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…
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?
Have people forgotten what happened around and in Kyiv just over a year ago? Even if you’re going to buy the bullshit that Zelensky would welcome that for some messed up personal reason, how did he get the Russians to do it?
And if there is a ‘quick way’ of ending this war, how is Zelensky standing in its way? Should he have handed over Kyiv and sat back and waited for more of the country to fall? Let the problem of when to resist belong to the elected leaders of Romania, Slovakia, Poland, Hungary?
Which scenario has him “working on the mundane process of government”, and at which point after Russia tried to take Kyiv was that an option for him?
Even if all the worse shit-flinging about Zelensky is true and more, he's still defending his country from invasion, so I'm not sure why anyone thinks it's relevant. The guy's certainly not perfect but it doesn't actually matter, and nothing that I've seen thrown at him has seemed anything more than puerile attempts at distracting.
kelvin
Full MemberWhat 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?
It's not about the russians, it is about makign absolutely damn sure you're right. Saddam Hussein didn't deserve the benefit of the doubt but that didn't stop the iraq war dossier from being absolute horseflops.
It's not about Putin, it's about us. And it's partly about us having also lost some of the authority and trustworthiness we'd once have had. Even more so now that we but much moreso the US has this huge and widely persuasive fifth column. (who can't be convinced of the truth, but who we can hopefully at least not feed real fuel) That doesn't mean we have to say "well we don't have 100% proof so we can't do anything", but it also means that we have to build the best case we reasonably can. Going too fast won't fix the dam after all.
There's some pretty decent seeming evidence that even randos like us can see, Russia's messaging is contradictory, and I assume that it was pretty well surveilled by powers other than ukraine and russia, powers who also have intelligence gathering and verification a bit beyond twitter, but a bit slower. So that's what I'm hoping comes through here.
Because yeah, at the end of the day there's no simple open and shut here. It definitely has been damaged before and could conceivably have failed. It could definitely have been an attempt to open a controllable (and repairable) gap. It definitely could have been a false flag operation or some rogue actor, or it could have been an accident (whether a wildly irresponsible one or a more tolerable one) or just some communication **** up, and all these things hit a little different or a lot, even though the result's the exact same. Some of these are insane but then there are significant actors involved who are insane, or desperate, or sane people trying to understand insane and desperate people. I mean, I totally believe that there could be some poor bastard very much like me who pressed the button because he thought he had no choice, and a local commander who thought he had no choice, and a strategic commander who has no idea what's going on at all and whose underlings are guessing what he wants, who is also guessing what his boss wants.
I 99% believe it's the russians. If nothing else, the logic for every reasonable explanation falls down in places, IMO, but when the logic falls down that doesn't point away from russia. And for it to be a central russian decision it pretty much points to them already believing they'd lost the territory that they're destroying, which would be a massive step at this point.
But I want more than belief.
Who actually did it and why is very much open to debate.
Is it? The standard questions are motive, means and opportunity.
The Russians have a motive in it blocks the Ukrainians launching a major attack in all the inundated areas. It is also going to impact Ukrainian farmers so a gain there. On the flip side there is going to be risk to their water supplies and impact on troops in the area but thats outweighed by the short term gains.
The Ukrainians dont really have a motive. Last year perhaps when the Russians invaded but not now they are on the counter offensive. So beyond a false flag to damage the Russians reputation its hard to see why and in that case there are far more sensible options.
Both have the means.
Opportunity though again its the Russians who stand out. They are the ones who raised the water level and have had possession of it. As such it would have been hard for the Ukrainians to plant the explosives.
And it’s partly about us having also lost some of the authority and trustworthiness we’d once have had
Absolutely true. But if you’re still waiting for firm evidence that Putin will invade Ukraine, flatten cities, put agricultural land out of use etc… you don’t need to rely on potentially politically motivated intelligence reports… the world has been able to see it all being carried out for over a year now… it’s not hidden… you don’t have to rely on western intelligence or politicians.
This is not Ukraine hitting itself in the face and asking for sympathy. Russia has invaded and wrecked it.
kelvin
Full MemberAbsolutely true. But if you’re still waiting for firm evidence that Putin will invade Ukraine, flatten cities, put agricultural land out of use etc…
Well obviously not, and there's no way you could reasonably think that's what I'm saying.
Useful idiots…
And with so many about, theres no chance for those 4 1/2 million dead civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq to get any justice.
If they had fitted detonators and they were activated accidently, which is very possible, then that’s basic incompetence
They have prior on being stupid.
I see the tankies have come out of the woodwork again.
It was the Russians. Classic MO from a bunch of gangsters.
