It's bullshit and you know it. It has nothing to do with the topic. There was no ethnic cleansing when a dam burst. A few beavers died at best. Omg the poor beavers. Bleeding hearts propaganda.
Russia did its own ethnic cleansing in Ukraine, a few decades ago. Holdomor.
You're right Ukraine didn't exist as the country its claiming, and it never has historically, but strangely there's this map showing something it thinks is. Ukraine existed 1000s of years ago. Roman specifically, and older. Okay. I'll agree, Russia gave Ukraine its borders. Because Ukraine has never existed as the country the map shows today, hadn't Russia granted Ukraine its borders and built much of it.
The dam bursting destroyed a bridge, and a dam, it expanded the river. It flooded low lying ground rising the water level.
Civilians being evacuated strains Ukrainian services more, I'd expect. An entire city, Kherson, plus lots of villages over a much larger area of river.
The dam bursting didn't make Ukraine fight any better. No. Their offensive operations have been woefully killed. Annihilated. At this point all they can do is deny they launched an offensive, because they haven't captured anything.
But what does a dam bursting do? It provokes, it causes support. This is ignorant, it happens regardless.
The probability is still Russia. Unless you can tell me why Ukraine did it, something factual objectively. Instead of dumb provocation.
Yes. Perhaps. But that's not an objective. It's speculation based on opposing propaganda.
Obviously Ukraine is suffering from warfare, and in the process it's partially breaking away from its Russian ancestry, or attempting too.
But to suggest an entire populace is genocided because it plans to replace its ethnic origin is ignorant. Ukraine will still be there no matter any changes by whom and what.
The dam bursting didn't genocide the rest of the Ukraine. It expanded a waterway that was previously dammed. Why? It's not because of joos migrating.
No. Sorry both sides use propaganda. Both have reasons.
It is finding the reason. Objectively. Not listening to bleeding hearts propaganda. Trust no one.
I am inclined not to believe either objectively.
Last year Kherson was in Russian hands it was moving forward to Odessa or at least the next city above Kherson, some name I don't want to look up, Mykol whatever. That dynamic changed on withdrawal. Russia blew out the connecting bridge on retreat. Where Ukraine then had attacked the dam. Now the bridge is destroyed and so is the dam.
Accurately was the hydro powerstation in use. No, the odds are it wasn't to any degree. Problematical it's war, but no excuse for preventing catastrophe. So it suggests there is probability for Russian causality. Accidentally or not. It was expected because of the known risk.
Currently Ukraine's offensive has gone shit, although there is still fighting in Donetsk and etc. But the press today is reading of lies. They hadn't started their counteroffensive. Nato suggesting its troops might be deployed. Talks of F16s being sent, prior to the supposed months of training. It suggests what? Ukraine are full of bananas.
It is possible they created this incident to gain further support. They do shit like it.
But come on. I'm not getting into banana throwing. It served a purpose. Now who is to blame and why?
The problem I have is debilerate or accident.
There is an obvious advantage. Now who.
I am trying to understand the Ukrainian advantage. Their mindless rationality is suicidal. It uses acts of provocation to justify funding and further support, constantly trying to escalate the situation into a much larger conflict. Regardless.
However. There is reasoning. It could be on crossing, the Dniper somewhere. It could've been to sabotage, disrupt, provoke, and confuse. While launching an attack. It could be to affect the Crimea's water. But this is easily routed and still has water systems flowing despite the reservoir now levelling off to the river's water level, expanding the river flooding the run off and rising the river.
Although there is a distinct advantage defensively in wiping out a South Western approach. Kherson has no other point concurrently. It simply provides cover. Until presumably disaster.
There is a long term set back to Odessa's advance and approaches, but let's face it, there is zero chance of that concurrently. Karkiv would be a bigger prize, still ignored. Because it takes far more than a defensive position holding territory. Odessa does secure the coast. But Karkiv the border. Problematic Odessa won't be taken for some time. The odds before that occurring are significantly null. Prior to accession and or truce. Or who knows. Except it is a historic nightmare.
The odds are placing it as Russian damages. But there are more than odds. Factors to consider. Was the substation operational. If so why wasn't the dam repaired since, Ukrainian attacks, last year? Come on, if it was operational there wouldn't be the complete causation of its breach. As it wasn't at much capacity, no real maintenance, releasing the outflow, and generating productivity, the blame further falls on the occupier. It failed to maintain it through suggestive attacks. These could easily cite the rhetoric of terrorism having abundant proof on hand. It was generating output being disrupted.
But it still doesn't rule out sabotage. Why objectively. They're monkeys, okay. No, where is that advantage, outside of acts of bananas? Bananas name calling.
A river is natural geography, expanding it also provides a bigger border. But who knows. There's only irony. I could probably think of far more reasons. Unless you can provide facts of how it serves an opposing advantage?
Sorry, composing, typos, half asleep. A long day, then writing hundreds of words.
Is this the Russian held town that had the hydro powerstation that was submerged? Is this where it is lowering from the original torrenting cascade? Explanation, because the river is expanding into the floodplains and estuaries going out to sea. Although won't it be some time before becoming inhabitable. It was at second storey height. Hasn't the river's banks burst and entire houses and cows and cars and beavers got carried away migrating into Kherson's costal outskirts, flooding their cellars with the drowned?
Flooding into its delta, along the coast.
Hang on. The river's closest points are at Kherson oblast. The widest points are further upstream. It snakes around going out to sea, and had been dammed. I think there might be some in Donetsk as well. I don't know enough about its channels, run offs, and outflows.
Water levels lowering where. Water doesn't lower in a flood. It has increased. It doesn't change because the geography has changed. The river has changed. Yes it will drop slightly as it runs into floodplains and estuaries expanding. But the water level has risen. The dam has burst. The reservoir, is one of the largest in the World, and it will drop to a point below dammed, but likely not significant enough to drive vehicles across. Those points were in few places, and they weren't the main waterways, bridged? Now however the river has expanded.
Upstream is dammed. This is where there might possibly be Ukrainian meddling, by releasing dams and allowing more water downstream. However the river is at its widest, much of upstream, and there are still many active bridges crossing it regardless the further North.
Accidental and ironic.
The Russian villages then were in the integrated Kherson oblast. After Kherson withdrawal, all territory West of the river and the Islands in it, were claimed by Ukraine. Russia retreated geographically to the East of the river. Yes while it was in Russian hands, I also did read the report of purported Ukrainian strikes on the dam, last year prior to withdrawal. As previously past conversation, a factor in withdrawal of Kherson, it among plenty of reasoning from the low ground that is unfavourable to artillery, and supporting an attacked city in Winter subjected to greater supply lines and outages, plus tactically Russia can return fire on a hostile city, where the Ukrainian forward line pressed, and your aforementioned bridge subjected to constant Ukrainian strikes until changing hands, now viceversa. It was blown up on Russian retreat of Kherson?
But sadly you won't change my opinion that it is an advantage. Does it prove it was accidental or deliberate? I can only find irony.
However there are questions of how the water level is affected upstream? If the reservoir drains, is it easier to cross upstream as water rushes downstream. Perhaps this could become contentious. Again it is hardly significant because river crossing would be subjected to the same historic status, unless it dropped well below the average tables?
And in every event the battlefield adjusts, reshaping. Forced to change tactics, and reposition in light of the new geography that won't be dammed again in conflict.
I don't know where, the river goes the length of the Ukraine. But Ukraine supposedly made a beachhead amassing. This was reported in most sources like Reuters, Guardian, it was around the time of Bakhmut's fall, when Ukraine pressed on the Russian retreat, or there after their defeat, while talk of the counteroffensive was being fully hyped. I believe it was somewhere Zaprozhzhia or Kherson. But don't quote me, it could've been anywhere. I didn't take much notice, apart from this memory of mine. It doesn't remember names, they're gibberish, just the content or the note.
Regardless in this conflict, crossing the river had laid traps on the Russian advance, where if we go back a year, last year, when a Russian brigade was annihilated attempting it. It has since been contentious crossing. Many bridges have been destroyed by both. However after Kherson, Ukraine had advanced claiming the central Islands. Yes they have settlements on them, some are large enough to host troops and equipment. Now ironically submerged.
Tactically, if I am funnelling into choke points I know I'd want my flanks covered.
If on probability we look at dam breaches, directly after Bakhmut, Russia knocked out a dam in the Dontesk region. It was ahead of Bakhmut to the West.
Regardless, crossing is treacherous, it has in every warfare in history where great feats of engineering have sometimes come up with solutions after losses, or they have faired badly. Because defensively it is often like shooting fish in barrel, movement across rivers.
I am basing the probability, hence my bittersweet humor. It's dastardly but perhaps accidental and ironic.
Because Ukraine have reportedly crossed, who know where, it's huge, but they were occupied on the central Islands now flooded and submerged. As well as in Kherson. Now useless. Of course it also halts advances to Odessa. But currently it has done what to the offense?
No, historically river crossing in flooding in every major conflict dating back to the beginning of civilization has been treacherous, including in WW2.
The same as gaining ground through flooding. The water level rising has now widened the area needed to be crossed. Defensively is it easier or harder to defend? No, the water level has not risen to the same incline, otherwise everywhere is submerged. It hasn't made an incline easier if it has expanded the river's surface area.
I am playing odds. Probability.
But you never know, what Ukraine are capable of. If the offensive went badly. Reeeeeee. They're almost suicidal. But come on? Defensively there is an advantage.
No, because the bridges were already blown. So how are they bridging it. The banks have burst. It causes much greater difficulty, crossing a wider/widening river. The ground on the other side was also lower. One of the major factors for Russia withdrawal from Kherson, and the danger posed by this dam flooding Kherson and the lower ground.
I don't buy Western media, until something significant from Ukraine occurs. But Ukraine outside of their bigger disaster yesterday in the same region, are reportedly pushing down from Zaporizhzhia area. It is possible they were also going to attempt a counterflank from Kherson area crossing.
Now state the obvious advantages?
There isn't much danger to the reactor, there's a secondary dam further up stream. It can fill the reactor ponds. The over capacity reservoir, not maintained in conflict, spilled, bursting the dam, and it remarkably flooded the lower Kherson ground held by Ukraine, and submerged the Islands also occupied by Ukraine.
This strategically doesn't need as much manpower defending that side, if any offensive is pushing from the north down, it can divert some of them. It has cut off a much bigger avenue from the southwest.
Who knows what caused it. But it smells dastardly.
Or please explain? Tactically it seems advantageous to defense. Offense if crossing it is in for hell, until the level stabilises and adjusts to the new levels of flooding, it won't be for some time. Meanwhile it has to concern itself with rescue and evacuation.
But it also puts more danger on the reactor.
Hahaha.
80% Russia. 20% Natural. Maybe 60. 40%. Naturally these things happen. It had damage. It was old and not serviced in warfare. An accident. It was also over capacity.
Objectively, hahaha, it really put a dampener on a counteroffensive coming from that Kherson side. It is now evacuated. It was the danger when Russia occupied it. This dam. It really fucks up that side. Russian held territory not as much. Higher ground. Crossing a flooded river is much harder. Going across floodplains is also much harder. Various bridges had been targeted in this conflict.
There is small danger to the nuclear reactor but it's minimal unless the other dam by it goes.
Odds put Russia as a culprit. Although natural causes are a factor.
Weeeee, need to charge, must charge, splaaaaaaat.
Fucking monkeys.
I am struggling to understand what the funding buys. Explain? Somebody explain Ukrainian rationality? It is awful. It's like pouring money down a shitter. A bullshittier.
The charge is supposed to be covered or create a field of fire allowing advance. It isn't supposed to get brand new stuff and throw it away.
Give gun to monkey it shoot itself. Please don't give them the F16s.
It's nothing to do with that. It's normalising AI. It's normalising clones. Other emerging tech. Tech faster infringing on our biology and its status.
It has usurped natural biological rights to invade under what rationality. Never from a freak. But from control.
Although you're right about them trying to move the age of consent. UK and America suggesting votes for 16 year olds, is faster claiming adult rights?
Topically there are huge problems being created by the freaks. Disgustingly so. At no point does anybody else need to hear it.
What is Russia Davos? It factually does not exist. Because Davos is in a different country, called Switzerland.
Reuters like almost every other paper has turned into feces.
If it was serious about what the summit was, it would have stated it. If it was an equivalent and held yearly as that event, stating its name might be relevant as to what it was about
Instead that report is nothing but drivel. It provides nothing but speculation, somebody said something they claimed, and lies regarding it. The flavour of online journalism, today, no facts, just gossip.
So they held a summit, western press wasn't welcome. Could it be Russian press is sanctioned? The headline said it all.
Back in the day. Now. Never. It's completely fake and totally gay. Every genuine post is attacked. You see it constantly, and in every sub. You see the guy commenting. The guy commenting doesn't fit the topic's narrative, questioning it. They don't echo kissing ass. They say something away from the narrative, and they're instantly smegged and blocked off the page, the page only showing bottom feeders. There are some subs, not many that still have discussion, but they're so rare and hard to find. They're also blocking IP's, so only smegs post in many subs, they shadow ban others. They're also favourite to foreign usurpers. VPN from Africa and Asia watch how your comments aren't as smegged on.
It's the way speech has been turned into on/off up votes/down votes. Completely amoral. Further they start giving monkey currency for making the most superficial, kiss ass, comments.
Back in the day game Dev. Now no point putting it on Reddit.
I only read the down votes. The rest of their shit kissing offers nothing else apart from analingus. They started removing the down votes now sanitising their human centipede Chambers. But they're up for a few hours. It's the down votes you find actual reasoning. Unless they're potty mouths.
They were completely destroyed, and possibly by a thermobaric weapon? Weeeeeee, splat, I guess tik tok immortalised their attempts. There's probably a few more of them desperate to charge and burn stuff. I guess that was the idea of raiding stuff, trying to divert troops to defend a huge border from mad max's incursion and the raider clans. I just don't think it turned out so well for them.
The point being, it's fucking ironic. Where was the facts? It didn't air they got squashed, 2 minutes later? I guess it would be even more ironic if a counter offensive decided to try to steal Belgorod. Somehow I don't think it could. But as CNN would have it, who knows?
Has the nuclear reactor been sabotaged?
If the Dnipro river is contaminated it would be disastrous for Kiev and Ukraine. Not just the Crimea. Plus the fallout would drift into Europe potentially.
There would be no gain there. It could cause nuclear war.
Not even Ukraine is as stupid I hope.
Topically the counter offensive has yet to materialise. It is seemingly a tabloid fantasy at this point. A word used to inspire morale and justify funding with the promises of escalation. Whenever. I doubt it will change much. This conflict is in for the long haul. It has so many agendas. Except for the fact Ukraine has been given so much new gear and training. It seems odd that they haven't done anything else with it to date. Battles however exchange troops, and the battlefield adjusts.
What is utterly dumbfounded is the propaganda that has no accuracy. It strains to air narratives instead of facts. The facts change in battle. 1 minute there's a charge, a minute later it's dead, perhaps it captured something for another minute, until it was recaptured the next minute. The press however jumps the gun. I hate its toxic culture today. Gossip serving no point. We've seen this continuously, on the whims of hearsay. I blame social media.
The fact is it's a talking point. The supposed counter offensive. Until it occurs there's only irony. The fact Ukraine are losing much more, look at the map. It's a grim business warfare, both sides have causality and losses until any terms and conclusion. Until something else significant occurs, there's only bullshit being aired.
There is a conundrum in this conflict. It will only be solved with a loser. The other side accepting the other's terms. They aren't what's being claimed.
How is it working?
What troops have Russia diverted from fortified lines to defend?
How many more are Ukraine losing there?
These are squadrons with tanks, artillery, personnel carriers, troops. They fire and what happened to them?
I guess this is the 'Counter Offensive' that the press has been talking about for half a year. Don't reclaim your territory because it is defended. Make incursions accross the border and raid stuff, until who knows how that worked out. But I mean look at it. The press has got to try and air something really positive, they're winning, they're attacking Russia some way somehow somebody said.
Haha WTF. Bleeding hearts propaganda. Not interested in that kind of critical thinking. About how the damned beavers were genocided by the Jews. Come on you're gonna have to do much better than the beavers.
Holodomor, Ukraine was still Russian. You haven't proved anything else. The point of debate was did Russia cause ethnic cleansing in Ukraine. Look at that, they actually did. Not bullshit.
I am not believing lies. I am gauging the probability. Something you have become very emotional about. It isn't critical thinking.
I am asking rationally why. Something we were talking about, until you started throwing bananas. Something I said I didn't want to partake in.
The probability. The obvious point of debate on your beloved landmark of Soviet engineering, was, was it operational. Not nonsense. Was it generating productivity? Was the overflow being vented producing electricity powering Russian territory. Not bullshit. Then you can claim the terrorism. I think you'll find it wasn't restored. Yes there are limitations in warfare. But it was seemingly expected. Because it was, it's no surprise. It's not a knicker twister where the poor beavers got genocided. It was an occurrence.
Now why? There are plenty of reasons and more put that probability higher Russian objectively, rather than Ukrainian provocation. Although their's could be similar. Although not for at the foreseeable future. Russia aren't launching an offensive there soon. They're defending and are still carrying out forward operations in Donetsk.