Talk:Project Sapphire

Less info here than on Alfa-class sub page

The paragraph on this subject within Alfa-class_submarine#Project_Sapphire has more and better information than this article. Someone who is a writer (not me -- I have terrible writing skills) needs to add to it. Linktex (talk) 15:59, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Neural Point of View ?

This text is written as if it was in the best interest of Kazahstan to loose this material without any consideration that it could have been given back to Russia and without any mention of any compensation for the high value of such material. The apparent blackmail (loose your uranium or you will not be able to trade with the West) is glossed over. It is also not explained why such action had to be done in secrecy if it was in the interest of the Kazah government. In total I remain with the impression that the entire report here is painted in very strong pro-US colors without any regard for alternatives or fairness as if it was not actually the West that gained and the East that lost in this case. Just to avoid any misunderstanding: I'm happy that such material did not get in the hands of terrorists. Still I think this report is not even close to being unbiased. And by the way America is not the same as the USA. That might be acceptable in everyday talk, but in an encyclopedia I would recommend to use the proper term. JB. --92.195.14.79 (talk) 16:53, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

There's something oddly naive about the article. The operation is described as clandestine, but the details obviously weren't *that* secret because it was coordinated with the Kazakhstan government and required US technicians to be on-site for almost a month. The article on Alfa-class submarine implies that it was spun as a humanitarian mission - one of the recovery aircraft carried "30,000 pounds of supplies Tennesseans had donated for Ust-Kamenogorsk area orphanages" - but this article doesn't mention it. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 20:42, 16 February 2021 (UTC)