Subscribe now and choose from over 30 free gifts worth up to £49 - Plus get £25 to spend in our shop
I know there is a Ukraine thread, but this isnt about the politics.
What impact will this have then? looking at Google maps the area effected will be huge, basically upstream looks like a lake more than a river. You cant see a new dam being constructed any time soon so will it all drain out to just a river again ?
Will the volume of water be enough to change the salt content of the Black Sea
Will the shift in water be enough to cause earth quakes ?
News coming out is very sketchy, but it's a massive body of water. How long is that water going to take to get 50km or so to Kherson ?
I was looking in the wiki page for the reservoir earlier. 18 cubic kilometres of water, or about 18 billion tonnes in weight. I don't know what that is in swimming pools but it'd be a bloody lot.
I saw something on Twitter about how this good for Russia's fresh water supply.
Not sure how?
. I don’t know what that is in swimming pools but it’d be a bloody lot.
18,000,000,000/2,500 = 7,200,000 Olympic pools
Roughly 7.2 million Olympic swimming pools
Flooding like that can spread effluent and cause disease.
Loads of stuff about this on the BBC website - the fact the damn was a hydro-electric plant & the waters behind supplied a nuclear power plant's cooling system makes this a real worry.
That along with the environmental damage this will cause.
This is a worrying escalation, even by Russian standards, or a clear sign that there military don't understand the consequences of their actions beyond military objectives.
Attacking a dam in this manner could be classed as a war crime according to the Geneva Convention. Essentially it's akin to a weapon of mass destruction because of the unwarranted harm it may cause on civilian populations.
I saw something on Twitter about how this good for Russia’s fresh water supply
I dont think the russians were even vaguely thinking that far ahead
https://twitter.com/VolodyaTretyak/status/1666015265971118082
Wonder if it went because of ****eries, recklessness and incompetance rather than explosives
Wonder if it went because of ****eries, recklessness and incompetance rather than explosives
No. Russian spite. And explosives.
They're scum.
Maybe 10,12 years from now they'll release a movie about it.
You cant see a new dam being constructed any time soon so will it all drain out to just a river again ?
Depends to what depth the dam has been damaged. I doubt it's all the way down to the original river bed though still a major breach.
Will the volume of water be enough to change the salt content of the Black Sea
No idea.
Will the shift in water be enough to cause earth quakes ?
I can't imagine why it would.
How long is that water going to take to get 50km or so to Kherson ?
It's already arrived, there is flooding in Kherson.
I saw something on Twitter about how this good for Russia’s fresh water supply.
A canal from just behind the dam feeds fresh water to Crimea. If the water level falls significantly that feed will be disrupted.
Apparently the canal is already flowing in the wrong direction.
Dunno tbh, I'm not in any way pro-Russian but the strategic benefits to Ukraine can't be denied.
As always there are two sides and somewhere in between, the truth.
That said, this is a tragedy regardless.
Dunno tbh, I’m not in any way pro-Russian but the strategic benefits to Ukraine can’t be denied.
Such as?
I was looking in the wiki page for the reservoir earlier. 18 cubic kilometres of water, or about 18 billion tonnes in weight. I don’t know what that is in swimming pools but it’d be a bloody
Loch Ness holds 7.45 km3 of water. So, almost 2.5 times Loch Ness
As always there are two sides and somewhere in between, the truth.
Not in every case. Either the Russians blew it up or the Ukranians did. Threy can't both (or neither) have done it.
Either the Russians blew it up or the Ukrainians did.
Or the Russians were incompetent or didn't care if it failed so didn't manage the dam. Still their fault.
Such as?
I assume you haven't read the reports?
That dam is used to supply water to Crimea for one; no dam, no water.
It's also going to be significantly easier to cross the river upstream of the dam with a 30m head of water gone.
Finally the IAEA seem confident that the nuclear power station downstream has enough diversity of supply to maintain cooling. The Ukrainians will know fine what resources the power station has at it's disposal, there's no way they want another nuclear disaster in their country.
Or the Russians were incompetent or didn’t care if it failed so didn’t manage the dam. Still their fault.
There's also the possibility of a rogue element on either side that neither would want to acknowledge. My point was that whatever the official word is on either side there's a good chance the reality is somewhat different.
Already mentioned up thread but it was widely reported last year that the Russians had mined the dam, so it seems - intentionally or not - they caused it to blow.
If that was blown up on purpose it looks like a mix of desperation or stupidity. IIRC the dam was pretty much the only remaining crossing of the Dnipro until you go far north east to the other end of the lake so with that gone there's basically no chance for Ukraine to do a ground assault into eastern Kherson unless their sappers are very good at (re)building bridges.
Of course the key water supply into Crimea is borked too, the Kursk bridge is damaged (some nice big cracks appeared in it a few weeks back) and I'm wondering if the Russians are unsure that they can actually hold Crimea agains a sustained ground assault...hence the desperation.
The Nuclear power station in Zaphoriza is pretty much on cold shut down except one reactor that is still warm (but on near shutdown) and there's a separate lake for cooling water so it should (fingers crossed...blimey are we really thinking about this...) be ok.
If the dam was blown up (its been heavily shelled and mined over the last 15 months) and then regardless of who did it (timing is very convenient/suspicious...cough*russia*cough) thats a clear breach of the Geneva Convention.
Probably won't find out what really happened for years yet though.
I dont think the russians were even vaguely thinking that far ahead
Oh, they were, they already had the propaganda blaming Ukraine for it ready to go. It’s what they do, standard Russian playbook. Exactly the same with Russian tourists visiting Salisbury to see the world famous cathedral.
Dunno tbh, I’m not in any way pro-Russian but the strategic benefits to Ukraine can’t be denied.
The strategic benefit of the dam, with its road across the top, was that it allowed Ukrainian armoured vehicles access into Crimea. Now it doesn’t, because much of the road networks are under metres of water, and Leopard, Challenger, T-60 tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles can’t swim very well.
muddy@rseguy beat me to the last bit there!
regardless of who did it (timing is very convenient/suspicious…cough*russia*cough) thats a clear breach of the Geneva Convention.
Just one more clear breach, along with deliberate targeting of civilian targets to add to the ever growing pile of folders on someone’s desk. Like Russia gives a shit. I mean, who are the victims here?
Clear breach of the geneva convention? What about the dambusters raid?
The allies being shits 70 years ago doesn't excuse this. We also firebombed Dresden which was undoubtedly a war crime, doubt we'd do it today but the Russians quite happily bomb residential blocks across Ukraine.
well said
I mean, who are the victims here?
As always, the civilians. Always has been, always will be. Kill enough and you get to write up the history books.
We can bleat on about 'Geneva convention' but its all pretty much hypocrisy. Superpowers will do what they want, and there's not going to be any comeback.
Today it's Ukraine/Russia, tomorrow it could be Africa/America, or India/whomever.
As they say. The oldest crimes in the newest ways.
Clear breach of the geneva convention? What about the dambusters raid?
The 'Geneva convention' relates to 4 separate agreements. The bit I think you are referring to was agreed in 1949 and enacted in 1950, after WWII
Clear breach of the geneva convention? What about the dambusters raid?
Dambusters - 1943
Geneva Convention - 1949
Not to mention that the Ruhr dams were hugely strategic as they provided electricity and water to the steel factories. In the Ukraine it seems they just wanted to knock a river crossing out.
There are 4 Geneva conventions dating back well before that. there was a geneva convention in place during WW2. dambusters raid was clearly a war crime as was the destruction of dams in libya during the gulf war
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions
NATO will attack non-military targets.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/apr/24/balkans3
"Journalists who are not members of armed forces and engaged in professional missions in areas of armed conflict shall be considered as civilians. They shall be protected under international humanitarian law provided that they take no hostile action".
Don't get me wrong - I am not defending the Russians in any way - just pointing out the inconsistencies / double standards on this.
Not to mention that the Ruhr dams were hugely strategic as they provided electricity and water to the steel factories.
I don't think they were "hugely" strategic and the damage caused was very quickly repaired. The cost in civilian deaths was high though, and many of the civilians were Allied nationals.
I am not suggesting that staging the raid was wrong though. But had the Allies lost the war it would probably have been classed as a war crime.
Geneva Convention – 1949
And dams only covered from 1977. And both sides regarded the attacks as legitimate military not terror attacks during WW2.
”Journalists who are not members of armed forces and engaged in professional missions in areas of armed conflict shall be considered as civilians.”
Shutting down propaganda being transmitted isn’t covered but that.
Back on topic… today’s destruction was predicted last year, and was expected to be at this time, to remove the advantage of hard summer ground for any advancing Ukrainian forces, especially tanks. I find it odd that the media coverage seems to be treating this as a total surprise, and not mentioning why it was to be expected… and even giving credence to the idea it might be accidental or a Ukrainian attack.
just pointing out the inconsistencies / double standards on this.
It isnt really. Quite a lot of the "strategic" bombing carried out in WWII would, rightly, be considered a war crime if our governments did it now.
Part of the reason why was after WWII people looking at the devastation caused and campaigning for it not to happen again.
Its part of why bomber campaign didnt get a memorial for many years.
Its also worth noting they did start off trying to precision bomb but the technology simply wasnt up to the task in most cases (although Ruhr dams are an example of them succeeding in this). Even bombing cities they sometimes missed and attacked some other poor place instead.
The most extreme being the USAF fifty plane bomb raid on Schaffhausen in Switzerland after going about 150 miles off target.
Shutting down propaganda being transmitted isn’t covered but that.
Which pretty much makes every journalist a target by at least one side.
I find it odd that the media coverage seems to be treating this as a total surprise, and not mentioning why it was to be expected…
I think its because although it was a possibility it is a risky option for the Russians. Its not far off destroying the village in order to save it.
Its not far off destroying the village in order to save it.
The Russians aren’t trying to save anything. They’ll flatten the village, town, city, county if they consider it to their military advantage.
Isn't there already a Ukraine thread that has argued these things endlessly?
Back on thread. On the radio this morning they were talking about the potential impact on grain production. I wasn't able to catch what was said, and i'm not familiar with the role the dam plays in agriculture in the region, but according to the Kyiv Independent wheat prices rose 3% already.
It appears all the land mines are being washed up and are being carried along with the flow.
The scale of ground/water pollution has got to be huge.
Just on the wireless that the initial surge has moved down stream. Does that mean the volume of the lake has already passed through, or there is an initial surge at breach that then becomes a steady flow.
The Delta looks a stunning natural region (not agricultural) which I assume will now be under water for some time.
I wasn’t able to catch what was said, and i’m not familiar with the role the dam plays in agriculture in the region
The reservoir was used to supply irrigation canals for the region. So those are all going to run dry.
It is extremely obvious how the likes of Sunak are apparently talking tough, but being very careful to dance around the term 'war crime' - which this most likely is.
Any comparison with the Dambusters raid (or any of the carpet bombing that took place during WWII) is difficult to make. Other than the facts already stated, we also have to bear in mind the sheer desperation of the Allied forces to annihilate the Nazis – if they had succeeded in getting what they wanted then the world would be a very different place.
Comparing this to Operation Chastise this utter nonsense.
A raid that was intended to disrupt the industrial capacity of a Fascist Dictatorship that had initiated a World War.
A better comparison would be what the German forces did to the Low Countries during the war, deliberately flooding reclaimed land with sea water, causing damage that lasted for generations and contribute to a famine in 1944 and 45.
Did I not read or hear something the other day about the roadway across this dam being closed to traffic due to its dangerous and poor condition. 😕
I remember hearing of a report, but didnt go looking for it for clarification.
So it could have just went on its own.
So it could have just went on its own.
LMAO. Yeah, the dam just failed all of its own accord just on the same day that Russian soldiers started boasting about how they'd blown it up.
So it could have just went on its own.
There was massive explosion yesterday morning that rattled windows 80km away, that's what took the dam out.
Whoever did it (and my money is very much on Russians, who were seem rigging it with explosives last year) It was deliberate.
The only way it could be non deliberate is if the explosive Russia placed were detonated accidentally, but even then it'd still be their fault for putting them there in the first place.
It was apparently the only means of crossing without a massive detour (and the detour would take you to other bridges that were also destroyed). I suspect this was a deliberate act...and it has an awful impact across plenty of things - environmental, agricultural, humanitarian...properly grim. War isn't nice by any means, but this seems to be hitting civilians and non-combative people very hard.
The only way it could be non deliberate is if the explosive Russia placed were detonated accidentally, but even then it’d still be their fault for putting them there in the first place.
I doubt they would have a "fitted charge" pre-rigged, if they had placed explosives it would of only been secondary explosives, the main charge but without a detonator. Secondary is very stable, you can even set fire to it and it doesn't explode, just burns very hot.
If they had fitted detonators and they were activated accidently, which is very possible, then that's basic incompetence.
Wonder if we'll see another story like this in a few months/years time?
You reckon it was the Ukrainians not the Russians that set off the explosives that the Russians had planted in the damn they had full control over?
You reckon it was the Ukrainians not the Russians that set off the explosives that the Russians had planted in the damn they had full control over?
I don't reckon anything. I simply don't know and I'm not prepared to accept the assumption, however likely or unlikely it may be, that the Russians would blow up a dam that gives them a strategic disadvantage in the war.
Do you mean the dam was a strategic disadvantage or blowing it up was?
What do the Russians actually have to do to lose the benefit of doubt? Was the latest invasion (that some said was a Western invention right up until tanks were on the outskirts of Kyiv) not enough?
And the advantage of destroying this dam, at this time, is all Russia’s, preventing the Ukrainians pushing back over dry/hard summer ground. With the bonus of crippling the region of Ukraine that could become the no man’s land between Russian held Ukraine and free Ukraine if they do get pushed back.
Some stuff I've read suggests destroying the dam gives the Russians a strategic disadvantage. Mostly in that it'll be easier for the Ukrainians to cross the Dnipro. Also Kherson is Russian controlled, why flood it if they're not vacating it? There's a lot of stuff which on the surface doesn't make sense. I agree it's most likely that the Russians did this, but why? Maybe like some people have said it wasn't entirely intentional? There are lots of questions.
What do the Russians actually have to do to lose the benefit of doubt?
It's not benefit of doubt, it's simply establishing the facts based on evidence rather than making assumptions.
the Russians would blow up a dam that gives them a strategic disadvantage in the war.
Blowing it up floods areas that Ukraine would have to cross to launch an offensive in that area. The dam was apparently the last remaining crossing in the area. Before this, Ukraine would have had to launch an attack across the river, which would have been difficult. Now, an attack would have to cross a huge area of mud and debris, which is impossible. Blowing it up makes it easier for Russia to defend its occupied territory. It's a strategic advantage to Russia and a disadvantage to Ukraine.
Well Tucker Carlson has just told me it was a Ukrainian false flag operation, so that must be right.
that the Russians would blow up a dam that gives them a strategic disadvantage in the war.
Does it?
Mid/long term it is likely to cause issues for Crimea especially with regards to water supply for short into mid term there is a clear strategic advantage of rendering a large area of land unsuitable for Ukrainians to attack and hence shortening the area the Russians need to defend.
full blame lies ultimately with the Kremlin, regardless of the mechanism for failure.
Exactly.
It’s not benefit of doubt, it’s simply establishing the facts based on evidence rather than making assumptions.
Do you salute Putins courage, strength and indefatigability?
You are George Galloway and I claim my signed Big Brother catsuit 😉
possibly it creates mid to long term issues for russia / crimea.
However do you seriously think russia is operating with a long term mindset? They are doing what they need to do now in order to hinder the offensive. They will worry about mid to longer term later. Because if they don't do something now to delay and slow then there won't be a mid or long term to worry about.
Bet they are trying to draw it out as long as possible to get their pal Trump in.
Maybe is was MOSSAD and it’s a Zionist plot and the CIA are also in on it?
Things like this usually are
Maybe is was MOSSAD and it’s a Zionist plot and the CIA are also in on it?
Peanut butter and red wine…? Worth trying next winter.
Something about it here
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/satellite-images-show-kakhovka-dam-061544319.html
And also mentioned in Time magazine how the dam was already in a poor state of repair. And in the BBC about one bit going, then the rest catastrophically
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65818705
Whilst it is clear that this dam has been breached through a deliberate attack with all the consequences that flow from that. Who actually did it and why is very much open to debate. I don’t trust the Russians further than I can throw them, but I’m not sure I have vans more faith in the Ukrainian version of the truth either. Nordstream is a classics recent case as it the fact that Zelenskyy was put into power with considerable help form the CIA.
As usual it is the ordinary people who suffer, putin wont and Zelensky has become very rich and influential as a result of this conflict and build up
Zelensky has become very rich and influential as a result of this conflict and build up
yes, its all been an elbaorate scam to make zelensky rich ,🙄
...as it the fact that Zelenskyy was put into power with considerable help form the CIA.
Is that a suggestion that the elections had little to do with it?
Some stuff I’ve read suggests destroying the dam gives the Russians a strategic disadvantage. Mostly in that it’ll be easier for the Ukrainians to cross the Dnipro. Also Kherson is Russian controlled, why flood it if they’re not vacating it? There’s a lot of stuff which on the surface doesn’t make sense. I agree it’s most likely that the Russians did this, but why?
I said it on the other thread, I could well imagine this was not 'the Russians' but 'a Russian' that was given a command to stop a counter invasion over the dam, OR ELSE with little in the way of further instruction. Dude just thinks about not being shot or killed, (likely by his own seniors) rather than the bigger picture as the Ukrainians approach buttons it. Doesn't care about the Crimean water supply or anything outside his few KM's of influence.
Entirely speculation, but there's a lot of that on this thread.
yes, its all been an elbaorate scam to make zelensky rich ,🙄
Of course it’s not but the facts are that is what has happened as a consequence. Does it really suit Zelensky for this conflict to be over quickly and he can spend his whole working life on the mundane processes of government?
Is that a suggestion that the elections had little to do with it?
No. It is nearly pointing out that the former comedian wasn’t noted for his involvement in politics until the CIA decided to throw is considerable resources behind his campaign to get elected. Who knows what he may or may not have agreed to in return. I’m merely pointing out that the elections were hardly fairly faught and had considerable foreign government influence
I've read a lot about Zelensky, but that's the first time I've heard about him being elected thanks to the CIA.
And him benefiting from a war.... 🤔. Somehow I think he and his colleagues in government would rather be worrying about the mundane day-to-day GF running a country as opposed to having to defend it from attacks.
FFS....
This is starting to sound, from our usual faux revolutionaries, like the time Jeremy Corbyn stood up after the Salisbury poisoning and said the Russians should be given the benefit of the doubt and we shouldn’t jump to conclusions
Useful idiots…