Continuation The Russian invasion of Ukraine part 7

[Mike!]

Originally Posted by Doubt

Almost tempted to poll everybody here to see what day they think the offensive will really start. Not having a good definition for what that will be makes it a bit silly. But we can still pick dates.

They are not going to wait for all the tanks and planes to show up. We are into June so the "spring" part of a spring offensive is about over with. Weather reports I looked at show rain starting around June 10th in a couple of key locations. I think they are going to go this month and, without much of anything to really back this up, I am guessing June 8th. Odds of being wrong are quite high. Take your best guess.

I suspect it's already started and it just hasn't become obvious yet. As I've said before, the pot of water is on the stove and the burner is lit, but it's set to slow boil and will take a little time before it is observably going on full steam.

[Doubt]

Originally Posted by Mike!

I suspect it's already started and it just hasn't become obvious yet. As I've said before, the pot of water is on the stove and the burner is lit, but it's set to slow boil and will take a little time before it is observably going on full steam.

That is the problem with trying to define what counts as the start. Clearly there are offensive operations happening. But they aren't yet making a play for a lot of territory and the majority of what they could commit are not currently active. Without a good definition for what counts as being "the" offensive, we have a subjective opinions about when it does or has started.

I am not calling the current operations "the" offensive since they have not really committed a serious amount of force yet. But that is, again, subjective.

[Doubt]

https://liveuamap.com/en/2023/4-june...-in-crimea-was

Quote:

Broadcasting of several TV channels in Crimea was hacked. Operators turning off them

Wondering if that was the work of somebody in Crimea or was it all done remotely.

[gnome]

Originally Posted by Doubt

That is the problem with trying to define what counts as the start. Clearly there are offensive operations happening. But they aren't yet making a play for a lot of territory and the majority of what they could commit are not currently active. Without a good definition for what counts as being "the" offensive, we have a subjective opinions about when it does or has started.

I am not calling the current operations "the" offensive since they have not really committed a serious amount of force yet. But that is, again, subjective.

Would a committed effort to reclaim and hold some portion of Russian-occupied territory count as a good criteria to distinguish the offensive itself rather than preparations?

[Dr.Sid]

Video which was shown on the hacked Crimean TV channels. No idea what's going on. But something is.

https://twitter.com/KyivPost/status/1665408228396507138

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by gnome

Would a committed effort to reclaim and hold some portion of Russian-occupied territory count as a good criteria to distinguish the offensive itself rather than preparations?

I would expect the offensive to have been well under way, before any such effort is visible. Ukraine cannot really afford to throw large amounts of soldiers and equipment at a head-on assault, unless victory is assured.

Therefore I suspect that they will continue to conduct "shaping" operations. Whittling away here. Eroding there. Until Moscow's defenses reach an inflection point, where the next attack will shatter them completely.

I think what we'll see is yet another withdrawal by Moscow, only it turns into a rout, and the rout becomes general, and the Ukrainians go all out in the pursuit and destruction of the routing forces.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by theprestige

I would expect the offensive to have been well under way, before any such effort is visible. Ukraine cannot really afford to throw large amounts of soldiers and equipment at a head-on assault, unless victory is assured.

Therefore I suspect that they will continue to conduct "shaping" operations. Whittling away here. Eroding there. Until Moscow's defenses reach an inflection point, where the next attack will shatter them completely.

I think what we'll see is yet another withdrawal by Moscow, only it turns into a rout, and the rout becomes general, and the Ukrainians go all out in the pursuit and destruction of the routing forces.

That seems very plausible

[gnome]

Originally Posted by theprestige

I would expect the offensive to have been well under way, before any such effort is visible. Ukraine cannot really afford to throw large amounts of soldiers and equipment at a head-on assault, unless victory is assured.

Therefore I suspect that they will continue to conduct "shaping" operations. Whittling away here. Eroding there. Until Moscow's defenses reach an inflection point, where the next attack will shatter them completely.

I think what we'll see is yet another withdrawal by Moscow, only it turns into a rout, and the rout becomes general, and the Ukrainians go all out in the pursuit and destruction of the routing forces.

I more or less agree with your prediction as a strong possibility. I guess it's still a matter of semantics as to what counts as prep and what counts as the offensive operation properly underway.

Now I wonder if the distinction is considered important among military professionals as much as it seems to be from the sidelines.

[jimbob]

https://twitter.com/ChrisO_wiki/stat...33835313020930

Interesting thread about how Mobiks are being treated.

Quote:

1/ Men mobilised by the Russian Army were reportedly sold to a mercenary group for 25,000 rubles each ($310) and told they would be shot unless they fought in the Battle of Bahkmut. Hundreds are said to have become casualties. Now their relatives cannot contact the survivors. ⬇️

claims in the thread are

Trained by a PMC

Quote:

7/ The Veterans PMC is an offshoot of Redut, a larger mercenary group owned by the Russian oligarch Gennady Timchenko. It has been active in Ukraine since the start of the war. The core of the Veterans consists of Russian military veterans who have been hired as mercenaries.

Given spiked water after training

Woken up with no phones etc and forced to sign contracts then made to fight in Bakhmut

130 survivors out of 501 starting. PMC said there're no casualties.

[Doubt]

Originally Posted by theprestige

I would expect the offensive to have been well under way, before any such effort is visible. Ukraine cannot really afford to throw large amounts of soldiers and equipment at a head-on assault, unless victory is assured.

Therefore I suspect that they will continue to conduct "shaping" operations. Whittling away here. Eroding there. Until Moscow's defenses reach an inflection point, where the next attack will shatter them completely.

I think what we'll see is yet another withdrawal by Moscow, only it turns into a rout, and the rout becomes general, and the Ukrainians go all out in the pursuit and destruction of the routing forces.

Russia's offensive operations are fading out. Either because they are prepping for defense or they just don't have anything left to attack with.

The inability to offer any real defense to the limited attacks at Bakmut and the actions by the Russian groups crossing the border suggests that they the Russians are already going to fold pretty quickly.

But as you said, the Ukrainians cannot afford casualties. But we seem to already be at the point where the offensive can start.

[a_unique_person]

Those Iranian drones diabolical.

[Pixel42]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65806152

Quote:

Russia's defence ministry says it has thwarted a major Ukrainian offensive and killed 250 Ukrainian troops.

There has been no comment from Kyiv and the Russian claim has not been independently verified.

The ministry said Ukraine had launched the offensive in the Donetsk region on Sunday using six mechanised and two tank battalions.

A Ukrainian counter-offensive has been promised, but on Sunday, Kyiv called for silence ahead of the operation.

It is as yet unclear whether the alleged attacks indicate that the offensive to recapture Ukrainian land from Russian forces has started.

"On the morning of 4 June, the enemy launched a large-scale offensive in five sectors of the front in the South Donetsk direction," the Russian defence ministry said on Telegram.

The ministry said the Ukrainians tried to break through Russian defences in what Kyiv saw as the most vulnerable part of the frontline.

"The enemy did not achieve its tasks, it had no success."

Video posted showed military vehicles being attacked from the air. Moscow claimed Ukraine had lost 250 troops as well as 16 tanks.

[Ethan Thane Athen]

Originally Posted by Pixel42

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65806152

Much as I distrust anything coming from Russia, this has a whiff of truth about it. Opinion this morning on Radio 4 was this was likely a probe that got beaten back rather than an all out assault but the general view was that an attack had happened and been repelled.

[jimbob]

Looks like Russian Telegram(Wargonzo milblogger, for example) is saying that the situation is getting worse (from a Russian perspective).

Secondhand sources though as I won't do Telegram as it is Russian owned

[jimbob]

Also reports by Prigozhin that his Wagner PMC captured a Russian Colonel who was shooting at them.

Which is interesting, and does seem to look at how many bridges he can burn

[Aridas]

Originally Posted by Ethan Thane Athen

Much as I distrust anything coming from Russia, this has a whiff of truth about it. Opinion this morning on Radio 4 was this was likely a probe that got beaten back rather than an all out assault but the general view was that an attack had happened and been repelled.

Maybe? It's Russia, so it's likely dramatically overstated, though, even if there happens to be at least a grain of truth. Given Russia, of course, video of a few stopped and a couple vehicles on fire might be just as likely to actually be Russian vehicles that Russia just lost, though. Supposedly, Russian Telegram sources admit that a couple settlements and other positions have been retaken by Ukraine, either way. Maybe shaping actions, maybe not. It's Russia, so it's always good to take with a pinch of salt.

Originally Posted by jimbob

Also reports by Prigozhin that his Wagner PMC captured a Russian Colonel who was shooting at them.

Which is interesting, and does seem to look at how many bridges he can burn

Captured, beaten, broke nose, and forced to confess that he was shooting at them out of personal animosity on now posted video, apparently. Whether the confession is actual true or not is hard to say, of course.

[TurkeysGhost]

NYTimes discussing the elephant in the room:

Quote:

Nazi Symbols on Ukraine’s Front Lines Highlight Thorny Issues of History

A decently comprehensive roundup of how all these pieces of pesky Nazi imagery keep showing up on the chests and shoulders of certain Ukrainian soldiers at the front.

Quote:

In November, during a meeting with Times reporters near the front line, a Ukrainian press officer wore a Totenkopf variation made by a company called R3ICH (pronounced “Reich”). He said he did not believe the patch was affiliated with the Nazis. A second press officer present said other journalists had asked soldiers to remove the patch before taking photographs.

Lol, that's a bold one.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/05/w...s-ukraine.html

[Drewbot]

Paywalled

But will add that Russian propaganda has been pointing out every symbol they can to push the idea that Ukraine is full of nazis.
However, actions speak much louder than pictures of tattoos on a few soldiers.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

NYTimes discussing the elephant in the room:



A decently comprehensive roundup of how all these pieces of pesky Nazi imagery keep showing up on the chests and shoulders of certain Ukrainian soldiers at the front.



Lol, that's a bold one.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/05/w...s-ukraine.html

This has been discussed before. I'm pretty sure that as you go further into Eastern Europe, "nazi" takes on a somewhat different meaning. Here in the west, we equate Nazism with the Holocaust and white supremacist ideology. But it seems that to the east of Germany, people think of Nazism more in terms of the horrors visited upon them by the Nazi regime. They're not making common cause with evil Jew-hating bastards to promote an aryan empire. They're identifying with evil Russian-hating bastards. And really, in Ukraine's case, can you blame them? Adopting the iconography of the army renowned for massacring Russians by the tens of thousands seems reasonable. Especially if you are not burdened by the Western taboo against it.

Of course, Ukrainians were also raped and pillaged by the Nazis, but sometimes you don't have a lot of choices. Even Finland allied first with the Third Reich, then with the Soviet Union, in a desperate attempt to keep itself intact with competing predators on either side.

Why should we be upset about Ukrainian appropriation of the iconography? Other than because of our extreme taboo against it? It's not like the west was there for them, when the Wehrmacht rolled through. It's not like the west was there for them, the last time they were raped and pillaged by the Russian Empire. Why should the west now dictate to them how they should feel about their own history, their own holocausts?

I do think that if you polled Ukrainians, you'd find a problematic amount of anti-semitism. And I think you'd find, perhaps, a distasteful amount of ultra-nationalist sentiment expressed. But I don't think you'd find a race-war-mongering neonazi Reichskult in the mold of, say, the brain-dead American fascist movements.

Whatever the actual extent of the problem (which I'm not convinced is even really a problem at all, except for Westerners who want to see it that way), I think at this point it's safe to let Ukraine deal with it after they win this war.

I would even go so far as to say it's morally correct to downplay this issue, in favor of encouraging broad public support for Ukraine, rather than harp on it like it needs to be a concern right now.

[lobosrul5]

Originally Posted by theprestige

This has been discussed before. I'm pretty sure that as you go further into Eastern Europe, "nazi" takes on a somewhat different meaning. Here in the west, we equate Nazism with the Holocaust and white supremacist ideology. But it seems that to the east of Germany, people think of Nazism more in terms of the horrors visited upon them by the Nazi regime. They're not making common cause with evil Jew-hating bastards to promote an aryan empire. They're identifying with evil Russian-hating bastards. And really, in Ukraine's case, can you blame them? Adopting the iconography of the army renowned for massacring Russians by the tens of thousands seems reasonable. Especially if you are not burdened by the Western taboo against it.

Of course, Ukrainians were also raped and pillaged by the Nazis, but sometimes you don't have a lot of choices. Even Finland allied first with the Third Reich, then with the Soviet Union, in a desperate attempt to keep itself intact with competing predators on either side.

Why should we be upset about Ukrainian appropriation of the iconography? Other than because of our extreme taboo against it? It's not like the west was there for them, when the Wehrmacht rolled through. It's not like the west was there for them, the last time they were raped and pillaged by the Russian Empire. Why should the west now dictate to them how they should feel about their own history, their own holocausts?

I do think that if you polled Ukrainians, you'd find a problematic amount of anti-semitism. And I think you'd find, perhaps, a distasteful amount of ultra-nationalist sentiment expressed. But I don't think you'd find a race-war-mongering neonazi Reichskult in the mold of, say, the brain-dead American fascist movements.

Whatever the actual extent of the problem (which I'm not convinced is even really a problem at all, except for Westerners who want to see it that way), I think at this point it's safe to let Ukraine deal with it after they win this war.

I would even go so far as to say it's morally correct to downplay this issue, in favor of encouraging broad public support for Ukraine, rather than harp on it like it needs to be a concern right now.

I couldn't read the linked article, is paywalled. But, I'd surmise its something along the lines of:

OK Russia, you keep calling us Nazi's, despite the fact that we overwhelming voted in a Jewish president. Well then, OK we'll play along. We're "nazis". You are being defeated by "nazis". Theyre thumbing their noses at them in away.

ETA: also may be related to Russia always playing the hero card that they defeated the Nazis in WW2, while totally ignoring all the horrendous **** they did... like cooperating with the Nazis until betrayed by them.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by theprestige

This has been discussed before. I'm pretty sure that as you go further into Eastern Europe, "nazi" takes on a somewhat different meaning. Here in the west, we equate Nazism with the Holocaust and white supremacist ideology. But it seems that to the east of Germany, people think of Nazism more in terms of the horrors visited upon them by the Nazi regime. They're not making common cause with evil Jew-hating bastards to promote an aryan empire. They're identifying with evil Russian-hating bastards. And really, in Ukraine's case, can you blame them? Adopting the iconography of the army renowned for massacring Russians by the tens of thousands seems reasonable. Especially if you are not burdened by the Western taboo against it.

Of course, Ukrainians were also raped and pillaged by the Nazis, but sometimes you don't have a lot of choices. Even Finland allied first with the Third Reich, then with the Soviet Union, in a desperate attempt to keep itself intact with competing predators on either side.

Why should we be upset about Ukrainian appropriation of the iconography? Other than because of our extreme taboo against it? It's not like the west was there for them, when the Wehrmacht rolled through. It's not like the west was there for them, the last time they were raped and pillaged by the Russian Empire. Why should the west now dictate to them how they should feel about their own history, their own holocausts?

I do think that if you polled Ukrainians, you'd find a problematic amount of anti-semitism. And I think you'd find, perhaps, a distasteful amount of ultra-nationalist sentiment expressed. But I don't think you'd find a race-war-mongering neonazi Reichskult in the mold of, say, the brain-dead American fascist movements.

Whatever the actual extent of the problem (which I'm not convinced is even really a problem at all, except for Westerners who want to see it that way), I think at this point it's safe to let Ukraine deal with it after they win this war.

That's fair enough, and by no means should any ultra-nationalist willing to go to frontlines be denied, and I roughly agree with what you're saying...

Originally Posted by theprestige

I would even go so far as to say it's morally correct to downplay this issue, in favor of encouraging broad public support for Ukraine, rather than harp on it like it needs to be a concern right now.

...except for this. At least, the press should not be in the business of such overt manipulation of the facts, especially for what amounts to a foreign affair for the US. Nor do I think it has that much use. People aren't that stupid, and the internet era means that these traditional gatekeepers of journalism don't have the same exclusive grip on how the news is reported. You don't have to be that perceptive to smell a rat here when the press keeps showing pictures of soldiers with nazi iconography all over them but won't discuss it.

[Jack by the hedge]

There are of course similarly delightful people on both sides.

The go-to image is Utkin, the guy after whose chosen call sign the Wagner group is named and who has SS insignia tattooed on his chest.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by lobosrul5

I couldn't read the linked article, is paywalled. But, I'd surmise its something along the lines of:

OK Russia, you keep calling us Nazi's, despite the fact that we overwhelming voted in a Jewish president. Well then, OK we'll play along. We're "nazis". You are being defeated by "nazis". Theyre thumbing their noses at them in away.

ETA: also may be related to Russia always playing the hero card that they defeated the Nazis in WW2, while totally ignoring all the horrendous **** they did... like cooperating with the Nazis until betrayed by them.

I've seen that idea bandied about, too, on places like r/ukraine. My ignorant foreigner's impression is that there's quite a bit of ironic piss-taking from the Ukrainians, throwing "nazi" salutes and whatnot to send up Moscow's headass narrative. But I do also think that Azov is probably sincere in their "this Totenkopf kills Russians" appropriation of Nazi iconography.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by theprestige

I've seen that idea bandied about, too, on places like r/ukraine. My ignorant foreigner's impression is that there's quite a bit of ironic piss-taking from the Ukrainians, throwing "nazi" salutes and whatnot to send up Moscow's headass narrative. But I do also think that Azov is probably sincere in their "this Totenkopf kills Russians" appropriation of Nazi iconography.

That doesn't really make much sense considering many of these neo-nazi orgs predate the current invasion and have roots to ultra-nationalist movements that predate the current hostility with Russia. Prior to the invasion even the mainstream press was quite comfortable speaking plainly about the ideology of these groups.



The key leaders of these groups aren't exactly mysteries. Their commitment to Nazi ideas seems a bit more than edgelord irony

[theprestige]

The current hostility towards Russia did not emerge from a vacuum. It is firmly rooted in the historic, generational, and entirely justified hostility towards Russia. Where do you think (ultra)nationalist movements in former SSRs come from? Ukraine has been Moscow's vassal for a long time.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by theprestige

The current hostility towards Russia did not emerge from a vacuum. It is firmly rooted in the historic, generational, and entirely justified hostility towards Russia. Where do you think (ultra)nationalist movements in former SSRs come from? Ukraine has been Moscow's vassal for a long time.

Sure. Explaining why neo-nazism might be popular in that context is not dismissing that they are, in fact, neo-nazis. Blood and soil nationalism isn't something we should be comfortable with just because it happens to motivate strong anti-Russian sentiment that we find useful.

While I fully understand the expediency of putting any fit volunteer into wartime service, I do very much worry what these nazi types will expect in any post-war Ukraine. They are likely going to feel very entitled to make their nazi ideals into policy as recognition for their wartime service, and many parts of the country are going to see explicitly fascist groups like Azov as being war heroes.

Going to be a very bad time for anyone not an ethnic Ukrainian, I suspect.

[Drewbot]

Consider the history of the Ukraine, in 1940 the Nazis would have been looked upon as liberators, had Hitler not decided he wanted to kill all of the Ukrainians, Stalin had been starving them, planting communist party operatives in the towns, sending the citizens for 'reeducation', up until the Nazis showed up, and just started killing Ukrainians.

I'm sure after the war the Russians were all so ANTI NAZI, that they Ukrainians took up somewhat of a Nazi stance simply because the Russians hated the Nazis so much.

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by theprestige

This has been discussed before. I'm pretty sure that as you go further into Eastern Europe, "nazi" takes on a somewhat different meaning. Here in the west, we equate Nazism with the Holocaust and white supremacist ideology. But it seems that to the east of Germany, people think of Nazism more in terms of the horrors visited upon them by the Nazi regime. ...

Why should we be upset about Ukrainian appropriation of the iconography? ...

Well, the leader of one of those groups, nom-de-plume "White Rex", is well networked with extreme-nazi, white-supremacy groups in other European countries, including Hungary and Germany. This IS exactly the kind of murderous, brutally anti-democratic racist nazi you absolutely do not want to represent your side at all.

Problem is, when Ukraine shall have won the war, and starts rebuilding, these die-hard white supremacist supernazis want their share of power, matching their share of effort and bravery in the fight. Do you suggest dumping them then, or accomodating the nastiest fascists in the future of our ally?

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

Sure. Explaining why neo-nazism might be popular in that context is not dismissing that they are, in fact, neo-nazis.

I dispute the premise. I think what Eastern Europeans mean by the word is different from what we mean by the word.

[Dr.Sid]

Originally Posted by theprestige

I dispute the premise. I think what Eastern Europeans mean by the word is different from what we mean by the word.

Russians, maybe. Eastern Europeans ? Not really.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by dudalb

Ah, the Moral Equivilency card.
Note how playing that card helps nobody but the bad guy?

It so US service personnel are not the bad guys merely for following orders to torture detainees? Yea warcrimes only get prosecuted if you lose. Why is that so controversial? We didn't do anything in WWII about Americans murdering POWs and Patton endorsed it.

The rule of law is a farce.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by jimbob

It's no Vietnam

It's killing Russian soldiers much faster for one.

[The Atheist]

If you were wondering why Russia seems to have no supply issues, wonder no more. At least some people are getting rich out of the conflict, as always:

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2...e-now-know-why

[Doubt]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidax...h=51e602bf1641

David Axe is a reliable source. Never really understood why he is working for Forbes. But he knows his subject. He is writing about the locations of the AMX-10s supplied by the French. From the article:

Quote:

On June 4 and June 5, the army’s 23rd and 31st Mechanized Brigades with their T-64BV tanks reportedly pushed back Russian defenders, potentially including 71st Motor Rifle Regiment and 37th Guards Motor Rifle Brigade, in and around Novodonetske in southern Donetsk Oblast just east of Zaporizhzhia Oblast.

It took me a while to locate Novodonetske. It is right on the front line. South East of a bigger town called Velyka Novosilka. It is to the North and slightly west of Mariupol.

On the one hand, that amount of info getting out is a potential problem. OTOH, not a lot of big highways there. The info might not be real.

[Wildy]

There are reports that the Nova Kakhova dam has been blown.

[crescent]

Originally Posted by Wildy

There are reports that the Nova Kakhova dam has been blown.

It's confirmed. https://twitter.com/yarotrof/status/1665908749205409795

The Russian mayor of the town on the Russian controlled side denied it for a time.

Now each side blames the other - but Russia had control of the operation of the dam and the failure seems to have been in the turbine hall, something Ukraine had no access to at all.

As I understand it, this cuts off water to Crimea. Or will, once the level of the reservoir drops below the canal's intake, which it will definitely very quickly.

It may also cut off water to the Zaphoriza nuclear plant. That plant has been shut down for some time but still needs some water to cool heat from decay.

Russia claims that Ukraine did it to flood out Russian defensive positions on the east side of the river.

I haven't read any Ukrainian claims of why Russia might have blown it, but the dam was pretty clearly a potential crossing point of the river. Plus, if Ukraine did try to cross the river below the dam then Russia could do a big release to make that harder for a while - flood the embarkation and landing points. Similarly, Russia could drop the lake level to mess with a Ukrainian attempt to cross the lake - make the embarkation and landing points need to be moved at the last moment.

It was hydroelectric. Loss of electric supply.

My penny's worth of speculation is that Russia mined it so that they could blow it at the last moment before Ukraine captured it. That would make sense.

Maybe the blew it early by accident. Or maybe they thought Ukraine was about to try a river or reservoir crossing. Maybe Ukraine actually was about to try a crossing.

[crescent]

Another view. https://twitter.com/IntelCrab/status...25290328031232

There is speculation that they blew the turbine hall. That would cause the structure above the hall to collapse down into it, aided by the force of the water pressing against the structure - but blowing it in the turbine hall would hide the evidence of the explosives. It's all be buried in rubble and silt and washed downstream.

It could have just been a failure of the dam due to lack of maintenance and damage from previous fighting, exasperated by higher water levels due to a wetter than average spring and Russian use of the reservoir and its water as a defensive thing.

But the timing is very, very suspicious. Just when the Ukrainian offensive seems to be kicking off or building up to kicking off.

This would also be a pretty good "screw you" from Russia to Ukraine. Loss of a transport route and a two-for-one loss of electricity: destroy the hydroelectric plant and deprive the nuke plant of reliable water supply. But that would also screw Russian plans to try to hold Crimea as well. Getting the water supply back to the peninsula was a big point of pride for Russia last spring.


ETA: The water level on the reservoir was high enough that it appears that the water started to flow over the top of the dam. I don't know if such dams are typically built to accommodate that. Also, earlier to day some satellite imagery showed that a section of the roadway over the dam had collapsed, although it wasn't clear it that was intentional or not - but would make sense from a defensive point of view.

[Wildy]

I wonder how this is going to affect water supplies to Crimea. The Canal starts at the dam.

[quadraginta]

Originally Posted by Wildy

I wonder how this is going to affect water supplies to Crimea. The Canal starts at the dam.

Good question.

Ukraine shut the canal down in 2014 when the Russians invaded Crimea. The Russians managed to get it flowing again last March, after they invaded Ukraine.

So they they got along without it as a water supply for eight years.

I have no idea how well they got along without it.

[jimbob]

If Russia thinks it's not going to hold the Crimea in the long term, it could be another bit of scorched earth