Ukraine

[Paul G.]

Re: Ukraine

Still no reports of the Russian side of the river?
As the fog of who-dunnit is clearing, the number of ignored posts is decreasing proportionally.

Cui bono?

That is the only question, and until a full investigation has been undertaken its just armchair guesswork as there are justifications on both sides, my money is on the Ukrainians at this stage due to the damage to Crimea but I remain open to arguments supporting the Russian's doing it.

[Osborne Russell]

Re: Ukraine

On to Moscow.

[gypsie]

Re: Ukraine

You broke it you bought it.

This is a compelling analysis.

Paul, you may not know that Russia has built a bunch of desalination plants to free Crimea from dependence on the canal. And that Ukraine had turned off the water for years, which means Crimea had figured this problem out. There's no benefit to Ukraine to blow up the dam.

[Edward Pearson]

Re: Ukraine

I dont think they’ve finished building any of the desalination plants yet. 10 by 2030 but nothings built. There’s also not the energy for it yet. There’s enough rainfall storage for drinking water but not agriculture without the canal. Putins expanded the military base at Sevastopol (the whole reason for the war) and military personel have increased from 10k to 30,000. He needs desalination for them. Its not an obligation to provide another country with water. Russia took Crimea, so the water provision became its responsibility.

[Peerie Maa]

Re: Ukraine

Apply the "What is more likely" test.
On the one hand, Ukrainian demolition experts lugged of the order of 10te of explosives and equipment through Russian occupied territory. Then spent enough time without being detected by said Russians to set the demolition charges. Then escaped back into unoccupied Ukraine without being captured and paraded by the Russian army.
On the other hand, Russian demolition experts, working on a dam occupied and guarded by Russian forces for a considerable time, set the charges for demolition at a later time by Russian forces.

Bit of a no-brainer

More from the Kyiv Post at https://www.kyivpost.com/post/18074

And the press release from Ukraine's SBU at https://ssu.gov.ua/en/novyny/ssus-in...ge-group-audio

Here's the recorded intercept:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3I5tnowpP4

Cui bono?

That is the only question, and until a full investigation has been undertaken its just armchair guesswork as there are justifications on both sides, my money is on the Ukrainians at this stage due to the damage to Crimea but I remain open to arguments supporting the Russian's doing it.

Please engage the brain before applying your typing finger.

[Paul G.]

Re: Ukraine

[QUOTE=Edward Pearson;6865584 Its not an obligation to provide another country with water. Russia took Crimea, so the water provision became its responsibility.[/QUOTE]

Putting this war aside for a moment, I am not sure thats the case but it complicated. Take any major river in Europe and it will flow through several countries at least, there will be treaties and obligations regarding its use but there is also a humanitarian aspect as well. Drawing a line on a map does not make a river "property" although the river bed is, the water is another story. While it may not be an obligation, usually countries do have agreements to prevent precisely this sort of thing.

[Peerie Maa]

Re: Ukraine

Putting this war aside for a moment, I am not sure thats the case but it complicated. Take any major river in Europe and it will flow through several countries at least, there will be treaties and obligations regarding its use but there is also a humanitarian aspect as well. Drawing a line on a map does not make a river "property" although the river bed is, the water is another story. While it may not be an obligation, usually countries do have agreements to prevent precisely this sort of thing.

Considering the context, that is a silly post.

[Paul G.]

Re: Ukraine

Please engage the brain before applying your typing finger.

How about lets agree that this is a war of propaganda? I have a brain and using it seems to offend the warmongers on both sides but I digress. I have stated repeatedly until there is a full investigation the true causes will not be known, and Russia may well have done it but it seems equally likely the Ukrainians did as well. I am not making any calls sorry, especially based on Russian or UKR ministries of truth. Furthermore I have no skin in this so I am not going to push either sides agenda, I vote for peace.

[Osborne Russell]

Re: Ukraine

Putting this war aside for a moment, I am not sure thats the case but it complicated. Take any major river in Europe and it will flow through several countries at least, there will be treaties and obligations regarding its use but there is also a humanitarian aspect as well. Drawing a line on a map does not make a river "property" although the river bed is, the water is another story. While it may not be an obligation, usually countries do have agreements to prevent precisely this sort of thing.

It took a heap of suffering to establish the principle of the nation state.

It's taking a lot more to establish that that principle is not the end of history.

There is this idea that, in justice, at some point the struggle must end. Surely, given the sacrifice to establish the principle of the nation state, we can relax in the peace that was promised?

Ask yourself: what struggle? For what? Does the principle of the nation state end it?

Animal games for me
say it plainly, the human name
Doesn't mean S to a tree.

[skuthorp]

Re: Ukraine

You ain't going to get it by voting…………….

[Osborne Russell]

Re: Ukraine

You ain't going to get it by voting…………….

How, then?

[Edward Pearson]

Re: Ukraine

It went to the UN and they shrugged there shoulders. The UN said its Russias responsibility under the Geneva convention to supply water as the occupier.

Its a man made open pipe that supplied a commodity: water. Russia took Crimea by force and said this is ours now.

Russia supplied Germany with a commodity: gas also through a man made pipe. It turned it off just before this winter.

The difference is Russia turned it off as a weapon. Ukraine didnt use it as a weapon against Crimean people. Russia took Crimea so now it has to provide its water and everything else.

Should the West invade Belorussia, call it East Poland and then demand Putin supplies it with gas?

Russian logic is “respect me I killed your mother!”. But it doesn’t work
like that, which is why they’re unloved and unwanted.

[skuthorp]

Re: Ukraine

How, then?

You have to be in the right jurisdiction…..and stay away from windows.
We can all vote until we are blue in the face, but it won't change anything in Russia or China, and not a few other places besides.
The UN cannot do anything much unless Russia, and China, and America say OK………..

[Osborne Russell]

Re: Ukraine

It went to the UN and they shrugged there shoulders. The UN said its Russias responsibility under the Geneva convention to supply water as the occupier.

As it was the responsibility of the "Allies" in Iraq as occupiers. As to which they failed to even plan, let alone carry out. Which is what made war crimes of all subsequent acts.

All

subsequent

acts

[George Jung]

Re: Ukraine

It seems an awful lot of hand wringing . All I’ve read, the preponderance of evidence convicts Russia. And then we have the final straw, Paul G, charging ‘it’s the Ukrainians.” Sounds like a royal flush.