- Oct 19, 2012
- 61,329
- 59,648
- 3,635
Probably the same people that took out Nordstream
Very possible, yes.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Probably the same people that took out Nordstream
can you explain to me this : The flood is expected to subside and drain into the Black Sea within 10-11 days. So what military benefit does blowing the dam provide other than to delay a possible Ukraine assault for 2 weeks? I don't get 's logicNever mind.
Seriously? Those positions versus what they have to lose?
Let's call the whole thing off. We aren't going to ever agree, so let's just forget it, O.K.?
View attachment 792396
Big Paint Lobbyist?
Mary Carter Paint Company?
I posted that in response to your comment wrt did Russia move any forces before the dam was blown. They didn't have to move many troops, because those positions were not selected randomly.Seriously? Those positions versus what they have to lose?
Exactly!!! Ukraine is spent force, they have no assault capabilities, this is their excuse to keep the $ flowingcan you explain to me this : The flood is expected to subside and drain into the Black Sea within 10-11 days. So what military benefit does blowing the dam provide other than to delay a possible Ukraine assault for 2 weeks? I don't get 's logic
The dam was the only remaining crossing of the Dnipro in Kherson Oblast. It's too wide for assault bridges.So what military benefit does blowing the dam provide other than to delay a possible Ukraine assault for 2 weeks?
Exactly!!! Ukraine is spent force, they have no assault capabilities, this is their excuse to keep the $ flowing
Very possible, yes.
Exactly!!! Ukraine is spent force, they have no assault capabilities, this is their excuse to keep the $ flowing
This is pretty serious. I'm hearing that water was being used to cool a nuclear site.
We've now been told Russia blew up their own bridge, was shelling their own nuclear power plant, blew up their own pipeline and now blew up a dam that cuts off water to Crimea which is one of the places they went to war to protect. Only a fool believes.I posted that in response to your comment wrt did Russia move any forces before the dam was blown. They didn't have to move many troops, because those positions were not selected randomly.
There are 4 canals that are fed by that reservoir. Only one goes to Crimea. Ukraine depends on them for irrigation on both sides of the Dnipro, and for the water supply to the nearby towns and to Kherson City.
Ukraine had way more to lose than Russia, who already stood to lose those positions and the canal to Crimea anyway. And that side of the Dnipro has been a shooting gallery for Ukrainian artillery on the Russian rear positions- they were doing just fine degrading the Russian logistics and hitting rear bases. They didn't need to change anything.
We've now been told Russia blew up their own bridge, was shelling their own nuclear power plant, blew up their own pipeline and now blew up a dam that cuts off water to Crimea which is one of the places they went to war to protect. Only a fool believes.
And none of those things would have happened if Russia hadn't invaded Ukraine.We've now been told Russia blew up their own bridge, was shelling their own nuclear power plant, blew up their own pipeline and now blew up a dam that cuts off water to Crimea which is one of the places they went to war to protect. Only a fool believes.
Neither of us really knows who did or did not do it.
If you claim to know, you are just a propagandist.
Here is the difference between us.
I condemn it no matter who did it.
If you found out that the Ukrainians did it? You would say, "by what ever means necessary."
But at this point? Neither of us have the forensic evidence to make, 100% positive declarative statements either way.
So you still believe this war was unprovoked. Lol.And none of those things would have happened if Russia hadn't invaded Ukraine.
I'll allow for the possibility of incompetence. It's not like I can argue with a straight face that the Russian "managers" are competent to operate a structurally weakened dam. It's also possible they intended a smaller flood, just enough to dislodge the AFU from the delta islands, and it got away from them.
I know their story has evolved over the day, from nothing happened at all and everything is normal, to it was shelled by the AFU...
Imagine, the brave ukrainian nazis were successfully preparing for the offensive, which was to finally crush the russian orcs and everything was ready, right down to the ironed shoelaces.Neither of us really knows who did or did not do it.
If I'm not mistaken, the area downstream from where the dam was bombed is currently being held by the Russians.
Draw your own conclusions from this.
They literally banned investigations into incidents at hydroelectrical structures in Kherson Obl. ONE WEEK agoAnd none of those things would have happened if Russia hadn't invaded Ukraine.
I'll allow for the possibility of incompetence. It's not like I can argue with a straight face that the Russian "managers" are competent to operate a structurally weakened dam. It's also possible they intended a smaller flood, just enough to dislodge the AFU from the delta islands, and it got away from them.
I know their story has evolved over the day, from nothing happened at all and everything is normal, to it was shelled by the AFU...