You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
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.
Oh yeah… I forgot everything has to be viewed through the prism of IRAQ!!!!
*grabs petticoats in horror and outrage*
The default ‘argument’ used by anyone fond of the old tinfoil helmet, that leads to some of the most mind-bogglingly stupid conspiracy nonsense ever spouted. Ie: it wasn’t the Russians behind the Salisbury poisonings
Of course it bloody was! Same with this.
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a ****ing duck, then it’s….
🙄
More rancid sarcasm from binners.
Yes yes, Russia is a bad superpower that does bad things purely in their own interest. We accept that.
Its just a shame the useful idiots like yourself see our own lot with rose tinted spectacles.
Anyone pointing anything other out must be shouted down.
You might as well reference the Suez crisis as Iraq
It’s about as relevant
But we know that our usual gang of faux revolutionaries have to come on to every thread like this and make out that they have some superior insight, usually from something they read on Twitter and that the overwhelming evidence that we all see before our eyes is wrong because… IRAQ!!!
Same old tedious sixth form level nonsense as always
occams razor. its bloody obvious who is behind it, just like the pipeline.
Ln time more evidence will appear. bit like the photos of the Russian ship specialising in submarine rescue that happened to be circling the area of the pipeline explosions with its tracker switched off.....just before they blew.
Russia will continue to deny. idiots I'll continue to give them the benefit of doubt
Ln time more evidence will appear. bit like the photos of the Russian ship specialising in submarine rescue that happened to be circling the area of the pipeline explosions with its tracker switched off…..just before they blew.
I'm under the impression there's increasing indications the explosion was as a result of Ukrainian action
I’m under the impression there’s increasing indications the explosion was as a result of Ukrainian action
Source(s)?
I’m under the impression there’s increasing indications the explosion was as a result of Ukrainian action
Unlikely, unless the Ukrainians were looking to hem the Russian military into one area. But I dont know the lay of the land there, or how Russia would move their forces if Ukraine launched a major offensive in that area against them.
Either side in the scenario of an action might use it to prevent a flanking move.
The ARRSE forum has good insights on who/why/when/what if. They're the ones with the experience to read this situation.
I personally think it probably fell down by itself. Many infrastructures previously held by the Russians were always in a state of disrepair. Great at monuments, not so good at maintenance.
I’m under the impression there’s increasing indications the explosion was as a result of Ukrainian action
Source(s)?
sorry, might have created some confusion there- I was replying to DT78's comment where he attributed the Nordstrom pipeline explosion to the Russians
re the pipeline there has been one report I've seen stating that Biden was warned the Ukrainians were planning on blowing up the pipeline. apparently convenienty leaked by that dumb kid.
unless there is something else you are referring to?
I call bollox on that. I put much more faith in the photographic evidence and reports about the Russian ship in the area at the time. think it was Denmark who published it.
of course I could be completely being taken in by our propaganda but the Russians are the most logical and obvious whodunit on both the dam and the pipeline.
I would also say a strong possibility they knocked out the cable to Shetland as well a while back
they have form
dyna-ti
Full MemberI personally think it probably fell down by itself. Many infrastructures previously held by the Russians were always in a state of disrepair. Great at monuments, not so good at maintenance.
If not for the reports of an explosion, I'd probably buy that too- there's satellite footage showing that part of the road across it either collapsed or was removed a few days earlier. Not sure why anyone'd remove it, so that supports the collapse theory. But none of it fits with the explosion reports, or the assorted russians apparently saying they did it, so that's a pretty strong argument against.
I call bollox on that.
TBF your opinion is irrelevant and worthless as you simply don't know. None of us do. All you're doing is reinforcing your own beliefs and biases with speculation.
they have form
All countries have form. The russians aren't the only country in the world which run illegal military operations.
Came across this in Ukraine Times earlier:
Engineering and munitions experts point to a deliberate explosion as the most logical reason behind the Kakhovka dam explosion, the New York Times reported on June 7.
A mass humanitarian and ecological disaster unfolded after the Kakhovka dam collapsed around 2:50 a.m. on June 6. According to the Ukrainian authorities, the dam was blown up by Russian forces to prevent a Ukrainian counter-offensive.
According to experts cited by the New York Times, hard evidence of a deliberate explosion was "very limited" given that the dam was located in an active warzone, but "an internal explosion was the likeliest explanation for the destruction of the dam, a massive structure of steel-reinforced concrete that was completed in 1956."
The breach would have required "hundreds of pounds of explosives" to cause the kind of destruction that occurred and "an external detonation by bomb or missile would exert only a fraction of its force against the dam," the experts added.
The dam had previously sustained damage during fighting between Ukrainian and Russian forces since the start of the full-scale invasion last year, but the plant was "built to withstand an atomic bomb," Ihor Syrota, the head of Ukraine's state-owned energy company Ukrhydroenergo, said.
Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba criticized international media on June 6 that entertained Russian narratives that Ukraine might somehow be responsible for the Kakhovka dam's destruction, saying that it "puts facts and propaganda on equal footing."
Over 1,300 people have been rescued or preemptively evacuated from flood zones in the past 24 hours, according to the Interior Ministry, and relief efforts are ongoing.
Meanwhile, the President's Office reported that at least 150 tons of oil had spilled into the Dnipro River following the destruction of the dam, with the risk of 300 additional tons leaking.
The Agriculture Ministry also predicted on June 7 that the disruption caused to the biodiversity in the region by flooding would have unprecedenced economic and environmental consequences for years to come.
I find it really quite remarkable that there are people here who are prepared to give Russia the benefit of the doubt after everything they’ve done over the last ten-fifteen years or so. It is now a nationalist theocratic autocracy, led by a man who sees himself as the reincarnation of Peter the Great, and is rewriting history to back up his claim that Ukraine was never anything more than a small backward state that was always part of Greater Russia. Which is provably false. Putin has passed laws that give himself the right to murder anyone he feels speaks out against him and his government, with complete deniability. We’ve seen it happen at least twice in our country, and yet Putin’s useful idiots are all too happy to accuse Ukraine of carrying out acts against themselves, that do nothing but hamper everything they’ve been building up to for weeks, just because Russia’s fascist regime says so.
@dazh honestly if I could mute you I would some of your recent contributions come acorss like deliberate trolling. every post on this thread is an opinion, not a single person knows 100% fact. to state opinions are worthless by adding your own is contradictory.
I suggest you don't contribute on threads if you don't like opinions!
of course the dam could have been blown by Ukrainians / NATO / aliens / whatever. however most to be gained by it, at this time was russia. and as I said they have form. not from several generations ago but right now.
I find it really quite remarkable that there are people here who are prepared to give Russia the benefit of the doubt after everything they’ve done over the last ten-fifteen years or so.
And I don't understand this weird logic which claims that because Russia has been the brutal aggressor in this conflict everything Kyiv claims must therefore be truthful.
It is like claiming that the Allies only ever told the truth during World War 2 because the other side were fascists guilty of murdering millions.
Ukraine is fighting a full-scale war ffs, there is a very good reason why they say that the first causality in a war is 'the truth'.
@dazh honestly if I could mute you I would
If dazh's opinions upset you that much you could try to avoid reading his posts 💡
I suggest you don’t contribute on threads if you don’t like opinions!
Oh so much ironing.
I fail to see the irony. I'm happy with people airing their opinions on what they think may have happened, even if i think its bloody obvious. I'm not ok with being told my opinion is worthless, hence calling out the troll.
and yes I will be ignoring posts which in my worthless opinion are trying to troll
so that probably means I shouldn't even be responding to this one. hey ho.
And I don’t understand this weird logic which claims that because Russia has been the brutal aggressor in this conflict everything Kyiv claims must therefore be truthful.
Does anyone claim that? Everyone I know acknowledges there is propaganda from the Ukrainian side as well.
However in this case there is no obvious upside for the Ukrainians and lots of downsides vs the Russians who have some upside as well as downsides.
Its also rather unclear how the Ukrainians could have destroyed it whereas for the Russians since they had possession of it there are clear options.
Does anyone claim that?
No one claims that. Dazh is just making up positions for everyone else for a good old ding dong.
Does anyone claim that?
Absolutely, on this very page. Apparently Kyiv's claims should be accepted because Russia's fascist regime is so awful.
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 Russians don't seem to be that concerned about the welfare of their troops TBH, or most of their citizens.
Drowning a few thousand and putting hundreds of thousands into water poverty wouldn't even put a blip on their radar.
I’m not ok with being told my opinion is worthless, hence calling out the troll.
Airing opinions about who is to blame for something without any real evidence is just pure speculation designed to reinforce whatever biases you have. I'm not excusing Russia for their invasion, in fact you'll see I said that I think Russia destroying the dam is the most likely scenario. But something of this magnitude needs a sober and serious approach. I note the US and UK govts haven't rushed to a conclusion as many on here have. Perhaps ask yourself why that is?
The other wider point I'm trying to get across is that this tribal goodies vs baddies level of discussion about the war is not only purile but self-defeating. The only priority is how to bring an end to the war as soon as possible,
and to do that the two sides are going to have to talk to each other, and govts and people on both sides are going to have to swallow some hard compromises. The alternative to that is more destruction and death and the unthinkable prospect of nuclear escalation.
Anyway, if you don't want a proper discussion and just want to shout 'Boo! Russians are evil!' then go ahead, but don't complain if others don't want to join in with your flag waving.
The only priority is how to bring an end to the war as soon as possible,
and to do that some the two sides are going to have to talk to each other, and govts and people on both sides are going to have to swallow some hard compromises.
There's another way. Ukraine just lets Russia take whatever land they want with their strength of numbers and willingness to do and destroy anything in the process. The war in Ukraine could be over already, with a Free Ukraine unsupported by other countries reduced to a runt or non existent country. Here's the thing Dazh, there is a "baddie", the invading force that has been pushed back. That push back would not and could not have happened without help from neighbouring countries, and countries farther afield. We could have all just left Ukraine to it... the idea that would result in nothing but "talk" is incredibly naive. Ukraine would have been gone, or all but gone, and Russia's expansion plans would be looking to the next country.
‘Boo! Russians are evil!’
I've met many amazing Russians. Not at all evil. It's the invasion that is wrong and is being resisted. Including by Russians... despite them risking their own lives in doing so.
Nice to see the protagonists are up early.
Russia’s expansion plans would be looking to the next country.
Are there any left ?,isn't the rest NATO members. Unless you think Turkey is next
Just a thought, probably a stupid one but hey:
Is it possible that a Ukrainian missile or whatever hit the dam, couldn't damage it but did set off the Russian explosives inside? Which would explain the claims of both sides and the confusion surrounding it all.
I know, I'm imagining a big pile of barrels of gunpowder inside the centre of the dam, I'm sure it's much more complex and that modern explosives may not even be able to be set off like this, but does anyone know if this is even a possibility?
That push back would not and could not have happened without help from neighbouring countries, and countries farther afield.
I don't think anyone, including myself, has ever suggested Ukraine shouldn't be helped and supported.
We could have all just left Ukraine to it…
Except that's sort of what is happening isn't it? We might be giving them weapons but we could have also helped them with boots on the ground and air support. I presume you want the west to do that in order to try to push through a total victory? And if not, then why not? We need to defeat the baddie don't we? Why don't we get on with it? I think we all know the answer to that question.
One thing is cleary certain is the dam would still be in place if on the 24th Feb 2022 Russia had not invaded a soverign state. Nothing more needs to be said really on the matter, one aggressor one blame
Airing opinions about who is to blame for something without any real evidence is just pure speculation designed to reinforce whatever biases you have.
To use legal jargon (because what's an STW discussion without being pedantic about definitions), it sounds like you're looking for 'beyond reasonable doubt' whereas the rest of us are happy with 'on the balance of probabilities'.
Sure, we don't know anything for sure and therefore knowing beyond reasonable doubt is never going to happen. However, if we consider motive and opportunity, on the balance of probabilities Russia did it.
If you feel that on the balance of probabilities Ukraine did it then it would be interesting to hear your reasoning for thinking that. In fact, if you think it's 50/50 it would be interesting to hear your reasoning for that.
If we refuse to assume anything that can't be proved beyond reasonable doubt in an active war zone then we're going to have to give pretty much everything Russia do the benefit of the doubt.
Just a thought, probably a stupid one but hey:
Is it possible that a Ukrainian missile or whatever hit the dam, couldn’t damage it but did set off the Russian explosives inside?
Anything is possible. Though I can't think why the Ukrainian military would attack a dam knowing full well what would happen were the dam to collapse.
It’s a country, not a region.
Oh great, pedantry. Just what this thread needs!
kelvin
Full Memberthe Ukraine
It’s a country, not a region.
Amended.
Just for you 🙂
Nice one. We've all got that one wrong over the years. I have, many many times in the past.
I only mentioned it because some now use it deliberately to belittle Ukraine and add credence to Putin's story that Russia is just on operations in a region that is rightfully part of their country, rather than invading an independent country with a right to exist in its own right.
the beeb has an interesting article - including some pictures over a few days showing damage.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65818705
That makes it look like the road was taken out a few days before, which could have triggered a later failure.
That would make a lot more sense - Russians just meant to make the crossing unviable but messed up
Doesn't explain the numerous reports of large scale explosion heard, There would have been satellites watching so missle/artillery will be easy to rule in or out
I think there could be several reasons why the US and UK are keeping quiet. If they come out and condemn it, they need to have a common approach to a response as there will highly likely be calls for action over it. I note a story this morning mentioning polish boots on the ground being discussed. This could be a worrying escalation.
I worry an 'accident' is becoming more likely at the nuclear plant
and I agree with 'on balance of probability' comment
If they come out and condemn it, they need to have a common approach to a response as there will highly likely be calls for action over it.
Exactly. That doesn't seem to align though with the calls from many on here to support Ukraine towards a total victory.
I note a story this morning mentioning polish boots on the ground being discussed. This could be a worrying escalation.
Is that not what is needed though? We can't have it both ways. We either give Ukraine the support they need to get rid of the Russians from their territory, or we come to a compromise. If the former option is 'worrying' then perhaps we should get on with the serious business of diplomacy.
Nothing more needs to be said really on the matter, one aggressor one blame
Well that is obviously not true. Just because a country has been attacked it doesn't mean that it cannot be blamed for anything that occurs after that event.
Besides, how can you be sure the damage to the dam was directly caused by the war, isn't one of theories that the water level were allowed to become dangerously high? Weren't there also issues concerning Ukraine deliberately affecting water supplies to Crimea before 24th Feb 2022?
I have to confess that the issue of who or what caused the Nova Kakhovka Dam collapse doesn't preoccupy me sufficiently that I feel I should be bothered to form an opinion on the matter, but I find it weird that some people seem to argue that whatever the Ukrainian government claims must be the truth because Ukraine is the victim.
Btw I recently attended a fund raising advent by Ukrainian community in the UK specifically because I support Ukraine's struggle against clear and indisputable aggression. I am definitely not neutral on the subject.
I worry an ‘accident’ is becoming more likely at the nuclear plant
According to the last report I read....hold on, see if I can find it....
" The Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Plant, Europe’s largest, shut down its six reactors months ago but still relies on water from the Dnipro River for cooling. The water reservoir was falling by two inches per hour on Tuesday, meaning that the supply of cooling water should last at least a few days. The U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency wrote in a statement that “there is no immediate risk to the safety of the plant.” "
I note a story this morning mentioning polish boots on the ground being discussed. This could be a worrying escalation.
Yes, apparently Poland is the head of NATO now, so any attack should be led by them and not the US, the UK or a coalition.
You first Poland...we have your back.. Honestly.
Yet, here you are
That's because I can read a thread without necessarily having a strong opinion on the subject matter.
Absolutely no one has said this.
Yes they have. Try reading the thread.
The accident I worry about is not necessarily based on the cooling, but more to do with sabotage
This is unconfirmed, but it seems pretty true to form for Russia.
https://twitter.com/warning_trdlo/status/1666709972426653696
The accident I worry about is not necessarily based on the cooling, but more to do with sabotage
I think that would affect Russian positions more than any, and its only a couple of hundred KM from where the Black sea fleet lives.
This dam was one of a series of 7 along the river, are any of the others in the hands of the bad guys?
This is unconfirmed, but it seems pretty true to form for Russia.
Could also simply be a way of preventing the army crossing the river.
isn’t one of theories that the water level were allowed to become dangerously high?
I'm not sure I buy into this one. Dams are generally built with emergency spillways which prevent excessively high levels even if all the controllable outlets and spillways are shut. Of course I say this without any detailed knowledge of this particular dam or of 1950s Soviet dam design in general.
Weren’t there also issues concerning Ukraine deliberately affecting water supplies to Crimea before 24th Feb 2022?
Yes. A quite reasonable approach to my mind given the Russian occupation of Crimea, though with hindsight that could well have precipitated the full scale invasion of Ukraine.
Here's an interesting article from The Financial Times in 2021.
A further report on the aftermath of the dam destruction. Play silly games, win silly prizes…
Russian troops occupying the east bank of the Dnipro River in Kherson Oblast were not ready for the effects of the Kakhovka dam destruction, resulting in losses in personnel and military equipment, the General Staff of Ukraine's Armed Forces reported on June 8.
In particular, there are injured, dead, and missing in Russia's 7th Air Assault Division and the 22nd Army Corps, the General Staff wrote, without specifying the numbers.
According to the report, those units also lost several field ammunition depots and food storages, soft-skinned vehicles, armored vehicles, and other military property.
On June 6, a mass evacuation of civilians from Russian-occupied Kakhovka reportedly took place with people using their own vehicles. Russian forces stationed in the town left via the same evacuation routes, thus "using residents as human shields," the Ukrainian military added.
Russia destroyed the Kakhovka Hydroelectric Power Plant's dam on the Dnipro River on June 6, sparking a large-scale humanitarian and environmental disaster across southern Ukraine.
As the Institute of the Study of War (ISW) said in its latest update, the flooding caused by the dam's collapse had "heavily disrupted" Russian defensive positions on the river's east bank, particularly Russian first-line positions in Hola Prystan and Oleshky.
According to the ISW, Russian troops were likely forced to retreat from the towns of Hola Prystan and Oleshky due to the flooding. They had previously used those positions to shell the regional capital of Kherson and other nearby settlements on the west bank.
Is it possible that a Ukrainian missile or whatever hit the dam, couldn’t damage it but did set off the Russian explosives inside?
Seems a possibiilty.
That makes it look like the road was taken out a few days before, which could have triggered a later failure.
IMHO it doesn't look like much damage to the road, not enough to trigger a failure.
did you look at the pictures closely? one picture has a curved section of road at the top of the dam, the next day's photo it's gone with some water escaping. next photos is dam completely breached.
unless I'm not seeing it right (perfectly possible!)
From what I can see, there's water coming through in both photos and from what I can see it's only a small section of road that has gone.
From what I can see, there’s water coming through in both photos and from what I can see it’s only a small section of road that has gone.
Was that part of the road removed in order to weaken the remaining structure ahead of the main detonation?
dunno, for a chunk of road to disappear something must have happened maybe it was just it failing through neglect / previous damage and not deliberately blown.
timing is very convenient though
Seems unlikely, that's going to be of little structural significance to a 30m tall dam. Bit of reinforced concrete roadway spanning a gap is all it is.
It does beg the question of why it was missing in the first place though.
Looking at streetview is worthwhile if you're interested in that part of things and how the dam and road worked... It had spillways/gates right along the top, the water that you see in those satellite pictures is probably a normal controlled release through some of those- the blue things you can see in the pictures over the water release are the moving cranes that lift the gates, I think, which strongly supports that- whereas if it'd been uncontrolled they'd almost certainly have moved those elsewhere and opened other gates.
I think that also basically disqualifies the idea of high water or simple maintenance being the issue- there's a massive amount of redundancy there, it'd have to be completely abandoned for it to have simply overtopped, and there's so many gates that a mechanical failure could have been worked around. They clearly had the capacity to release pressure just a few days before the collapse and were doing so.
But also, I'd imagined it as basically being "road on top of dam" but the road's kind of rigged off the back side of it, it's sort of half-dam-half-bridge. The bit of road that collapsed/is missing looks to have been quite separate from the dam in this way, it curved away from the dam and around the hydro plant. So that creates a bit more separation between the two- if, say, the road over hoover dam collapsed you'd say that's a sign of major dam damage, because it's literalyl just on top of the dam. But here the top of the dam is all the gates etc not the road.
There's obviously other reasons to take down a road, in a warzone, and I suspect that where it's broken is exactly where you'd do it if you just wanted to stop all traffic, it looks like the least supported span. It's also for the same reason probably the part where a road collapse is least likely to affect the dam. But that doesn't apply to "dam is damaged, road collapse is just a symptom of that, a precollapse"
I can't figure out the actual process of collapse, though? Some videos show 2 breaches, one effectively straight through the power station building (turbine hall?) and then the main span. But that's a weird thing to happen. And it's hard to imagine a breach of the northern side (ie where it's just a dam) then causing such a seeminly separate failure in the southern side (where it cut through the power station). But it's maybe more likely that a failure on the power station side could undermine the back of the main dam by allowing a lot of water where it's not supposed to be... But presumably the part with the buildings would be the strongest part. Which in some ways points towards controlled demolition, but also, it's a kind of weird place to do it- why demolish the strongest part? Why not just cut the main dam...
Just thinking out loud but it's something I've not seen spoken about much and just looking at it Made Me Think Innit.
It's not like actual mechanical failure is unprecedented though, Sayano-Shushenskaya was only in 2009. Looking at what happened there it's not hard to see how the same could have happened here that triggered a series of events, man made or otherwise.
Again, just idle speculation.
Here's a nice image of part of the dam as it used to look.
On the right is the turbine hall with tailrace gates below it, on the left the spillways and gates used to regulate reservoir level and downstream flow. It is those gates which have been destroyed allowing uncontrolled flow downstream. The dam structure is (presumably) still substantially intact below the level of the spillway gates, so the lake impounded by the dam will not empty completely but find a new level slightly above the new dam crest. It's going to be a sod of a job to reinstate some form of downstream control and that's not going to happen until this war is over.
Ah okay, never mind my previous post then, I was under the impression the turbine hall was destroyed.
It has been- this page has a pretty good video
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/06/europe/ukraine-nova-kakhovka-dam-breach-intl-hnk/index.html
It's possible that the damage to the northern part of the dam started out purely with the gates, but if so, it's grown massively and kind of strangely.
Data from regional seismic stations show clear signals on Tuesday 6 June at 2:54 local time (01:54 Norwegian time). Time and place coincide with reports in the media about the collapse of the Kakhovka dam. The signals indicate that there is an explosion.Magnitude estimate is between 1 and 2.
The figure below shows the signal from the Bukovina (BURAR) seismic array, a measuring station in Romania. Distance from the dam is 620 km.
I cannot verify the source for reliability. At first glance appears to be a legit seismic monitoring organisation.
The only priority is how to bring an end to the war as soon as possible,
The alternative to that is more destruction and death and the unthinkable prospect of nuclear escalation.
Putin would have to be mad to launch nuclear weapons, so why do think Zelensky should talk to a mad man? It seems to me that the one threat totally negates the usefulness of the other. If I was Zelensky I would only talk to Putin if he did a constructive act such as withdraw troops or show some other sign of seriously wanting to de-escalate the war. As long as Putin claims that he'll launch nuclear weapons, I wouldn't go anywhere near the negotiating table, what would be the point?
and govts and people on both sides are going to have to swallow some hard compromises.
What compromises do you think that Ukraine should make? It seems to me that they are just defending themsleves, the only compromises should be made by the Russians as they withdraw to their previous border
@nickc, you actually hit the nail on the head there a bit, with "previous border". Which previous border?
Compromises come in a lot of shapes. I mean, in a just and dream world they ought to be shooting for a complete restoration of pre-2014 borders (*) AND for compliance with war crimes courts AND for reparations and compensation... So, anything short of that could be considered a compromise. With my optimistic-but-cynical hat on I think they might well eventually have to settle a post-2014 border, no reparations, and be mourning their dead with the people who did it just over the garden fence. There could be some very difficult decisions in Donetsk, Lunanks...
(* I say pre-2014, maybe there's some other line in the sand that's more appropriate, but you get what I mean)
The dam structure is (presumably) still substantially intact below the level of the spillway gates, so the lake impounded by the dam will not empty completely but find a new level slightly above the new dam crest
Guess that depends on how much additional damage is caused by the huge volume of water flowing above it. Erosion could remove a lot of it.
Nick you seem to feel that Ukraine, and indeed the West, is in a strong position with regards to Russia and can simply demand and expect Russia to unconditionally withdraw - it really isn't.
Russia is in no great rush, the sanctions which were suppose to cripple her economy and bring its collapse has harmed the US and Europe more than it has Russia.
Despite sanctions Russia's economy is plodding along and it appears able to comfortably finance its military operations in Ukraine.
Soaring defence spending has kept Russia's industrial sector ticking along, driving forecasts for economic growth this year and helping Moscow to continue its military campaign in Ukraine.
In contrast the sanctions have caused economic turmoil in the West with Germany recently entering recession as a direct consequence and then today this:
https://www.politico.eu/article/eurozone-is-in-a-technical-recession/
In the meantime the Ukrainian economy is understandably in a severe crisis. Plus as well as causing more damage to the West than to Russia sanctions have provided huge economic benefits for China, India, and Iraq.
Despite well publicised Ukrainian advances I very much doubt that Ukraine can fully defeat Russia militarily and I am fairly certain that Russia is prepared for a long drawn out conflict.
IMO internal politics is more likely to put effective pressure on Putin than sanctions, however unlikely that might currently appear.
Ah okay, never mind my previous post then, I was under the impression the turbine hall was destroyed.
No, I think you are right, part or all of the turbine hall was also destroyed. I think the photos posted by @natrix show that.
Guess that depends on how much additional damage is caused by the huge volume of water flowing above it. Erosion could remove a lot of it.
That depends on the construction of the dam. If it was an earth gravity dam then I would agree. I haven't been able to find any details of the construction (I have tried as a nerdy retired civil engineer) but I suspect it consists of earth embankments to both sides of a central concrete structure where the spillways and hydro plant are. If I'm right I can't see the flow of water causing much more damage. Certainly once the water level has reduced significantly the kinetic energy available to cause additional damage will be much reduced.
I was going from the angle of an explosion originating within the turbine hall taking out the rest of the dam, I'm not sure this is the case here.
Despite sanctions Russia’s economy is plodding along and it appears able to comfortably finance its military operations in Ukraine.
This is solely based on numbers provided by the Kremlin in case anyones wondering but hasnt followed the links source.
Russia is in no great rush, the sanctions which were suppose to cripple her economy and bring its collapse has harmed the US and Europe more than it has Russia.
Do you have a source for that expectation from someone imvolved in putting together those sanctions? Sounds a bit of a Daily Express claim, everything I read suggested the expectations were more about inhibiting, not destroying.
Ukraine think that almost 600,000 hectares of irrigated land will be affected by this and that affects farming on a similar area again.
1 million+ hectares and who knows how many tonnes of crops in a world struggling to feed itself
@ernielynch, if you honestly think that Russia is in a stronger financial position that "The West" generally and Germany in particular and has a military that is capable of occupying and maintaining control over a country the sizeof Ukraine, good luck to you.
No of course I don't think that Russia is in a stronger financial position than the West. I am just pointing out that the sanctions are causing more damage to the the US and Europe than it is to Russia. And they are an absolute godsend to China.