Comments on: Kursk torpedoed by US Sub?

By: J S

J S — Mon, 03 Jul 2006 18:05:03 +0000

The damage pictures would be impossible involving a MK-48 adcap torpedo. Stradling is an idiot. He should do some research before presenting a theory. If it was a US torpedo attack, there wouldn’t have been any survivors for any amount of time. It wouldn’t have created a hole, it would have broken the ship in half. Also, I was in a position with access to priveleged information, and a torpedo attack didn’t happen. The Soviet/Russian navy has always been negligent and dangerous. The Kursk sunk like all of the rest, incompetence and an insane idea of duty.

By: herberthoover

herberthoover — Tue, 07 Feb 2006 20:36:47 +0000

As far as the $10billion is concerned that was explained at the time as paying russia for some former soviet military bases that the us now uses in Asia and Eastern Europe. Another interesting thing is that when they raised the Kursk they cut off the front portion of the Sub and left it on the ocean floor. That is where the damage occured.

By: Alexei

Alexei — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

It wouldn’t have gone anywhere. The other way round, when debt is cancelled, no money changes hands by definition. The question is who the real creditors are, and who is going to shoulder the losses from the write-off.

I bet it’s all a hoax anyway.

By: Daniel

Daniel — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

This analysis is outrageous. If it were true, Zhirinovsky or any wacky Russia nationalist would find out.

Russia would not be able to contain a secret like that – some nationalist in Russia would of gotten hold of such an incident and easily use it to confirm the Western/mondialist conspiracy against Russia.

Still – very interesting post.

By: Andy

Andy — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Alexei – the US government would be expecting this money to come in. It would be in their accounts forecasts as a predicted income. If that large amount of income didn’t come in, it would have had to have raised eyebrows at the very least.

Which is why I think the loan section of this conspiracy can be written off as daft pretty easily. The rest, well who knows? I don’t know my submarine affairs well enough to comment. Although I think the idea that a US sub was involved is bound to be far-fetched – especially when you consider that every downed plane/sub/boat has a ‘US shot them down’ conspiracy attached to it.

By: Nathan

Nathan — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Not that I read it that well, but it seems that at least at the time the President had unilateral authority to forgive or delay portions of Russia's debt. HR 4118 (which never made it out of the Senate) tried to stop this. This was the administration's position.

By: Scott

Scott — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

B.S.

The old Russian joke when their large TV tower in Moscow caught fire was “we’re looking for the American TV tower that collided with our TV tower.”

C. theorists must provide ONE SHRED OF EVIDENCE. Not guesswork. Not hopeful theories.

The Kursk blew herself up in a missle test. Not that that’s ever happened in the Russian Navy.

Prove me wrong.

By: News from Around the World

News from Around the World — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Kursk torpedoed by US Sub?

Isn’t there a word for this:…