0 Members and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.
Experts are saying no artillery shell in the World could have done that much damage, everything points towards the Russians
Quote from: wilts rover on June 06, 2023, 08:09:09 pmWhilst the destruction of the dam has caused huge damage to the north of the river, it has actually caused greater damage to the southern, Russian occupied side. Reports that their stores & fortifications are under water and the troops are in a blind panic.Seems they underestimated the force of water they were unleasing - and forgot that their bank is lower than the Ukrainian side.https://twitter.com/AleksandrX13/status/1665985163547877377Which does suggest that its not all clear that Russia did it. On balance, and especially looking at who benefits, it would appear Russia would be the most likely. However, a benefit to Ukraine is lowering the river upstream to make crossing it easier. They have been continually trying to for several months and lost a lot of troops in the process. That, and Ukraine apparently wanting to attack it with mines last year to trap Russians suggests its not as black and white as the pro western media try to say.
Whilst the destruction of the dam has caused huge damage to the north of the river, it has actually caused greater damage to the southern, Russian occupied side. Reports that their stores & fortifications are under water and the troops are in a blind panic.Seems they underestimated the force of water they were unleasing - and forgot that their bank is lower than the Ukrainian side.https://twitter.com/AleksandrX13/status/1665985163547877377
Quote from: Bristol Red Rover on June 07, 2023, 06:47:29 pmQuote from: wilts rover on June 06, 2023, 08:09:09 pmWhilst the destruction of the dam has caused huge damage to the north of the river, it has actually caused greater damage to the southern, Russian occupied side. Reports that their stores & fortifications are under water and the troops are in a blind panic.Seems they underestimated the force of water they were unleasing - and forgot that their bank is lower than the Ukrainian side.https://twitter.com/AleksandrX13/status/1665985163547877377Which does suggest that its not all clear that Russia did it. On balance, and especially looking at who benefits, it would appear Russia would be the most likely. However, a benefit to Ukraine is lowering the river upstream to make crossing it easier. They have been continually trying to for several months and lost a lot of troops in the process. That, and Ukraine apparently wanting to attack it with mines last year to trap Russians suggests its not as black and white as the pro western media try to say. So you're arguing that there's a possibility that for the first time in recorded history, an attacking side has flooded an entire battlefield.And you're saying that they've done that so they they can advance across 30 miles of sediment covered land upstream?Whatever vestige of self respect you may have had has now evaporated. You are beyond embarrassment.
Quote from: wilts rover on June 06, 2023, 08:09:09 pmWhilst the destruction of the dam has caused huge damage to the north of the river, it has actually caused greater damage to the southern, Russian occupied side. Reports that their stores & fortifications are under water and the troops are in a blind panic.Seems they underestimated the force of water they were unleasing - and forgot that their bank is lower than the Ukrainian side.https://twitter.com/AleksandrX13/status/1665985163547877377Which does suggest that its not all clear that Russia did it. On balance, and especially looking at who benefits, it would appear Russia would be the most likely. However, a benefit to Ukraine is lowering the river upstream to make crossing it easier. They have been continually trying to for several months and lost a lot of troops in the process. That, and Ukraine apparently wanting to attack it with mines last year to trap Russians suggests its not as black and white as the pro western media try to say.
Whilst the destruction of the dam has caused huge damage to the north of the river, it has actually caused greater damage to the southern, Russian occupied side. Reports that their stores & fortifications are under water and the troops are in a blind panic.Seems they underestimated the force of water they were unleasing - and forgot that their bank is lower than the Ukrainian side.https://twitter.com/AleksandrX13/status/1665985163547877377
I swear if Putin dropped a nuke on Kyiv, there'd be useful idiots in the West saying "Well, let's analyse whether Ukraine did it themselves to gain an advantage. Or whether it was a natural event. And anyway, NATO is to blame."What on earth will it take for some people to be jolted into seeing was a creature Putin is?
I'm struggling to understand why an academic who deals with rivet flows would think himself a suitable person to speak to the media on structural engineering and war strategy.
Quote from: Filo on June 06, 2023, 09:58:49 pmExperts are saying no artillery shell in the World could have done that much damage, everything points towards the RussiansAs well as multiple mines floated down to it, multiple himars could also be responsible. As could previous wired mines from Ukraine, or even special forces mining it more recently.
Quote from: Bristol Red Rover on June 07, 2023, 06:53:11 pmQuote from: Filo on June 06, 2023, 09:58:49 pmExperts are saying no artillery shell in the World could have done that much damage, everything points towards the RussiansAs well as multiple mines floated down to it, multiple himars could also be responsible. As could previous wired mines from Ukraine, or even special forces mining it more recently. Experts looking at footage of one blast say the blast is upwards, so that blast would not be from missiles or shells, as the blast from those would be outwards.Next theory please!
Ukraine have an intercepted phone call From a Russian soldier to another man, he tells the other man that the Russian sabotage group blew up the dam, though it didn’t go to plan, it was only meant to scare peopleOver to you BRR
The dam had big internal hydroelectric turbine halls. If you're going to blow up a dam that size, it's far more effective to do it by getting explosives inside the structure. Ockham's Razor. Look for the obvious answer on who had easiest access, most to gain tactically and least to lose strategically. All points one way. But some folk will still bothsides this.
Quote from: BillyStubbsTears on June 09, 2023, 02:16:57 pmThe dam had big internal hydroelectric turbine halls. If you're going to blow up a dam that size, it's far more effective to do it by getting explosives inside the structure. Ockham's Razor. Look for the obvious answer on who had easiest access, most to gain tactically and least to lose strategically. All points one way. But some folk will still bothsides this. But it doesn't all point one way. Russia would have benefitted more by waiting for Ukraine to have more troops in the flood zone. Ukraine has since moved troops to the more active frontline. Both sides had some troops in the flood zone, neither seemed prepared to evacuate. It dies currently suggest an accident of some kind. Though of course that won't satisfy the reactive, jump to dogmatic conclusions folks on this. "come on you yellows!" "pen ref!" "cheats" etc etc
Quote from: Bristol Red Rover on June 09, 2023, 02:49:58 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on June 09, 2023, 02:16:57 pmThe dam had big internal hydroelectric turbine halls. If you're going to blow up a dam that size, it's far more effective to do it by getting explosives inside the structure. Ockham's Razor. Look for the obvious answer on who had easiest access, most to gain tactically and least to lose strategically. All points one way. But some folk will still bothsides this. But it doesn't all point one way. Russia would have benefitted more by waiting for Ukraine to have more troops in the flood zone. Ukraine has since moved troops to the more active frontline. Both sides had some troops in the flood zone, neither seemed prepared to evacuate. It dies currently suggest an accident of some kind. Though of course that won't satisfy the reactive, jump to dogmatic conclusions folks on this. "come on you yellows!" "pen ref!" "cheats" etc etcDetonating explosives is not an accident
Quote from: BillyStubbsTears on June 09, 2023, 02:16:57 pmThe dam had big internal hydroelectric turbine halls. If you're going to blow up a dam that size, it's far more effective to do it by getting explosives inside the structure. Ockham's Razor. Look for the obvious answer on who had easiest access, most to gain tactically and least to lose strategically. All points one way. But some folk will still bothsides this. But it doesn't all point one way. Russia would have benefitted more by waiting for Ukraine to have more troops in the flood zone. Ukraine has since moved troops to the more active frontline. Both sides had some troops in the flood zone, neither seemed prepared to evacuate. It dies currently suggest an accident of some kind. Though of course that won't satisfy the reactive, jump to dogmatic conclusions folks on this. "come on you yellows!" "pen ref!" "cheats" etc etc
Quote from: Filo on June 09, 2023, 03:50:38 pmQuote from: Bristol Red Rover on June 09, 2023, 02:49:58 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on June 09, 2023, 02:16:57 pmThe dam had big internal hydroelectric turbine halls. If you're going to blow up a dam that size, it's far more effective to do it by getting explosives inside the structure. Ockham's Razor. Look for the obvious answer on who had easiest access, most to gain tactically and least to lose strategically. All points one way. But some folk will still bothsides this. But it doesn't all point one way. Russia would have benefitted more by waiting for Ukraine to have more troops in the flood zone. Ukraine has since moved troops to the more active frontline. Both sides had some troops in the flood zone, neither seemed prepared to evacuate. It dies currently suggest an accident of some kind. Though of course that won't satisfy the reactive, jump to dogmatic conclusions folks on this. "come on you yellows!" "pen ref!" "cheats" etc etcDetonating explosives is not an accidentIf that happened, who detonated them?
Quote from: Bristol Red Rover on June 09, 2023, 02:49:58 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on June 09, 2023, 02:16:57 pmThe dam had big internal hydroelectric turbine halls. If you're going to blow up a dam that size, it's far more effective to do it by getting explosives inside the structure. Ockham's Razor. Look for the obvious answer on who had easiest access, most to gain tactically and least to lose strategically. All points one way. But some folk will still bothsides this. But it doesn't all point one way. Russia would have benefitted more by waiting for Ukraine to have more troops in the flood zone. Ukraine has since moved troops to the more active frontline. Both sides had some troops in the flood zone, neither seemed prepared to evacuate. It dies currently suggest an accident of some kind. Though of course that won't satisfy the reactive, jump to dogmatic conclusions folks on this. "come on you yellows!" "pen ref!" "cheats" etc etcDetonating explosives is not an accident
Quote from: BillyStubbsTears on June 09, 2023, 02:16:57 pmThe dam had big internal hydroelectric turbine halls. If you're going to blow up a dam that size, it's far more effective to do it by getting explosives inside the structure. Ockham's Razor. Look for the obvious answer on who had easiest access, most to gain tactically and least to lose strategically. All points one way. But some folk will still bothsides this. But it doesn't all point one way. Russia would have benefitted more by waiting for Ukraine to have more troops in the flood zone. Ukraine has since moved troops to the more active frontline. Both sides had some troops in the flood zone, neither seemed prepared to evacuate. It dies currently suggest an accident of some kind. Though of course that won't satisfy the reactive, jump to dogmatic conclusions folks on this. "come on you yellows!" "pen ref!" "cheats" etc etc
Interesting escalation being talked about.https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/07/nato-members-may-send-troops-to-ukraine-warns-former-alliance-chief
I said there were many possibilities. I don't know what happened. Some here are fixated on limited possibilities. Maybe we'll never know.Meanwhile, significant issues I posted about above are far more important to watch.1) talk of NATO troops being sent to Ukraine2) Ukraine looking like it's prepared to concede significant territory in a peace deal. A massive u turn, coincidently (?) coming immediately after a disastrous offensive over recent days.