Comments by "Adam Bainbridge" (@AdamMGTF) on "The Hidden Underwater Theatre Of The Cold War | Submarines In Enemy Depths | Timeline" video.

Thanks for your service Christopher. From an Englishman who had uncles in RN Subs :)
6
@christainmarks106 I believe Christian is surprised that you thought the interviews were conducted while the Soviet Union still existed. Though he could have put it in a nicer way.
4
I don't think it's a conspiracy theory. More a case of pointing out that "this is history, but very recent history and we don't know the whole story". This isn't unusual. There are still documents from ww2 classified by the government of Great Britain. They are under the 100 year rule. It's not a conspiracy theory just because it's secret.
4
Probably find out 100 years after the incident. ,😅
4
@Crashed131963 I was under the impression that high level officers in the red fleet were all Russians. Paranoid bunch and what not. But if course your right. Long after the fall of the ussr
3
@josephturner4047 thank you for your service
3
It's really not. It's a documentary made in the West about the cold war. Which had only ended a decade before. Access to information about what the ussr did at the time was more difficult than it is now. Access to information in general was harder as the internet was still a novelty for lots of people. It's told largely from the western perspective and yes, it focuses on the failures of the Soviet navy submarines. But. That's because they are well documented. It's not propoganda. Its just told from a western perspective. As a addendum. What would be the point in anti Soviet propoganda, a decade after the Soviet Union fell?
2
@andrewthomson I knew what it meant Andrew. But like you was confused. I'm not sure if the op thinks that RN Subs were tracked or that the RN tracked Argentine subs. As I understand it. Neither happened
2
He did a lot of documentaries in the 90s and early 00s. Very much what we called at the time "the BBC accent" :)
2
@xenophon8958 yes, it's good seeing old documentaries. Only down side is they do get some things wrong (I used to love the battlefield series on history channel, I think originally made for BBC). But since more has been discovered and declassified. They are a little out of date on specifics. It's like reading an old history book. Good news is there are some good YouTube channels now. The tank museum and the greatwar/ww2 are my faves. Just sadly they don't have the budget of a TV production :)
2
@DameWhoGames623 I totally agree. But my comment was the preposition that the speaker held a very different view due to the reasons I stated
2
@ragingstauner6109 that is all kinds of confusing lol
2
@SW-mv6fw would you mind explaining what you mean? I've never heard of it. The name does ring a bell. But I'm thinking of the polesti oil fields. I know lots of American, great British and allied airmen died to attack the place. But few are still alive and I doubt any live there. Any explanation would be great. Thanks
2
@seashorelineone buy a none Apple product :) Side note. I don't have add blockers. I'm using YT app and a android phone. There are no adverts for me.
2
As I understand it, it wasn't a 'war' but a 'conflict' as it didn't escalate into GB attacking the A mainland? Could you clarify what you mean by AS detecting submarines? As I understood it, the AN didn't depoly submarines or have Nuclear powered boats. And no RN sub was attacked? Such a tragic waste of life that conflict.
1
@xenophon8958 yep. It evolved from BBC radio and was basically a public school accent (confusingly, public schools were places like Eton. Where people with money sent their kids). It was much more "posh" in the 40s/50s with radio. But many presenters still use a clear accent which has been taught in language lessons (forget the name of it). I definitely think it's a great thing for a documentary. The modern documentaries, especially American ones, just try and sound mega dramatic about everything. Really over the top. It's more like a movie trailer than learning about something. It makes them unwatchable for me. It was bad enough when the history channel went down this route. But the national geographic documentaries have started to go this way too. :( Makes me sad.
1
Any idea who originally made it?
1
They aren't clips. This is a made for TV documentary from around the year 2000. It's just been uploaded as it was made.
1
I suppose that's both a mixture of propoganda and the metric by which you measure success. Stalin said that quantity had a quality all of its own. And the one thing they did well was churn out weapons en mass. I mean. You don't buy russian for the warranty. But still.....
1
Dan snow?
1
@ragingstauner6109 the more you know. Cheers. But.... He's not part of the documentary is he?
1
@ragingstauner6109 fair enough. Must admit I wouldn't have known who he was lol. I thought it was just some random youtuber or something lol Shame to miss out on these grand old documentaries like.
1
No, the ones not in service were broken for parts and recycled
1
Propaganda?
1