lol, true
I think one of my favorites lately from a usual is how Russia losing 4 ships in a few days is no big deal.
“Russia losing 4 ships in a few days is no big deal.”
Actually I would agree on 3 of those ships as they were not lost from enemy action, but from Russian engineering incompetence. Now that Ukraine has forced Russia out of the Black Sea for much of the time, Russia was trying to convert some of its wild water fleet to river and lake utility. They cut midsections of of 3 ships, and welded the two ends together to make a smaller ship. when subjected to fierce Black Sea storm conditions all 3 ships were severely damaged or split and sank. The first ship sunk by the new Ukrainian Sea Baby system was very significant. Ukraine can now send an unarmed boat holding drones armed with heavy explosives and/or machine guns all around to attack Russian shipping while risking NONE of their own personnel.
A fifth ship loss is probably the most important. The Ursa Major (Sparta class) was carrying 2 large cargo cranes, and 2 large massive hatches for either a submarine or an icebreaker. All this is now lost, and the chances of shipping such equipment in mid winter from Western Russia through warm waters all the way to far eastern Russia is now much delayed even if they have the replacement cranes or hatches available. The important question is what was/is Russia planning with the icebreaker or the submarine? Mobility in high Arctic waters is especially competitive now as warming changes the ice cover and accessibility to far north land areas.
It is reported new Russian icebreakers can go 4 mph and break 13 feet of ice at that speed. US icebreakers apparently are only able to cut 3 ft. ice at that speed. Where might such a Russian icebreakers, followed by a nuclear sub be able to travel north of Alaska, and Canada with such equipment? How many minutes away from critical targets could that place them?