"Russia Reportedly Wants its Cold War Aircraft Carrier Back from China -
Even though there is no overt ideological alignment, Beijing and Moscow currently enjoy the best relations since the late 1950s. While China and Russia have no formal alliance, the two countries do have an informal agreement to coordinate diplomatic and economic movies."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russia-wants-to-buy-back-its-old-aircraft-carrier-from-china/ar-AA168DHA
ltlee1, <news:809bb9c9-aea3-4bc4...@googlegroups.com>
"Russia Reportedly Wants its Cold War Aircraft Carrier Back from China - Even though there is no overt ideological alignment, Beijing and Moscow currently enjoy the best relations since the late 1950s. While China and Russia have no formal alliance, the two countries do have an informal agreement to coordinate diplomatic and economic movies."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russia-wants-to-buy-back-its-old-aircraft-carrier-from-china/ar-AA168DHA| "Given the current situation, I propose to buy the ship from China,
| give it the name of the founder of the Liberal Democratic Party
| Vladimir Zhirinovsky and make it the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet,"
| Karginov, a member of the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR),
| told .."
The Liberal Democratic Party (LDPR) in Russia is a quasi-opposition semi-clownish party which primary social-political function is to curb
and spoil real - if any - radical nationalism: they pick some impulses
and slogans that might fit to radical nationalist sentiment and turn
it into hot air so that it ends with essentially nothing.
It's a part of the Kremlin's "counter-extremist" social engineering.
As one may notice, the folks seek for something bold that can be named
after Zhirinovsky, their former party leader (earlier they also sought
to name one of the Aeroflot's airplanes in honor of Zhirinovsky).
In turn, this "old aircraft carrier" theme started back autumn 2021.
Beijing Today newspaper <https://is.gd/g3SzEP> wrote about rumors that
China allegedly seeks to sell its old ships (including the old Soviet-
design aircraft carrier that China once bought from the Ukriane) to
Russia or India. I could not find the Beijing Today's article online,
but few Russian outlets discussed these rumors referring to the Beijing Today's article (<https://is.gd/QmtM0t>, <https://clck.ru/33FM3V>).
Then there were also speculations in the American media on "the realm
of possibility the Russian Navy will operate decades in the future with Chinese-made aircraft carriers" <https://clck.ru/33FMCg>.
What this LDPR (Liberal Democratic Party) member has said looks like an
echo from those rumors, and so far his claim should be seen mainly as a
PR action intended to produce a hot air around the LDPR once again.
Given that certain cooperation between Russia and China really exists,
it's not impossible that there'd be something more behind these noises
and rumors. However, it'd be better to rely on some more reliable news
from more official sources. So far there were no such news on the topic,
as far as I know.
On Thursday, January 12, 2023 at 8:08:55 AM UTC, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
In turn, this "old aircraft carrier" theme started back autumn 2021.
Beijing Today newspaper <https://is.gd/g3SzEP> wrote about rumors that
China allegedly seeks to sell its old ships (including the old Soviet-
design aircraft carrier that China once bought from the Ukriane) to
Russia or India. I could not find the Beijing Today's article online,
but few Russian outlets discussed these rumors referring to the Beijing
Today's article (<https://is.gd/QmtM0t>, <https://clck.ru/33FM3V>).
Looks like Russia media was quoting British and Beijing Today reporting which, in turn, based on Chinese netters discussion. https://news.sina.com.cn/c/2021-12-04/doc-ikyakumx1916701.shtml
ltlee1, <news:40939da4-2595-40a9...@googlegroups.com>
On Thursday, January 12, 2023 at 8:08:55 AM UTC, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
In turn, this "old aircraft carrier" theme started back autumn 2021.
Beijing Today newspaper <https://is.gd/g3SzEP> wrote about rumors that
China allegedly seeks to sell its old ships (including the old Soviet-
design aircraft carrier that China once bought from the Ukriane) to
Russia or India. I could not find the Beijing Today's article online,
but few Russian outlets discussed these rumors referring to the Beijing
Today's article (<https://is.gd/QmtM0t>, <https://clck.ru/33FM3V>).
Looks like Russia media was quoting British and Beijing Today reporting which, in turn, based on Chinese netters discussion. https://news.sina.com.cn/c/2021-12-04/doc-ikyakumx1916701.shtmlVery good research!
| .. After verification, the Chinese government has never stated that
| it will resell the "Liaoning" to Russia or India .. After verification,
| the Beijingtoday website registered by Kunming Lewang Digital
| Technology Co., Ltd. has a "Military" column. On November 29, an
| article titled "Once the Liaoning is decommissioned, is it feasible to
| sell it back to Russia?" .. Further searches found that this article
| was published on the "Today's Toutiao" platform on November 28, and it
| was originally created by the military self-media "Baiyang Observation
| Room" .. This article cannot be called a press release. It can only be
| regarded as the opinion of ordinary netizens, and it cannot be used as
| a source of news reports ..
Those who look through the China's internet periodically, know well that there's a lot of Chinese bloggers (what's called "self-media" in Chinese style) who often speculate even on "sensitive" topics related to politics
and military, and their individual opinions may deviate from the China's official settings, and sometimes their opinions may be even crazy.
Do the editors of Gazeta.ru know this?
Maybe no, then it's a blatant unprofessionalism.
Maybe yes, then it's a deliberate spewing of misinformation.
In the both cases, it harms the Gazeta.ru's reputation.
Gazeta.ru has been more than once seen spreading dubious reporting with regard to China (I once already noticed it <https://tinyurl.com/kayf7vah>, "2021-02-12 Russian "liberal opposition" outlet says ...", and that case looked definitely as an intentional spreading of confusing stuff related
to China).
As to the mentioned LDPR member, as an MP, he's aside from the executive branch. What exactly he did is that he's sent to some government agency
his proposal "to buy the ship from China" likely keeping in mind the idea (which he likely picked up from the misleading Gazeta.ru/Aif's articles)
that China seeks to sell it. If so, then all this is nothingburger.
"Russia Reportedly Wants its Cold War Aircraft Carrier Back from China - Even though there is no overt ideological alignment, Beijing and Moscow currently enjoy the best relations since the late 1950s. While China and Russia have no formal alliance, the two countries do have an informal agreement to coordinate
diplomatic and economic movies."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russia-wants-to-buy-back-its-old-aircraft-carrier-from-china/ar-AA168DHA
Why not?
If Russia promises to use it for Self Defense purpose only, China could certainly sell it to Russia. In reality, China should have no reason not to help Russia for its self-defense.
On Thursday, January 12, 2023 at 9:44:37 PM UTC, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
As to the mentioned LDPR member, as an MP, he's aside from the executive
branch. What exactly he did is that he's sent to some government agency
his proposal "to buy the ship from China" likely keeping in mind the idea
(which he likely picked up from the misleading Gazeta.ru/Aif's articles)
that China seeks to sell it. If so, then all this is nothingburger.
When is a nothingburger a nothingburger?
Feel free to speculate on whether the member of the Liberal Democratic
Party of Russia was misled by Gazeta.Ru. And what did he want to accomplish by raising the issue. He is after all speaking as a Russian insider on Russian issue. Whether Russia could buy the originally made in Russia aircraft carrier or not does not per se make the issue a nothingburger from Russian point of view.
"Russia Reportedly Wants its Cold War Aircraft Carrier Back from China
- Even though there is no overt ideological alignment, Beijing and
Moscow currently enjoy the best relations since the late 1950s. While
China and Russia have no formal alliance, the two countries do have an informal agreement to coordinate diplomatic and economic movies."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russia-wants-to-buy-back-its-old-aircraft-carrier-from-china/ar-AA168DHA
Why not?
If Russia promises to use it for Self Defense purpose only, China
could certainly sell it to Russia. In reality, China should have no
reason not to help Russia for its self-defense
On 12 Jan 2023 at 00:23:18 CET, "ltlee1" wrote:
"Russia Reportedly Wants its Cold War Aircraft Carrier Back from China - Even
though there is no overt ideological alignment, Beijing and Moscow currently
enjoy the best relations since the late 1950s. While China and Russia have no
formal alliance, the two countries do have an informal agreement to coordinate
diplomatic and economic movies."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russia-wants-to-buy-back-its-old-aircraft-carrier-from-china/ar-AA168DHA
Why not?Wait, if China wants to sell its Air carrier, which means China will have only
If Russia promises to use it for Self Defense purpose only, China could certainly sell it to Russia. In reality, China should have no reason not to help Russia for its self-defense.
one left air carrier in its arsenal that combat ready / active
--
-alien-
~ Work like you don't need the money. ~
~ Love like you've never been hurt. ~
~ Dance like nobody is looking. ~
ltlee1 wrote:
"Russia Reportedly Wants its Cold War Aircraft Carrier Back from China
- Even though there is no overt ideological alignment, Beijing and
Moscow currently enjoy the best relations since the late 1950s. While
China and Russia have no formal alliance, the two countries do have an informal agreement to coordinate diplomatic and economic movies."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russia-wants-to-buy-back-its-old-aircraft-carrier-from-china/ar-AA168DHA
Why not?Does USA use (currently) aircraft carriers for "self defense only"?
If Russia promises to use it for Self Defense purpose only, China
could certainly sell it to Russia. In reality, China should have no
reason not to help Russia for its self-defense
Military might projection *far away* seems fit better.
--
A. Filip : Big (Tech) Brother is watching you.
| What passes for optimism is most often the effect of an
| intellectual error. (Raymond Aron, "The Opium of the Intellectuals")
"Russia Reportedly Wants its Cold War Aircraft Carrier Back from China - Even though there is no overt ideological alignment, Beijing and Moscow currently enjoy the best relations since the late 1950s. While China and Russia have no formal alliance,the two countries do have an informal agreement to coordinate diplomatic and economic movies."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russia-wants-to-buy-back-its-old-aircraft-carrier-from-china/ar-AA168DHA
Why not?
If Russia promises to use it for Self Defense purpose only, China could certainly sell it to Russia. In reality, China should have no reason not to
help Russia for its self-defense.
On Thursday, January 12, 2023 at 7:23:19 AM UTC+8, ltlee1 wrote:the two countries do have an informal agreement to coordinate diplomatic and economic movies."
"Russia Reportedly Wants its Cold War Aircraft Carrier Back from China - Even though there is no overt ideological alignment, Beijing and Moscow currently enjoy the best relations since the late 1950s. While China and Russia have no formal alliance,
delay longer or even ended.https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russia-wants-to-buy-back-its-old-aircraft-carrier-from-china/ar-AA168DHA
Why not?This is interesting, the topic is worth consideration. If Russia wants to buy back its carrier now, the answer is, Yes.
If Russia promises to use it for Self Defense purpose only, China could certainly sell it to Russia. In reality, China should have no reason not to
help Russia for its self-defense.
For sure, there is a need for it. For both side, there is a reason for it, too.
If not careful, to sell and purchase could take some years of discussions between them. If takes too long, a lot can happen. A change of mind can happen. The need may not be there anymore. There may be a change of plan, too. The sale and purchase may
Buy back or lease option is worth a consideration. Lease is a faster option than purchase. Just pay the rental lease of the carrier and it can send over to Russia. Rental payment can be paid by way of sales of oil and natural gas or sales of lands too.their carrier and let China build for them. China can also jointly with China, as it can shorten the long house in
Another option is to have China built new carrier for Russia. China can, on average, build a new carrier in 3 years and commissioning in another 1 year. Another option is for Russia and China to jointly build a new carrier instead. Russia can design
ltlee1, <news:fe391b84-da97-45b2...@googlegroups.com>
On Thursday, January 12, 2023 at 9:44:37 PM UTC, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
As to the mentioned LDPR member, as an MP, he's aside from the executive >> branch. What exactly he did is that he's sent to some government agency
his proposal "to buy the ship from China" likely keeping in mind the idea >> (which he likely picked up from the misleading Gazeta.ru/Aif's articles) >> that China seeks to sell it. If so, then all this is nothingburger.
When is a nothingburger a nothingburger?
Feel free to speculate on whether the member of the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia was misled by Gazeta.Ru. And what did he want to accomplish by raising the issue. He is after all speaking as a Russian insider on Russian issue. Whether Russia could buy the originally made in Russia aircraft carrier or not does not per se make the issue a nothingburger from Russian point of view.Pure non-speculative fact is that a freaky MP has filed his
individual proposal to one of the MFA's departments.
Presenting it like "Russia wants etc" is a misinterpretation.
So the statement in the headline of the MSN's article you've
posted here is misleading.
In Russia-related infospace it's not being discussed. There
were initial news reports in January 6 about the proposal.
After that, there were no comments from officials as well as
no comments in the media, and in the Russian social networks
I saw very few negative remarks sort of "look, what a fool".
That is what the case looks like without speculations.
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 11:15:14 AM UTC, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
Pure non-speculative fact is that a freaky MP has filed his
individual proposal to one of the MFA's departments.
Presenting it like "Russia wants etc" is a misinterpretation.
So the statement in the headline of the MSN's article you've
posted here is misleading.
freaky MP?
According to whom and what criteria?
In Russia-related infospace it's not being discussed. There
were initial news reports in January 6 about the proposal.
After that, there were no comments from officials as well as
no comments in the media, and in the Russian social networks
I saw very few negative remarks sort of "look, what a fool".
So?
For comparison, was Nixon a freaky politician for befriending
China? Was not being wildly discussed made the issue foolish
or irrelevant?
If Kissinger feigning illness while visiting Pakistan and then
got on a plane to China freaky?
That is what the case looks like without speculations.
ltlee1, <news:c255d56c-7b9a-4f11...@googlegroups.com>
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 11:15:14 AM UTC, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
Pure non-speculative fact is that a freaky MP has filed his
individual proposal to one of the MFA's departments.
Presenting it like "Russia wants etc" is a misinterpretation.
So the statement in the headline of the MSN's article you've
posted here is misleading.
freaky MP?According to the fact that his proposal is silly.
According to whom and what criteria?
Also, he was known for some unrealistic proposals before.
As well as the LDPR is known as "hot air" party.
In Russia-related infospace it's not being discussed. There
were initial news reports in January 6 about the proposal.
After that, there were no comments from officials as well as
no comments in the media, and in the Russian social networks
I saw very few negative remarks sort of "look, what a fool".
So?
For comparison, was Nixon a freaky politician for befriending
China? Was not being wildly discussed made the issue foolish
or irrelevant?
If Kissinger feigning illness while visiting Pakistan and then
got on a plane to China freaky?
That is what the case looks like without speculations.
On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 1:30:37 PM UTC, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
ltlee1, <news:c255d56c-7b9a-4f11...@googlegroups.com>
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 11:15:14 AM UTC, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
Pure non-speculative fact is that a freaky MP has filed his
individual proposal to one of the MFA's departments.
Presenting it like "Russia wants etc" is a misinterpretation.
So the statement in the headline of the MSN's article you've
posted here is misleading.
1. So you don't really known him as a person. And you can't or don't carefreaky MP?According to the fact that his proposal is silly.
According to whom and what criteria?
Also, he was known for some unrealistic proposals before.
As well as the LDPR is known as "hot air" party.
to distinguish a politician who occasionally has silly proposal and a freaky politician. And because he is Russian? Yes.
2. More important, silly or not is often a matter of perspective and context. The common saying is one man's meat is another man's
ˈpoison'.
Anyway, whether the specific suggestion is silly or the Russian politician is freaky is irrelevant. Because his question is touching one of the most important question of on international peace. The question of arms transfer and when is self-defense self-defense.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 483 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 151:48:59 |
Calls: | 9,592 |
Calls today: | 6 |
Files: | 13,676 |
Messages: | 6,148,494 |
Posted today: | 3 |