Russia/Ukraine conflict

[wdolson]

I believe Russia had reinstated the canal water to Crimea since they took the dam etc

I think you're right about that.

Seems to me this (partial dam breach, notably not a full breach* *** see EDIT ****) is Russia trying to reduce the frontage at risk, and playing the ZNPP blackmail card again.

Fairly clearly Ukraine is now probing along quite a lot of the front, with non trivial force. But at some point they will have to make choices so as to focus the efforts and the logistics. I don't think we are seeing that yet

**** * EDIT - actually it might almost as well be a full breach. In which case the upstream level becomes de facto uncontrollable and low. That in turn will tend to mean that Ukraine will want to a) recapture the dam PDQ so as to do an emergency breach reinstatement (!!) and b) recapture the six ZNPP reactors so as to do their absolute best to get them into an even safer condition than at present, by hook or by crook. That in turn may force particular decisions on Ukraine in terms of the offensive that is commencing. ****

https://twitter.com/x/status/1665907948986458113

* I was going off other photos of the dam damage earlier. These are far worse.

From what someone posted above, the cooling water at the ZNPP is fed by a pond that is topped up from the reservoir. Because the plant is shut down and cooling water needs are minimal, the pond can supply enough water for at least a wile, but I'm not sure how long. Once Ukraine recaptures the plant they could retop the pond by setting up a temporary water pump to bring water from the new level of the river up to the pond.

The damage downstream is going to be pretty much the worst case scenario.

Russia appears to be in much more dire straits than it would seem from their presentation. For the people that invented the Potemkin village, this seems be in character. Here's another headslapper along that lines:

Fake Putin Speech Calling for Martial Law Aired in Russia

The Kremlin said it was investigating what it called a “hack” after a bogus speech aired on some radio and television networks.

www.nytimes.com

If things are all great in Russia and the war is going great and they are going to win, as the Russia tool David Sacks suggests, then why are they unable to block stuff like this from happening? I thought their FSB was supposed to have everything locked down.


It is also interesting to me to note that this information warfare works both ways now, Russia had a free ride for years on social media disruption, and the upcoming AI takeover of information spaces is going to make everything suspect, all the time. Using spoofed audio to stick them in the eye is karmic retribution.

Be sure to question literally everything that comes from the internet. The AI spoofing from ChatGPT and others is just getting started.

For example, if you watch a few YouTube videos on the war, the algorithm will start suggesting a bunch of AI/ChatGPT generated trash that is created just to get viewers and ad dollars. It's auto-generated scripts from ChatGPT, with random war images not necessarily related to what the robot Text-to-speech is saying. It's all a waste of time.

My partner found a complete rebuttal to the post from David Sacks. Sacks misinterpreted John Mearsheimer's lecture.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1665811530653237249

Illia Ponomarenko has commented on the Nazi symbolism seen on some Ukrainian troops.
Illia Ponomarenko: Why some Ukrainian soldiers use Nazi-related insignia

 

[bo3bdar]

My partner found a complete rebuttal to the post from David Sacks. Sacks misinterpreted John Mearsheimer's lecture.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1665811530653237249

Interesting rebuttal, seems quite a lot more reality based. However, I also disagree with the statement that Sacks misinterpreted Mearsheimer, it seems like a fairly good transciption to me, even if Mearsheimer's points are stupid. Sacks himself chimed in on the comments to say:

The part I question is why would Sacks amplify this rubbish? Is Sacks this stupid, or an actual Russian asset? I don't skip the possibility that Sacks is actually this stupid, because I've met a lot of these rich white tech-bros over my career, and the defining component is Dunning-Kruger levels of assurance about things which they've never even remotely studied. Having Elon then retweet it with his vacuous 'Interesting' is doing Putin's work for him.


I'd never heard of Mearsheimer, and I'm always willing to look at opposing viewpoints, especially if it's from someone with a track record or academic background. Unfortunately I think Mearsheimer is either a Russian asset just parroting talking points, or is one of those guys like Noam Chomskey who just loves the sound of their own voice.

Here's an interview with Mearsheimer from before the war, and he says literally the same thing now as then. People who are unable to learn are not very interesting.

Why John Mearsheimer Blames the U.S. for the Crisis in Ukraine

For years, the political scientist has claimed that Putin’s aggression toward Ukraine is caused by Western intervention. Have recent events changed his mind?

www.newyorker.com

 

[RobStark]

I found this map interesting, maybe others will too.

 

[nativewolf]

Just trying to digest what blowing the damn means in terms of strategy and tactics. ZNPP blackmail seems on order. Ukraine will ignore.

I don't think anything much changes except for a few weeks lull in attacks across the lower Dnipro. The pool runs out quickly and then we'll just have normal river fluctuations which by late summer/fall will be low. The flooded areas will be impassable for a couple of weeks but this flood is right by the sea, the dispersal area is huge and the fairly straightforward- not going to flood much area but I guess it inundates the marshes across from Kherson. They will drain quickly.

This seems to me to be desperation and ZNPP blackmail. I don't think this was well thought out by Russia. Globally this will be poorly received and likely to result in even greater western arms shipments (if the west was getting weary this is like a shot of caffine). Tactically it alters little I think. After the war maybe we find out there was going to be a major raid across the Dnipro, the russians knew it, blew the damn. Who knows. Today it seems poorly played.

Onto other topics

Yesterday one twitter genius posted this

https://twitter.com/x/status/1665795931025948673

The professor figure referenced was simply discussing the same that we've discussed on here for weeks. That attacking the places Russia is worried about you attacking is likely to be a feint designed to draw yet more resources. This has been discussed ad infinitum across multiple social media platforms. I don't see any point in 3rd party prognosticators being silent. Just my opinion on commenting on the war. For the record, I'm obviously in agreement with the prof. 2nd nobody in Ukraine that actually knows anything was telling the prof anything.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1665995605246722048

Recon in force and biting at the flanks of Bhakmut. Russian losses climbing again.

 

[BitJam]

Just trying to digest what blowing the damn means in terms of strategy and tactics. ZNPP blackmail seems on order. Ukraine will ignore.

I don't think anything much changes except for a few weeks lull in attacks across the lower Dnipro. The pool runs out quickly and then we'll just have normal river fluctuations which by late summer/fall will be low. The flooded areas will be impassable for a couple of weeks but this flood is right by the sea, the dispersal area is huge and the fairly straightforward- not going to flood much area but I guess it inundates the marshes across from Kherson. They will drain quickly.

I don't think it's nuclear blackmail because that would end very badly for Russia in general and Putin in particular. The West has made this clear.

I just listened to a BBC report that stressed widening of the river will help Russia's defense of southern Kherson. IIRC, flooding as a defensive measure goes back hundreds or thousands of years. Once clear advantage it gives Russia is, as you say, they can rule out an attack across the part of the Dnieper below the dam at least for a few weeks, maybe much more. Ukraine had been waiting for the battlefield to dry out.

IMO one unknown is how much equipment and supplies have Ukraine amassed on the left bank and on the islands? If it was a significant amount then it's gone now or soon will be. I had been hoping it was quite a lot and would be a nice surprise to spring on Russia. As war crimes go, this could have been a smart move by Russia.

What puzzles me is why would Russia cut off the water supply to Crimea? Maybe they realize the water would probably get cut anyway during the counter-offensive so they might as well do something destructive with the water behind the dam first.

It does reek of desperation. I'm reminded of American football coaches who call a time out right before the other team tries to kick a game-winning field goal. The rationale is it will fluster the kicker but I think it's partly because calling a time out is the last button the coach has left to push so, of course, he pushes it. I wouldn't be surprised if the Russian situation is much worse than they let on. Perhaps blowing up this dam was one of the few non-world-ending buttons they had left to push so they pushed it.

 

[Tiger]

I don't think it's nuclear blackmail because that would end very badly for Russia in general and Putin in particular. The West has made this clear.

Maybe they are trying to convert/disctract it into a Hollywood style ticking timebomb instead?

 

[nativewolf]

I don't think they had much equipment on the delta islands. Russian special forces were frequently contesting those islands. Historically this was a major base of the russian special forces and they trained there. Second they had boats good for raiding but to actually assault they will need barges, lots of them. Carrying fuel and even ammo for anything other than light mortars would have been difficult. They'd have to bring barges from Odessa. Maybe they had but it doesn't seem likely. Kherson is a short flight from 3 aviation bases in Crimea and despite having storm shadows not a single one went south. None went north either but there are not many russian aviation assets in Luhansk, they are in russia itself. Lastly, Ukraine knew (it was discussed) that Russia might blow the damn. It was a high probability event.

 

[nativewolf]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1666015265971118082

 

[heltok]

The part I question is why would Sacks amplify this rubbish? Is Sacks this stupid, or an actual Russian asset? I don't skip the possibility that Sacks is actually this stupid, because I've met a lot of these rich white tech-bros over my career, and the defining component is Dunning-Kruger levels of assurance about things which they've never even remotely studied. Having Elon then retweet it with his vacuous 'Interesting' is doing Putin's work for him.

I disagree with Sacks, wrote so to him in the twitter thread. That being said I think it's too early to call him wrong. Let's see who wins the war first, then we will know the answer. From the news sources I am reading it seems like win after win for Ukraine recently and I am getting the image that they are holding back their new western equipment but will soon break through the lines and recapture all land north of Crimea or Mariupol or Bakhmut which would soon vindicate my position. That's what my news are saying. I think Sacks are reading different news sources and believes them. One of us will be wrong, I think it's him, he thinks it's me. Time will tell...

Seeing Elon making comments that are hard to interpret("interesting" could mean anything), but reading between the lines I take it that that he thinks Sacks side is likely correct. That's disappointing but also makes me doubt my position a bit. I will wait until I have more news to call Elon and Sacks wrong on this, but for now I disagree with them.

If it turns out that they were wrong I don't think can call them stupid or Russian assets. They just happen to get different news sources and it can be hard to know when to trust one side of the news. Something we all should have learnt from the last few years regarding Tesla, Covid, lab leak, Hunter Biden and many other conspiracy theories that turned out to be partly correct... But lets wait and see first...

 

[SageBrush]

^^ I share your viewpoint

Something we all should have learnt from the last few years regarding Tesla, Covid, lab leak, Hunter Biden and many other conspiracy theories that turned out to be partly correct...

I would call the conspiracy crapola 'not completely wrong' or 'has a grain of truth, and a whole lot of BS on top.'

 

[wdolson]

Interesting rebuttal, seems quite a lot more reality based. However, I also disagree with the statement that Sacks misinterpreted Mearsheimer, it seems like a fairly good transciption to me, even if Mearsheimer's points are stupid. Sacks himself chimed in on the comments to say:

View attachment 944377


The part I question is why would Sacks amplify this rubbish? Is Sacks this stupid, or an actual Russian asset? I don't skip the possibility that Sacks is actually this stupid, because I've met a lot of these rich white tech-bros over my career, and the defining component is Dunning-Kruger levels of assurance about things which they've never even remotely studied. Having Elon then retweet it with his vacuous 'Interesting' is doing Putin's work for him.


I'd never heard of Mearsheimer, and I'm always willing to look at opposing viewpoints, especially if it's from someone with a track record or academic background. Unfortunately I think Mearsheimer is either a Russian asset just parroting talking points, or is one of those guys like Noam Chomskey who just loves the sound of their own voice.

Here's an interview with Mearsheimer from before the war, and he says literally the same thing now as then. People who are unable to learn are not very interesting.

Why John Mearsheimer Blames the U.S. for the Crisis in Ukraine

For years, the political scientist has claimed that Putin’s aggression toward Ukraine is caused by Western intervention. Have recent events changed his mind?

www.newyorker.com

So Mearsheimer is another of the "US is to blame for everything" crowd. Those people have to cram everything that happens in the world into some kind of fault of the US. The US has been guilty of or contributed to a fair number of the world's problems, but NATO's eastward expansion is not one of them. The US tried to prevent it, but the choice was Poland in NATO or a nuclear Poland outside of NATO.

People in the US is at fault for everything camp need to warp everything that happens into their world view. When the US actually did do bad, they might be right, but the rest of the time they are working from faulty premises.

I don't think it's nuclear blackmail because that would end very badly for Russia in general and Putin in particular. The West has made this clear.

I just listened to a BBC report that stressed widening of the river will help Russia's defense of southern Kherson. IIRC, flooding as a defensive measure goes back hundreds or thousands of years. Once clear advantage it gives Russia is, as you say, they can rule out an attack across the part of the Dnieper below the dam at least for a few weeks, maybe much more. Ukraine had been waiting for the battlefield to dry out.

IMO one unknown is how much equipment and supplies have Ukraine amassed on the left bank and on the islands? If it was a significant amount then it's gone now or soon will be. I had been hoping it was quite a lot and would be a nice surprise to spring on Russia. As war crimes go, this could have been a smart move by Russia.

What puzzles me is why would Russia cut off the water supply to Crimea? Maybe they realize the water would probably get cut anyway during the counter-offensive so they might as well do something destructive with the water behind the dam first.

It does reek of desperation. I'm reminded of American football coaches who call a time out right before the other team tries to kick a game-winning field goal. The rationale is it will fluster the kicker but I think it's partly because calling a time out is the last button the coach has left to push so, of course, he pushes it. I wouldn't be surprised if the Russian situation is much worse than they let on. Perhaps blowing up this dam was one of the few non-world-ending buttons they had left to push so they pushed it.

The Russians have done more damage to their own positions than the Ukrainians. Most of the right bank is up on bluffs and the left bank is mostly marshes. The water is going to flow towards the marshland. My partner said she read that Russians are up in trees trying to avoid the flood waters and all the trenchlines on the left bank are flooded, as are their artillery positions. The weight of the water is setting off the minefields.

I scanned the Twitter post @nativewolf posted and it looks like it's possible the Russians destroyed the dam by accident. In any case, they triggered a pretty good size disaster that's probably going to hurt them more than Ukraine in the short term.

 

[SageBrush]

it's possible the Russians destroyed the dam by accident

Nah. The timing argues against it

I buy the desperation move argument

 

[bo3bdar]

Seeing Elon making comments that are hard to interpret("interesting" could mean anything), but reading between the lines I take it that that he thinks Sacks side is likely correct. That's disappointing but also makes me doubt my position a bit. I will wait until I have more news to call Elon and Sacks wrong on this, but for now I disagree with them.

If it turns out that they were wrong I don't think can call them stupid or Russian assets. They just happen to get different news sources and it can be hard to know when to trust one side of the news. Something we all should have learnt from the last few years regarding Tesla, Covid, lab leak, Hunter Biden and many other conspiracy theories that turned out to be partly correct... But lets wait and see first...

I agree with you in principle, and especially about keeping an open mind with possible alternate information sources. However, in this specific example, the Mearsheimer comments are directly Russian talking points. This is propaganda, not 'different news sources'. There's being open-minded, and then there is being a tool for terrorists.

In Sacks case- why now, why post this? What's the point other than to give comfort to the terrorists? Why amplify this to Elon's 130M followers? Wouldn't that same advice of waiting to see who is right apply to them? Wouldn't he and Elon both be more respected if they just STFU about stuff they know nothing about?

My objection here is the deliberate spreading of Russian propaganda.

 

[petit_bateau]

So Mearsheimer is another of the "US is to blame for everything" crowd. Those people have to cram everything that happens in the world into some kind of fault of the US. The US has been guilty of or contributed to a fair number of the world's problems, but NATO's eastward expansion is not one of them. The US tried to prevent it, but the choice was Poland in NATO or a nuclear Poland outside of NATO.

People in the US is at fault for everything camp need to warp everything that happens into their world view. When the US actually did do bad, they might be right, but the rest of the time they are working from faulty premises.

I don't think you are being fair to Mearsheimer. Often I don't agree with him myself either, but we should at least try to understand his viewpoint. He likes to think he is a proponent of the realist policy school, i.e. we should understand how the world is now (rather than how we would hope it is now) and then try to develop the best possible practicable course of action (rather than promoting fantasies that cannot actually be achieved). He considers fantasy policies to be more damaging than realist policies.

I personally think we have to find a pragmatic policy middle ground between nihlistic realpolitik and hopeful striving for a better future without going into la la land fantasy. If we always circle back to realism then we never achieve substantive human progress in global policy/politcs/strategy terms. And we have achieved progress.

Bluntly in the current conflict he [Mearsheimer] is saying "the West always gets bored and ultimately wanders off and gives in; this will happen again; so best we give in before it starts and get Ukraine to give in before it starts or else Ukraine will get hurt more than it has to be". Whereas in this instance the West has - since 2014 - organised not to give in and prepared both itself and Ukraine to not give in; and the Ukrainian people have found their collective mojo and for sure aren't giving in. So on this occasion Mearsheimer is wrong in my opinion (though he would describe me as a delusional liberal). That doesn't mean that his viewpoint is always wrong and should always be rejected without due consideration and understanding and forensic examination.

(Sacks is just being a parrot, but I won't analyse his position further)

John Mearsheimer - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[CatB]

Bluntly in the current conflict he [Mearsheimer] is saying "the West always gets bored and ultimately wanders off and gives in; this will happen again; so best we give in before it starts and get Ukraine to give in before it starts or else Ukraine will get hurt more than it has to be". Whereas in this instance the West has - since 2014 - organised not to give in and prepared both itself and Ukraine to not give in; and the Ukrainian people have found their collective mojo and for sure aren't giving in. So on this occasion Mearsheimer is wrong in my opinion (though he would describe me as a delusional liberal). That doesn't mean that his viewpoint is always wrong and should always be rejected without due consideration and understanding and forensic examination.

Agree it's helpful to understand others' perspectives (even when based on perceptions that are factually untrue (in the example of helping antivaxxers any way you can by reaching them where they are) or self-destructive).

But to paraphrase your paraphrase of Mearsheimer: "West stupidly gets distracted and gets itself backed into a corner, so let's pick a less worse corner."

Unfortunately, that corner may be nicer for Ukraine in the short-term, but if it allows Putler to regroup and start WW3 in a few years when he has a better chance of winning it... I'm just not liking that option.

Again, appreciate your effort to explain where he's coming from, but I still disagree with him and think his position is ultimately harmful.

 

[petit_bateau]

Agree it's helpful to understand others' perspectives (even when based on perceptions that are factually untrue (in the example of helping antivaxxers any way you can by reaching them where they are) or self-destructive).

But to paraphrase your paraphrase of Mearsheimer: "West stupidly gets distracted and gets itself backed into a corner, so let's pick a less worse corner."

Unfortunately, that corner may be nicer for Ukraine in the short-term, but if it allows Putler to regroup and start WW3 in a few years when he has a better chance of winning it... I'm just not liking that option.

Again, appreciate your effort to explain where he's coming from, but I still disagree with him and think his position is ultimately harmful.

For the avoidance of doubt, personally I both dislike and disagree with Mearsheimer's stance on a lot of things, this included.

 

[nativewolf]

Impressively Ukraine did not pause even a second . Shaping continues throughout the port cities. Bahkmut may become encircled, huge losses on the flanks yesterday and this morning.

Of course the brave soldiers of the Russian Volunteers continue to hold ground in Bilhorod.

The environmental legacy of that damn destruction will be fairly long. The river forests wiped out, irrigation systems destroyed for a decade. Going to be very complex rebuilding and redesigning an appropriate new hydro facility but here is the bright point. It's likely that the dam was poorly built/designed. Russia was heavy handed in the construction of hydro facilities and we may be able to help Ukraine do much better and have fewer negative consequences. Perhaps return some of the tillable acreage to production, more forests, cleaner water, etc. Not sure, every hydropower project is different and multi-functional but soviets were not great civil engineers.

 

[JRP3]

Seeing Elon making comments that are hard to interpret("interesting" could mean anything), but reading between the lines I take it that that he thinks Sacks side is likely correct. That's disappointing but also makes me doubt my position a bit.

It shouldn't, Elon has not shown much ability outside of technology, to put it mildly.

 

[Ogre]

I have not seen any credible public domain studies for how long the six ZNPP reactors can go without external makeup for the cooling water that is in the plant's own ponds. Four of the reactors are fully shut down, the other two offline and in various stages of warmish shut down. These two were producing steam for the area & plant heating & services at least until recently. There is supposed to be approximately two weeks of diesel on site to keep the systems running (coolant pumps etc) in case of the (to be expected, again) loss of the HV grid feeds and so the coolant ponds will be good for at least two weeks. Beyond that I have no insight. This begins to set some timescales and likely will force the Ukraine planners to favour a more central thrust.

A reminder that in war, both sides get to make moves. This is at the upper level of the shaping that Russia can do, short of going tactical-nuclear.

This all sort of assumes it will fail due to neglect/ lack or resources to repair.

My worry about ZNPP is that it will be actively sabotaged by the Russians. That 2 weeks of fuel becomes tank fuel or destroyed. Coolant pond dams can get blown.

This is my big concern. They’ve already shown they have zero care about environmental impacts or the people in the region. Having another Chernobyl right in the middle of the Ukrainian offensive gives them deniability. I have no idea if it would be a broad enough disaster to prevent the Ukrainian offensive, but it would certainly make for a narrower front.

Russia has no problems stationing people on the edge of a nuclear disaster.

 

[madodel]

Days apart detailed comparison satellite photos of the destruction of the dam.

Russia-Ukraine WarCritical Dam Destroyed on Front Line in Southern Ukraine