal waters and do some fighting on the high seas. The ships carry large amounts of missiles. So 1 ship can spam a large enough number of missiles into the air to potentially take out an American carrier group. But then of course are those Russian ships worthless at anything else. They are not reliable, they cost much to operate, they rely on old technologies On paper did Moscow have a strong air defence at both long range and close range. But she did sink, so that reputation of being an anti-aircraft shield for all other ships in the Russian navy was probably a myth since she failed at this, which was one of her most important jobs.
    2
  5. Your argument is based on logic and reason. Sadly does the 3rd world not care about such things. Instead do for example the African union blame Ukraine and the west for the risk of famine, instead of blaming Russia that started the war and are trying to block Ukrainian ports and stealing grain from Ukraine. Either are people in Africa enormously stupid. Or either do they know the truth, but act dishonest and blame the west and try to push them into giving in to Russian terrorism by lifting sanctions so African leaders can save their own skin. That is probably an easier path to take for them than collecting all their warships and send them to the black sea to protect all food ships from Russian attacks - which would be a more reasonable and logic respons from their part.
    1