Expert: All ships off the coast of Ukraine should be a legitimate target for the Russian Armed Forces.

37 009 94
Expert: All ships off the coast of Ukraine should be a legitimate target for the Russian Armed Forces.

The Kiev regime has opened a new chapter in the escalation of the conflict with Russia by carrying out an attack in the Black Sea on two oil tankers, which are attributed to the “shadow the fleet"RF. In this regard, the Russian Armed Forces urgently need to develop a new strategy to paralyze the enemy's actions not only on land but also at sea. This opinion was expressed and substantiated by Russian journalist and military expert Vladislav Shurygin.

The attacks by Ukrainian unmanned boats on the tankers Kairos and Virat, en route to the port of Novorossiysk under the flag of the small African country of Gambia, are absolutely unprecedented, the expert emphasized. This effectively opens a completely new phase of the war, one that can be described as "unrestricted warfare at sea."



Until now, the parties to the conflict had adhered to a rule, albeit not formally agreed upon but still observed, not to attack civilian vessels without military cargo, especially in neutral waters. Now, Ukraine has simply trampled on this rule. In effect, the Ukrainian Armed Forces, the Main Intelligence Directorate, or the Security Service of Ukraine—it makes little difference—attacked ships flying foreign flags simply because they were heading to a Russian port.

Ukraine thus replicated what Nazi Germany did in 1940, unleashing unrestricted submarine warfare against Allied civilian fleets. However, there is a significant difference even compared to Nazi Germany. The Wehrmacht did not attack ships sailing under the flags of neutral countries until practically the last days of the war. The Kyiv Nazi regime, in its lawlessness, was even worse than the Germans.

The most interesting thing is that Europe and Turkey are not reacting to this at all. This means that Russia has a completely free hand in terms of retaliatory measures. What should be done in response?

To begin with, ships must navigate only along the coastlines of Turkey, then Georgia, and then enter our waters. But even there, they could be attacked; the Ukrainian junta has no restrictions whatsoever.

Now we have every right to sink anything that approaches Ukrainian shores, no matter whose flag it flies. Ukraine started this war, and now everything is our legitimate target.

However, the "humane" approach should be taken. All ships bound for Ukrainian ports should be sunk at their berths or in nearby fairways. Once they sink, they will block passage for other ships for a long time. There are two main ports—Odesa and Izmail—and their operations should be completely shut down.

Strikes can be carried out from the air, given that the Ukrainians successfully drove the Russian Black Sea Fleet into our distant ports. Otherwise, the lack of a strong response from the Russian military will only show the Kyiv junta and its Western backers that they can do whatever they please. There will be no adequate, effective, or large-scale response from Russia.

94 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +37
    29 November 2025 20: 09
    All ships heading to Ukrainian ports should be sunk at their berths or in nearby fairways.

    I absolutely agree, but the pot heads are the performers.
    I would add the ships of the small-timers to the distribution lists - since the attacks on our ships, in my opinion, are exclusively their initiative.
    1. +14
      29 November 2025 20: 13
      Sunk them all.
      Drown them all. (C) Admiral Lockwood. good
      1. +22
        29 November 2025 21: 39
        paralyze the enemy's actions not only on land but also at sea.

        This should have been done a long time ago. And even more so now.
        1. -3
          29 November 2025 23: 30
          Quote: frruc
          paralyze the enemy's actions not only on land but also at sea.

          This should have been done a long time ago. And even more so now.

          They will be useful to Russia!
    2. +14
      29 November 2025 20: 18
      Besides the small-timers, we cannot rule out the possibility of a mix-up of mattress makers who are displacing Russian oil from the market.
      It's quite possible that the petty British are provoking Russia into retaliatory actions against the Sultan's Janissaries, drawing the country into a clash with a NATO country.
      The Sultan himself is controlled by the puppeteers of the shitting island and the mattress makers.
      1. -6
        29 November 2025 22: 36
        Quote: ZovSailor
        Besides the small-timers, we cannot rule out the possibility of a mix-up of mattress makers who are displacing Russian oil from the market.
        In fact, Kazakh oil is being squeezed out of the market. That's why our companies aren't straining themselves so much.
        1. +5
          30 November 2025 00: 12
          topol717
          Today, 22: 36
          In fact, Kazakh oil is being squeezed out of the market. That's why our companies aren't straining themselves so much.

          hi If we consider the sanctions against Russia's Lukoil and Rosneft, and the latter's attempt to sell assets in Europe at market prices to the international energy group Gunvor, the deal was immediately banned by the mattress makers. So that their own penguin company could buy up the assets at a bargain price and then dictate to Europe its prices for the sale of petroleum products by the finished, bought-out enterprises, using Russian oil!
          This is the whole trick of the red-haired fixer from Washington and lover of beautiful deals.
          Even in the international CPC (Caspian Pipeline Consortium, terminals: Novorossiysk - Yuzhnaya Ozereyevka) there are shares of Russian, Kazakh, American and small British components.
    3. +29
      29 November 2025 20: 49
      I don't care who does it...sink EVERYTHING... I would really sink it in the ports, so that they drown at the berths, so that the port infrastructure is paralyzed.
      1. +16
        29 November 2025 21: 28
        Quote: Ovsigovets
        I don't care who does it...sink EVERYTHING... I would really sink it in the ports, so that they drown at the berths, so that the port infrastructure is paralyzed.

        Hello, no one will listen to my opinion, but any vessel that finds itself in the territorial waters of the former Ukraine, no matter what flag it is under, must be sunk.
        1. +2
          29 November 2025 23: 32
          Quote: Ivan Kuzmich
          Quote: Ovsigovets
          I don't care who does it...sink EVERYTHING... I would really sink it in the ports, so that they drown at the berths, so that the port infrastructure is paralyzed.

          Hello, no one will listen to my opinion, but any vessel that finds itself in the territorial waters of the former Ukraine, no matter what flag it is under, must be sunk.

          Dry cargo ships. That's for sure!! The ports of Odessa have been bombed. The screams are coming from the hoooools.
        2. 0
          30 November 2025 07: 32
          They'll quickly change their tune—the ships will head to Romanian ports. From there, cargo will be transported across the Danube on small barges.
      2. +1
        1 December 2025 15: 02
        I don't care who does it...sink EVERYTHING... I would really sink it in the ports, so that they drown at the berths, so that the port infrastructure is paralyzed.

        But the Kremlin ones will still be waiting on the branch like that bibizyana while the enemy's corpse floats down the river.
        Meanwhile, the English Channel is still unmined, the Norwegian gas pipelines are running smoothly, and the cables and fiber optics on the seabed are all intact. We need to inflict maximum damage on the enemy. Theater m l a.
        Apparently, the Euroreich is allowed to gradually, without strain, accelerate the economy to pre-war readiness.
    4. 0
      30 November 2025 12: 41
      Quote: Andrey K
      All ships heading to Ukrainian ports should be sunk at their berths or in nearby fairways.

      I absolutely agree, but the pot heads are the performers.
      I would add the ships of the small-timers to the distribution lists - since the attacks on our ships, in my opinion, are exclusively their initiative.

      Briefly about our relations with the British, just the facts: Ochakov, in its heyday, had a population of 16. Currently, there are British bases and training centers there. Russia has been bombing Ochakov for four years. In response, the British haven't diminished, and they're still demanding that we leave the Kinburn Spit; they're thinking of expanding...
    5. -1
      30 November 2025 14: 54
      And the Banderites don't listen to anyone anymore. The Pindos used to forbid them from attacking tankers because they were afraid of rising gasoline prices, and even more so now—the Senate elections are in 2026.
  2. +5
    29 November 2025 20: 15
    Couldn't Varshavyanka mine the fairway around their ports and simultaneously report it to the media? Whoever wants to do it will do it themselves.
    1. +2
      30 November 2025 01: 04
      Have you heard much about submarine operations in this war?
      1. +6
        30 November 2025 01: 58
        We've heard little about combat operations involving surface ships, more like them repelling attacks with varying success. As for actually doing anything—our numerous admirals aren't trained in that, haven't been through it, and haven't been asked to do it.
    2. -1
      30 November 2025 05: 09
      And there are no "Varshavyankas" there... There was one, and that was damaged.
    3. +5
      30 November 2025 06: 57
      No, it's impossible. Our admirals are, unfortunately, incapable of taking action. And there's no political will either.
    4. 0
      30 November 2025 07: 35
      Quote from Huggie
      Couldn't Varshavyanka mine the fairway around their ports and simultaneously report it to the media? Whoever wants to do it will do it themselves.

      There are a lot of mines there even without the Varshavyankas, and the water there is too shallow for the Varshavyankas.
  3. +15
    29 November 2025 20: 18
    Russia doesn't know how to act preemptively, so how about at least in retaliation?
    1. +9
      30 November 2025 01: 14
      Quote: Vertuhai 2003
      Russia doesn't know how to act preemptively, so how about at least in retaliation?

      Russia launched a preemptive military operation, albeit only eight years after the mass murder of pro-Russian Ukrainian citizens. Before that, we "avenged" Georgia for the murder of our peacekeepers in Abkhazia. As a result of this "revenge," Saakashvili's tie was damaged. It's best not to censor later examples at all.
  4. +17
    29 November 2025 20: 27
    I wonder what official Russian government representatives will say about this? The expert expresses valid thoughts, but experts have expressed sound ideas before, only to have the Russian government react differently, or, more accurately, almost indifferently.
    1. -5
      29 November 2025 20: 50
      The Russian government bombed (fired missiles at) ports along with ships... it's just that this will most likely become systemic from now on
    2. +3
      29 November 2025 21: 00
      Most likely, they'll remain silent. And they'll let it slide. They'll launch another routine strike (and thank goodness for that!) and declare it retaliation. Of course, I'd like it to be such a strike that it would plunge the entire territory of the Ukrainian Reich into a long-lasting darkness. Of course, I'd like to see the organizers and instigators of these attacks eliminated. That's demonstrably harsh. I'd like...
      1. LMN
        -6
        29 November 2025 21: 30
        Quote: Volunteer Marek
        Most likely, they'll remain silent. And they'll let it slide. They'll deal another routine blow (and thank goodness for that!) and declare it retaliation.


        laughing You don't live in Ukraine, do you?)
        1. 0
          30 November 2025 23: 09
          I'm in Russia, which, by the way, owns Crimea, Dombas, Kherson, and so on. Ukraine is an integral part of Russia, which, through the criminal intent of traitors in power, has temporarily turned into Anti-Russia. And where are you, sir? Do you love your homeland from afar? Think again before asking provocative questions.
    3. LMN
      -4
      29 November 2025 21: 38
      Quote: opuonmed
      I wonder what official Russian government representatives will say about this? The expert expresses valid thoughts, but experts have expressed sound ideas before, only to have the Russian government react differently, or, more accurately, almost indifferently.

      What will they say!?
      What can they say?
      Surrender...VVP and the entire government, straight to prison.
      Generals from the Military District to the government!
      Some of them are in the Armed Forces! It is obvious that with such people, the issue of the SVO will be resolved in months.
    4. +2
      30 November 2025 00: 22
      Quote: opuonmed
      I wonder what the official representatives of the Russian Federation authorities will say about this?

      They will express concern or, at best, very deep concern. laughing
  5. +17
    29 November 2025 20: 44
    Judging by the Kremlin's deathly silence, the British can continue sinking ships in both the Black Sea and other seas. The main thing is not to disrupt the peace process. That's the most important thing.
    1. +9
      29 November 2025 20: 51
      The Kremlin's silence is incredibly surprising. Oh well. They'll keep on sinking everything.
      1. -3
        30 November 2025 07: 39
        Quote from Ella34
        The Kremlin's silence is incredibly surprising. Oh well. They'll keep on sinking everything.

        Well, the ships are flying the Gambian flag. Maybe Ukraine has some kind of friction with Gambia. And it seems Russia doesn't have a mutual assistance treaty with Gambia.
        1. +2
          30 November 2025 08: 14
          Quote: VSO-396
          Well, the ships are Gambian-flagged. Maybe Ukraine has some kind of friction with Gambia.

          The flag can be anything. The main thing is who owns it. And the ships belong to Russia. That's what they say. And if that's true, then they're our ships.
          1. 0
            1 December 2025 03: 30
            Quote: Stas157
            Quote: VSO-396
            Well, the ships are Gambian-flagged. Maybe Ukraine has some kind of friction with Gambia.

            The flag can be anything. The main thing is who owns it. And the ships belong to Russia. That's what they say. And if that's true, then they're our ships.

            A vessel's legal identity is its flag, and its owner can be anyone registered in the flag country and paying taxes there. The flag country, therefore, is obligated to protect the vessel.
            1. 0
              1 December 2025 10: 58
              Quote: VSO-396
              The flag country must therefore protect this vessel.

              Do you think Gambia should protect our ships?
              In my opinion, Gambia doesn't give a damn about the Banderites drowning in the Black Sea, even under the Gambian flag.
        2. 0
          30 November 2025 12: 45
          Quote: VSO-396
          Well, the ships are flagged in Gambia. Maybe Ukraine has some kind of friction with Gambia.

          If you drive a Renault, it doesn't mean you're French.
    2. -5
      29 November 2025 21: 05
      Aaaaaaah......so that's how it works, it turns out....if you need to say something, then everything will work)))))) I read comments from such "whiners" all the time....but in fact, they've shut down gas production, almost shut down the electric power industry, and they're still breaking a lot of other things - it's a question of systemicity and timing.....the courts were also drowned in hloports, and now they'll most likely start doing it systematically.....and they even did it silently all the time.....but the funniest thing is that those who do the work, maybe slowly and not quickly, are blamed by those who sit with their ass in the deep rear.....that's probably the funniest
      1. -4
        29 November 2025 22: 12
        But in fact, gas production has been shut down, electric power has been almost shut down, and they are still breaking a lot of other things.
        I hope that now they are definitely hitting the right places!
        Well, in the first years, they say, that's how it was.
        1. -1
          29 November 2025 22: 31
          Some people write clever things on Telegram, for example, while others issue orders at the local level to limit electricity supply, for example. It's unclear what to believe... whether it's speculation or facts.
        2. 0
          29 November 2025 23: 33
          I watch them too. It's funny)))
  6. -10
    29 November 2025 20: 45
    Military expert... What is his rank, how many years did he serve in the army?
    He graduated from the Lviv Political School and was promoted to captain in the reserve. He gives advice like an Army General.
    Experts
    1. +4
      29 November 2025 21: 15
      As one art critic replied to an artist who was indignant that the art critic had not painted a single picture, but dared to discuss his paintings: "I have not laid a single egg, but I know the taste of scrambled eggs better than any chicken."
      1. +2
        29 November 2025 22: 34
        This doesn't work that way in many respects)))))) He may know better about the taste of scrambled eggs, but he couldn't figure out that the issue of childbearing is at stake)))) Such uneducated and stupid experts are a common occurrence
    2. +6
      29 November 2025 22: 10
      Well, the person graduated from a military-political school in his specialty "military-political Journalism, served in the army for nine years and was in hot spots. He certainly knows more about the current military-political situation than most.
    3. +2
      29 November 2025 22: 35
      Shoigu is an army general, so what?
      1. +3
        29 November 2025 22: 53
        Well, of course, he managed the ministries brilliantly for many years, received numerous awards, and was promoted. What a man! Put him in bronze, in granite, in marble! In textbooks! ̶N̶a̶ ̶M̶a̶r̶s̶!̶ Ugh, you're getting carried away...
  7. +10
    29 November 2025 20: 45
    An honest position. But I wouldn't mirror it. Our naval aviation and submarines simply need to mine everything there. The dancers don't have minesweepers. As soon as the first vessel hits a mine, traffic will grind to a halt. This absolutely must be done!!! But I'm afraid the Kremlin will back off again.
    1. +1
      29 November 2025 21: 36
      In addition, we need to block ports and the coast from unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) launches. Our navy, unlike our ground forces, isn't yet ready to effectively counter UAVs, drones, or anti-ship missiles. But this is precisely the task we need to set and work toward. This is still an oversight. I hope Removich will address it and the problem will be solved. Without this, our navy will be destroyed by the enemy in any skirmish.
      1. +4
        29 November 2025 22: 07
        The Russian Navy is never ready for anything, but something has to be done. Otherwise, the Ukrainian Navy, which doesn't even exist, will overwhelm everything.
    2. -1
      30 November 2025 05: 12
      But there are no more submarines there, and laying mines from the air is unsafe due to the fact that the Ukrainian Reich's air defense still exists.
  8. +5
    29 November 2025 20: 48
    We need to attack ships not off the coast of Ukraine, but off the coast of Britain....
    1. 0
      29 November 2025 22: 53
      We need to attack ships not off the coast of Ukraine, but off the coast of Britain....

      Well... well... Do we want a war with NATO or what?
      1. +3
        30 November 2025 08: 47
        Of course, that's impossible; half of London could offend them. And the Brits, in our Civil War, are up to their ears in personnel, weapons, and other nasty tricks. They're not really the main party in the conflict. In Russia, you can take down a dozen "strategists," name the person who ordered it, and wag your finger at them, but you can't smash anything from the little Brits. What if there's a war with NATO? And who's fighting now?
  9. +12
    29 November 2025 20: 51
    To "Sunk them all" (drown them all), you need steel Fabergé. It's doubtful that the Guidelines even have any. This is confirmed by daily practice. When did calls for strikes on the 404 power grid begin, and how many have been heard on the sidelines of the forum? For how many years? So, the current call is a voice crying in the wilderness, I'm sure. Even the Kazakhs, by their actions, confirm that they don't rely on us. IMHO
  10. 0
    29 November 2025 20: 54
    Expert: All ships off the coast of Ukraine should be a legitimate target for the Russian Armed Forces.


    Expert, where have you been for the last four years, my dear? So, are we only going to use tactical nuclear weapons against Ukraine if they use them against us?
    1. +1
      29 November 2025 21: 22
      Have you reviewed all of Shurygin's statements over the past four years? And are you convinced that he has never previously called for harsh action against the enemy?
    2. 0
      30 November 2025 05: 13
      My dear, are you so confident in the omnipotent power of the TNW?
  11. +6
    29 November 2025 21: 01
    All ships off the coast of Ukraine should become a legitimate target for the Russian Armed Forces.

    If they didn't start doing so at the beginning of the Second World War, then the likelihood of them doing so now is zero. I don't understand our leadership's strategy at all. What they're thinking, what they're thinking with... I don't understand.
  12. -4
    29 November 2025 22: 02
    Attacking third-party vessels is unwise. Firstly, it's clearly a provocation, designed to elicit a response from Russia, which will lead to accusations and everything being done to disrupt the negotiations. Secondly, the scum themselves won't immediately feel the impact of an attack on their ships; the cargo will travel by land. We need to respond directly to the scum, so that karma catches up with them tomorrow. Targeting their energy is more effective.
    1. +3
      30 November 2025 13: 59
      Quote: navigator777
      accusations will rain down

      So what? We're constantly being accused, but the dog barks, and the caravan moves on.
      Everything is being done to disrupt the negotiations.
      Do we really need these negotiations? I think it's already clear to everyone on our side: there's no one to negotiate with and nothing to negotiate about. Negotiations for the sake of negotiations, to avoid further accusations, right? Who cares about all these accusations; we need to see this through to the end, and not worry about what our "partners" think.
      the cargo will go by land
      How do they get from the ports? Rail logistics need to be used as much as possible, as road transport isn't ideal for transporting much, and even then, there are potential bottlenecks (bridges, tunnels, fuel depots, etc.) that complicate all types of deliveries.
      1. +2
        30 November 2025 14: 06
        There's absolutely no need to sink third-party tankers. The Nazis, the Japanese, pirates, and now the Ukrainians did that. They need to be held accountable. You're right. Railways and port infrastructure can and should be destroyed. The point is, we need to respond to these scumbags here and now, and sinking a few foreign ships won't hurt them. You don't need negotiations, of course, but those in the trenches do, especially since we're talking about forcing these scumbags to surrender Donbas without a fight, or you need Slavyansk and Kramatorsk razed to the ground and thousands of our men killed.
  13. SIT
    +4
    29 November 2025 22: 11
    The Ukrainian Armed Forces' primary supply routes are via Odesa. If they wanted to end the war as quickly as possible, the port of Odesa would have long ago ceased to be a place for boating. This means that this isn't part of the infamous plan, and the war must continue as long as possible. This war has no other beneficiaries besides the United States, and no one will touch Odesa without orders from the Washington regional committee.
  14. +1
    29 November 2025 22: 21
    Sink everything that moves toward Ukrainian ports. With aircraft, drones, missiles—everything.
  15. SSR
    0
    29 November 2025 22: 25
    In this regard, the Russian Armed Forces urgently need to develop a new strategy to paralyze the enemy's actions not only on land but also at sea.

    Maybe a little Poseidon and that's it?
    It really depends where.
  16. +1
    29 November 2025 22: 35
    Everything hinges on prolonging the war. And recently, Lukashenko warned the "illegitimate" narco-fuhrer that prolonging the fighting would most likely lead to Ukraine losing its entire Black Sea coastline, along with its access to the sea. And that's precisely the solution to the problem.
    1. +2
      29 November 2025 22: 58
      Why did Lukashenko warn him? Doesn't Lukashenko want us to own the Black Sea coast? It's understandable when the Americans and other Europeans do this, but why would our so-called "ally" prevent us from getting our lands back?
  17. +6
    29 November 2025 22: 56
    There's a lot of wishful thinking in this article, a lot in the comments... But in the end, nothing will happen. As it was, so it will be.
  18. +2
    29 November 2025 23: 15
    I'm afraid I'll incur the wrath of the community for my version. But let's look at the facts. Just recently, we set fire to a Turkish gas tanker on the Danube with geraniums while it was unloading. Even the Romanians declared an evacuation on their side of the river due to the threat of an explosion. Do you think the Turks forgave that? They most likely leaked information about the tankers to the forelocks. The rest is a matter of technique. Whether we like it or not, it turns out we're in trouble (or rather, in trouble) for the gas tanker.
    1. +2
      29 November 2025 23: 25
      I'd like to add one more thought. The tankers attacked were empty. Ukraine couldn't care less whether they were empty or full. But the Turks do. The oil spill would have affected their beaches, and they'd have had to deal with the cleanup afterwards.
  19. +2
    29 November 2025 23: 33
    But what about a happy old age in the bourgeoisie and children and grandchildren at Eton, Cambridge, and the Sorbonne? Easy for you to say.
  20. 0
    29 November 2025 23: 52
    War is war, everything goes according to plan. The cost of tankers and the dangers of operating them will return to the fallow land tenfold. And the fleet isn't ready yet; the barbecue hasn't been invented.
  21. +4
    30 November 2025 00: 09
    We need to go to Transnistria, but even the port of Odessa is still intact, not to mention the Danube. Paradoxes of their own.
  22. +2
    30 November 2025 00: 09
    Where is this all heading?
    Now the final word, the decision is up to... the "giraffe", he's big, he knows better.
  23. +1
    30 November 2025 01: 08
    Quote from: topol717
    Actually, Kazakh oil is being squeezed out of the market. That's why our companies aren't straining themselves so much.

    You are downvoted. 5 points.
    Everyone's fighting. We're playing picks. Why is there anything floating in the Black Sea at all? What for? Is Odessa a Russian city? Why do we always respond? Why not preemptively?
    What else do we need to do to make us say "enough"? Or do we need to tell a joke and a pencil about a talking hedgehog?
    1. +2
      30 November 2025 01: 13
      Quote: alexputnik17
      Why not preventatively?

      Well, “we are avengers, not preventers.” laughing hi
  24. +1
    30 November 2025 01: 21
    Quote: guest
    Well, “we are avengers, not preventers.”

    Ah... Well, I forgot. If so. First, we need to be provoked 500 times. And then we load with a pull. Yes. That's it.
    1. +3
      30 November 2025 04: 07
      We're not charging. We're issuing another 498th Chinese warning. Well, that's how it looks from our side...
  25. 0
    30 November 2025 02: 13
    There will be no adequate, effective and large-scale response from Russia.

    Why use aircraft? There are UAVs, or let the submariners train and conduct live launches of old torpedoes against ports with small ships!
  26. +3
    30 November 2025 03: 26
    The threat of using force is only considered a threat when you demonstrate it, not when you promise to demonstrate it.
  27. 0
    30 November 2025 04: 54
    This "naval commander" led the Wehrmacht to unleash a submarine war against civilian ships, and the Kriegsmarine attacked the Red Army in the steppes of Ukraine.
  28. +4
    30 November 2025 05: 17
    The Wehrmacht had no way of attacking any ships at sea. This was because the Wehrmacht was a land force. The German Kriegsmarine was in charge of naval warfare.
    1. 0
      30 November 2025 13: 38
      good Subtlely spotted! hi drinks ............................................
  29. +1
    30 November 2025 07: 18
    The Bayraktars probably took part in the attack under Erdik's laughter... It will finally force our fleet not to hide, but to fight.
    1. 0
      30 November 2025 13: 40
      Quote: VovaVVS
      The Bayraktars probably took part in the attack under Erdik's laughter... It will finally force our fleet not to hide, but to fight.

      The Navy needs a new concept, but if the missile forces and the Aerospace Forces can untangle their hands and wings, they will resolve many issues in a short time.
  30. 0
    30 November 2025 08: 36
    I'd like to ask the author: is Novorossiysk a distant port? Isn't there a rule when conducting combat operations to disperse ships when under attack?
  31. 0
    30 November 2025 09: 54
    Soon, the valuable assets of those affiliated with Britain will explode.
    An exchange of pleasantries - a prick on the finger for a flick on the nose
  32. +1
    30 November 2025 13: 13
    I'm certainly in favor of imposing a complete blockade of the 404. But I understand that it's impossible. For a multitude of reasons. We're not even officially at war! And it's impossible to find a legal basis for it. And we don't have the strength to do it. The Black Sea Fleet should be reorganized into a flotilla. And the main reason is the lack of testicles.
  33. +3
    30 November 2025 13: 37
    To the expert: there shouldn't have been any ships off the coast of the outskirts since the loss of the flagship Moskva, just like there shouldn't have been any docks or British troops in Ochakov. The latter, by the way, are stuck there, like a stopgap on the way to Mykolaiv, the South Ukrainian Nuclear Power Plant, and Odesa. And yet we keep stroking this backwater as if it were a warm, fuzzy place... am
  34. -1
    30 November 2025 14: 09
    As if anyone's paying attention to our "harsh reaction"! They're spitting and rubbing us in the face! We're stuck with our double or triple game, and no one's paying any attention to us anymore! They could at least set up shoe change stations at the border. And all because we're still dreaming of Courchevel, and God forbid we harm our Aligarh.
  35. kig
    0
    30 November 2025 14: 47
    The expert apparently doesn't read newspapers, doesn't watch television, and doesn't know what the internet is. On July 20, 2023, the Russian Ministry of Defense declared all vessels heading to Ukrainian ports potential military targets.
  36. 0
    30 November 2025 14: 53
    All ships heading to Ukrainian ports should be sunk at their berths or in nearby fairways.
    Why be so blunt? We now have our own back-end systems, too. And then we can start all sorts of debates.
  37. 0
    30 November 2025 15: 18
    Expert: All ships off the coast of Ukraine should be a legitimate target for the Russian Armed Forces.

    The reason for this was given long ago: explosions in the Mediterranean Sea on our ships or ships transporting goods for us...
    but there was a stern silence...
  38. amr
    0
    30 November 2025 21: 33
    A good argument for regrouping and going to Odessa, we need to cut off the Ukrainian people from the sea!
  39. 0
    1 December 2025 07: 38
    Expert: All ships off the coast of Ukraine should be a legitimate target for the Russian Armed Forces.

    Since February 2022, I've been hearing this phrase: "They must become a legitimate target for the Russian Armed Forces." It's all futile, because the country's military-political leadership lacks any will. Or, even more simply, the current Russian state is incapable of winning wars; it was created for only one purpose: profit for its founders.