Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
so you're not taking issue with the all claims as long as they involve russia bit
Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-24
- Thread starter kebabking
- Start date
strung out
💩 🤣 🍆 💦 🧐 👻 🐝 🐈⬛
Can't be arsed
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
the russians have presented the ukrainians with a perfect opportunity where no russian denials even where truthful will receive the same credence as any ukrainian claims, no matter how baseless they may be
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
The reports of Russian shelling of the nuclear plant do not seem to make sense.
The Russians are in control of the plant and surrounding areas. They have moved troops and equipment there.
Then shelled the plant? Really?
Zaporizhzhia: Russian rockets damaged part of nuclear plant, Ukraine says
Ukraine says Russian rockets hit part of a giant nuclear plant - but Russia blames Ukraine for it.www.bbc.co.uk
They're apparently using it as an ersatz military base because the Ukrainians won't want to shoot rockets at it.
Last edited:
strung out
💩 🤣 🍆 💦 🧐 👻 🐝 🐈⬛
Yes. Another masterclass in military strategy from the Russians.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
yet we've been told time and again by the ukrainians how the russians are on the last legs. not so much recently, it's true. but so often in the earlier period of the war that it's plain they're not immune to telling a few lies themselves.
strung out
💩 🤣 🍆 💦 🧐 👻 🐝 🐈⬛
Not sure that's true.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
strung out
💩 🤣 🍆 💦 🧐 👻 🐝 🐈⬛
I don't think any of the Ukrainian authorities were saying that.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
More like the equipment they've got is shite and the men don't want to be there.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
i thought they had but i find i was mistaken. although the top ukrainian intelligence man did say there'd be false flag terror attacks in russia Deranged Putin now plans to 'bomb own country' to spark 'anti-Ukrainian hysteria' and that russia has a year's worth of ammunition, now presumably much diminished.
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
Maybe its a case of mistaking some posts on here for Ukrainian govt announcements?
There were lots of reports about Russia running out of vehicles, reliant on Masda Bongos to get equipment and troops to the front etc.
Also the various Putin's at death's door, will be bumped off etc stuff.
Can all probably be filed under propergander, exageration or over interpretation. The normal stuff of 21C war information.
But as to the who's blowing up what or killing who, there's perhaps a bit more certainty, given cui bono and precedence.
Also the various Putin's at death's door, will be bumped off etc stuff.
Can all probably be filed under propergander, exageration or over interpretation. The normal stuff of 21C war information.
But as to the who's blowing up what or killing who, there's perhaps a bit more certainty, given cui bono and precedence.
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
The Times not sparing the rod either
Cid
Proper break this time
We're always dealing with uncertainty here... But the idea that Ukraine used a high value precision weapon which involves US oversight to attack a well known prison site is a real stretch. Even if you discount discussion of pictures, not allowing ICRC access (in itself a war crime) etc.
Attacks on the nuclear plant are more open to speculation, think that's fair. But false flags are absolutely part of Russia's playbook. That plant needs a no fire zone around it, and IAEA access now... And I'm going to hazard a guess it's not Ukraine holding that up.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Cid
Proper break this time
Tbf you've gone a bit word salad today. But yes, I agree. So just got to look at the evidence as it emerges.
elbows
Well-Known Member
The nuclear power plant stuff is a total nightmare to unpick, just like it was earlier in the war. Because its being used as propaganda, but if I become too dismissive of it as a result, I could miss a very real disaster unfolding or at least becoming plausible. Earlier in the war it tended to be the Ukrainian side that used the spectre of a variety of nuclear risks as part of their campaign to get the world to pay attention and get involved more actively. There seem to be more counter-claims from the Russians this time so the picture is even murkier.
The BBC are providing plenty of coverage on this, but so far when it comes to the very latest accusations, they are stuck in 'the BBC has not been able to verify the claims from either side.' mode.
Certainly international organisations are making more comments this time. Comments from the head of the UN are featuring on the BBC live updates page today: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/62462223
It was also very surreal reading the comments from the IAEA about this the other day. Language was used along the lines of "the nuclear plant is totally out of control" which is the absolute opposite of the sort of language we'd expect from the IAEA at all times. An incredibly poor choice of words that runs totally counter to their normal agenda and modus operandi, conjuring up images of the reactors themselves being out of control, which is not an image the IAEA is usually keen to promote even on the extremely rare occasions when nuclear power stations are in that sort of state or teetering towards meltdown. The press were happy to report that quote without asking simple questions such as what that comment actually meant.
The BBC are providing plenty of coverage on this, but so far when it comes to the very latest accusations, they are stuck in 'the BBC has not been able to verify the claims from either side.' mode.
Certainly international organisations are making more comments this time. Comments from the head of the UN are featuring on the BBC live updates page today: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/62462223
It was also very surreal reading the comments from the IAEA about this the other day. Language was used along the lines of "the nuclear plant is totally out of control" which is the absolute opposite of the sort of language we'd expect from the IAEA at all times. An incredibly poor choice of words that runs totally counter to their normal agenda and modus operandi, conjuring up images of the reactors themselves being out of control, which is not an image the IAEA is usually keen to promote even on the extremely rare occasions when nuclear power stations are in that sort of state or teetering towards meltdown. The press were happy to report that quote without asking simple questions such as what that comment actually meant.
Last edited:
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
teqniq
DisMembered
Re: the reactor situation, i read this when it was published a week ago:
Using Nuclear Reactors for Cover, Russians Lob Rockets at Ukrainians
Using Nuclear Reactors for Cover, Russians Lob Rockets at Ukrainians
elbows
Well-Known Member
I'm just reviewing a bit more of the nuclear power station reporting.
Nuclear experts continue to add little of value to our understanding. They cant offer much beyond the usual no shit Sherlock stuff such as the ramifications of leaks and the consequences of missiles hitting reactor buildings. Further detail on the risks involves 'loss of colant' stuff if certain plant infrastructre was hit that affected the ability to provide cooling water to the reactors or other hot fuel on site. Standard nulcear reassurances are also in play, in the form of bigging up how strong the containment around reactors is.
In terms of the latest accusations, Russian ones arent reported with much detail, but seem to be centred on the idea that Ukraine is shelling the plant and that international pressure should be applied to get them to stop. On the Ukraine side their nuclear agency has now claimed that the head of Russia's radiation, chemical and biological defence forces has said "there will be either Russian land or a scorched desert". And that the same Russian bloke also said "We have mined all the important facilities of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant,".
I am very far away from being to take those claims at face value. There were some huge lies earlier in the war in this regard, but as I said earlier, I cannot completely dismiss all this stuff either, and even if particular claims are bullshit they may just mask an equally dangerous situation or risk of escalation.
Nuclear experts continue to add little of value to our understanding. They cant offer much beyond the usual no shit Sherlock stuff such as the ramifications of leaks and the consequences of missiles hitting reactor buildings. Further detail on the risks involves 'loss of colant' stuff if certain plant infrastructre was hit that affected the ability to provide cooling water to the reactors or other hot fuel on site. Standard nulcear reassurances are also in play, in the form of bigging up how strong the containment around reactors is.
In terms of the latest accusations, Russian ones arent reported with much detail, but seem to be centred on the idea that Ukraine is shelling the plant and that international pressure should be applied to get them to stop. On the Ukraine side their nuclear agency has now claimed that the head of Russia's radiation, chemical and biological defence forces has said "there will be either Russian land or a scorched desert". And that the same Russian bloke also said "We have mined all the important facilities of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant,".
I am very far away from being to take those claims at face value. There were some huge lies earlier in the war in this regard, but as I said earlier, I cannot completely dismiss all this stuff either, and even if particular claims are bullshit they may just mask an equally dangerous situation or risk of escalation.
elbows
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the link. I note that it mentions them receiving reports of the shelling, without going into any detail about it at all.
The out of control line that the press used for headlines came from this sort of interview, the language in the document is more carefully chosen when it comes to that theme:
elbows
Well-Known Member
I'm very pissed off with both sides about this, gross irresponsibility on both sides. Given the stakes, this is an area of the war where they need to do a deal like they did with grain supplies. But there are no public signs that there is any appetite for that, although we arent privy to what degrees of international pressure may be being applied by allies behind the scenes.
elbows
Well-Known Member
This is how Reuters reported the shelling on Friday:The reports of Russian shelling of the nuclear plant do not seem to make sense.
The Russians are in control of the plant and surrounding areas. They have moved troops and equipment there.
Then shelled the plant? Really?
Zaporizhzhia: Russian rockets damaged part of nuclear plant, Ukraine says
Ukraine says Russian rockets hit part of a giant nuclear plant - but Russia blames Ukraine for it.www.bbc.co.uk
Shells hit power lines at Ukraine nuclear plant, fighting in east
Russia and Ukraine accused each other on Friday of shelling Europe's biggest nuclear power plant as fighting raged again in the crucial border region of the Donbas and three more ships left ports carrying previously blockaded Ukrainian grain.
www.reuters.com
I'm forced to keep an open mind about which side was responsible. The default framing by some media of it being a Russian attack is expected and simply reflects what the Ukrainian nuclear agency have claimed, but does not shine any genuine light on which side was actually responsible.
Both sides have denied the IAEA access apparently elbows
This was the Ukr statement
"We consider this message from the head of the IAEA as another attempt to get to the (power plant) by any means in order to legitimise the presence of occupiers there and essentially condone all their actions,"
It seems IAEA and Ukrainian nuclear authority have a very bad relationship.
This was the Ukr statement
Ukraine slams planned IAEA mission to Russian-occupied nuclear plan
June 7 (Reuters) - Ukraine's state nuclear company Energoatom on Tuesday criticised an IAEA plan to send a delegation to a Russian-occupied nuclear plant in southern Ukraine, saying it "did not invite" such a visit."We consider this message from the head of the IAEA as another attempt to get to the (power plant) by any means in order to legitimise the presence of occupiers there and essentially condone all their actions,"
It seems IAEA and Ukrainian nuclear authority have a very bad relationship.
Last edited:
Cid
Proper break this time
They've changed their position since then. Currently seems they want a DMZ with UN and IAEA monitoring.
Zaporizhia NPP: Europe now facing nuclear disaster as Russia opts for new plot
NAEC Energoatom calls on the UN, IAEA, and the international community to take all possible measures to send a security mission to the Zaporizhia Nuclear Power Plant to ensure its further demilitarization and withdrawal of Russian troops from the facility and surrounding area. — Ukrinform.
Also Bloomberg just now reporting Russian authorities inviting IAEA to visit. Can't find any more on this though.
Russia Invites Nuclear Monitors to Visit Shelled Ukrainian Plant
Russia told diplomats it’s ready to welcome international monitors into Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, whose safety is in doubt after coming under attack last week.
www.bloomberg.com
elbows
Well-Known Member
Yeah the current Ukrainian demands sound like a non-starter in their current form because it involves giving them back control of the plant. Putting peacekeepers into Ukraine is probably a headache for the international community too, demands for such things didnt go anywhere in the past.
www.reuters.com
Also complicated by this war aim, which may well be why we're hearing more about the nuclear plant and military action in the area again these days:
Ukraine, Russia trade blame for nuclear plant shelling amid global alarm
Kyiv and Moscow traded blame on Monday for the weekend shelling of Ukraine's Zaporizhzhia nuclear complex amid international alarm that their battle for control of the plant could trigger catastrophe.
www.reuters.com
Also complicated by this war aim, which may well be why we're hearing more about the nuclear plant and military action in the area again these days:
Let's hope the Ukr govt allow them to conduct “activities within the framework of the implementation of safeguards, as well as monitoring the state of nuclear safety and security,” without insisting on a DMZ with UN monitoring as it's probably off the cards by a long way.
Similar threads
