italianjob
Well-known member
So, Russia has 'repelled' the offensive?!?!?
So, Russia has 'repelled' the offensive?!?!?
I would guess simply a lack of an alternative narrative. If the Ukraine side is keeping schtum there is little else to be said. Also OPSEC.as always, v strange the bbc repeats the russian news agencies. presumably theres a reason they do this?!
as always, v strange the bbc repeats the russian news agencies. presumably theres a reason they do this?!
Very very scary and this for me is the huge false flag moment which was rumoured last week on the power plant. This has certainly upped the stakes in this war and brought the world closer to involvement with such a major disaster. Russia have literally gone on a scorched earth tactic, they will be salting fields next!Yep.
Insane thing to do. That's Crimea's water supply done for.
"Russia has blown up the Nova Kakhovka dam, probably as a cover for withdrawing from those parts of Ukraine.
The consequences are immense, truly staggering.
Ukraine has a very good plan for evacuation if they did this on their controled side.
Problem is that the bulk of damage will be on the low banked side towards the south of the river, and the Russians there will not evacuate anyone.
So, on the Russian occupied side we can expect high casualty rates among civilian Ukrainian.
It is also an environmental disaster that will take years to clear up.
This means that there are actually two separate war crimes here.
Then we have that they have condemned themselves to an acute water shortage in Crimea.
The water coming across the bridge is by far not enough to sustain them, especially in the northern parts of Crimea.
But, the worst part is that now the Zhaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant is in acute risk status.
The internal cooling dam contain roughly two weeks of water to cool the spent fuel, and to cycle water through the shuttered reactors (all of them are shuttered).
After that disaster will strike and the area will be irradiated, how much is anyones guess right now.
Consequences
I fear that this was the moment that NATO have to say enough and enter the war.
And it must be done very fast to secure the ZPP, install pumps, and pump water up from the river into the cooling dam.
A mamoth project if I ever heard of one.
I just hope that our politicians have the balls to do what is needed now."
I'm not certain he's right about the conclusion here. But it's probably the single most damaging event of the war.
I think this is a desperate act in several ways.If they’re F***ing up the water supply to crimea , are the eventually conceding they are going to lose crimea too ?
I know the Kremlin doesn’t give a **** about its population , but them doing this seriously **** a lot of their own citizens
This is clearly an absolute disaster and a war crime (if initial assessment turns out to be true l) but I think your mate is going a bit Dr strangelove here... I'd go as far to say that it would be veering into false flag territory if this happening was used as a reason to escalate to WW3, which it would be."Consequences
I fear that this was the moment that NATO have to say enough and enter the war.
And it must be done very fast to secure the ZPP, install pumps, and pump water up from the river into the cooling dam.
A mamoth project if I ever heard of one.
I just hope that our politicians have the balls to do what is needed now."
I'm not certain he's right about the conclusion here. But it's probably the single most damaging event of the war.
This is clearly an absolute disaster and a war crime (if initial assessment turns out to be true l) but I think your mate is going a bit Dr strangelove here... I'd go as far to say that it would be veering into false flag territory if this happening was used as a reason to escalate to WW3, which it would be.
On the one hand he says UKR have everything they need and are winning handily.
On the other he's saying now we need NATO going to war with Russia.
If point 1 is true then doing point 2 effectively guarantees a nuclear holocaust.
I'm in my 30's I'd like to have a chance of having a full life, my children having a full life etc.
I think the point of NATO getting involved is more to do with the largest nuclear powerplant in Europe on emergency mode and probably not far from a full meltdown(also considering the damage already done to the site). This could quite easily affect other NATO members and possibly trigger article 5.This is clearly an absolute disaster and a war crime (if initial assessment turns out to be true l) but I think your mate is going a bit Dr strangelove here... I'd go as far to say that it would be veering into false flag territory if this happening was used as a reason to escalate to WW3, which it would be.
On the one hand he says UKR have everything they need and are winning handily.
On the other he's saying now we need NATO going to war with Russia.
If point 1 is true then doing point 2 effectively guarantees a nuclear holocaust.
I'm in my 30's I'd like to have a chance of having a full life, my children having a full life etc.
There was an episode by that American analyst on YouTube where he said that their is a large nato force on standby ready-to-go in and take the power plant if needed and setup a defensive area around it. Not necessarily there to take on the Russians but to protect the powerplant from having a catastrophic failure.I think the point of NATO getting involved is more to do with the largest nuclear powerplant in Europe on emergency mode and probably not far from a full meltdown(also considering the damage already done to the site). This could quite easily affect other NATO members and possibly trigger article 5.
I don't think this is within Water Aids remit.This is really bad news, and a despicable act from Russia, but to me it just looks like an act of desperation which effectively proves how much they're in the ****. If the Crimea water situation is true, then this basically looks like they're just effectively giving this up. Will be interesting to see if Water aid comes to Crimea via Ukraine, that would be good to see, and sticks two fingers up at Putin.
NATO won't enter the war, but this will just invigorate them further into supporting Ukraine with more and more, which is the right thing to do.
But if NATO had to "take" the power plant ie having a big ruck with the Russians to take control (would the Russians just give up?) will this not potentially risk further sabotage? Russians see them coming, blow things up and retreat? Scorched earth policy on steroids?There was an episode by that American analyst on YouTube where he said that their is a large nato force on standby ready-to-go in and take the power plant if needed and setup a defensive area around it. Not necessarily there to take on the Russians but to protect the powerplant from having a catastrophic failure.