ChrisO_wiki

9/ While Ukraine has not claimed that it carried out the attack, Russian commentators are showing no doubt about who was responsible. /end

Sources:
🔹 t.me/bomber_fight...
🔹 www.bbc.co.uk/news/article...

8/ The USVs appear to have repeatedly targeted the same area of the Ivanovets – the idea likely being to blow a hole in the side which could then be hit again, increasing the damage to the ship. Fighterbomber's account suggests that this was also done to the Arctic Metagaz.

7/ The channel's description of the attack is strikingly remeniscent of the sinking of the Russian Navy corvette Ivanovets on 1 February 2024. The ship was swarmed by Ukrainian USVs off Crimea, with six hitting it according to Ukrainian sources.
bsky.app/profile/tend...

6/ If Fighterbomber's account is correct, the damage suggests that the same point on the ship was targeted with repeated time-on-target strikes to maximise the chances that the double hull would be breached and the tank ignited. If so, it clearly succeeded.

5/ Aerial images of the crippled ship, prior to its sinking, were posted by Ukrainian blogger and defence ministry advisor Serhii Sternenko. It's not clear where they came from, though the overlay appears to be similar to that produced by a Boeing P-8A Poseidon patrol aircraft.

4/ "In other words, the goal was to destroy the vessel.

As far as I understand, this is the first vessel sunk by drones.

The crew was rescued by our sailors from another vessel; there were no casualties.

No one else came to the rescue."

3/ The channel reports: "According to the rumour mill, which in turn dreamed it up, four UAVs and two unmanned surface vehicles (USVs) arrived at the gas carrier. They struck at the same location, at a coordinated time."

2/ 'Fighterbomber', which proclaimes itself to be the "chronicles of a retired fighter-bomber [pilot]", often posts information from apparent insider sources within the Russian Air Force, such as news of Russian military aircraft shootdowns and crashes.

1/ Did Ukraine recreate a January 2024 attack which sank a Russian corvette in the Black Sea with the sinking of the Russian LNG tanker Arctic Metagaz on 3 March 2026? A Russian source says that the tanker was sunk off Libya by four UAVs and two USVs attacking as a swarm. ⬇️

Supremest Leader. The President of Iran is a relatively junior post.

bsky.app/profile/leon...

That's a very Crassus thing to say

Decontamination, hopefully

I hear Ayatollah Mâr-ko Rubiyo is already on the case

I believe the technical term for this sort of thing is satrapy, which of course was a Persian innovation

Картавых Александр Чет у меня не все коллеги смогли осилить восприятие происходящего на Ближнем Востоке. И часть вьебалась в Сциллу "Иран беспределит, надобно его осудить". А куда большая часть вьебалась в Харибду того,...

24/ …right up to and including starting a nuclear war. Let them implement it there, and we'll keep our fingers crossed for them. Wishing you happiness and good health – now eat each other alive." /end

Source:
t.me/AlexCarrier/...

23/ "But we benefit from this without our active participation, since there are people there to carry out their lawlessness. The Persians now, after the assassination of their grandfather, have an indisputable moral right to do any bullshit,…

22/ "Objectively, it's in our interests to keep them screwing around for as long as possible. So that the four weeks Trump announced turn into four months, and then four years. So that Arab oil burns in the Persian Sea and global logistics grinds to a halt.

21/ "They're a Chinese gas station, after all. Our level of cooperation and investment in Iran is complete bullshit compared to China's. And those rice-eaters have been dodging a direct deal with the US for years now.

20/ "So, what's the bottom line on this iceberg? Let Iran fight. We should help them with something, like likes and reposts, for example. But not too much. Just so they feel our love, but don't initiate a huge beating in the Middle East on their own.

19/ "This isn't the first time we've invested in crap; we also invested in Venezuela. We're not great investors, of course, but the money is relatively small, so it's negligible.

18/ "And then there's the matter of weapons, trade, and investments. Not great, not terrible. It would be a shame if we lost the money we invested in Iranian energy production, but nothing critical.

17/ "9. At the same time, we do have a strategic partnership. The most famous are the Shahids, which [Russia has adapted as] the Gerans. But they didn't give us drones, but a technology that the Tatars [sic] deployed and scaled, and now it's their domain.

16/ "That we'll come to them and start dying in their wars. And while simultaneously waging our own, which no one came to. Fuck them! Everyone except North Korea.

15/ "8. For which we have a fucking fundamental basis. Not a single country that didn't send its troops to fight alongside ours during the difficult times of the Special Military Operation has any right to demand the same from Russia.

14/ "7. Besides, we shouldn't proactively help Iran in their jihad for purely objective reasons. Because we have our own jihad at home, against the Salafis, in the Donbass Emirate [sic]. And we must finish it first, and then rush headlong into some foreign policy adventures.

13/ "6. But playing along is cynical, because the sheikhs are making a killing off this, and it benefits them to keep Eastern Europe burning forever, so they can profit forever.

12/ "5. Yes, they sell to the Ukrainians there, but the official pro-American position is that we are the global Satan, and the Ukrainians are hobbits from the Shire, so neutrality here is clearly playing along with us.

11/ "And if we proactively support them, at the very least they won't sell us Chinese drones at a discount in Dubai.