OSINT (Open Source Intel) look at Russia-Ukraine

Using legitimate bio-research as justification for what the Russians are doing is not worthy of a rejoinder.

I guess the rooskies are also justified for the invasion because the Ukrainians are (were) operating a nuclear power plant, huh?
I mean, by SOME people's standards, that's nuclear weapons proliferation, isn't it?
Heck.....they probably use chlorine bleach, which would also cover chemical weapons research.

Two things can be true at once.
OUR President was wrong for getting off of his leash and calling for a regime change during a diplomatic grip and grin....and yes...the Rooskies will twist that into a further "justification" for the invasion.

HOWEVER (comma!)
EVEN IF ALL OF THAT IS TRUE and the Ukes were developing the next corona - er (*) bio-weapon...
EVEN IF ALL OF THAT IS TRUE and the Ukrainians are re-investing in nukes ...
and EVEN IF our cognitively challenged President is foie-gras feeding the Russians all of the justifications that they think that they need to invade their neighbor they are still in stark violation of many of the International Laws of Armed Conflict.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_war

That's sorta why you need to give Putin enough of a runway to land the plane and bring this conflict to a close without going turbo....or do you think he's going to allow himself to be "brought to justice?"
(everyone ELSE is using the "off-ramp" analogy)

Thanks for YOURS by the way....
During my second deployment I was actually foolish enough to attempt to get closer to all of the noise and smoke, but I was 'voluntold' to work a comms node "in the rear, with the gear" (a duty I truly loathed!!)
I'm old enough to remember all the REMF jokes from the 70's and am still slightly embarrassed to have drawn 11 months of combat pay for what I did....

 

"What happened" is probably a function of a 40-year-old, billion ruble ship that is crewed by 19-year-old not-all-volunteer lads.

My very favorite Navy Admiral (Hopper) once said that "ships are safe in port.....but that's not what ships are for."

She was right about that, but if you don't want somebody giving your ship 'water-cooled handrails' then you might want to reconsider trailing your coats within sight of hostile forces....ESPECIALLY when the Americanskis can dime you out.

The Argentinians found this out the HARD way with their OWN outdated 40 year old capitol ship off the Falklands. They also got dimed out by the Norte Americanos but....that's another tale....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARA_General_Belgrano

This conflict is making FOOLS out of a lot of keyboard strategerists (yes, including yours truly) BUT I've always thought that a couple of $400,000 "Harpoonski" missiles stood a pretty good chance of scoring for points against a guided missile cruiser.
The latest 'hotness' in weapons systems is hypersonics.
HOWEVER (Comma!!)
That doesn't mean that you throw away your old subsonic sea-skimming missiles.

Something that Aaron didn't point out:
Damage Control.

Even if both of the Neptune missiles hit the Moskva and started fires.....they should not have lost the boat.
I can think of three immediate examples of much smaller American ships suffering similar battle damage Stark, Cole, Samuel B Roberts. where competently trained sailors didn't "give up the ship."


DEEP Divers:

 

Even IF the the weather was dog crap (they're probably hoping nobody bothers to check!) that is face-saving that......won't.

Context:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slava-class_cruiser
Moskva was hull #1 of the Slava-class cruiser.
It was originally called THE Slava, but they changed the name sometime after the SFR inploded.

Slava class guided missile cruisers are 10,000 tonne, 200 meter long warships.
They have a crew of about 500.

Warships tend to be somewhat MORE compartmentalized than trash-haulers.
They tend to have (or SHOULD HAVE) much better, and more redundant firefighting and counter-flooding capability.
Warships are designed for.........(wait for it!).......WARfighting.
One presumes that battle damage might occur which is why these types of ships have extra EVERYTHING, including sailors...ALL OF WHOM are taught and re-taught damage control from the skipper all the way down to the deck apes and junior snipes.

...at least that's the way that the pros do it.

Getting hit in the snot-locker with a knock-off of a 40-year old, sub-sonic missile is embarrassing.
Losing your ship AFTERWARDS to "a fire" and then blaming it on the weather is pure balloon-juice.

They would be better off saying "Hey, we designed (stole) a damn good anti-ship missile and those nasty NAZIs stole our design and used them on one of our largest ships."

That's a blatant lie too, but at least it doesn't make you look like you're completely incompetent.

You're a Marine.
What's more important....the weapon or the person behind the weapon?
(Ask anyone who has ever been in the Nam or the Stan.....)

The Missile in question has been widely copied and re-copied.
The original was the Harpoon_(missile) but the Sovs QUICKLY stole it and punched out their own "Harpoonskis" improving on the original concept by developing a TRUCK MOUNTED launcher in addition to all of the others - with about a 75mile range if memory serves for their export models and something like twice that for the home team.
For shore defense?
Seventy miles is "good Nuff!"

The Russian's biggest problem so far isn't our weapons, or their weapons, but rather it's their OWN troops.
They've lost a LOT more tanks to mud than they have to all of the new-fangled missiles that everybody is field testing, and now a couple of their ships have been taken off the table due to an apparent lack of attention to BASICS - like maneuvering room, damage control, probably watchstander alertness, and equipment maintenance and training.

EVERYBODY underestimated the Ukies until about D+2 because they used to be a second-rate kleptocracy.
They might STILL be.....but they've shown a willingness, even an EAGERNESS to fight for home and hearth.

The Russians cannot afford to keep underestimating them, or more to the point WE CANNOT AFFORD for the Russians to keep underestimating them....

 

Moskva (ex-Slava) had a normal crew of about 500, and even multiple missile hits would leave a lot of survivors.
When USS Stark got hit with 1.5 Exocet missiles in '87 it resulted in 37 killed and 21 wounded on a much smaller ship, with the Neptune and Exocet being very comparable in missile body and warhead size (150kg and 180kg respectively)
One of the French missiles failed to detonate inside Stark BUT the fuel that it brought along added a lot to the overall fun that day.

The point being that most of the Russian sailors would not have died from weapons effect.
How many were aboard when Moskva foundered/sank/was sunk is anyone's guess.

900 bodies washing ashore reports might be Ukie disinformation.
They've done a pretty good job of making their invaders look fairly bad....both virtually and real-world.
Fortunately, the Rooskies have been helping them out quite bit.