Russian internal propaganda right now: "It's very good that we blew it up, actually!" Russian external propaganda: "Ukraine did it! Artillery strike, sabotage group with explosives, etc -- whatever floats at the moment!" International Press: "Sure Russians had control of the dam, sure Russians rigged the dam with explosives, sure it was in Russian interest to blow up the dam, sure Russians are committed to terrorising Ukraine, sure Russians are shelling the Ukrainian survivors and Ukrainian first responders... But can we REALLY be sure they did it? I guess we'll never know!"
Actually; I’m pretty sure the Russian foreign minister came Out and directly accused Ukraine. Meanwhile; the US state department says they have no evidence it was Russia responsible
You/Vaush/The Collective West: Provide no evidence… Also You/Vaush/The Collective West: “Trust us bro…” - sites sources like Bellingcat, Kyiv Independent, and Amnesty International. Me/Everyone that has already been here/done that: … Start the count.😒
Fun fact: week ago Russian legislature passed an act to postpone any investigation of incidents on vital infrastructure facilities(including hydroelectric plants) on the "newly incorporated" territories till year 2028. (Decree 873 from 30.05.2023 paragraph 10)*
That could be because they were neglecting infrastructure (and allowing military shenanigans) to the point that their engineers kept giving them red flag reports.
Oh boy… I hate to see reporters reveal UKRAINE doing exactly what you just posted here. (Would be a dam (pun intended) shame to see if there is evidence of the former and the latter.)
The fact that Russia filled the dam to the brim after capturing it dispelled any doubt for me. They turned that dam into a weapon and were waiting to use it.
@@donovan4222 lol, flooding Kherson was much more beneficial to ruzzia then it would hurt them you halfwit. Also ruzzia doesn’t care about the Crimean population. They only care about their naval base there. Like honestly, you are so consistently wrong about literally everything you comment on.
@@realGBx64I’m betting combined factors, I’d put money on poorly stored fertilizer or munitions along with mismanagement of pressure/water behind the dam. I don’t think Russians did it on purpose because that was vital fresh water for Crimea but I would totally believe stupidly caused this Tragedy
@@Piratewaffle43 they only opened one chute that was the closest to their side, and they didn’t open a second one when the river got bigger due to spring snowmelts and rain. The satellite images show deteriorating situation for days including the dam oversplilling before it failing. The hypothesis is that they didn’t dare to open other spillways because of the fear of ukrainian sniper fire and/or sheer incompetence. For me it is convincing as the tactical advantages to the russians are very small, actually the water washed away many of their defensive infrastructure in the Kherson region.
@@MrGksarathy It's weirder then that. They paradoxically believe that Ukrainians are both "just Russians deep down" while also believing they're subhuman and don't have the right to exist.
@@donovan4222 No. We were eradicating yet another brutal regime. (Also punishing them for refusing to trade oil in dollars.) Not as cartoonishly evil as russia but some mistakes were made.
This is more like the bs with the nuclear reactor. If it had experienced a meltdown due to their incompetence and gross negligence during while in their control. As I understand it, this dam failure looks solidly like a result of incompetence and gross negligence.
The lack of radiation and nuclear fallout are probably big factors... Internationally, people would care a lot more if it had a more international effect.
@@YokaiX yeah but my point is that the only difference between the two being one is way more frowned upon than the other. a nuke makes striked area uninhabitable for a month or two tops unless it's in the megaton range. that's the same fucking thing as a massive flood and therefore it should be treated as such.
Says a lot about tankies that their only form of defence for this kind of thing is 'oh no, it was Ukraine that did it to itself'. I cannot fathom why anyone would take tankies seriously, their entire existence is a joke.
@@donovan4222 yes, it is literally writen in geneva convention. Luckily for us, russians are obviously responsible and It is as true as the fact that water is wet. Supposedly, they dig under the dam and implanted explosives exactly for this situation to avoid ukraine offensive.
"Fun" fact: Hydroelectricity is by far the deadliest green energy (by deaths per MW of energy), purely because of dam failures. Dam failures have killed more than nuclear incidents, even including Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That's how terriffying that is. Still less deadly than pollution by fossile fuel power plants, though...
@@peterthegreat996 Bro, this one has likely killed thousands of people. You know how many died from Chernobyl? The single worst atomic accident in human history? 31 And that's counting people who died months after from secondary effects like cancer. Counting people who died years and decades later, it gets closer to 60. There have not been many nuclear failures, and most countries don't use nuclear energy. Two nuclear weapons have ever been deployed at war. Every country with rivers and the money to dam them has tried, typically with failed attempts at each desired dam site. I don't have exact statistics, and I don't need em. This is one of those things like hearing "more pizza delivery guys die on the job than cops and soldiers combined." At first that sounds weird. As a society, pizza delivery is a job we give to kids, but you can only become a soldier/cop after becoming an adult and specialized training. But there's a lot of pizza guys, always delivering pizza, and there's many ways to die from it with little in the way of protective measures. Still, people salute the troops and often don't even thank their delivery guy, even though most people have been supported far more by pizza than tanks. Statistics are weird like that, and society is fucked up.
@@peterthegreat996 You're in luck, there are great statistics! You can find it by searching for "deaths by TWh" (terawatt-hours) which will show you statistics of fatalities by energy (watthours) produced by each method of electrical energy generation. Alternatively, go look up a list of hydroelectric dam failures throughout history and compare it to the short list of major nuclear accidents and their death tolls... They are _incomparable_ but the general public tends to make the decision to scare each other with, and likes be scared about, something that demonstrably hasn't killed many of us... while not batting an eye at many things that are (or can be) ticking time bombs. Which ones they are depends on how well or badly they are managed. Heck, even rooftop solar kills more people per unit of energy ultimately produced because workers fall off roofs every now and again. Every now and again workers also get trapped up top on wind turbine nacelles that catch fire during maintenance work. Even with an admirable safety record and starting from zero it would be really, really tough - nigh impossible - to compete with nuclear power. If saving peoples' lives was truly the goal, we would not be burning anything in coal plants anymore and instead replaces them with a safe, compact form of power generation that produces waste we can contain instead of letting it out.
@@donovan4222 You mean the... however many people die in any form of mining job? Uranium mining isn't uniquely dangerous, since the radiation from naturally formed Uranium is incredibly low. Though yes, the radiation exposure does go up for a lot of miners, since many fly to work and as such are exposed to _atmospheric radiation_ that way.
So peaceful. So brave. Totally not inhuman orcs that'd rather drown citizens and animals rather than face the Ukrainian army. What great fellas those guys are (I know you were being sarcastic. As am I. Please don't hurt me lol)
I'm not going to advocate for the direct removal of a head of state by kinetic impact. I'm going to advocate for black bagging him in the middle of the night and not bothering to tell anyone which CIA black site he may or may not be held in.
@@TobiasRD **obviously fake thick Russian accent and a mustache for some reason** Glorious Leader Vladimir Vladimiorvich Vladilovstok Vladtastic "Vladdy" Poutine win great free holiday vacation trip and new Sony TV. Left note say "Don't wait up. Am getting tan on beach or jungle. Maybe go look at high open window later."
Why would Ukraine intentionally endanger a nuclear power plant and therefore endanger the entirety of Europe? If they were caught doing this, they would instantly lose all support from the EU and lose the war
@lostonearth7856 Lol the Russians claim that it was to stop an attack from the absolutely not nihilated VDV forces. XD Personally I think the Russian's thought they could just blow a smaller hole in the dam, enough to flood Ukrainian forces positioned on islands in the middle of the river. Evidently that was a retarded idea. Right after the explosion they acted as if there was a level of deniability. When they realized what actually happened they stopped denying things and started to blame Ukraine. Russia has been trying to flood these islands for some times now. Opening up all the flood gates wasn't enough. Filling the reservoir above its recommended limit and then open them up did not do the job either. So all they where left with was blowing a new flood gate. This is what I believe. The pros of completely blowing up the dam did in no way outweigh the cons. This just motivates the west to give more weapons to Ukraine, since the Russian's just used a weapon of mass destruction. This ruins one of the main reason why Putin wanted to take Kherson, which was to unblock the canal supplying water to Crimea frome the Kakhovka reservoir. It also flooded Russian defensive positions. So when the water recedes again there will be the same issue again, but worse.
@Lost on Earth Russia simps: yes Ukraine destroyed a major infrastructure project that produces huge amounts of energy that will cause their most important nuclear power plant to be out of action and make their own offensive harder just to make the westerners, who are already mostly pro-Ukrainian even more pro-Ukrainain
Honestly I wouldn't put it past Putin to not care (presuming the Russians did it and he knew this would happen). This war has been such a disaster with massive downstream effects felt the world over, and Putin still has a seat at international power conferences. He'll push his boundaries if he thinks he can get away with it. I honestly don't trust him to have a rational view of the world or a rational philosophy.
You can't cause catastrophic damage to a dam by attempting to blowing it up with artillery or missiles. Maybe even a nuke in many cases. So the only way Ukraine could have been behind this is the mentioned "test attacks" against certain parts of the dam earlier; if the sluice gates was made inoperable, dam could overtop and that could definitely cause a catastrophic failure through quick piping (type of erosion) that weakens the structure enough to allow the overfilling to cause a collapse. Ryan McBeth describes this better in his recent video where he attempts to put the blame to something else than an internal explosion. However, more and more evidence are surfacing making this less likely, especially as an isolated cause: 1) Seismologists have determined the seismic data to have been caused by setting off a charge rather than "just a failure". 2) Satellites have picked up heat from the site at the time that could match an explosion. 3) People in the area woke up to a single loud bang, not dozens of Himars. 4) Russia has precedent of blowing up dams; previously in this war and killing up to 100k Ukranians in WW2 when they blew up a dam to slow Nazi advances. 5) Russia didn't participate in providing *ANY* sort of assistance to those affected. In fact they were shelling the place while Ukranians did rescue operations. 6) Every single thing Russia has said so far during this war has been lies and ridiculous propaganda, even if propaganda is not meant for us. 7) We know Russia already did mine the dam. 8) Ukraine didn't blow the dam when they had the chance, when it would be more beneficial to them tactically (and strategically?) 9) Maybe Russia wanted to create a small flooding, and due to piping/overflowing it turned horrifically bad? There was a cross river landing by Ukrainian forces recently that might have been a target. But the end result was far *worse* for Russia in that they apparently drowned several platoons (companies?) in the area, destroyed fortifications that have been prepared for a very long time. So I find it hard to believe this was the desired outcome, without warning their own troops in the area in advance. Regardless, they're absolutely 100% responsible. And if it *WAS* the intended outcome, that indicates they're not foreign to causing a meltdown in the nuclear powerplants they currently control, causing *WAAAAAY* more long term devastating effects in a *WAAAAAY* bigger area (all of Black and Mediterranean sea). Would they be *that* crazy? It's Russia and their history of war crimes, enough said... If this was indeed deliberate, that's to me is the far most scary option.
Yeah, the only explanation I’ve heard for Ukraine supposedly destroying it is “a missile,” A singular missile that supposedly hit the dam. That would have to be a mighty big missile, and I don’t think Ukraine has any large silo or naval-based missiles.
Kherson counteroffensive, Russian retreats - CITING possible destruction of the dam. (*Many of you mock that response…*) Washington Post refers to “Test Strikes…” Ukraine finally gets that “missile”, and the results. There. A “single missile.”
@@Kikasitsu What missile? Only thing I've heard of is longer range version of GLMRS and ATACSM, none of which would be required to reach the dam and none of which increasing the yield. Other than damaging the sluice gates causing the dam to overflow and cause damage to itself over time, there is no way of causing enough damage to cause catastrophic failure from an external blast. There is also Decree 873 date 30.05.23, paragraph 10, which I wasn't aware of until now (copied from other post here by *RAD): Russian legislature passed an act to postpone any investigation of incidents on vital infrastructure facilities(including hydroelectric plants) on the "newly incorporated" territories till year 2028. So while there still are no conclusive proofs, the evidence is certainly stacking up against ruZZia - yeah, I'm biased, sue me. 😁
Don’t worry… I’m certain their latest “investigation” will turn up nothing… (like before.) And the moment that- Oh, wait… what’s that? There were “Test Strikes” done by the Ukrainians BACK IN DECEMBER? … Huh. *The Washington Post* reported it? … Huh.🤔
i am honestly surprised only 1 person used the jerma emote when the reporter said "emergency meeting". maybe we have grown stronger, maybe we have surpassed the sus age of memetic hazards. i am proud of you guys.
@@Razoredge581 yeah. The worst bit about that is that there were procedures in place that would have stopped it but it would have damaged the reactor so the owners instead delayed and caused the meltdown.
@@andrewgreenwood9068 Yeah, the whole situation with Fukushima was a shitshow. There's a good vid, "The Lies and Corruption Behind Fukushima," which goes in depth on the numerous issues that led to Fukushima, and where I got my info on this disaster.
@@justsomeguy6336cringe Putin fannie Literally Putin could step before the cameras tonight and release a statement that "oh well yeah we bombed the dam not Ukraine" and you would still eat boogers and say "uhmmmm ackshually yoo-crane..."
@@Aadrian7 I'd say Jet's a tankie because his moral compass and reason for resistance is merely "Fire Nation bad, and anything done against them is ok.", which doesn't sound like a very anarchist way of viewing the world.
Last time this dam was blown up by soviets to stop nazis advancement. It didn’t really help, but form 20 000 to 100 000 Ukrainians were killed because of that. My hometown survived 8 month of agonizing occupation, 7 months of constant shelling, and now this, I can’t fucking take it anymore
You clearly don’t know Ukraine. Then again, we did warn you of their Nazi problem… and their collaboration with U.S/U.K. orders as well… But I guess you’ll never learn. Seriously. How many World’s Shittiest Murder Mysteries do you intend for us to solve? It’s getting old.
Tbf they did around Kyiv during the opening stages of the war, but it was a much smaller dam and they didn't blow the dam up, only opened the floodgates for a while. Ironically, Russia shelled the dam during the attack and made it harder to close it up and dry out the area again lol.
My dude… I’m tired of it as well. They don’t mean that The Collective West *will ever* admit their guilt to crimes they committed. I’ve lost count on this song and dance. Crime happens, both sides blame each other, Russia demands investigations, WEST DENIES REQUESTS, Ukraine “demands” it, West “accepts…” they can’t find evidence, still blame Russia, people like you smile and nod. Look, if the Katyn Massacre proved anything, it’s that you all just will accept anything the media tells you, and you’ll ignore the evidence. You all have the collective memory of a goldfish. The dam is near the Kherson. Unless you don’t recall gloating about how Ukraine “defeated” the Russians back then…
Simple: WHO do you think committed attacks on a train station, staged massacres, attacked a nuclear power plant, bombed a gas pipeline, blew up a theater full of hostages, keep attacking civilians with Western-backed missiles/artillery, kept attacking civilians for 9 long years, and keep blaming Russia for every single atrocity that ALWAYS turn up Ukraine? Clearly it’s not a country that is trying to provoke Russia into EXPANDING their SMO (Special Military Operation) into a full-blown war, swallowing up NATO countries into an unwinnable conflict of their design, right?
@@exiledhebrew1994 Ah yes, "We will begin our offensive by drowning our own citizens and creating an impassable quagmire which will prevent us from crossing to pierce the Russian line." You really think they'd do that when they're on the defense against an invasion by a massive geopolitical power? Cause that'd be really fuggin' stupid of them.
@Exiled Hebrew It shortened Ukrainian front which is actually bad for them considering they have a tendency to attack in various places at once in order to divert attention from their main target. They've done it last time, they were doing it this time supporting the "Belgorod People's Republic". Not to mention that they'll have to deal with humanitarian response on the top of the offensive. Not to mention that it would make West pretty angry if they intentionally endangered stability of a nuclear plant Ukrainian would have much more to lose than Russia in this sit
The only way this wasn't direct Russian action, is the remote but real chance that they fucked with the flow controls of the dam enough to induce dam failure without a planned demolition. SO still Russia's fault, but they were dumb enough to not control their big brain war crime attack. The timing counts against it, but it was my first impulse. Actually, blowing up a major dam is terrifying.
@@donovan4222 why would they destroy a major reservoir that leaves major environmental damage, makes advancing useless for both sides *and* threatens their nuclear plant? Doesn't make much sense to do that to yourself.
@@donovan4222 🥱 Crimea survived just fine without this water for 8 years prior to invasion. There's enough water for civilians in there. Effect on Crimea pales in comparison to economic damage done to Ukraine.
I never knew how important and how powerful dams were as infrastructure. You would have to be psychotic to destroy one of these and not care about the destruction that it creates and causes down the road.
16:00 ish - Dams are valid infrastructure targets... but the target is the support buildings near the dam, not the dam itself; That way the dam stays intact but you disable its ability to power anything
There are 3 things that could cause mass destruction and hinder the offensive in that region of Ukraine. The Dam (already destroyed), Chemical plant "Titan" in Armyansk, and Nuclear Power plant. I think, that they will blow up Titan chemical plant next.
so the dam is 2 miles long (3.2 KM) but i couldn't find how thick it was. but for reference the hoover dam is top 20 and 45 feet at the top and 660 at the base
Even if this was just an infrastructure failure the level of incompetence required to cause this goes beyond negligence into callous disregard for consequences.
"In my opinion, as somebody with no expertise on the subject whatsoever [...]" Surprised that didn't segue into Vaush asking Google how to blow up a dam.
I was going to say, the only thing the US got close to was when Oroville Dam nearly went over. The rivers were already full and at least three cities nearly wiped out.
1. The dam was not destroyed by explosives, no seismic recording detected explosives. 2. It was undermined and overtopped. Gravity dams are held together by.... gravity and once you run water over the top of the dam it falls over, that's why they have emergency spillways. 3. The spill way was open for days longer than it should have been collapsing the walking bridge on the Russian side causing undermining by hydronic force. 4. The road bridge going over the damn on the Ukrainian side was destroyed not to long before the dam gave out. 5. This happened just before the Ukrainian counter Offensive They just ran the dam in a way that caused it to collapse with plausible deniablity.
At the base the damn is probably 200 feet thick of steel reinforced concrete. It’s probably 20-30 feet thick at the top. You would need multiple large bunker busting deep penetration bombs to maybe break a damn. Artillery will barely put small dents or pits on the damn.
Not war crimes. Special military offences against humanity. Ryan McBeth had an interesting comment. Doesn’t matter if it was a dam failure. It was in Russian control and they are still responsible for what happens to it.
British had to design a special bomb to destroy dams during WW2, called the bouncing bomb. Basically, its really hard for regular bombs to cause enough damage to destroy a dam.
@@primuspandora it was said many months ago that the dam had been mined and rigged for demolition by the russians after kherson was liberated. They function as bridges as well. During the early invasion last year, Ukraine actually blew up small ones to prevent the russians from crossing certain rivers, or at least slowing them down. The water had been lowered a bit to prevent flooding though on when those dams blew and the dams were much smaller.
My point is an external attack on a dam is very difficult and requires either massive firepower or specialized bombs. Destruction from inside is much easier using demolition charges (eg. C4, plastique, semtex charges, or even dynamite put in the right places).
1) Kherson Counteroffensive ring any bells? Or did you suddenly forget the offensive ever occurred? 2) Wasn’t there a power plant that Russia was accused of attacking? *Where was it located again?* 3) How many crimes was Russia accused of doing in the past? Tell me… whatever occurred to these crimes that Russia keeps getting accused of? I swear, they always get blamed… but when Russia *demands investigations* the West deny such requests, or always end up blaming Russia. (Almost like there’s a history of them doing this song and dance.) 4) Oh yeah… didn’t they report on Ukraine flooding a previous village to get the Russians out? (Man, this tiresome pattern is getting VERY tiresome.)
Russian State TV actually reported on russian units preparing a demolition of the dam "in case there's a Ukrainian counteroffensive" Russia's 205th Separate Motor Rifle Brigade posted images of themselves installing explosives on that dam since October 2022 There are seismic records from Norway showing that there has been one singular explosion shortly before news reached us about the dam being blown up, and that explosion was triangulated around Nova Kakhovka. No shelling, just one big blast - from inside the dam. But I assume that doesn't fit into the Putin X Reader fanfiction that you consider a foreign policy standpoint?
I've heard it that the breach was actually caused by negligence in maintenance or repair, which some people seem to think absolves Russia. BS. If your chained-up dog dies because you didn't feed it, and you prevent anyone else from feeding it, you don't get to say "I didn't kill my Dog, he died of starvation." The withholding of necessary care is just as bad as actually executing harm.
Tankies, and Z Orcs will try to tell you that Ukraine hit it with a Bomb/Mortar/Artillery/Missile. The Soviet Union built the Nova Khakovka Dam to withstand a Near Nuclear Strike, obviously a direct hit from a nuke wouldve turned it into a crater, but you couldnt take it out from the outside. The Russians set charges on the internal structure to compromise it and make it collapse. (After closing all but 1 sluice gate to raise the water level to the highest it has been in 8 years). Oh and the Russians are shelling Evacuees, and also moved all their troops back the day before the collapse. Any ambiguity is non existant and pretending there is any is only helping The Kremlin.
Jfc, those pictures remind me of the footage from Katrina. I have no doubt the people in that region of Ukraine are suffering to a similar extent. Puck Futin. 🇺🇦
Well with the reactors shut down, xenon poisoning isn't really much of a concern. With no more xenon being generated, the current levels would decay away over a few days. For shut down reactors, the only real concern regarding water is coolant. Since even with no fission occurring, the fuel still generates a lot of heat from radioactive decay.
The best explanation I have heard for how Ukraine allegedly destroyed the dam is “A missile hit the dam,” but thinking about it, that doesn’t make a lot of sense. A single HIMARS missile wouldn’t destroy the dam, it would take a large cruise missile to do that. The kind that is based out of a silo, a ship, or a heavy mobile platform and which there would probably be more evidence of (like a lauch plume or exhaust trail) than for a smaller artillery missile.
Actually you need something alot bigget then a conventional ballistic missle, its far from enough. The amount of outside force needed to be used to destroy the dam are close to nuclear
Everything will pass: the sufferings, the torments, the hunger and the pestilence. The sword will disappear, but the stars will remain even when the shadows of our bodies and our works are no longer on the Earth. There is no man who does not know this. So why don't we want to turn our gaze to the stars? Why? (Bulgakov, in his 1924 novel describing Ukraine during the Civil War and the invasion of Soviet Russia).
Ryan mcbeth has done a wonderful video on this in which he bought a LOT of sattelite footage and eventually concluded that the dam collapsed probably due to negligence
I know of at least one bombing run that destroyed dams. Look up Operation Chastise, a WWII bombing raid by British bombers that destroyed 2 dams in the Ruhr. Of course, that took massive specialized bombs.
In the Soviet Union iirc pretty much everyone had a car... And it was literally the exact same car... (Though yeah, maybe not for government officials)... It was just a boring vehicle called the Moskvich...
That is not true. Not everyone had a car. The vast majority of people did not and relied on public transportation. And there were cars other than Moskvich, including Zhiguli, Zaporozhets, Chayaka, Volga, Lada and i imagine there were other brands that i'm not remembering.
@@the-gadfly4743 After looking more into it, I'm pretty sure I was thinking of the Trabant since this was something I learned about when I was taking a class on the history of modern Germany... Basically the communists wanted people to be seen as equal and that's why pretty much everyone in East Germany was driving the practically the same vehicle... According to Wikipedia the Trabant was produced in East Germany from 1957 up until 1990 (or 1991)... I guess they did have other cars, but probably nothing too much flashier than the Trabant... I saw one stat that says that in East Germany from 1957-1989 basically every second car would be a Trabant car... But yeah, I think it was the same with housing too in that you see a lot of shitty concrete block Soviet buildings and the idea was basically that this way no one was living in like some sort of nice bourgeoisie palace... My prof mentioned something like that since I remember asking in response "Isn't it kind of still unequal in the sense that the top floors have a better view and the bottom floors are more accessible?" and that's where prof gave some answer along the lines of like "That's actually a good point and you'd sometimes see government officials perhaps reserving certain rooms." The convo went something like that anyway...
Even if Zelensky himself had setup the charges and pressed the detonation button it would still be Russia's fault. Have they not invaded no destruction of dams, villages, cities, lifr would have ocurred.
Dams are certainly a low carbon energy source (essentially carbon free after their construction), but they are often not "green" given their impact on riparian ecosystems.
Embodied carbon is also a factor. Concrete, which is the most common material used to build dams, is extremely carbon intensive. Dams would need to be in operation for a while before they break even with the carbon footprint generated by the concrete production used to build them.
@@jyw0000 This is absolutely true, though that is an issue shared with other low-carbon energy sources. I believe hydro is estimated to be between solar (higher life-cycle carbon footprint per unity energy produced) and wind or nuclear (lower life-cycle carbon foot print) in this regard, though obviously there is a high degree of variance depending on the details of a particular project.
@@recurrenTopology lol as someone who just finished getting an M.Arch degree, I never thought I’d be seeing the term “life cycle carbon footprint” outside of my low-carbon structures class, let alone in one of Vaush’s comment sections 😂👍
Eh I think they could have stored fertilizer or munitions incorrectly and they failed. Everyone forgets 2020 Beirut explosions fertilized can go critical and cause insane problems
I work in water, i tell people often that we need to take our water infrastructure the most serious. Yall have not the slightest clue how fragile our human civilization is. Water plants are virtually unprotected - very expensive- and very fragile. This is horrible. Hopefully they can recover and no Chernobyl part 2
To elaborate- every single water plant in that region is wrecked - they have to be totally drained and re-setup, then deal with the challenge of making drinking water out of significantly dirtier water than before. Most people can't even make it 2 days with no water
Honestly, I'd like to think it was the dam failure leading to planted charges detonating due to shelling. It fits right in with the rest of the Wiley Coyote reality. But it also wouldn't surprise me in the slightest to just find out it was Russia.
I don't think Russia bombed the dam, I think they incompetently let it break. There's satellite evidence of them only allowing one gate to let out reservoir water and it would likely have undermined the dam with the water pressure. We also see the water overrunning the top of the dam from spring snow melt which I'd a death sentence for most dams. The reason it's not sabotage (or at least not a demolition) is that the roadway was washed away a day before the dam broke. This was progressive damage from incompetent upkeep
I have seen good evidence that it wasn't deliberate by Russia, but rather that when they took over the dam in the invasion they just stopped all maintenance. The road near the power-station washed out before the total failure. In the before pictures, you can see the only sluice gate open is the single gate on the Ukraine side. Russia has both cranes on their side, but none of their gates are open. Not sure if it being Russian negligence as the cause is better or worse than malice.
Not saying the Russians didn't cause this - Russia absolutely DID cause this, but by mis-operation of the dam, either intentionally or not. At best, it was "just" negligence allowing the one spillway to underscour itself, and by then also overtopping the dam to boot. Equally likely I estimate of their incompetence and their indifference to under-maintenance. Russia did control the power station section though, so if they did want to blow it up, they had full access to the most delicate interior areas, but, y'know, Hanlon's Razor.
Vaush, if you want good analysis of situations in Ukraine pertaining to war crimes check out Ryan Mcbeth, he's a military analyst who use to work with strategic systems.
Oh yes… because Ukraine outlawed the Russian language under Poroschenko. Right… I forgot. (It was right before Ukraine cut off the water to Crimea, attacked the civilians, and spent 8 years trying to commit a genocide.)
Google allows you to filter results by date. Tools -> "Any Time"-Dropdown -> "Custom range...". All other options there are to the current date like "past month" or "past year". Should help if the feed is flooded with current events and you are looking for older results. “before:YYYY-MM-DD” and “after:YYYY-MM-DD” in the search itself also allows you to search in a specific range. There are other helpful commands but i usually only use "site:" to limit the the search to a website.
Having seen some in depth analysis, it seems like the dam failed due to structural collapse. This is still at the hands of the Russians, but it doesn't seem like it was bombed. Instead Russian forces did not maintain the correct safety procedures to keep the dam running and it collapsed. Thanks to some satellite images it seems like the dam was suffering "overtopping" shortly before the dam failed. Wouldn't have happened if Russia didn't invade but it seems like neglect rather than intentional malice.
(4:27) But their forces were on the low lands side of the river. So flooding would affect their forces greater than the Ukraine forces. If bombing were there intent, It would seem fainting a retreat allowing your enemy to cross the river then bomb it. Some of their forces will be caught in the flooding of the river and then the rest of them will be pinned between the flooding river and your advancing forces.🤔
From a materialistic point of view the destruction of the dam is a great thing for the russian army, since they have to deal with the ukrainian couter-offensive. Now that the water is high, raiding paries by the UAF are way eazier to detect, allowing Russia to pull troops away from that front for defensive opereations against the counter-attack for a while. There is a silver lining for the UAF in this scenario. Since the lake from this dam is going to dry up, the UAF will have more fronts from which they can initiate small raids and counter attacks on the Russians. This will make the required manpower to defend this part of the front significantly higher and may in turn help the UAF launch more counter-offensive actions further in the east. It also may bring more NATO support for Ukraine to the table.
You definitely COULD destroy a dam with a missile... The US has multiple dams on the verge of breaking and flooding villages in America which often the state governments cannot afford to fix... If it's a dam like that, one that could burst any moment, a missile could be the final nail in the coffin... And when you look at images of the dam on June 1st and June 2nd there seems to be damage to the dam already as more of it appears to be missing... (That said, almost certainly still Russia... They EASILY benefit the most when you go over all the pros/cons for both sides and Russia had far more ability to do it like this... The timing is also just WAYYYY too coincidental to be believable that it broke on its own (RIGHT when the counteroffensive seemingly was starting))... Also its possible Ukrainian divers as Russia has said swam under and planted explosives that way... But again, just doesn't seem too likely...
Russian internal propaganda right now: "It's very good that we blew it up, actually!"
Russian external propaganda: "Ukraine did it! Artillery strike, sabotage group with explosives, etc -- whatever floats at the moment!"
International Press: "Sure Russians had control of the dam, sure Russians rigged the dam with explosives, sure it was in Russian interest to blow up the dam, sure Russians are committed to terrorising Ukraine, sure Russians are shelling the Ukrainian survivors and Ukrainian first responders... But can we REALLY be sure they did it? I guess we'll never know!"
just like CCP China, say one thing outside and the complete opposite inside
Effing cowards 😮
Actually; I’m pretty sure the Russian foreign minister came
Out and directly accused Ukraine. Meanwhile; the US state department says they have no evidence it was Russia responsible
Both sides gaiz
@@jingbot1071
All-wayze
Russia: *Commits war crimes*
Tucker Carlson: How could Ukraine do this to us?
You/Vaush/The Collective West: Provide no evidence…
Also You/Vaush/The Collective West: “Trust us bro…” - sites sources like Bellingcat, Kyiv Independent, and Amnesty International.
Me/Everyone that has already been here/done that: … Start the count.😒
Best part is he's not even in the line of fire, it doesn't affect him
Affects his wallet.
Well... it used to, anyway.
А ещё хохлы не стреляли по гэс полгода назад. Ну вот вообще такого не было!
Ill never understand those who defend Russia for fucking free.
Fun fact: week ago Russian legislature passed an act to postpone any investigation of incidents on vital infrastructure facilities(including hydroelectric plants) on the "newly incorporated" territories till year 2028.
(Decree 873 from 30.05.2023 paragraph 10)*
Hmmmmmmmmmmm
Not fishy at all! You have a suspicious mind...😂
They also legalized looting by their soldiers. They basically said that if you need to take something from civilians - we won't prosecute you.
That could be because they were neglecting infrastructure (and allowing military shenanigans) to the point that their engineers kept giving them red flag reports.
Are you kidding me...?
They might as well be saying they didn't do it, while filming themselves planting the bombs.
Russia: “we wouldn’t blow up a dam! What do you think we are, monsters??”
Also Russia: *shelling civilians as they flee the destruction*
Oh boy… I hate to see reporters reveal UKRAINE doing exactly what you just posted here.
(Would be a dam (pun intended) shame to see if there is evidence of the former and the latter.)
Meanwhile. Russian soldiers on leaked cell phone conversations have said. We did it.
@@TheBlazersfan22 how do you know those weren’t Russian speaking Ukrainians on a fake call?
@@Kikasitsu exactly; there are many Russian speaking Ukrainian, it could have been a fake phone call
State TV talked about the need to destroy infrastructure and leave Ukrainians without power before the dam destruction.
Tankies say this is a false flag attack but a drone burning the russian flag is not. Completely deranged.
Tankies will also add "the Ukrainian untermenschen deserved it anyway."
Tankies are dumb.
They're only SLIGHTLY better than neo nazis. They're both still horrible people.
Not that tankies weren't always deranged, but this war is really making them look like monsters, isn't it?
@[DATA EXPUNGED] : again, only SLIGHTLY better than nazis
The fact that Russia filled the dam to the brim after capturing it dispelled any doubt for me. They turned that dam into a weapon and were waiting to use it.
According to Ryan MacBeth the Russians mismanaged the dam for months, so it collapsed due to the high water level.
@@donovan4222 lol, flooding Kherson was much more beneficial to ruzzia then it would hurt them you halfwit. Also ruzzia doesn’t care about the Crimean population. They only care about their naval base there. Like honestly, you are so consistently wrong about literally everything you comment on.
@@realGBx64 Ah yes, it was "mismanaged". They "accidentally" made the dam as potentially destructive as possible before it "spontaneously" burst.
@@realGBx64I’m betting combined factors, I’d put money on poorly stored fertilizer or munitions along with mismanagement of pressure/water behind the dam. I don’t think Russians did it on purpose because that was vital fresh water for Crimea but I would totally believe stupidly caused this Tragedy
@@Piratewaffle43 they only opened one chute that was the closest to their side, and they didn’t open a second one when the river got bigger due to spring snowmelts and rain. The satellite images show deteriorating situation for days including the dam oversplilling before it failing.
The hypothesis is that they didn’t dare to open other spillways because of the fear of ukrainian sniper fire and/or sheer incompetence.
For me it is convincing as the tactical advantages to the russians are very small, actually the water washed away many of their defensive infrastructure in the Kherson region.
They do it because they think they'll never be held accountable.
And because they think of Ukrainians as subhuman.
Sort of like the NYPD.
And they're probably right
@@MrGksarathy It's weirder then that. They paradoxically believe that Ukrainians are both "just Russians deep down" while also believing they're subhuman and don't have the right to exist.
@@officernealy Doublespeak is a hallmark of fascism after all.
Most legal Russian war strategy
Try not to war crime, level: Russian
@Guillaume Lagueyte Try not to traumatize/massacre an entire generation, level: Russian
@@donovan4222 You have issues with society, yet you live in it, curious.
@@donovan4222Oh no not the Iraqi dictatorship nooooooo.
@@donovan4222 No. We were eradicating yet another brutal regime. (Also punishing them for refusing to trade oil in dollars.) Not as cartoonishly evil as russia but some mistakes were made.
this is effectively on the level of a nuclear strike but without that much international backlash and most importantly allegedly legally deniable
Or the fallouts it’s a war crime though . We should retaliate by ejecting diplomats on Ukrainians behalf .
This is more like the bs with the nuclear reactor. If it had experienced a meltdown due to their incompetence and gross negligence during while in their control. As I understand it, this dam failure looks solidly like a result of incompetence and gross negligence.
And the dam was built to take an indirect nuclear strike.
The lack of radiation and nuclear fallout are probably big factors... Internationally, people would care a lot more if it had a more international effect.
@@YokaiX yeah but my point is that the only difference between the two being one is way more frowned upon than the other. a nuke makes striked area uninhabitable for a month or two tops unless it's in the megaton range. that's the same fucking thing as a massive flood and therefore it should be treated as such.
Says a lot about tankies that their only form of defence for this kind of thing is 'oh no, it was Ukraine that did it to itself'. I cannot fathom why anyone would take tankies seriously, their entire existence is a joke.
now that's a dam war crime
Nah that's orcish military doctrine
Oooohhhh....
Im dying because its such a dam good pun, but the context is full of tragedy
@@donovan4222 yes, it is literally writen in geneva convention. Luckily for us, russians are obviously responsible and It is as true as the fact that water is wet. Supposedly, they dig under the dam and implanted explosives exactly for this situation to avoid ukraine offensive.
@@donovan4222 *Dam* I don't know
People monitoring this saw that Russia overfilled the reservoir before they blew the dam to stall the expected Ukrainian offensive
"Fun" fact: Hydroelectricity is by far the deadliest green energy (by deaths per MW of energy), purely because of dam failures. Dam failures have killed more than nuclear incidents, even including Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That's how terriffying that is.
Still less deadly than pollution by fossile fuel power plants, though...
I’d like to see some statistics on that …
@@peterthegreat996 Bro, this one has likely killed thousands of people. You know how many died from Chernobyl? The single worst atomic accident in human history?
31
And that's counting people who died months after from secondary effects like cancer. Counting people who died years and decades later, it gets closer to 60.
There have not been many nuclear failures, and most countries don't use nuclear energy. Two nuclear weapons have ever been deployed at war. Every country with rivers and the money to dam them has tried, typically with failed attempts at each desired dam site.
I don't have exact statistics, and I don't need em.
This is one of those things like hearing "more pizza delivery guys die on the job than cops and soldiers combined."
At first that sounds weird. As a society, pizza delivery is a job we give to kids, but you can only become a soldier/cop after becoming an adult and specialized training.
But there's a lot of pizza guys, always delivering pizza, and there's many ways to die from it with little in the way of protective measures.
Still, people salute the troops and often don't even thank their delivery guy, even though most people have been supported far more by pizza than tanks.
Statistics are weird like that, and society is fucked up.
@@peterthegreat996 You're in luck, there are great statistics! You can find it by searching for "deaths by TWh" (terawatt-hours) which will show you statistics of fatalities by energy (watthours) produced by each method of electrical energy generation. Alternatively, go look up a list of hydroelectric dam failures throughout history and compare it to the short list of major nuclear accidents and their death tolls... They are _incomparable_ but the general public tends to make the decision to scare each other with, and likes be scared about, something that demonstrably hasn't killed many of us... while not batting an eye at many things that are (or can be) ticking time bombs. Which ones they are depends on how well or badly they are managed.
Heck, even rooftop solar kills more people per unit of energy ultimately produced because workers fall off roofs every now and again. Every now and again workers also get trapped up top on wind turbine nacelles that catch fire during maintenance work. Even with an admirable safety record and starting from zero it would be really, really tough - nigh impossible - to compete with nuclear power. If saving peoples' lives was truly the goal, we would not be burning anything in coal plants anymore and instead replaces them with a safe, compact form of power generation that produces waste we can contain instead of letting it out.
@@peterthegreat996 I'm too lazy, but there's hundreds of statistical graphs people have made for this.
@@donovan4222 You mean the... however many people die in any form of mining job?
Uranium mining isn't uniquely dangerous, since the radiation from naturally formed Uranium is incredibly low.
Though yes, the radiation exposure does go up for a lot of miners, since many fly to work and as such are exposed to _atmospheric radiation_ that way.
So this is the famous humane russian army i hear about
So peaceful. So brave. Totally not inhuman orcs that'd rather drown citizens and animals rather than face the Ukrainian army. What great fellas those guys are
(I know you were being sarcastic. As am I. Please don't hurt me lol)
I'm not going to advocate for the direct removal of a head of state by kinetic impact.
I'm going to advocate for black bagging him in the middle of the night and not bothering to tell anyone which CIA black site he may or may not be held in.
And if anyone starts complaining about the US engaging in regime change, we can just call it a Special Diplomatic Action.
@@TobiasRD **obviously fake thick Russian accent and a mustache for some reason** Glorious Leader Vladimir Vladimiorvich Vladilovstok Vladtastic "Vladdy" Poutine win great free holiday vacation trip and new Sony TV. Left note say "Don't wait up. Am getting tan on beach or jungle. Maybe go look at high open window later."
@@BaronVonQuiply What zero pussy does to a mf
Question is if Biden has a high enough Intrigue stat to pull it off.
@@samiamrg7 That depends on if the full moon or something has awakened Dark Brandon at the time.
Why would Ukraine intentionally endanger a nuclear power plant and therefore endanger the entirety of Europe? If they were caught doing this, they would instantly lose all support from the EU and lose the war
@lostonearth7856
Lol the Russians claim that it was to stop an attack from the absolutely not nihilated VDV forces. XD
Personally I think the Russian's thought they could just blow a smaller hole in the dam, enough to flood Ukrainian forces positioned on islands in the middle of the river.
Evidently that was a retarded idea.
Right after the explosion they acted as if there was a level of deniability.
When they realized what actually happened they stopped denying things and started to blame Ukraine.
Russia has been trying to flood these islands for some times now.
Opening up all the flood gates wasn't enough.
Filling the reservoir above its recommended limit and then open them up did not do the job either.
So all they where left with was blowing a new flood gate.
This is what I believe.
The pros of completely blowing up the dam did in no way outweigh the cons.
This just motivates the west to give more weapons to Ukraine, since the Russian's just used a weapon of mass destruction.
This ruins one of the main reason why Putin wanted to take Kherson, which was to unblock the canal supplying water to Crimea frome the Kakhovka reservoir.
It also flooded Russian defensive positions.
So when the water recedes again there will be the same issue again, but worse.
Good point
@Lost on Earth Russia simps: yes Ukraine destroyed a major infrastructure project that produces huge amounts of energy that will cause their most important nuclear power plant to be out of action and make their own offensive harder just to make the westerners, who are already mostly pro-Ukrainian even more pro-Ukrainain
Honestly I wouldn't put it past Putin to not care (presuming the Russians did it and he knew this would happen). This war has been such a disaster with massive downstream effects felt the world over, and Putin still has a seat at international power conferences.
He'll push his boundaries if he thinks he can get away with it. I honestly don't trust him to have a rational view of the world or a rational philosophy.
Because the offensive is going badly so it’s scorched Earth time. Also the region worst affected is under Russian control.
You can't cause catastrophic damage to a dam by attempting to blowing it up with artillery or missiles. Maybe even a nuke in many cases. So the only way Ukraine could have been behind this is the mentioned "test attacks" against certain parts of the dam earlier; if the sluice gates was made inoperable, dam could overtop and that could definitely cause a catastrophic failure through quick piping (type of erosion) that weakens the structure enough to allow the overfilling to cause a collapse. Ryan McBeth describes this better in his recent video where he attempts to put the blame to something else than an internal explosion. However, more and more evidence are surfacing making this less likely, especially as an isolated cause:
1) Seismologists have determined the seismic data to have been caused by setting off a charge rather than "just a failure".
2) Satellites have picked up heat from the site at the time that could match an explosion.
3) People in the area woke up to a single loud bang, not dozens of Himars.
4) Russia has precedent of blowing up dams; previously in this war and killing up to 100k Ukranians in WW2 when they blew up a dam to slow Nazi advances.
5) Russia didn't participate in providing *ANY* sort of assistance to those affected. In fact they were shelling the place while Ukranians did rescue operations.
6) Every single thing Russia has said so far during this war has been lies and ridiculous propaganda, even if propaganda is not meant for us.
7) We know Russia already did mine the dam.
8) Ukraine didn't blow the dam when they had the chance, when it would be more beneficial to them tactically (and strategically?)
9) Maybe Russia wanted to create a small flooding, and due to piping/overflowing it turned horrifically bad? There was a cross river landing by Ukrainian forces recently that might have been a target. But the end result was far *worse* for Russia in that they apparently drowned several platoons (companies?) in the area, destroyed fortifications that have been prepared for a very long time.
So I find it hard to believe this was the desired outcome, without warning their own troops in the area in advance. Regardless, they're absolutely 100% responsible. And if it *WAS* the intended outcome, that indicates they're not foreign to causing a meltdown in the nuclear powerplants they currently control, causing *WAAAAAY* more long term devastating effects in a *WAAAAAY* bigger area (all of Black and Mediterranean sea). Would they be *that* crazy? It's Russia and their history of war crimes, enough said... If this was indeed deliberate, that's to me is the far most scary option.
Yeah, the only explanation I’ve heard for Ukraine supposedly destroying it is “a missile,” A singular missile that supposedly hit the dam. That would have to be a mighty big missile, and I don’t think Ukraine has any large silo or naval-based missiles.
Kherson counteroffensive, Russian retreats - CITING possible destruction of the dam. (*Many of you mock that response…*)
Washington Post refers to “Test Strikes…”
Ukraine finally gets that “missile”, and the results.
There.
A “single missile.”
Russia has actually blown 2 other dams since may 18th, they haven't been reoorted
@@Kikasitsu What missile? Only thing I've heard of is longer range version of GLMRS and ATACSM, none of which would be required to reach the dam and none of which increasing the yield. Other than damaging the sluice gates causing the dam to overflow and cause damage to itself over time, there is no way of causing enough damage to cause catastrophic failure from an external blast. There is also Decree 873 date 30.05.23, paragraph 10, which I wasn't aware of until now (copied from other post here by *RAD):
Russian legislature passed an act to postpone any investigation of incidents on vital infrastructure facilities(including hydroelectric plants) on the "newly incorporated" territories till year 2028.
So while there still are no conclusive proofs, the evidence is certainly stacking up against ruZZia - yeah, I'm biased, sue me. 😁
Yeah the Dambusters in WW2 had to use specialised barrel bombs and I doubt Ukraine would be able to deploy something like that.
1992, a glass of water was tipped over in mongolia 300 million chinese citizens died instantly.
They do it because they want to and they see themselves getting away with it
Don’t worry…
I’m certain their latest “investigation” will turn up nothing… (like before.)
And the moment that-
Oh, wait… what’s that? There were “Test Strikes” done by the Ukrainians BACK IN DECEMBER?
… Huh.
*The Washington Post* reported it?
… Huh.🤔
i am honestly surprised only 1 person used the jerma emote when the reporter said "emergency meeting". maybe we have grown stronger, maybe we have surpassed the sus age of memetic hazards. i am proud of you guys.
Reactors, even when off, they produce heat and need to be cooled, somewhat. Off means reactivity is at minimum, but not entirely gone.
And that "minimum" reactivity is more than enough to cause a total meltdown. That was how Fukushima failed for example.
@@Razoredge581 yeah. The worst bit about that is that there were procedures in place that would have stopped it but it would have damaged the reactor so the owners instead delayed and caused the meltdown.
@@andrewgreenwood9068 Yeah, the whole situation with Fukushima was a shitshow. There's a good vid, "The Lies and Corruption Behind Fukushima," which goes in depth on the numerous issues that led to Fukushima, and where I got my info on this disaster.
So thet's my grandfathers grave gone . Grate
cringe russia goverment
Cringe NPC believing it was Russia
@@justsomeguy6336cringe Putin fannie
Literally Putin could step before the cameras tonight and release a statement that "oh well yeah we bombed the dam not Ukraine" and you would still eat boogers and say "uhmmmm ackshually yoo-crane..."
@@justsomeguy6336 cringe crackpot thinking he is smarter than everyone else
Can't believe Jet blew up the damn
Imagine a Russian Jet lol.
@@conbinspark3144Jet is a tankie, so not that farfetched.
@@MrGksarathy Isn't he just a very morally broken anarchist tho? Tankies are not necessarily anarchists as far as I know.
@@Aadrian7 I'd say Jet's a tankie because his moral compass and reason for resistance is merely "Fire Nation bad, and anything done against them is ok.", which doesn't sound like a very anarchist way of viewing the world.
@@Aadrian7+
I was gonna say I thought Tankies were pro-authoritarian left-wing government structure supporters
Busting a dam like this essentially a weapon of mass destruction
Last time this dam was blown up by soviets to stop nazis advancement. It didn’t really help, but form 20 000 to 100 000 Ukrainians were killed because of that. My hometown survived 8 month of agonizing occupation, 7 months of constant shelling, and now this, I can’t fucking take it anymore
Yeaaa no Ukraine did not do that. No country who wants to defend itself will drown itself with dam water.
You clearly don’t know Ukraine.
Then again, we did warn you of their Nazi problem… and their collaboration with U.S/U.K. orders as well…
But I guess you’ll never learn.
Seriously.
How many World’s Shittiest Murder Mysteries do you intend for us to solve?
It’s getting old.
What about a country that hates half of their own population?
Russia did not blow up Nord Stream.
@@justsomeguy6336 oh right my bad
They had a "special operation at the dam"
Tbf they did around Kyiv during the opening stages of the war, but it was a much smaller dam and they didn't blow the dam up, only opened the floodgates for a while. Ironically, Russia shelled the dam during the attack and made it harder to close it up and dry out the area again lol.
"both sides are guilty and we don't know anything it can be both" is a russian narrative i'm so sick of it. Also "Dnieper" and not "Dnipro" is telling
My dude… I’m tired of it as well.
They don’t mean that The Collective West *will ever* admit their guilt to crimes they committed.
I’ve lost count on this song and dance.
Crime happens, both sides blame each other, Russia demands investigations, WEST DENIES REQUESTS, Ukraine “demands” it, West “accepts…” they can’t find evidence, still blame Russia, people like you smile and nod.
Look, if the Katyn Massacre proved anything, it’s that you all just will accept anything the media tells you, and you’ll ignore the evidence.
You all have the collective memory of a goldfish.
The dam is near the Kherson. Unless you don’t recall gloating about how Ukraine “defeated” the Russians back then…
It literally makes no sense for Ukraine to bomb the dam when they were JUST ABOUT TO LAUNCH AN OFFENSIVE
Simple: WHO do you think committed attacks on a train station, staged massacres, attacked a nuclear power plant, bombed a gas pipeline, blew up a theater full of hostages, keep attacking civilians with Western-backed missiles/artillery, kept attacking civilians for 9 long years, and keep blaming Russia for every single atrocity that ALWAYS turn up Ukraine?
Clearly it’s not a country that is trying to provoke Russia into EXPANDING their SMO (Special Military Operation) into a full-blown war, swallowing up NATO countries into an unwinnable conflict of their design, right?
Blowing up the dam was the offensive
@@exiledhebrew1994?
@@exiledhebrew1994 Ah yes, "We will begin our offensive by drowning our own citizens and creating an impassable quagmire which will prevent us from crossing to pierce the Russian line."
You really think they'd do that when they're on the defense against an invasion by a massive geopolitical power? Cause that'd be really fuggin' stupid of them.
@Exiled Hebrew
It shortened Ukrainian front which is actually bad for them considering they have a tendency to attack in various places at once in order to divert attention from their main target. They've done it last time, they were doing it this time supporting the "Belgorod People's Republic". Not to mention that they'll have to deal with humanitarian response on the top of the offensive. Not to mention that it would make West pretty angry if they intentionally endangered stability of a nuclear plant
Ukrainian would have much more to lose than Russia in this sit
The only way this wasn't direct Russian action, is the remote but real chance that they fucked with the flow controls of the dam enough to induce dam failure without a planned demolition. SO still Russia's fault, but they were dumb enough to not control their big brain war crime attack. The timing counts against it, but it was my first impulse. Actually, blowing up a major dam is terrifying.
Quick question:
Why did Russia *retreat from the Kherson* last year in Ukraine’s counteroffensive?
Remind me…
@@Kikasitsu Oh, I remember this one. Because they couldn't supply sufficient occupying force across the river. Your point?
@@donovan4222 why would they destroy a major reservoir that leaves major environmental damage, makes advancing useless for both sides *and* threatens their nuclear plant? Doesn't make much sense to do that to yourself.
@@donovan4222 lol, they didn’t need to destroy to cut off Crimeas resources dipshit.
@@donovan4222 🥱 Crimea survived just fine without this water for 8 years prior to invasion. There's enough water for civilians in there. Effect on Crimea pales in comparison to economic damage done to Ukraine.
I never knew how important and how powerful dams were as infrastructure. You would have to be psychotic to destroy one of these and not care about the destruction that it creates and causes down the road.
Or be old as fuck & a fascist plutocrat.
16:00 ish - Dams are valid infrastructure targets... but the target is the support buildings near the dam, not the dam itself; That way the dam stays intact but you disable its ability to power anything
Jake Broe made a very good video explaining why Russia is the perpetrator.
Jake Broe a legend at this point
There are 3 things that could cause mass destruction and hinder the offensive in that region of Ukraine. The Dam (already destroyed), Chemical plant "Titan" in Armyansk, and Nuclear Power plant. I think, that they will blow up Titan chemical plant next.
Remember that in WWII the British designed special bombs to destroy dams. Ukraine does not have any.
so the dam is 2 miles long (3.2 KM) but i couldn't find how thick it was.
but for reference the hoover dam is top 20 and 45 feet at the top and 660 at the base
Love from a Xanderhal and VeteranReacts Fan!
Dam failure is still russia's fault, because of willful negligence.
Even if this was just an infrastructure failure the level of incompetence required to cause this goes beyond negligence into callous disregard for consequences.
"In my opinion, as somebody with no expertise on the subject whatsoever [...]"
Surprised that didn't segue into Vaush asking Google how to blow up a dam.
I was going to say, the only thing the US got close to was when Oroville Dam nearly went over. The rivers were already full and at least three cities nearly wiped out.
Wait till you hear what they did in Syria to a “No Strike Zone…”
1. The dam was not destroyed by explosives, no seismic recording detected explosives.
2. It was undermined and overtopped. Gravity dams are held together by.... gravity and once you run water over the top of the dam it falls over, that's why they have emergency spillways.
3. The spill way was open for days longer than it should have been collapsing the walking bridge on the Russian side causing undermining by hydronic force.
4. The road bridge going over the damn on the Ukrainian side was destroyed not to long before the dam gave out.
5. This happened just before the Ukrainian counter Offensive
They just ran the dam in a way that caused it to collapse with plausible deniablity.
At the base the damn is probably 200 feet thick of steel reinforced concrete. It’s probably 20-30 feet thick at the top. You would need multiple large bunker busting deep penetration bombs to maybe break a damn. Artillery will barely put small dents or pits on the damn.
The Ukrainian army will ensure that they DO stop committing war crimes. Slava Ukraini, Heroyam Slava.
Not war crimes. Special military offences against humanity. Ryan McBeth had an interesting comment. Doesn’t matter if it was a dam failure. It was in Russian control and they are still responsible for what happens to it.
British had to design a special bomb to destroy dams during WW2, called the bouncing bomb. Basically, its really hard for regular bombs to cause enough damage to destroy a dam.
since when did russia had only 1 bomb ?
@@isuckatusernames4297 wasn't the dam under russian control, meaning they could have just planted explosives without the need for rockets?
@@primuspandora that too.
@@primuspandora it was said many months ago that the dam had been mined and rigged for demolition by the russians after kherson was liberated. They function as bridges as well. During the early invasion last year, Ukraine actually blew up small ones to prevent the russians from crossing certain rivers, or at least slowing them down. The water had been lowered a bit to prevent flooding though on when those dams blew and the dams were much smaller.
My point is an external attack on a dam is very difficult and requires either massive firepower or specialized bombs. Destruction from inside is much easier using demolition charges (eg. C4, plastique, semtex charges, or even dynamite put in the right places).
Jet fuel can’t melt steel dams
Here's a question to consider in lieu of evidence as to who did it, why should we believe Russia?
1) Kherson Counteroffensive ring any bells? Or did you suddenly forget the offensive ever occurred?
2) Wasn’t there a power plant that Russia was accused of attacking? *Where was it located again?*
3) How many crimes was Russia accused of doing in the past? Tell me… whatever occurred to these crimes that Russia keeps getting accused of? I swear, they always get blamed… but when Russia *demands investigations* the West deny such requests, or always end up blaming Russia.
(Almost like there’s a history of them doing this song and dance.)
4) Oh yeah… didn’t they report on Ukraine flooding a previous village to get the Russians out?
(Man, this tiresome pattern is getting VERY tiresome.)
Yeah, you’re right, the C1A is much more credible
Russian State TV actually reported on russian units preparing a demolition of the dam "in case there's a Ukrainian counteroffensive"
Russia's 205th Separate Motor Rifle Brigade posted images of themselves installing explosives on that dam since October 2022
There are seismic records from Norway showing that there has been one singular explosion shortly before news reached us about the dam being blown up, and that explosion was triangulated around Nova Kakhovka. No shelling, just one big blast - from inside the dam.
But I assume that doesn't fit into the Putin X Reader fanfiction that you consider a foreign policy standpoint?
@@exiledhebrew1994 lol, wow a self hating Jew.
@@Kikasitsu lol, kikasitsu powned count is like 20 to nothing lol. How are you not embarrassed?
I've heard it that the breach was actually caused by negligence in maintenance or repair, which some people seem to think absolves Russia. BS. If your chained-up dog dies because you didn't feed it, and you prevent anyone else from feeding it, you don't get to say "I didn't kill my Dog, he died of starvation." The withholding of necessary care is just as bad as actually executing harm.
A dam being destroyed at this scale is on the level of a small tactical nuke in terms of short term damage
Tankies, and Z Orcs will try to tell you that Ukraine hit it with a Bomb/Mortar/Artillery/Missile. The Soviet Union built the Nova Khakovka Dam to withstand a Near Nuclear Strike, obviously a direct hit from a nuke wouldve turned it into a crater, but you couldnt take it out from the outside. The Russians set charges on the internal structure to compromise it and make it collapse. (After closing all but 1 sluice gate to raise the water level to the highest it has been in 8 years). Oh and the Russians are shelling Evacuees, and also moved all their troops back the day before the collapse. Any ambiguity is non existant and pretending there is any is only helping The Kremlin.
Jfc, those pictures remind me of the footage from Katrina. I have no doubt the people in that region of Ukraine are suffering to a similar extent. Puck Futin. 🇺🇦
The power plant actually could be a problem because if they do t have enough water they could run into a xenon pit. Basically poisoning the reactor.
Well with the reactors shut down, xenon poisoning isn't really much of a concern. With no more xenon being generated, the current levels would decay away over a few days.
For shut down reactors, the only real concern regarding water is coolant. Since even with no fission occurring, the fuel still generates a lot of heat from radioactive decay.
Can’t Putin fall out of black hawk, so we can all get on with life.
The best explanation I have heard for how Ukraine allegedly destroyed the dam is “A missile hit the dam,” but thinking about it, that doesn’t make a lot of sense. A single HIMARS missile wouldn’t destroy the dam, it would take a large cruise missile to do that. The kind that is based out of a silo, a ship, or a heavy mobile platform and which there would probably be more evidence of (like a lauch plume or exhaust trail) than for a smaller artillery missile.
Actually you need something alot bigget then a conventional ballistic missle, its far from enough.
The amount of outside force needed to be used to destroy the dam are close to nuclear
It would have taken a MOP at the minimum, which Ukraine 100% doesn't have nor has the capacity to launch
Oh...so my grandpa was talking abouy THAT kind of flood he saw on tv...
Russia try not to cause nuclear disaster in Ukraine challenge impossible difficulty
“Ever hear about… War crimes?” That depends, are you some kind of cop?
Everything will pass: the sufferings, the torments, the hunger and the pestilence. The sword will disappear, but the stars will remain even when the shadows of our bodies and our works are no longer on the Earth. There is no man who does not know this. So why don't we want to turn our gaze to the stars? Why? (Bulgakov, in his 1924 novel describing Ukraine during the Civil War and the invasion of Soviet Russia).
Ryan mcbeth has done a wonderful video on this in which he bought a LOT of sattelite footage and eventually concluded that the dam collapsed probably due to negligence
Ryan McBeth did a really good video about the dam
"we're the bad guys" *immediately talks about the actual bad guys*
it is like a nuclear bomb, in slow motion
I know of at least one bombing run that destroyed dams. Look up Operation Chastise, a WWII bombing raid by British bombers that destroyed 2 dams in the Ruhr. Of course, that took massive specialized bombs.
The Dam Busters. But instead of awesome bomber planes flying inches off the water, it's soldiers putting explosives inside the dam over weeks.
I mean Russia/Putin said he'd take Ukrain back to the stone age if Russia can't take possession of it.
By scale, this is far more damaging than if they had actually used a nuclear weapon.
I don’t think that’s true unless we’re talking like a tactical nuke
Even after bike lady, he keeps doing this.
In the Soviet Union iirc pretty much everyone had a car... And it was literally the exact same car... (Though yeah, maybe not for government officials)... It was just a boring vehicle called the Moskvich...
That is not true. Not everyone had a car. The vast majority of people did not and relied on public transportation. And there were cars other than Moskvich, including Zhiguli, Zaporozhets, Chayaka, Volga, Lada and i imagine there were other brands that i'm not remembering.
@@the-gadfly4743 After looking more into it, I'm pretty sure I was thinking of the Trabant since this was something I learned about when I was taking a class on the history of modern Germany... Basically the communists wanted people to be seen as equal and that's why pretty much everyone in East Germany was driving the practically the same vehicle...
According to Wikipedia the Trabant was produced in East Germany from 1957 up until 1990 (or 1991)... I guess they did have other cars, but probably nothing too much flashier than the Trabant... I saw one stat that says that in East Germany from 1957-1989 basically every second car would be a Trabant car...
But yeah, I think it was the same with housing too in that you see a lot of shitty concrete block Soviet buildings and the idea was basically that this way no one was living in like some sort of nice bourgeoisie palace...
My prof mentioned something like that since I remember asking in response "Isn't it kind of still unequal in the sense that the top floors have a better view and the bottom floors are more accessible?" and that's where prof gave some answer along the lines of like "That's actually a good point and you'd sometimes see government officials perhaps reserving certain rooms."
The convo went something like that anyway...
CZcams titles in a few months "R***ia Can't Stop Committing W*r Cr**es"
Meanwhile it turns out it's worse. They didn't mean to blow the dam they accidentally did lmao
Cannot say that I have, I asked GW Bush and his friends and they laughed. Got the same reaction from V. Putin.
Even if Zelensky himself had setup the charges and pressed the detonation button it would still be Russia's fault.
Have they not invaded no destruction of dams, villages, cities, lifr would have ocurred.
Dams are certainly a low carbon energy source (essentially carbon free after their construction), but they are often not "green" given their impact on riparian ecosystems.
Embodied carbon is also a factor. Concrete, which is the most common material used to build dams, is extremely carbon intensive. Dams would need to be in operation for a while before they break even with the carbon footprint generated by the concrete production used to build them.
@@jyw0000 This is absolutely true, though that is an issue shared with other low-carbon energy sources. I believe hydro is estimated to be between solar (higher life-cycle carbon footprint per unity energy produced) and wind or nuclear (lower life-cycle carbon foot print) in this regard, though obviously there is a high degree of variance depending on the details of a particular project.
@@recurrenTopology lol as someone who just finished getting an M.Arch degree, I never thought I’d be seeing the term “life cycle carbon footprint” outside of my low-carbon structures class, let alone in one of Vaush’s comment sections 😂👍
Eh I think they could have stored fertilizer or munitions incorrectly and they failed. Everyone forgets 2020 Beirut explosions fertilized can go critical and cause insane problems
I work in water, i tell people often that we need to take our water infrastructure the most serious. Yall have not the slightest clue how fragile our human civilization is. Water plants are virtually unprotected - very expensive- and very fragile. This is horrible. Hopefully they can recover and no Chernobyl part 2
To elaborate- every single water plant in that region is wrecked - they have to be totally drained and re-setup, then deal with the challenge of making drinking water out of significantly dirtier water than before. Most people can't even make it 2 days with no water
6:38 this isn't even including the spread of all kinds of diseases
Hydro-electricity unfortunately is one of the more impactful green energy sources. It can reshape entire river ecosystems.
They could have just flown a plane into it. 🙄 you can't accidentally destroy a sky scraper.
Honestly, I'd like to think it was the dam failure leading to planted charges detonating due to shelling. It fits right in with the rest of the Wiley Coyote reality.
But it also wouldn't surprise me in the slightest to just find out it was Russia.
I don't think Russia bombed the dam, I think they incompetently let it break.
There's satellite evidence of them only allowing one gate to let out reservoir water and it would likely have undermined the dam with the water pressure. We also see the water overrunning the top of the dam from spring snow melt which I'd a death sentence for most dams.
The reason it's not sabotage (or at least not a demolition) is that the roadway was washed away a day before the dam broke. This was progressive damage from incompetent upkeep
A few weeks ago Russia was basically defeated and on the brink of collapse . What happened?
Yeah,let's hold that multipolar world dream for another 50 yearsthere is no country that is even slightly responsible enough to be another superpower
Honestly the most likely candidate is the eu. China and Russia are too bad at diplomacy
I have seen good evidence that it wasn't deliberate by Russia, but rather that when they took over the dam in the invasion they just stopped all maintenance. The road near the power-station washed out before the total failure. In the before pictures, you can see the only sluice gate open is the single gate on the Ukraine side. Russia has both cranes on their side, but none of their gates are open. Not sure if it being Russian negligence as the cause is better or worse than malice.
Not saying the Russians didn't cause this - Russia absolutely DID cause this, but by mis-operation of the dam, either intentionally or not. At best, it was "just" negligence allowing the one spillway to underscour itself, and by then also overtopping the dam to boot. Equally likely I estimate of their incompetence and their indifference to under-maintenance. Russia did control the power station section though, so if they did want to blow it up, they had full access to the most delicate interior areas, but, y'know, Hanlon's Razor.
Vaush, if you want good analysis of situations in Ukraine pertaining to war crimes check out Ryan Mcbeth, he's a military analyst who use to work with strategic systems.
They have dam buster bombs even back in WW2 we had them
Meanwhile. Russian troops on cellphone . That has been leaked. Have said. They blew up then dam , and ukraine did not do it.
Ukrainian is a dialect of Russian… you do know that, right?
And , you do realize they can trace cellphones by numbers.
@@Kikasitsu Not anymore, it's not.
Oh yes… because Ukraine outlawed the Russian language under Poroschenko.
Right…
I forgot.
(It was right before Ukraine cut off the water to Crimea, attacked the civilians, and spent 8 years trying to commit a genocide.)
@@Kikasitsu "These guys who are getting invaded are totally genociding, guys!"
Stfu, tankie
Posting the LotR clip was worth the ban tbh
bababooey
It was a Nestle marketing stunt actually
Google allows you to filter results by date. Tools -> "Any Time"-Dropdown -> "Custom range...". All other options there are to the current date like "past month" or "past year". Should help if the feed is flooded with current events and you are looking for older results. “before:YYYY-MM-DD” and “after:YYYY-MM-DD” in the search itself also allows you to search in a specific range. There are other helpful commands but i usually only use "site:" to limit the the search to a website.
Is this a god dam?
Uhuhuhuhuh shut up beavis
Having seen some in depth analysis, it seems like the dam failed due to structural collapse. This is still at the hands of the Russians, but it doesn't seem like it was bombed. Instead Russian forces did not maintain the correct safety procedures to keep the dam running and it collapsed. Thanks to some satellite images it seems like the dam was suffering "overtopping" shortly before the dam failed.
Wouldn't have happened if Russia didn't invade but it seems like neglect rather than intentional malice.
(4:27) But their forces were on the low lands side of the river. So flooding would affect their forces greater than the Ukraine forces.
If bombing were there intent, It would seem fainting a retreat allowing your enemy to cross the river then bomb it. Some of their forces will be caught in the flooding of the river and then the rest of them will be pinned between the flooding river and your advancing forces.🤔
10/10 vaush intro
From a materialistic point of view the destruction of the dam is a great thing for the russian army, since they have to deal with the ukrainian couter-offensive. Now that the water is high, raiding paries by the UAF are way eazier to detect, allowing Russia to pull troops away from that front for defensive opereations against the counter-attack for a while.
There is a silver lining for the UAF in this scenario. Since the lake from this dam is going to dry up, the UAF will have more fronts from which they can initiate small raids and counter attacks on the Russians. This will make the required manpower to defend this part of the front significantly higher and may in turn help the UAF launch more counter-offensive actions further in the east. It also may bring more NATO support for Ukraine to the table.
You definitely COULD destroy a dam with a missile... The US has multiple dams on the verge of breaking and flooding villages in America which often the state governments cannot afford to fix... If it's a dam like that, one that could burst any moment, a missile could be the final nail in the coffin... And when you look at images of the dam on June 1st and June 2nd there seems to be damage to the dam already as more of it appears to be missing... (That said, almost certainly still Russia... They EASILY benefit the most when you go over all the pros/cons for both sides and Russia had far more ability to do it like this... The timing is also just WAYYYY too coincidental to be believable that it broke on its own (RIGHT when the counteroffensive seemingly was starting))...
Also its possible Ukrainian divers as Russia has said swam under and planted explosives that way... But again, just doesn't seem too likely...
NATO must intervene and occupy the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant.
do the US next cringe king