Was Blowing Kakhovka Dam Part of the counter offensive?

a reply to: datguy

Good post.

the footage in this article claims to show the shelling of the dam.
I have heard reports of charges set inside the dam,
Either way i think the reports i have also heard of this being due to maintainence failure or negligence, have been blow out of the water, sry yeah im an ass for that....
The Scottish Sun

originally posted by: datguy
the footage in this article claims to show the shelling of the dam.
I have heard reports of charges set inside the dam,
Either way i think the reports i have also heard of this being due to maintainence failure or negligence, have been blow out of the water, sry yeah im an ass for that....

Seems the big narrative from Russia is it collapsed on its own, but I would bet explosives were used by Russia to slow down the offensive move from Ukraine. Shelling doesn't make sense as hitting a dam on the top would not typically collapse it, but explosives inside would, also being dead-center failure kind of looks to be deliberate.

a reply to: Xtrozero

You only need to have watched the Dambusters to know how tricky it is to blow up a dam.

Bit easier if you are actually occupying the dam thing.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: datguy
the footage in this article claims to show the shelling of the dam.
I have heard reports of charges set inside the dam,
Either way i think the reports i have also heard of this being due to maintainence failure or negligence, have been blow out of the water, sry yeah im an ass for that....

Seems the big narrative from Russia is it collapsed on its own, but I would bet explosives were used by Russia to slow down the offensive move from Ukraine. Shelling doesn't make sense as hitting a dam on the top would not typically collapse it, but explosives inside would, also being dead-center failure kind of looks to be deliberate.

Its not that unlikely though. We've seen the blast that took out just a small section of the roadway (when Russia blew up the dam the first time, something people say Russia would neeeeeeeever too because it doesnt make any sense, lol) and it was huge just for that. Look at the current footage and you'd realize that i'ts probably not blast damage, it's just a complete collapse.

To speculate once more, I think what happened is that Russia let the dam drain to extremely low levels, which would threaten the Crimea canal.

Then they closed off *everything*. And what happens after a while? Water levels goes to highest it's ever been because of course that happens. The last couple of weeks it went over all the flood gates putting extreme pressure on the entire dam. So they tried to open the gates in the center and... well, we know what happened.

And now they're spending their time shelling evacuees instead.

Classic Russia.

If we find proof them actually having blown it up, then that shows intent by letting the water levels overflow and then blowing it.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Xtrozero

You only need to have watched the Dambusters to know how tricky it is to blow up a dam.

Bit easier if you are actually occupying the dam thing.

Well, Russia was occupying it, and shelling just isn't that effective on something like a dam. It would also be nice to see shelling damage on parts not destroyed. How many shells are we talking about here anyways 100? lol It seems Russia is sticking to the "it broke on its own" but it was 100% in favor of Russia for it to break.

originally posted by: merka

And now they're spending their time shelling evacuees instead.

Classic Russia.

If we find proof them actually having blown it up, then that shows intent by letting the water levels overflow and then blowing it.

For me the timing is suspicious...lol Russia greatly benefited from it since Ukraine needs to cross it and Russia doesn't.

a reply to: Xtrozero

The old "some bigger boys did it and ran away" excuse?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2

The old "some bigger boys did it and ran away" excuse?

Just perfect timing for Russia for it to happen. I also don't think people understand how a damn is built. They just see the flat side away from the water and think it is the same on the other side instead of the massive growing thickness that angles down into the water.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Yes. They need to look up about Barnes Wallis.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2

The old "some bigger boys did it and ran away" excuse?

Just perfect timing for Russia for it to happen. I also don't think people understand how a damn is built. They just see the flat side away from the water and think it is the same on the other side instead of the massive growing thickness that angles down into the water.

Yep, I watched the dam busters it takes a lot to immediately take out a dam. The Russian 5th Army has been there the whole time, they had much easier access than any Ukrainians could have

Circumstantial evidence is piling up. Heard it mentioned somebody shelled the sluice gate damaging it, the Russians .who are in control of the dam, through neglect or on purpose let the levels rise to where maximum damage would occur through flooding.

Russia had control of this dam.
Russia blew it while retreating.

Contrarians have had too many greasy MargaritaS.

a reply to: spacedoubt

The same contrarians who a while back were screaming at the thought that Russia blew its own gas pipelines are now popping up and claiming that Ukraine blew it's own dam.

It's beyond ridicule.

Or irony.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
The same contrarians who a while back were screaming at the thought that Russia blew its own gas pipelines are now popping up and claiming that Ukraine blew it's own dam.

It's beyond ridicule.

Or irony.

It wasn't a Russian pipeline, both sides owned it and invested in it.

originally posted by: vNex92
The Propaganda from the Hawkish Crowd is amusing...

Trying to frame and blame Russia as they tried with the North Stream Pipelines.

Ukraine still couldn't pull off the so called counter offensive.
Was blowing the Kakhovka Dam part of the counter offensive?

Highly Unlikely.

Speaking of whataboutism.

How is Russia’s open door policy into the investigation of the Russian POW prison in Olenivka coming along? The POW prison supposedly attacked resulting in dead POW’s?

a reply to: Xtrozero

True, but you know what I meant about those posters?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: spacedoubt

The same contrarians who a while back were screaming at the thought that Russia blew its own gas pipelines are now popping up and claiming that Ukraine blew it's own dam.

It's beyond ridicule.

Or irony.

Here's another aspect Ive seen mentioned and just bring it up for the sake of discussion. Is it possible that whoever is leading the 5th Army decided independent of the Kremlin to neglect the dam, and ultimately blow it up cause at the end of the day it's the 5th Army that likely benefitted the most, and they had access and it definitely keeps the Ukrainian offensive from starting in their sector? Hell, the demolitions team in the 5th Army could have decided on thier own to blow it.

on a side note if we think it gets crazy in here, in the Twitterverse it's off the charts just follow this one thread.



The World has issues lots of them, on both sides all sides LOL it all sounds a bit like it could be heading off the rails and FWIW that only benefits the MIC

twitter.com...

You guys might want to read this. Zero Hedge found out that last year, Ukrainian officials studied the possibility of blowing up this dam.

Kiev's Long-Term "Last Resort" Plan To Blow-Up The Kakhova Dam Exposed

Titled “Inside the Ukrainian counteroffensive that shocked Putin and reshaped the war”, its journalists quoted former commander of November’s Kherson Counteroffensive Major General Andrey Kovalchuk who shockingly admitted to planning this war crime:

“Kovalchuk considered flooding the river. The Ukrainians, he said, even conducted a test strike with a HIMARS launcher on one of the floodgates at the Nova Kakhovka dam, making three holes in the metal to see if the Dnieper’s water could be raised enough to stymie Russian crossings but not flood nearby villages. The test was a success, Kovalchuk said, but the step remained a last resort. He held off.”

To answer the OP. My stern belief is that it was incompetence/stupidity rather than anything tactical. However I saw something earlier that suggested the Russians deliberately raised the water-levels before the breach. So it could be an act of malice?

www.reddit.com...

hydroweb.theia-land.fr...
^ source (notice the spike)

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2

True, but you know what I meant about those posters?

In all these cases I have a tendency to think about who gets the most out of it. As to the pipeline bombing, cutting off Germany with 100% oil from Russia helped no one and could have moved Germany out of supporting Ukraine as it might have been devastating for them to not have the oil. So who gains from it all? Not Germany, US, or Ukraine if the fallout was to lose Germany's support.

Russia had gains if it meant that the EU would pull back, but it didn't work and the EU pushed forward even with the energy losses. It was a calculated risk that didn't pan out. Invading Ukraine was another calculated risk that didn't go to plan either. It could have been America, but I really see no "why" to it.

Same thing with the dam as there is no gain for Ukraine to now blow it up, but plenty for Russia.