• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-opened Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vixen said:
In international waters you can schlepp around and not worry about being challenged by anyone. You are indemnified from all sorts of things.
Click to expand...
Remember what you're being asked about. I'll quote your original post.

Vixen said:
One survivor said she knew it was midnight because her cabin mate's alarm clock went off. Michael Oun said his alram clock crashed onto the floor and the battery fell out. He stuffed it in his pocket as it was in his way as he fled and it had stopped at 1:00. This would have been the same time the ship was at the half-way point on its journey, the last point it was in international waters, the ship's watch was changing shifts, etc.
Click to expand...
You've yet to demonstrate that the Estonia was at the "half-way point" on its journey and at its "last point" in international waters and why it been sank at its half-way point or at its "last point international waters" means something?
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
Okay, but why would Sweden be interested in tech that was likely outdated when it was first deployed, and almost certainly behind what Sweden already had developed for itself or in collaboration with other Western powers?
Click to expand...

Would there be any value in just seeing what tech the Russians were using even if they had no plans to actually use it themselves? Like going around your skint mates house and quietly laughing at his 30 year old Sony Trintron.
 
Vixen said:
On a hobby basis, yes.
Click to expand...

What, exactly, does that mean?

I did strategic studies courses as part of my degree, as well as Cold War studies and also studies on the former Soviet states in the immediate aftermath of the collapse of the USSR.

Do you know the Mitrokhin archive for example?
 
RolandRat said:
Would there be any value in just seeing what tech the Russians were using even if they had no plans to actually use it themselves? Like going around your skint mates house and quietly laughing at his 30 year old Sony Trintron.
Click to expand...

I'm sure intelligence analysts throughout the West were gratified to discover which of their conjectures and inferences about late-stage Soviet military technology were correct and which were not. I just don't think that by 1994 it would have been a pressing concern for the Swedes.
 
Vixen said:
I trust you understand the concept of waters being in a territorial zone? Remember the British frigate or whatever it was being threatened - in fact fired at - in the Black Sea as it was in someone else's waters, just the other month? Or the cod wars going on between the UK, the Norwegians, the Dutch and the French?

In international waters there are few maritime laws, which is why the privae expeditions crews to the Estonia wreck have been careful to fly under the flag of a nation that is not signed up to the Estonia Treaty. For example, from Germany and the latest from the Netherlands. The Evertsson ship that brought about the recent treaty amendments sailed from Germany under a German flag. As a Swedish national, he was arrested and charged in Sweden but the case had to be dismissed as the spot was in international waters.

In international waters you can schlepp around and not worry about being challenged by anyone. You are indemnified from all sorts of things.
Click to expand...


LOL We can add international maritime law (and its enforcement mechanisms) to the ever-lengthening list of subjects you deign to pronounce upon - but do so in a fashion which clearly indicates you know little or nothing about them.
 
For those interested in the use of Estonia to transport military equipment, you can find the official report here. Please forgive me for not bothering to give a summary, but I have only briefly skimmed it and decided I wasn't all that interested in diving deeper. Perhaps someone else would be so interested and can summarize the main findings for us.
 
Vixen said:
Bildt and the JAIC obviously took that view.

(Or at least, that is the view presented to the public.)
Click to expand...


No. They took the view (the evidence-based view) that the ferry didn't sink because of some nefarious criminal act, but rather because it was poorly designed, poorly constructed and poorly maintained (coupled with the terrible double-whammy that there was no redundancy whatsoever designed or built into the one area of the ship which, if it failed (which it did), would virtually guarantee the loss of the ship unless it was identified and rectified almost immediately (which it was not)).
 
Vixen said:
History, dear Fellow. As you know East Europe was under the iron fist of the vast stalinist Soviet Union. Many of the so-called Baltic States populations were displaced by the Soviets and 'russified'. At the collapse of the Soviet Union, Swedish PM Carl Bildt, said to have been a CIA-agent according to wikileaks, was very keen to ensure nothing went wrong in bringing these newly liberated states into the realm of Western democracies and into the European Union.

As 25% of the population of Estonia is officially Russian ethnicity/citizenship a moment's thought will indicate that it is obvious there will be resistance from this class, which was also largely the former ruling classes, and still loyal to the old stalinists and the new Russia.

The Iron Curtain may have come down in 1991 but changing the political landscape and ensuring independence was not something that could be taken for granted.
Click to expand...

Even if I grant that everything you've stated is fact (it isn't, for example the USSR was not "stalinist" since the mid 1950's, Khrushchev brought in massive reforms.... but for sake of argument), none of this post explains WHY the Swedes would be after Soviet Weapons. Bildt was keen for ex Warsaw Pact countries to ally themselves with the west and join the EU. OK sure, I totally buy that. But this is a non-sequitur, why would Sweden sink an Estonia vessel, or try and smuggle out ex Soviet weapons to foster relations with Estonia?!?!? It does nothing to explain it. Also, Bildt had already lost the general election when the Estonia sank, he was only a week away from being replaced. Why would a lame duck PM sink a ferry with ~1000 civilians on it even if he was an amoral monster, with some political machinations going on. Why would the incoming opposition party not throw up the red flag and go WHOA look at what the other side did the minute they took power?!

You've done nothing to establish a reasonable motive for sinking the Estonia, just wild conjecture. Just like the method of her sinking, you go from one wild conjecture to the next while ignoring every single shred of evidence or relying on unreliable sources. You can't even decide which of about 8 security services are responsible for it.
 
Axxman300 said:
I've been forced to watch six different videos on the sinking, half of them call it a visor, and others call it a hood. All the narrators have British accents so, as an American, I assume they're smarter than me.:D
Click to expand...



But I thought the Hood was sunk by the Bismarck.


(*I'll get my oilskin*)
 
Vixen said:
You have to iunderstand the political background. Then POTUS Bill Clinton was keen to be a peace-negotiator between Israel and Palestine. Israel was suffering many terrorists acts in 1994.


So, whilst one might not approve of Jutta Rabe's wikileak-style of investigative journalism, I have no doubt she believes her sources to be authentic, when she claims the FSU/Russian cargo Sweden was smuggling out of Estonia was on the order of the CIA/USA and was intended for Israel.

Middle East Journal
Click to expand...

That's the problem with low-key antisemitism, it leads to bad CTs.

After the fall of the Soviet Union almost every interesting piece of Red Army hardware was up for sale. Spetsnaz operators, now unemployed, officer their services to the highest bidders. NATO sent advisors in to make sure the Russians recovered all of their nuclear warheads to make sure they didn't end up on the black market.

As for Israel, after the fall of the Communist block immigration from Russia and former Soviet states went through the roof. Israel didn't need to steal anything because they had the people who designed Soviet hardware moving in to the country. Also, the Israelis are sensitive to things like mass murder, so sinking a ship is out. And President Clinton was risk-averse.

Jutte Rabe had her press credentials revoked due to her unprofessional tactics. This whole CT is her brainchild and that alone should be a red flag.
 
JesseCuster said:
Remember what you're being asked about. I'll quote your original post.


You've yet to demonstrate that the Estonia was at the "half-way point" on its journey and at its "last point" in international waters and why it been sank at its half-way point or at its "last point international waters" means something?
Click to expand...

Stockholm is at coordinates: 59°20'N (59.33N) 18° 3' E (17.07E)

Tallinn is at coordinates: 59°26N (58.44N) 24°45'E (24.75E)

The wreck Estonia is at: 59°23'N (59.3E) 21°42'E (21.7E)

So, it had 6°15'E (7.68E) to travel. It only managed 3°03'E (3.05E)- which is roughly half way, bearing in mind it veered off course whilst sinking. (1 minute = 1.5 miles. Half of 6°15'E is 3°075' (3.84E), so you see it is just .045' away from exactly half way point, or, no more than apx half a mile out.

Even the northward journey is at the half-way point in minutes.

As for international waters, you can see the boundaries here, although the wreck does fall within the Finnish exclusive economic zone (so no unauthorised fishing allowed I presume). Source: https://vasab.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Book_J.Zaucha_governing.pdf
 

Attachments

  • 2021-09-21 (4).jpg
    2021-09-21 (4).jpg
    24.3 KB · Views: 6
phiwum said:
For those interested in the use of Estonia to transport military equipment, you can find the official report here. Please forgive me for not bothering to give a summary, but I have only briefly skimmed it and decided I wasn't all that interested in diving deeper. Perhaps someone else would be so interested and can summarize the main findings for us.
Click to expand...

It says Russian hardware was being smuggled out of Estonia to Sweden, and The Estonia was one of the ships used.

The report also says that the commission doing the investigation questions if the Estonia had actually passed all of her inspections, and was in fact seaworthy on the night of the sinking.

So a lot of nothing interesting.
 
theprestige said:
I'm pretty sure that by 1994 Israel's own indigenous military tech industry was already pretty mature, and had no need for obsolete Soviet kit.
Click to expand...

Over a week ago there was an airstrike on the Syrian border taking out an Iranian-backed militia staging area. The thing is nobody is taking credit for it. It wasn't the US, Syria, Russia, Iraq, or Turkey...so...

And a few years back someone's air force destroyed a secret uranium enrichment facility in Syria. Wasn't the USAF. Best part is that this unnamed air force flew right through the latest Russian air defense radar systems like it was wet toilet paper.

The point being that stealing the latest hardware from your enemy does have the advantage of figuring out how to neutralize it. That's what we do at that Nevada test site. Don't tell anyone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom