The problem with this "flag ship" sinking is that it doesn't add up. The Moskva was commissioned in 1982. This means it was 40 years old. Nothing has really changed in naval history regarding the life expectancy of a naval vessel. There's no getting around a ship at the end of its life cycle and 40 years service is an obvious indicator it is ready to be moth-balled.

A "flag ship" simply means the admiral of the fleet resides there. If the admiral moves to another ship it becomes the flag ship.

The entire incident is very perplexing. A flag ship is one that is not at the tip of the spear when it comes to the battle ground. Instead, it would normally be at the rear and at a safe distance from the battle front. Why this ship was 30 km from hostilities is mind-blowing.

I tend to believe this was a FF to rally and galvanize the Russian people to the war effort in Ukraine. It was Russia's 'Pearl Harbor'.

Whether the U.S. provided "intelligence" to help Ukraine sink the Moskva is questionable. With all the other lies coming out of the Pentagon, I don't necessarily believe it. No, there's something more to this story.

The question needing to be asked is -- 'cui bono'; who really benefited from this incident? It certainly hasn't changed one iota of Ukraine's war situation. Nothing from this incident has really helped Ukraine. Instead, we see the Russian's are slowly, but methodically taking village after village in positional battles that Ukraine has consistently been losing. The sinking of the Moskva on the other hand has helped Russia's war effort by obtaining a better than 85% approval rating from its people. This incident has completely galvanized and united the Russian people in this war effort.

The problem with this "flag ship" sinking is that it doesn't add up. The Moskva was commissioned in 1982. This means it was 40 years old. Nothing has really changed in naval history regarding the life expectancy of a naval vessel. There's no getting around a ship at the end of its life cycle and 40 years service is an obvious indicator it is ready to be moth-balled.

A "flag ship" simply means the admiral of the fleet resides there. If the admiral moves to another ship it becomes the flag ship.

The entire incident is very perplexing. A flag ship is one that would normally be at the rear and at a safe distance from the battle front. Why this ship was 30 km from hostilities is mind-blowing.

I tend to believe this was a FF to rally and galvanize the Russian people to the war effort in Ukraine. It was Russia's 'Pearl Harbor'.

Whether the U.S. provided "intelligence" to help Ukraine sink the Moskva is questionable. With all the other lies coming out of the Pentagon, I don't necessarily believe it. No, there's something more to this story.

The question needing to be asked is -- 'cui bono'; who really benefited from this incident? It certainly hasn't changed one iota of Ukraine's war situation. Nothing from this incident has really helped Ukraine. Instead, we see the Russian's are slowly, but methodically taking village after village in positional battles that Ukraine has consistently been losing. The sinking of the Moskva on the other hand has helped Russia's war effort by obtaining a better than 85% approval rating from its people. This incident has completely galvanized and united the Russian people in this war effort.

The problem with this "flag ship" sinking is that it doesn't add up. The Moskva was commissioned in 1982. This means it was 40 years old. Nothing has really changed in naval history regarding the life expectancy of a naval vessel. There's no getting around a ship at the end of its life cycle and 40 years service is an obvious indicator it is ready to be moth-balled.

A "flag ship" simply means the admiral of the fleet resides there. If the admiral moves to another ship it becomes the flag ship.

The entire incident is very perplexing. A flag ship is one that is would normally be at the rear and at a safe distance from the battle front. Why this ship was 30 km from hostilities is mind-blowing.

I tend to believe this was a FF to rally and galvanize the Russian people to the war effort in Ukraine. It was Russia's 'Pearl Harbor'.

Whether the U.S. provided "intelligence" to help Ukraine sink the Moskva is questionable. With all the other lies coming out of the Pentagon, I don't necessarily believe it. No, there's something more to this story.

The question needing to be asked is -- 'cui bono'; who really benefited from this incident? It certainly hasn't changed one iota of Ukraine's war situation. Nothing from this incident has really helped Ukraine. Instead, we see the Russian's are slowly, but methodically taking village after village in positional battles that Ukraine has consistently been losing. The sinking of the Moskva on the other hand has helped Russia's war effort by obtaining a better than 85% approval rating from its people. This incident has completely galvanized and united the Russian people in this war effort.

The problem with this "flag ship" sinking is that it doesn't add up. The Moskva was commissioned in 1982. This means it was 40 years old. Nothing has really changed in naval history regarding the life expectancy of a naval vessel. There's no getting around a ship at the end of its life cycle and 40 years service is ready to be moth-balled.

A "flag ship" simply means the admiral of the fleet resides there. If the admiral moves to another ship it becomes the flag ship.

The entire incident is very perplexing. A flag ship is one that is would normally be at the rear and at a safe distance from the battle front. Why this ship was 30 km from hostilities is mind-blowing.

I tend to believe this was a FF to rally and galvanize the Russian people to the war effort in Ukraine. It was Russia's 'Pearl Harbor'.

Whether the U.S. provided "intelligence" to help Ukraine sink the Moskva is questionable. With all the other lies coming out of the Pentagon, I don't necessarily believe it. No, there's something more to this story.

The question needing to be asked is -- 'cui bono'; who really benefited from this incident? It certainly hasn't changed one iota of Ukraine's war situation. Nothing from this incident has really helped Ukraine. Instead, we see the Russian's are slowly, but methodically taking village after village in positional battles that Ukraine has consistently been losing. The sinking of the Moskva on the other hand has helped Russia's war effort by obtaining a better than 85% approval rating from its people. This incident has completely galvanized and united the Russian people in this war effort.

The problem with this "flag ship" sinking is that it doesn't add up. The Moskva was commissioned in 1982. This means it was 40 years old. Nothing has really changed in naval history regarding the life expectancy of a naval vessel. There's no getting around a ship at the end of its life cycle. A "flag ship" simply means the admiral of the fleet resides there. If the admiral moves to another ship it becomes the flag ship.

The entire incident is very perplexing. A flag ship is one that is would normally be at the rear and at a safe distance from the battle front. Why this ship was 30 km from hostilities is mind-blowing.

I tend to believe this was a FF to rally and galvanize the Russian people to the war effort in Ukraine. It was Russia's 'Pearl Harbor'.

Whether the U.S. provided "intelligence" to help Ukraine sink the Moskva is questionable. With all the other lies coming out of the Pentagon, I don't necessarily believe it. No, there's something more to this story.

The question needing to be asked is -- 'cui bono'; who really benefited from this incident? It certainly hasn't changed one iota of Ukraine's war situation. Nothing from this incident has really helped Ukraine. Instead, we see the Russian's are slowly, but methodically taking village after village in positional battles that Ukraine has consistently been losing. The sinking of the Moskva on the other hand has helped Russia's war effort by obtaining a better than 85% approval rating from its people. This incident has completely galvanized and united the Russian people in this war effort.