What floodgates? They don't allow the ships through. Previously. So the gates that power the hydro electricity? So they didn't release the overflow. It was spilling, previously. But they weren't operating this entire time? Dumb dumb dumb. As suspected.

The upper dam is maintained. Tell me what the weather was? It releases the excess automatically, like in rainfall. Because this is what the system is designed to do, pass the overflow down the river, collecting it in the reservoir. It doesn't need a conspiracy. But there you are rubbing your hands together, hatching a plot.

What are you on about. I know how the dam works without the ships and the beaver genocide.

The counter offensive you've linked. Except. The invasion started as a big feint in the North. That huge convey was diversionary. Combined into a lot of inexperience. Problematical they didn't know what they were completely facing. Where they secured footing was along a land corridor. It probably still sought terms. Who knows that complete agenda but there's far more tactics at play and overall agenda on a bigger stage than the proxy. However the media on both sides has been seeped in propaganda in warfare that has shifting dynamics over a colossal country. What was Bakhmut as example, who used it and why for what. It had another purpose outside of the misinformation. The biggest problem this conflict has had is a real lack of dominating air superiority. It has sought territory over the complete degradation of an enemy, because it has been fighting its own and it is defending itself from far more risk.

The territory won back then wasn't quite the complete forward positions. No. It gained smaller towns and faster retreated off bigger feints. I suspect Kherson was problematic. Because Odessa hosted far more. It didn't capture Karkiv either. The main fighting did what then. It was gaining the land corridor via the Southern Oblasts East of the Dnipro, while engaging against the fortified line in Donetsk and Luhansk. Now however it has entrenched as it grinds away at an enemy's resolve.

The geography of gain has also followed which landmarks? More than the river. It's obvious.

But the dam I am not convinced. You spew provocation. Except it's there anyway. It hasn't changed much. The funding and escalation is there already.

It changed access. Objectively who does this favour? It could be Ukraine if Russia still seeks the rest of the coast. However not in the immediate future.

What floodgates? They don't allow the ships through. Previously. So the gates that power the hydro electricity? So they didn't release the overflow. It was spilling, previously. But they weren't operating this entire time? Dumb dumb dumb. As suspected.

The upper dam is maintained. Tell me what the weather was? It releases the excess automatically, like in rainfall. Because this is what the system is designed to do, pass the overflow down the river, collecting it in the reservoir. It doesn't need a conspiracy. But there you are rubbing your hands together, hatching a plot.

What are you on about. I know how the dam works without the ships and the beaver genocide.

The counter offensive you've linked. Except. The invasion started as a big feint in the North. That huge convey was diversionary. Combined into a lot of inexperience. Problematical they didn't know what they were completely facing. Where they secured footing was along a land corridor. It probably still sought terms. Who knows that complete agenda but there's far more tactics at play and overall agenda on a bigger stage than the proxy. However the media on both sides has been seeped in propaganda in warfare that has shifting dynamics over a colossal country. What was Bakhmut as example, who used it and why for what. It had another purpose outside of the misinformation. The biggest problem this conflict has had is a real lack of dominating air superiority. It has sought territory over the complete degradation of an enemy, because it has been fighting its own and it is defending itself from far more risk.

The territory won back then wasn't quite the complete forward positions. No. It gained smaller towns and faster retreated off bigger feints. I suspect Kherson was problematic. Becsuse Odessa hosted far more. It didn't capture Karkiv either. The main fighting did what then. It was gaining the land corridor via the Southern Oblasts East of the Dnipro, while engaging against the fortified line in Donetsk and Luhansk. Now however it has entrenched as it grinds away at enemy's resolve

But the dam I am not convinced. You spew provocation. Except it's there anyway. It hasn't changed much. The funding and escalation is there already.

It changed access. Objectively who does this favour? It could be Ukraine if Russia still seeks the rest of the coast. However not in the immediate future.

What floodgates? They don't allow the ships through. Previously. So the gates that power the hydro electricity? So they didn't release the overflow. It was spilling, previously. But they weren't operating this entire time? Dumb dumb dumb. As suspected.

The upper dam is maintained. Tell me what the weather was? It releases the excess automatically, like in rainfall. Because this is what the system is designed to do, pass the overflow down the river, collecting it in the reservoir. It doesn't need a conspiracy. But there you are rubbing your hands together, hatching a plot.

What are you on about. I know how the dam works without the ships and the beaver genocide.

The counter offensive you've linked. Except. The invasion started as a big feint in the North. That huge convey was diversionary. Combined into a lot of inexperience. Problematical they didn't know what they were completely facing. Where they secured footing was along a land corridor. It probably still sought terms. Who knows that complete agenda but there's far more tactics at play and overall agenda on a bigger stage than the proxy. However the media on both sides has been seeped in propaganda in warfare that has shifting dynamics over a colossal country. What was Bakhmut as example, who used it and why for what. It had another purpose outside of the misinformation. The biggest problem this conflict has had is a real lack of dominating air superiority. It has sought territory over the complete degradation of an enemy, because it has been fighting its own and it is defending itself from far more risk.

The territory won back then wasn't quite the complete forward positions. No. It gained smaller towns and faster retreated off bigger feints. I suspect Kherson was problematic. Becsuse Odessa hosted far more. It didn't capture Karkiv either. The main fighting did what then. It was gaining the land corridor via the Southern Oblasts East of the Dnipro, while engaging against the fortified line in Donetsk and Luhansk. Now however it has entrenched as grinds away.

But the dam I am not convinced. You spew provocation. Except it's there anyway. It hasn't changed much. The funding and escalation is there already.

It changed access. Objectively who does this favour? It could be Ukraine of Russia still seeks the rest of the coast. However not in the immediate future.

What floodgates? They don't allow the ships through. Previously. So the gates that power the hydro electricity? So they didn't release the overflow. It was spilling, previously. But they weren't operating this entire time? Dumb dumb dumb. As suspected.

The upper dam is maintained. Tell me what the weather was? It releases the excess automatically, like in rainfall. Because this is what the system is designed to do, pass the overflow down the river, collecting it in the reservoir. It doesn't need a conspiracy. But there you are rubbing your hands together, hatching a plot.

What are you on about. I know how the dam works without the ships and the beaver genocide.

The counter offensive you've linked. Except. The invasion started as a big feint in the North. That huge convey was diversionary. Combined into a lot of inexperience. Problematical they didn't know what they were completely facing. Where they secured footing was along a land corridor. It probably still sought terms. Who knows that complete agenda but there's far more tactics at play and overall agenda on a bigger stage than the proxy. However the media on both sides has been seeped in propaganda in warfare that has shifting dynamics over a colossal country. What was Bakhmut as example, who used it and why for what. It had another purpose outside of the misinformation. The biggest problem this conflict has had is a real lack of dominating air superiority. It has sought territory over the complete degradation of an enemy, because it has been fighting its own and it is defending itself from far more risk.

But the dam I am not convinced. You spew provocation. Except it's there anyway. It hasn't changed much. The funding and escalation is there already.

It changed access. Objectively who does this favour?

What floodgates? They don't allow the ships through. Previously. So the gates that power the hydro electricity? So they didn't release the overflow. It was spilling, previously. But they weren't operating this entire time? Dumb dumb dumb. As suspected.

The upper dam is maintained. Tell me what the weather was? It releases the excess automatically, like in rainfall. Because this is what the system is designed to do, pass the overflow down the river, collecting it in the reservoir. It doesn't need a conspiracy. But there you are rubbing your hands together, hatching a plot.

What are you on about. I know how the dam works without the ships and the beaver genocide.

The counter offensive you've linked. Except. The invasion started as a big feint in the North. That huge convey was diversionary. Combined into a lot of inexperience. Problematical they didn't know what they were completely facing. Where they secured footing was along a land corridor. It probably still sought terms. Who knows that complete agenda but there's far more tactics at play and overall agenda on a bigger stage than the proxy. However the media on both sides has been seeped in propaganda in warfare that has shifting dynamics over a colossal country. What was Bakhmut as example, who used it and why for what. It had another purpose outside of the misinformation. The biggest problem this conflict has had is a real lack of dominating air superiority. It has sought territory over the complete degradation of an enemy, because it has been fighting its own and it is defending itself from far more risk.

What floodgates? They don't allow the ships through. Previously. So the gates that power the hydro electricity? So they didn't release the overflow. It was spilling, previously. But they weren't operating this entire time? Dumb dumb dumb. As suspected.

The upper dam is maintained. Tell me what the weather was? It releases the excess automatically, like in rainfall. Because this is what the system is designed to do, pass the overflow down the river, collecting it in the reservoir. It doesn't need a conspiracy. But there you are rubbing your hands together, hatching a plot.

What are you on about. I know how the dam works without the ships and the beaver genocide.