Then you should be relieved. The evidence is that the dam was broken by an internal explosion, not shelling, and Russians were in control of the dam.The more I learn about the Kakhovka dam's destruction and the aftermath, the more convinced I am that Ukraine was the party responsible for the dam's breech. I don't want that to be true but I'm becoming more convinced that it is true.
The breech does a lot to slow Ukrainian advances (as opposed to hurting current positions) and kill Ukrainians.The breech of the dam does little to Ukrainian positions but ruins the Russian trench networks and minefileds south of the river.
Yes. It was not shelling. Also, the Russians had destroyed the road on the Kherson side of the dam so they could retain control of the dam itself. The explosion that caused the breech of the dam was clearly on the Russian side. All of that is true. It makes it very easy to place blame on the Russians for this act.Then you should be relieved. The evidence is that the dam was broken by an internal explosion, not shelling, and Russians were in control of the dam.
Ya im wondering if the dam is still ok if russia never invades ukraine. Im guessing it would be.The dam break is going to be an ecological disaster for decades to come.
It is a war crime to destroy dams where there is a risk to civilians. I'm pretty sure this was done by the Russians (they controlled the dam and previously announced that they had mined it to prevent the Ukrainians from trying to take it) but I don't care who it was when it comes to holding them accountable for this.
Thought this was an interesting thread
View: https://twitter.com/thestudyofwar/status/1667703484244787200?s=46&t=QT7YFlZ_IlHq81PpZAhKgw