<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Russian Navy&#8217;s role in the Mediterranean</title>
	<atom:link href="http://russiamil.wordpress.com/2013/02/01/the-russian-navys-role-in-the-mediterranean/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://russiamil.wordpress.com/2013/02/01/the-russian-navys-role-in-the-mediterranean/</link>
	<description>Tracking developments in the Russian military</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 03:05:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: erepubliktutorial</title>
		<link>http://russiamil.wordpress.com/2013/02/01/the-russian-navys-role-in-the-mediterranean/#comment-3774</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[erepubliktutorial]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2013 13:30:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://russiamil.wordpress.com/?p=1253#comment-3774</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Good article. Can&#039;t say much about submarine details, since I&#039;me not to well informed on that matter, but I can agree that this is not a preparation for operations in Syria. This is basically excercise (as you wrote) and I would like to add that this is more diplomatic than a military move (if there is any distinction between those two today). This is a way of addressing to public (both Russian domestic and international), stating that Russia is capable and determined to preserve their last naval base outside the Russian borders.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good article. Can&#8217;t say much about submarine details, since I&#8217;me not to well informed on that matter, but I can agree that this is not a preparation for operations in Syria. This is basically excercise (as you wrote) and I would like to add that this is more diplomatic than a military move (if there is any distinction between those two today). This is a way of addressing to public (both Russian domestic and international), stating that Russia is capable and determined to preserve their last naval base outside the Russian borders.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dmitry Gorenburg</title>
		<link>http://russiamil.wordpress.com/2013/02/01/the-russian-navys-role-in-the-mediterranean/#comment-3760</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dmitry Gorenburg]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2013 21:56:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://russiamil.wordpress.com/?p=1253#comment-3760</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes, there were a few other things that were misguided about that article. But I would be shocked if there were no submarines involved in the exercise. As you note, having a nuclear-powered submarine present when large combat ships are in the Med is more or less standard operating procedure. So the remaining question is whether there was more than one, and if so, if the second was diesel-powered. Again, no official confirmation is likely to be forthcoming, but I don&#039;t see why that would be impossible.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, there were a few other things that were misguided about that article. But I would be shocked if there were no submarines involved in the exercise. As you note, having a nuclear-powered submarine present when large combat ships are in the Med is more or less standard operating procedure. So the remaining question is whether there was more than one, and if so, if the second was diesel-powered. Again, no official confirmation is likely to be forthcoming, but I don&#8217;t see why that would be impossible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Artjom Hatsaturjants</title>
		<link>http://russiamil.wordpress.com/2013/02/01/the-russian-navys-role-in-the-mediterranean/#comment-3759</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Artjom Hatsaturjants]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2013 21:03:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://russiamil.wordpress.com/?p=1253#comment-3759</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;ll have to chalk that down to Debka-style rumor-mongering.

The author of that article is also incorrect about nuclear weapons, since Russian Navy ships don&#039;t carry nuclear weapons as per standard operational practice.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ll have to chalk that down to Debka-style rumor-mongering.</p>
<p>The author of that article is also incorrect about nuclear weapons, since Russian Navy ships don&#8217;t carry nuclear weapons as per standard operational practice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dmitry Gorenburg</title>
		<link>http://russiamil.wordpress.com/2013/02/01/the-russian-navys-role-in-the-mediterranean/#comment-3758</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dmitry Gorenburg]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2013 20:53:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://russiamil.wordpress.com/?p=1253#comment-3758</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Source is here: http://www.tolerance.ca/Article.aspx?ID=157507&amp;L=en. Certainly not official. Could be wrong, I suppose.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Source is here: <a href="http://www.tolerance.ca/Article.aspx?ID=157507&#038;L=en" rel="nofollow">http://www.tolerance.ca/Article.aspx?ID=157507&#038;L=en</a>. Certainly not official. Could be wrong, I suppose.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Artjom Hatsaturjants</title>
		<link>http://russiamil.wordpress.com/2013/02/01/the-russian-navys-role-in-the-mediterranean/#comment-3757</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Artjom Hatsaturjants]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2013 20:42:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://russiamil.wordpress.com/?p=1253#comment-3757</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&gt;&gt;two submarines (one nuclear and one diesel-powered)

Come again? What is your source for this?

That a nuclear-powered submarine was present is no surprise. That is was identified is.

Deployments of submarines even for exercises (much less for combat patrols) has always been an area where the Russian Navy never makes any announcements or comments. All deployments are announced ex post facto. So, again, what&#039;s your source?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt;&gt;two submarines (one nuclear and one diesel-powered)</p>
<p>Come again? What is your source for this?</p>
<p>That a nuclear-powered submarine was present is no surprise. That is was identified is.</p>
<p>Deployments of submarines even for exercises (much less for combat patrols) has always been an area where the Russian Navy never makes any announcements or comments. All deployments are announced ex post facto. So, again, what&#8217;s your source?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
