Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-24

[existentialist]

It’s worked out pretty well for the Ukrainians, Now they’ve got a good excuse for not launching a counter offensive

That's an odd thing to say.

 

[gosub]

That's an odd thing to say

Who needs Occums razor when a Sharpie has thr word sharpie written on it

 

[existentialist]

Yep. 70 ton tanks don't work too well on boggy ground. They lose their advantage in speed and maneuverability. I suppose the Ukrainian and NATO planners thought 'well it's inevitable...'.

Curious to see what contingencies they've thought up (if any).

They were never going to be going there,. Any (perceived) benefits for the Russians weren't about stopping them fighting across the left bank towards Kherson. Whatever Ukraine does in the south is far more likely to be a drive towards Melitopol/Mariupol, with the intention of cutting off the western Russian forces. History likes to rhyme, and it would be a very economical use of Ukrainian forces to eliminate a significant part of Russia's army without having to slaughter them kilometer by kilometer, much as happened in the Falaise Gap (1944).

If Russia thought the same, they may have decided to drop the dam at Nova Khakokva as a kind of "scorched earth" strategy. But it has clearly disadvantaged their own troops in the area, and effectively forced a withdrawal. My suspicion is that someone thought that a bit of "damage" to the dam might have provided them with a tactical advantage - which it might - but that instead, some idiot (смечалка at work here) deliberately or accidentally ended up dropping the whole thing, with results that hardly serve Russia's tactical interests. Or maybe Putin went full Mad Dictator and demanded that the whole thing be destroyed, regardless of the military consequences. It's hard enough to figure out stuff in wars and conflicts, but the random Mad Dictator element tends to make it even more tricky.

 

[Ming]

They were never going to be going there,. Any (perceived) benefits for the Russians weren't about stopping them fighting across the left bank towards Kherson. Whatever Ukraine does in the south is far more likely to be a drive towards Melitopol/Mariupol, with the intention of cutting off the western Russian forces. History likes to rhyme, and it would be a very economical use of Ukrainian forces to eliminate a significant part of Russia's army without having to slaughter them kilometer by kilometer, much as happened in the Falaise Gap (1944).

If Russia thought the same, they may have decided to drop the dam at Nova Khakokva as a kind of "scorched earth" strategy. But it has clearly disadvantaged their own troops in the area, and effectively forced a withdrawal. My suspicion is that someone thought that a bit of "damage" to the dam might have provided them with a tactical advantage - which it might - but that instead, some idiot (смечалка at work here) deliberately or accidentally ended up dropping the whole thing, with results that hardly serve Russia's tactical interests. Or maybe Putin went full Mad Dictator and demanded that the whole thing be destroyed, regardless of the military consequences. It's hard enough to figure out stuff in wars and conflicts, but the random Mad Dictator element tends to make it even more tricky.

I sometimes wonder if Putin is going for for the Nixon 'I'm mad' strategy.

 

[existentialist]

I sometimes wonder if Putin is going for for the Nixon 'I'm mad' strategy.

I don't think he is that self-aware.

 

[DownwardDog]

That's an odd thing to say.

Not really. Zelensky's number one goal since the start of The Forever War has been to get NATO fighting and ideally dying in Ukraine - remember the No Fly Zone bollocks. If he can't do that then his number two goal is to keep them interested. Now that Season 4 of Succession has been and gone and there's a few weeks until Wimbledon people are desperate for the counter-offensive to maintain interest. If the counter-offensive can't happen then the dam thing is a perfect mid-season story arc.

 

[Flavour]

It’s worked out pretty well for the Ukrainians, Now they’ve got a good excuse for not launching a counter offensive

Good troll

 

[Artaxerxes]

It's basically destroyed Crimea as a viable economical and inhabitable area. So yeah that's not great.

 

[tim]

Ukraine weren't going to launch any counterattack through the now flooded regions anyway.

You insiders who know it all are supposed to keep it under your hat.

 

[The39thStep]

You insiders who know it all are supposed to keep it under your hat.

Where is _Russ_ list ?

 

[Rimbaud]

It's basically destroyed Crimea as a viable economical and inhabitable area. So yeah that's not great.

I've heard a couple of different takes about Crimea which make this an interesting point.

Blowing up the dam: Putin has given up on Crimea

The question is no longer whether Putin can win, but how many more people will die before he loses

www.theneweuropean.co.uk

This guy reckons that blowing up the dam means Russia has given up hope of holding Crimea and is essentially a kind of scorched earth policy.

Two, the dam supplied water to barren Crimea. Blowing up the dam is a critical sign that Russia has abandoned its long-term strategy of holding onto the peninsula. This is not being promulgated in the Kremlin’s patsy media but the long traffic jams going east leading to the Kerch bridge speak to Crimxit. Unarticulated, but Putin’s supporters are going back to Russia. The last time a mass of Russians voted with their feet was not good news for the tsar.

But I'm not sure how this squares with this take on how important Crimea is for Putin, which I found convincing:



The thrust of the argument is that Crimea is tied to Ancient Greece, so is part of Putin's civilisational mission and Russia's self-image, meaning that its loss would be existential for Putin.

Either one of these takes is wrong, or, if they are both right, we have reason to be very worried about what the rest of the year holds.

 

[platinumsage]

Why would it signal abandonment of a long-term strategy when the dam can easily be rebuilt in the medium term? Win the war, rebuild the dam, Crimea is ours for ever and Bob's your Uncle.

 

[Kaka Tim]

Why would it signal abandonment of a long-term strategy when the dam can easily be rebuilt in the medium term? Win the war, rebuild the dam, Crimea is ours for ever and Bob's your Uncle.

Yeah. It's makes sense in terms of putin going with the "whatever it takes" line. I guess for him what's important is it all being part of Russia, even if Ukraine and crimea are reduced to a smoking wasteland in the process.
Not a happy thought in terms of where all this ends

 

[kebabking]

I think it's both obvious and certain that there is an ideology driving Putin/wider Russian elites and to whatever extent it's population, but I think it would be a mistake to assume that the plan to bring that about, or to bring that about in a particular way, or indeed that big political objective, is in the driving seat at all times.

It may be, as platinumsage suggests, that he thinks he's got enough time that he can effectively abandon the current war, go home, rebuild and then come back with Russia's Big Boy Pants on, with Ukraine hoisting the white flags as the New Russian Army roars into view.

One hesitates to to use the analogy, but it's obvious that Putin - to an extent - venerates/models himself in Stalin (observers will have seen that the plaques commemorating the deportations to the Gulags came down in Moscow in the last few weeks) - and old Joe had many cracks at Ukraine, at no point, regardless of what reverses he/the project had suffered, did he ever say 'nah, bin it, it's fucked - we'll just have to live with it...'

Happy to write off a failing plan and come up with a new one - which is a sign of intelligence, and a dangerous opponent. The question will be, if Ukraine does kick Russia out of most, of Ukraine, particularly if that includes Crimea, whether he gets the luxury of time, or if he learns to fly for 3 seconds before hitting the pavement.

 

[Pickman's model]

Russ the geologist.

He's a rock where his brain should be

 

[strung out]

Why would it signal abandonment of a long-term strategy when the dam can easily be rebuilt in the medium term? Win the war, rebuild the dam, Crimea is ours for ever and Bob's your Uncle.

Rebuilding the dam almost certainly requires control of both sides of the Dnieper river, which looks like it's completely off the table for the long term now, even if Russia does somehow manage to hold on to its existing territory on the left bank.

If Putin doesn't realise that and therefore still has a long term strategy to somehow invade and subjugate the majority of Ukraine, then he's clearly even more removed from reality than we thought.

 

[Artaxerxes]

It’s not going to be cheap and it’ll take several years just to build it let alone make the river safe to work and clear the rubble.

 

[UnderOpenSky]

It’s not going to be cheap and it’ll take several years just to build it let alone make the river safe to work and clear the rubble.

I'd assume before such a significant investment that no side would be willing to commit until a proper peace is hashed out, which could be a log way off.

 

[maomao]

I am not an engineer but I would have thought repairing a dam of that size which has been damaged and weakened was an even bigger job than just building a dam in the first place.

 

[Rob Ray]

There's a useful take from New Civil Engineer here, which sounds pretty confident it's a repair job rather than build anew (makes sense to me – the sheer mass of concrete involved in new build is immense), but even so nothing will be happening until the war's done and they're talking multiple years of work, from construction of cofferdams just to inspect everything properly to replacement of purpose-built hydroelectric machinery:

Industry specialists assess damage on Ukraine's breached Nova Kakhovka dam | New Civil Engineer

The 3.2km long, 30m high dam across the Dnipro River was breached on 6 June in an attack that Ukraine is calling a Russian terrorist attack, but which

www.newcivilengineer.com

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

English video with subtitles in the second tweet.

 

[cupid_stunt]

The Seismic Data from that Dam breach actually looks more like what you see from a sudden collapse and not an explosion

Meanwhile, back in reality...

“The plant was designed to withstand a nuclear strike,” Syrota told the Guardian in an interview in Kyiv. “To destroy the plant from the outside, at least three aircraft bombs, each of 500kg, would have had to be dropped on the same spot. The station was blown up from the inside.”

He added: “They brought hundreds of kilograms of explosives there. Ukraine reported last year that the station was mined. The Russians were just waiting for the right day to blow it up.”

Seismic data adds to evidence that Ukraine’s Kakhovka dam was blown up

Signals point to explosion early on Tuesday, as Ukraine says intercepted call proves Russia was responsible

www.theguardian.com

 

[xenon]

Well a sudden collapse... Caused by an explosion?

What's the deal with the video above then. Can someone preces it please. The idea they were just rigging it with explosives to blow it up a little bit. Or it wasn't meant to go off at all at this stage?

 

[cupid_stunt]

Well a sudden collapse... Caused by an explosion?

What's the deal with the video above then. Can someone preces it please. The idea they were just rigging it with explosives to blow it up a little bit. Or it wasn't meant to go off at all at this stage?

Here you go...

Transcript of conversation Ukraine claims proves Russia blew up Nova Kakhovka dam
Ukraine’s domestic security service (SBU) said earlier on Friday it had intercepted a telephone call proving a Russian “sabotage group” blew up the Kakhovka hydroelectric station and dam in southern Ukraine.

A one-and-a-half minute audio clip on its Telegram channel of the alleged conversation featured two unidentified men who appeared to be discussing the fallout from the disaster in Russian.

In the conversation the first speaker starts by saying: “News. Yesterday there was a video in the Telegram channel – a soldier was standing there, his face covered, in his uniform. And he says there is no flooding, that people are living normally. And behind him there is a window and you can see knee-deep water.”

The second speaker says: “It’s funny. Is it about the fact that the hydroelectric power plant was destroyed?”

The conversation continued:

Speaker one: Yeah. The main problem is that the hydropower plant cools their nuclear reactor.

Speaker two: That’s fine. They did it to themselves. It’ll blow up and that’s it.

Speaker one: So our guys did it. It’s not them, it’s ours.

Speaker two: Really, it was ours? They said that the Khokhols [derogatory term for Ukrainians] blew it up.

Speaker one: They didn’t blow it up. Our saboteur group is there. They wanted to cause fear with this dam. It did not go according to the plan. More than they planned.

Speaker two: Yeah, well, naturally. It’s gonna be like Chornobyl, right?

Speaker one: Built in the 1950s. It went down fast, it went down.

Reuters reports the SBU did not offer further details of the conversation or its participants. It said it had opened a criminal investigation into war crimes and “ecocide”.

“The invaders wanted to blackmail Ukraine by blowing up the dam and staged a man-made disaster in the south of our country,” it said in a statement.

Russia and the officials it has imposed in occupied Ukraine have blamed Kyiv for destroying the dam but have offered no evidence, and varying conflicting explanations.

LINK

 

[xenon]

Cheers for that. Utter bastards obv.

 

[existentialist]

If that's true, it bears out the idea that this was half conspiracy, half cockup. Is it possible the intention was to cause damage to the dam, both to actually create some problems, but also to use it as blackmail in the future? But they overdid it, and, well...

 

[WouldBe]

The idea they were just rigging it with explosives to blow it up a little bit. Or it wasn't meant to go off at all at this stage?

As I said earlier "careless smoking".

 

[Kaka Tim]

The Crimea Job - Michael Caine and his gang of cockney crims race through the streets of Sevastopol on Tractors having pulled of a daring heist knicking the wagner groups hoard of vodka, potatoes and amphetamines.

 

[tim]

I am not an engineer but I would have thought repairing a dam of that size which has been damaged and weakened was an even bigger job than just building a dam in the first place.

It's a piece of piss for a couple of eager beavers.

 

[andysays]

The Crimea Job - Michael Caine and his gang of cockney crims race through the streets of Sevastopol on red, white and blue Tractors having pulled of a daring heist nicking the Wagner groups hoard of vodka, potatoes and amphetamines.

CFY