Russian Moskva Sank with Nuclear Warheads, Forum Claims
A forum thread alleges the Moskva sank with two nuclear warheads, leaving 50 survivors rescued by Turkey. Russia has not confirmed the report.
English · Original discussion in Spanish · Published
The Russian cruiser Moskva sank, according to a forum, with two nuclear warheads on board
What is a Black Sea Fleet flagship doing with two nuclear warheads in its hull? This is not a rhetorical question. The sinking of the Moskva raised an issue that no one in the West has conclusively denied, according to some participants in a forum debate: the ship went down with nuclear arms on board. According to circulating versions, there were only 50 survivors, all rescued by Turkey. The ship, they insist, was never towed: it went to the bottom of the sea. Two foreign media outlets confirm this, though each emphasizes the aspect that suits them.
What peine to the Moskva and its 500 crew members
The official Russian account first spoke of a fire and then a storm during towing. The version prevailing in less suspicious circles of Russophilia is different: impact by Ukrainian missiles, sinking, and a casualty toll that Moscow has never acknowledged. The recurring figure is 500 dead. There is no official statement confirming it, nor is there a serious denial.
What is striking is not the number. What is striking is that a cruiser of that category sailed with two nuclear warheads in an active war zone, according to circulating versions. The question hovering over the entire matter is who will go down to retrieve them. And the answer, for now, is no one.
Who retrieves the nuclear warheads from the sea floor
Some claim that Vladimir Pilingui will send someone to bring back "those warheads by the ears." Others recall precedents: the Soviet K-129 and the American USS Scorpion, both sunk during the Cold War, both with official stories that do not add up. The difference is that there were no cameras or social media back then.
The option of doing nothing also has its defense. Recovering nuclear material from the Black Sea floor is an operation requiring resources that Russia, by now, does not seem to have available. And doing so under NATO surveillance turns any attempt into a spectacle.
The Russian revenge that never arrives
The most repeated argument in these forums is that Russia will strike back. That it will sink a NATO ship. That the grandchildren of those who ate rats in Leningrad do not kneel. The problem is that this strike has been months in the making. According to a calculation circulating in the debate, Russia has lost 15,000 men, lost aircraft and helicopters, and had 25% of its armored fleet incinerated, yet Russia still has not declared war on NATO.
There is an uncomfortable explanation: it does not interest them. An open war against NATO is either a loss for Russia or something worse for everyone, Europe included. So tantrums, nuclear threats, and accusations. Nothing more.
The Kursk, the Indianapolis, and selective memory
When the Kursk is brought up, it is worth remembering the USS Indianapolis. Both sank, both left hundreds dead, and both were handled with an opacity that would be unthinkable today. Selective memory is a national sport everywhere.
What is certain is that the Moskva was the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet. That it carried some "cucumbers" [nuclear warheads] on board should not surprise anyone. That it carried exactly two is what is being debated.
Ukraine and the calculation of provocation
The most twisted theory circulating is that Ukraine simulates an attempt to recover the nuclear arms to draw out more Russian fleet and destroy it. The Russians would get nervous, make mistakes, and the war would end sooner. It is a theory, not a confirmed plan.
What makes sense is that Ukraine does not want to use nuclear arms even if it could. Dropping a non-nuclear weapon on Moscow would pose such a high risk that the war would escalate uncontrollably. And nuclear warheads, in any case, are not detonated by whoever captures them: they carry codes and security measures that make casual use impossible.
The sea floor as a nuclear cemetery
There is a current that claims the warheads are expired and rotten, that the person in charge did not maintain them and took the budget. If this is true, the risk of detonation is low. The risk of contamination is another matter.
The Black Sea floor already has enough scrap to add radioactive material. The difference is that this time there are witnesses, media, and an ongoing war. No one is going down to check it with a camera.
So the question remains unanswered. Who goes down to retrieve the nuclear warheads? No one. And if someone goes, they will not tell.
What is a Black Sea Fleet flagship doing with two nuclear warheads in its hull? This is not a rhetorical question. The sinking of the Moskva raised an issue that no one in the West has conclusively denied, according to some participants in a forum debate: the ship went down with nuclear arms on board. According to circulating versions, there were only 50 survivors, all rescued by Turkey. The ship, they insist, was never towed: it went to the bottom of the sea. Two foreign media outlets confirm this, though each emphasizes the aspect that suits them.
What peine to the Moskva and its 500 crew members
The official Russian account first spoke of a fire and then a storm during towing. The version prevailing in less suspicious circles of Russophilia is different: impact by Ukrainian missiles, sinking, and a casualty toll that Moscow has never acknowledged. The recurring figure is 500 dead. There is no official statement confirming it, nor is there a serious denial.
What is striking is not the number. What is striking is that a cruiser of that category sailed with two nuclear warheads in an active war zone, according to circulating versions. The question hovering over the entire matter is who will go down to retrieve them. And the answer, for now, is no one.
Who retrieves the nuclear warheads from the sea floor
Some claim that Vladimir Pilingui will send someone to bring back "those warheads by the ears." Others recall precedents: the Soviet K-129 and the American USS Scorpion, both sunk during the Cold War, both with official stories that do not add up. The difference is that there were no cameras or social media back then.
The option of doing nothing also has its defense. Recovering nuclear material from the Black Sea floor is an operation requiring resources that Russia, by now, does not seem to have available. And doing so under NATO surveillance turns any attempt into a spectacle.
The Russian revenge that never arrives
The most repeated argument in these forums is that Russia will strike back. That it will sink a NATO ship. That the grandchildren of those who ate rats in Leningrad do not kneel. The problem is that this strike has been months in the making. According to a calculation circulating in the debate, Russia has lost 15,000 men, lost aircraft and helicopters, and had 25% of its armored fleet incinerated, yet Russia still has not declared war on NATO.
There is an uncomfortable explanation: it does not interest them. An open war against NATO is either a loss for Russia or something worse for everyone, Europe included. So tantrums, nuclear threats, and accusations. Nothing more.
The Kursk, the Indianapolis, and selective memory
When the Kursk is brought up, it is worth remembering the USS Indianapolis. Both sank, both left hundreds dead, and both were handled with an opacity that would be unthinkable today. Selective memory is a national sport everywhere.
What is certain is that the Moskva was the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet. That it carried some "cucumbers" [nuclear warheads] on board should not surprise anyone. That it carried exactly two is what is being debated.
Ukraine and the calculation of provocation
The most twisted theory circulating is that Ukraine simulates an attempt to recover the nuclear arms to draw out more Russian fleet and destroy it. The Russians would get nervous, make mistakes, and the war would end sooner. It is a theory, not a confirmed plan.
What makes sense is that Ukraine does not want to use nuclear arms even if it could. Dropping a non-nuclear weapon on Moscow would pose such a high risk that the war would escalate uncontrollably. And nuclear warheads, in any case, are not detonated by whoever captures them: they carry codes and security measures that make casual use impossible.
The sea floor as a nuclear cemetery
There is a current that claims the warheads are expired and rotten, that the person in charge did not maintain them and took the budget. If this is true, the risk of detonation is low. The risk of contamination is another matter.
The Black Sea floor already has enough scrap to add radioactive material. The difference is that this time there are witnesses, media, and an ongoing war. No one is going down to check it with a camera.
So the question remains unanswered. Who goes down to retrieve the nuclear warheads? No one. And if someone goes, they will not tell.
Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication. Read the full discussion (152 replies).
More summaries
-
Photos of the sunken Moskva: a hole at the waterline
The first images of the sunken Moskva show a hole at the waterline and smoke on the decks, while the storm account falls apart.
-
Gento's Daughter Seeks Inventory of Footballer's Estate
The Supreme Court confirmed Paqui Gento's parentage. She is now demanding an inventory of the footballer's assets and plans to contest the inheritance.
-
Zelensky Makes Peace Contingent on Putin Leaving Crimea
Zelensky signals readiness to negotiate with Putin only if Russia withdraws from Crimea, while Moscow controls key eastern territories and the front remains active.
-
Oklahoma Deploys National Guard to Texas Border in Federal Dispute
Oklahoma joins Texas in border standoff, with Rep. Greene citing 25 supportive governors. This escalation highlights the clash between state authority and federal immigration control.
-
Russia: Jail Time for War Stickers vs. Open Criticism of Putin
Forum members cite prison sentences for anti-war stickers and report on Moscow cafes where criticizing Putin carries no consequences.
-
Spain vs. Russia: Who Contributed More to History?
The Quixote, Elcano, and the first circumnavigation face 280 million Russians and the space race: Spain and Russia's historical rivalry.