Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[Storr]

https://twitter.com/DefMon3/status/1666129084127096851?s=20

[Storr]

https://twitter.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/1666005052769685505?s=20

https://twitter.com/BasedWarszawa/status/1665953636218707969?s=20

Wow, there's archival footage of the dam being blown up in 1941:

https://twitter.com/revishvilig/status/1666067352453095426?s=20

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Someone just unironically cited a Ben Norton tweet! LMAO!

Also "Collective West"...LOL.

[Red Velvet]

JFC dude. ‘Oh noes, some kid put a Swastika on his helmet, I guess that means we have to ethnically cleanse Ukraine’ is only a thought that would occur to a xenophobic tankie trying to make the world conform to his knee jerk anti-American conspiracy theories.

Lol Projection much? Or lack of reading comprehension?

I never said in the post that “Nazis in Ukraine” justify a Russian invasion, but that Western media and people are starting to shift their approach to war.

If last year this “moral greying” was completely not allowed in these newspapers who tried to sell Ukraine as a liberal democracy, now they’re going back to reporting stuff that they stopped doing after the war started.

Because even the US congress pre-2022 was banning weapons to Ukraine militias linked to neonazis. From Congresman Ro Khanna’s website, posted in 2018:

https://khanna.house.gov/media/in-the-news/congress-bans-arms-ukraine-militia-linked-neo-nazis

This was everywhere in mid to late 2010s and just stopped being reported after the war because western media saw it as convenient for the Russian narrative.

And why this shift is now slowly happening that is the question to me. That the Western institutions hate and don’t respect Zelenskyy I already knew, but he’s useful enough. If the West happens to change their understanding it would necessarily be because they understand that this changed, that either he’s not useful or that he’s going to lose.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

So the blowing of the dam in 1941 killed a few thousand people...not a significant number as it would be, given this was a front where around 20-25 million people died. (Probably low-balling it)
These Ukrainian activists criticizing the NKVD for its blowing of a dam do not have perspective. I almost wonder if they know what Generalplan Ost even is.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

I don't know who did it, but I am leaning towards Russia. Seems like a strategic play in their part. This morning (Ukrainian time) the Ukrainian garrisons finally withdrew from the islands located in the Dnieper due to the flooding. Crimea already taps other reservoirs for water and before the invasion they usually just shipped it off from Russia.

Seriously, you’re not sure have who blew the damn that Russia rigged to blow?

How would you know 100%? You're just a guy from Illinois. Do you have the Russian and Ukrainian battle plans?

I know it was widely reported that Russia mined this dam after withdrawing from Kherson and we had a wide round of reporting re: will they do it and what will happen when they do and that they were in control of the dam.
Like it doesn’t take any specialized knowledge to figure out who blew up the dam that Russian army was guarding that had planted explosives in 6 months ago.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Gigabrain takes here:

"The Russians were the ones who blew up the dam, but as a result this is actually in Ukraine's favor"

Russia has a long track record of committing war crimes and attacking civilian targets + being militarily incompetent and strategically stupid, so this isn’t out of character.

In fact, this entire “military special operation” has been defined by all of the above on the Russian side.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I don't know who did it, but I am leaning towards Russia. Seems like a strategic play in their part. This morning (Ukrainian time) the Ukrainian garrisons finally withdrew from the islands located in the Dnieper due to the flooding. Crimea already taps other reservoirs for water and before the invasion they usually just shipped it off from Russia.

Seriously, you’re not sure have who blew the damn that Russia rigged to blow?

How would you know 100%? You're just a guy from Illinois. Do you have the Russian and Ukrainian battle plans?

I know it was widely reported that Russia mined this dam after withdrawing from Kherson and we had a wide round of reporting re: will they do it and what will happen when they do and that they were in control of the dam.
Like it doesn’t take any specialized knowledge to figure out who blew up the dam that Russian army was guarding that had planted explosives in 6 months ago.

Specifically when did this happen? Not doubting you, just want to know the specific time frame.

[Storr]

Russian war bloggers are not exactly the most trustworthy sources, but it looks like fighting is still occurring near/around Novodonetske:

https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1666147234621030404?s=20

[oldtimer]

I don't know who did it, but I am leaning towards Russia. Seems like a strategic play in their part. This morning (Ukrainian time) the Ukrainian garrisons finally withdrew from the islands located in the Dnieper due to the flooding. Crimea already taps other reservoirs for water and before the invasion they usually just shipped it off from Russia.

I'm positive it was Ukraine.

How though?

Blowing up a dam that isn't in your possession, particularly one the size of the kakhovka dam, is very hard. These are structures specifically designed to withstand huge external forces. It isn't the case of just lobbing a bunch of missiles, they would barely cause a scratch. To put it in perspective the bouncing bombs of the famous Dambusters Raid had over six times the amount of high explosive of even the largest missile in Ukraine's possession, and those took advantage of the pressure wave caused by underwater detonation to amplify the damage.

On the other hand, rigging the dam internally with lots of explosives is far easier.

It's extremely easy with guided missiles, HIMARS for example has a practical accuracy of about 1 yard.

That's what guided missiles are for, to destroy stationary or slow moving targets with very high accuracy.

You ony need one large hole and most of the dam pops like a balloon from the released force.

And Russia gets a big hole of about 100 miles in it's defence lines.

[Woody]

I don't know who did it, but I am leaning towards Russia. Seems like a strategic play in their part. This morning (Ukrainian time) the Ukrainian garrisons finally withdrew from the islands located in the Dnieper due to the flooding. Crimea already taps other reservoirs for water and before the invasion they usually just shipped it off from Russia.

I'm positive it was Ukraine.

How though?

Blowing up a dam that isn't in your possession, particularly one the size of the kakhovka dam, is very hard. These are structures specifically designed to withstand huge external forces. It isn't the case of just lobbing a bunch of missiles, they would barely cause a scratch. To put it in perspective the bouncing bombs of the famous Dambusters Raid had over six times the amount of high explosive of even the largest missile in Ukraine's possession, and those took advantage of the pressure wave caused by underwater detonation to amplify the damage.

On the other hand, rigging the dam internally with lots of explosives is far easier.

It's extremely easy with guided missiles, HIMARS for example has a practical accuracy of about 1 yard.

That's what guided missiles are for, to destroy stationary or slow moving targets with very high accuracy.

And Russia gets a big hole of about 100 miles in it's defence lines.

That still isn't anywhere near enough to destroy a giant-ass dam. Remember the Antonovskiy bridge? It made holes here and there making it impassible, but even a bridge of that magnitude could not collapse despite being pounded all the time.

Russians ended up blowing up it's pillars with explosives when they withdrew.

[Storr]

More videos from Kherson:
https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1591105306700177408?s=20&t=s2nWIL...

https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1591133205985361931?s=20&t=s2nWIL...

https://twitter.com/Militarylandnet/status/1591124002617298944?s=20&t=s2nWIL...

It's depressing that these were the same streets people were celebrating being freed from Russian occupation just back in November. Based visualizations of where the flood is predicted to impact, it looks like most of the city will not be affected, but some low lying neighborhoods are already flooded:

https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1666143828808482816?s=20

https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1666124175705092101?s=20

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Something once again came to mind for me about all this.
The Soviet Union gave Ukraine a lot in the way of good, resilient, firm infrastructure. Dams, nuclear power plants, etc.

This war has done as much to demolish what remains of the Soviet Union than anything else since 1991. And if Zaporizhya nuclear power plant is not online for many years to come, well, that would be fitting as it would easily fit in with the rest of that picture.

Ukraine's something of an economic basketcase, that could get worse before it gets better even in a Ukrainian victory.

[Woody]

From everything I have seen and read, it seems likely the dam was just heavily mismanaged/incompetence. There was no explosions (recorded) prior to the dam nor any witnesses to corroborate.

https://twitter.com/evanhill/status/1665915785707921408

[oldtimer]

I don't know who did it, but I am leaning towards Russia. Seems like a strategic play in their part. This morning (Ukrainian time) the Ukrainian garrisons finally withdrew from the islands located in the Dnieper due to the flooding. Crimea already taps other reservoirs for water and before the invasion they usually just shipped it off from Russia.

I'm positive it was Ukraine.

How though?

Blowing up a dam that isn't in your possession, particularly one the size of the kakhovka dam, is very hard. These are structures specifically designed to withstand huge external forces. It isn't the case of just lobbing a bunch of missiles, they would barely cause a scratch. To put it in perspective the bouncing bombs of the famous Dambusters Raid had over six times the amount of high explosive of even the largest missile in Ukraine's possession, and those took advantage of the pressure wave caused by underwater detonation to amplify the damage.

On the other hand, rigging the dam internally with lots of explosives is far easier.

It's extremely easy with guided missiles, HIMARS for example has a practical accuracy of about 1 yard.

That's what guided missiles are for, to destroy stationary or slow moving targets with very high accuracy.

And Russia gets a big hole of about 100 miles in it's defence lines.

That still isn't anywhere near enough to destroy a giant-ass dam. Remember the Antonovskiy bridge? It made holes here and there making it impassible, but even a bridge of that magnitude could not collapse despite being pounded all the time.

Russians ended up blowing up it's pillars with explosives when they withdrew.

You only need one hole and Dams pop from the contained force that is unleashed:

You can even see the progression on the kakhovka dam from the pictures, first one flood gate then gradually the whole thing.

It's why building dams above populated areas is a risk.

[rc18]

I don't know who did it, but I am leaning towards Russia. Seems like a strategic play in their part. This morning (Ukrainian time) the Ukrainian garrisons finally withdrew from the islands located in the Dnieper due to the flooding. Crimea already taps other reservoirs for water and before the invasion they usually just shipped it off from Russia.

I'm positive it was Ukraine.

How though?

Blowing up a dam that isn't in your possession, particularly one the size of the kakhovka dam, is very hard. These are structures specifically designed to withstand huge external forces. It isn't the case of just lobbing a bunch of missiles, they would barely cause a scratch. To put it in perspective the bouncing bombs of the famous Dambusters Raid had over six times the amount of high explosive of even the largest missile in Ukraine's possession, and those took advantage of the pressure wave caused by underwater detonation to amplify the damage.

On the other hand, rigging the dam internally with lots of explosives is far easier.

It's extremely easy with guided missiles, HIMARS for example has a practical accuracy of about 1 yard.

That's what guided missiles are for, to destroy stationary or slow moving targets with very high accuracy.

And Russia gets a big hole of about 100 miles in it's defence lines.

What has precision got anything to do with it if you are still just packing a firecracker?

A unitary GMLRS fired from a HIMARS has a warhead of just 90kg. That is not particularly large and isn't intended for hardened structures. It took an ungodly amount of them fired in salvos over many weeks to break through the deck of the Antonovsky bridge. The dam is a vastly stronger structure still.

Even Tochkas or Storm Shadows with 420-450kg warheads would only cause localised damaged.

As I pointed out, WW2 bouncing bombs were almost 3000kg, with multiple being needed to bring down a dam, despite being emplaced in the optimum position to blow one up.


Sorry, HIMARS can't destroy a dam. You might be getting confused with reports Ukraine was looking into breaking open individual gates with HIMARS, but that is clearly not what has happened here, the damage is far more extensive.

[oldtimer]

I don't know who did it, but I am leaning towards Russia. Seems like a strategic play in their part. This morning (Ukrainian time) the Ukrainian garrisons finally withdrew from the islands located in the Dnieper due to the flooding. Crimea already taps other reservoirs for water and before the invasion they usually just shipped it off from Russia.

I'm positive it was Ukraine.

How though?

Blowing up a dam that isn't in your possession, particularly one the size of the kakhovka dam, is very hard. These are structures specifically designed to withstand huge external forces. It isn't the case of just lobbing a bunch of missiles, they would barely cause a scratch. To put it in perspective the bouncing bombs of the famous Dambusters Raid had over six times the amount of high explosive of even the largest missile in Ukraine's possession, and those took advantage of the pressure wave caused by underwater detonation to amplify the damage.

On the other hand, rigging the dam internally with lots of explosives is far easier.

It's extremely easy with guided missiles, HIMARS for example has a practical accuracy of about 1 yard.

That's what guided missiles are for, to destroy stationary or slow moving targets with very high accuracy.

And Russia gets a big hole of about 100 miles in it's defence lines.

What has precision got anything to do with it if you are still just packing a firecracker?

A unitary GMLRS fired from a HIMARS has a warhead of just 90kg. That is not particularly large and isn't intended for hardened structures. It took an ungodly amount of them fired in salvos over many weeks to break through the Antonovsky bridge. The dam is vastly stronger structure still.

Even Tochkas or Storm Shadows with 420-450kg warheads would only cause localised damaged.

As I pointed out, WW2 bouncing bombs were almost 3000kg, with multiple being needed to bring down a dam, despite being emplaced in the optimum position to blow one up.


Sorry, HIMARS can't destroy a dam. You might be getting confused with reports Ukraine was looking into breaking open individual gates with HIMARS, but that is clearly not what has happened here, the damage is far more extensive.

It's precicely what probably happend.

They blew up a dam gate with a HIMARS or something like it, you only need one significant hole to pop a dam.

And now an entire 100 miles stretch of the front has no russian defence lines, it's a brilliant move.

If you can't win the battle with it's terrain, change the terrain.

[Logical]

Simplest and most likely answer is structural failure. The dam has been neglected for almost a year and was damaged in fighting. Do you think dams can last forever without maintenance?

[Storr]

https://twitter.com/michaeldweiss/status/1666166708095135745?s=20

https://twitter.com/michaeldweiss/status/1666142813220659204?s=20

[Dereich]

It heavily strains credulity to say that a major disaster that causes major changes and disruptions across Ukraine happened entirely by coincidence on the first day of the long-awaited Ukrainian counteroffensive.

[Virginiá]

Ukraine had accused Russia of placing mines and other explosives in the dam last year:

https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-mined-a-ukrainian-dam-planned-false-flag-attack-zelenskyy-2022-10

Russia has mined a major Ukrainian hydroelectric dam and is ready to flood dozens of towns in an attack it would blame on Ukraine, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy claimed on Thursday.

Zelenskyy made the remarks in a meeting with the European Council on Thursday evening local time, saying that "Russia is deliberately creating the grounds for a large-scale disaster in the south of Ukraine."

Zelenskyy said he has received information that mines were placed at the Kakhovka Hydroelectric Power Plant. Insider was unable to immediately verify the claim.

The dam generates energy from the huge Dnipro river, which is around two miles wide just upstream from the dam.

Take it as you will, but I don't see why Russia wouldn't rig it to blow. It is was also a bridge and they were probably hedging against a possible Ukrainian attack that never came, because the Ukrainians aren't stupid and reckless.

That being said, if Russia wanted to do this, they were likely already set up to do it.

[Storr]

https://twitter.com/akihheikkinen/status/1666167107099262976?s=20

[John Dule]

Simplest and most likely answer is structural failure. The dam has been neglected for almost a year and was damaged in fighting. Do you think dams can last forever without maintenance?

Dams are some of the strongest structures made by man. Without maintenance, it's estimated that the Hoover Dam would stand for hundreds of years. Even the generators could run unattended for years.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Simplest and most likely answer is structural failure. The dam has been neglected for almost a year and was damaged in fighting. Do you think dams can last forever without maintenance?

Dams are some of the strongest structures made by man. Without maintenance, it's estimated that the Hoover Dam would stand for hundreds of years. Even the generators could run unattended for years.

Depends on the dam in question to be fair: infamously Mosul Dam is a complete disaster of a construction that requires near constant renovation/fresh concrete to prevent its collapse.

[Storr]

"Advance between 5 and 10 kilometers in some areas of the front"?! Big if true.

https://twitter.com/michaeldweiss/status/1666197590780567583?s=20

https://twitter.com/michaeldweiss/status/1666200025645342733?s=20