Take our user survey and make your voice heard.
world

Evidence suggests Russia blew up Kakhovka dam in Ukraine: New York Times

45 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Thomson Reuters 2023.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.


45 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

New York Times evidence?

Well that's sorted then...LOL

3 ( +16 / -13 )

claiming CNN said one thing when clearly they did not say that.

They said collapse. I posted 5 articles that said so.

the headline is the narrative. Like this:

Evidence suggests Russia blew up Kakhovka dam in Ukraine: New York Times

Does the article have any such evidence? No, just a bunch of unnamed “engineers and explosives experts” “said” this or that. And oh wait….

"Erosion from water cascading through the gates could have led to a failure if the dam were poorly designed, or the concrete was substandard, but engineers called that unlikely," the newspaper said.

So they don’t know and can’t prove it.

-9 ( +7 / -16 )

It would have taken an enormous amount of explosives to blow the dam and create semic waves measured far away.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

I love the liberal panic that sets in when they can’t decide if NYT is lying or CNN is lying

For NYT, if NYT says "evidence suggests" but didn't actually state what evidence it was then NYT is lying/ making things up.

So I asked what evidence in my first post I think .

-6 ( +7 / -13 )

Is this, or could this mean the global community has accented/accepted the inevitably that the escalator of war is soon upon us again?

Ideological political differences cannot or will not compromise.

Freedom democracy with its flaws, or the iron jack boot of dictatorship?

4 ( +5 / -1 )

I love the liberal panic that sets in when they can’t decide if NYT is lying or CNN is lying when they push different narratives from different masters.

Lol I'm not panicking. I don't see any liberals here panicking either.

All I'm saying is:

1) it's quite funny to read posts from the rightists here claiming CNN said one thing when clearly they did not say that.

and

2) it's also utterly ironic that they would criticize western news as propaganda, and yet take the Russian government at their word. Now, tell me about "propaganda?"

3 ( +10 / -7 )

I love the liberal panic that sets in when they can’t decide if NYT is lying or CNN is lying when they push different narratives from different masters.

they haven’t even realized yet that both of them can be lying.

mind blown.

-4 ( +12 / -16 )

cNN:

photographs taken a few days later, on 5 June, instead show significant damage to a section of the road that crowned the edge of the dam, damage that appears to have been caused by an external attack, perhaps by means of artillery shells. of artillery shells.

questions:

what day was the dam now “blown up”? June 6.

Then why do photos show damage on June 5th (the day before) that did not exist on 28 May?

Why does the damage appear to be from external artillery shells? but now it’s internal explosives?

flip meet flop.

-6 ( +10 / -16 )

This is what's passing as journalism nowadays. How pathetic!

I used to read the NYT back in the day. Now can't stand the sorry state of journalism.

-1 ( +9 / -10 )

*CNN article did in fact say collapse. Even yesterday*

Ah yes, I too only read the headlines. Are you kidding me? I can't be bothered to read the actual article. The third paragraph of the article:

It is unclear if the dam was deliberately targeted or whether structural failure was behind its collapse.

Also, why do rightists here say the NYT can't be trusted, but they literally believe what the Russian government says? Tell me about propaganda.

3 ( +11 / -8 )

CNN article did in fact say collapse. Even yesterday

It was 100% blown up. The Russians released a video showing it. One can't see on the video due to the large flash blocking out the view buy before the flash, everything was normal. After it subsided, the dam was in the process of failing.

But the Russians are saying it wasn't completely destroyed. The foundations are intact despite the Nasty regime opening all the gates of the upstream dam. They don't have to rebuild it from scratch.

-5 ( +5 / -10 )

“Here are the key theories on what caused Ukraine’s catastrophic dam collapse”

Kakhovka dam collapse has made Black Sea a ‘garbage dump and animal cemetery,’ Ukraine warns

Russians shooting at rescuers in flooded areas following dam collapse, Zelensky says

Ukraine dam collapse serves neither side well as war enters next crucial phase

need more? It’s been the narrative since Day 1 at CNN- “collapse”.

-10 ( +6 / -16 )

CNN article did in fact say collapse. Even yesterday

At least 16 dead in Kakhovka dam collapse flooding, Kyiv says

By Mariya Knight, CNN

Published 6:59 PM EDT, Sat June 17, 2023

-11 ( +6 / -17 )

would we expect anything else from The NY Times?

Right, so the NYT isn't to be trusted, but the Russian government is.

so the CNN story that it collapsed was false?

That is not what the CNN article says.

5 ( +13 / -8 )

So the guy who said it collapsed because experts had been saying for months that it was in desperate need of repair?

now he’s here talking that of course Russia blew it up.

any propaganda seems to do just fine in the flip flopping.

-11 ( +8 / -19 )

This is very deceptive - it completely fails to mention that the dam was earth-fill embankment with a clay base type of construction.

There is no "passageway running through the dam's concrete base"

-11 ( +6 / -17 )

McCarthy is alive .!. .!. .!.

-8 ( +4 / -12 )

We all saw them make a run at Kyiv and fail. That's not part of any sane strategy.

Moving troops in the direction of Kiev was probably to make the Ukrainians commit more of their forces there. Taking the Russian speaking eastern part of the country was the objective.

-6 ( +7 / -13 )

This is the same rag that said Iraq had WMDs.

And who sabotaged Nordstream II ?

-14 ( +7 / -21 )

This is Putins doing .!. Ukrainians or the west didn’t invade or encroach on Russian territory or sovereignty.!. The only peaceful solution is when Putin is taken out either by a bullet , or simply arrested for being the murdering thug he is.!. Putin and Putin alone has set Russia back 50+ years .!. I empathize with the Russian people, The entire living and next generation will only understand being poor.!. Vladimir bit off more than he can chew and should happy NATO hasn’t pushed them out … yet .!.

9 ( +17 / -8 )

Regardless of your opinion (I don't have one tbh)

> How about on whether Ukraine is responsible for it or not, do you think NATO would definitively know?

responsible for the dam destruction I mean

-11 ( +6 / -17 )

Regardless of your opinion (I don't have one tbh)

How about on whether Ukraine is responsible for it or not, do you think NATO would definitively know?

-12 ( +6 / -18 )

This 'spectacular failing' seems to be reflected neither on a map nor in terms of Ukrainian troop losses, the latter which may actually be part of the Russian strategy.

We all saw them make a run at Kyiv and fail. That's not part of any sane strategy.

9 ( +16 / -7 )

Would this be reported if the Ukrainians had destroyed it? To me it seems the msm reports every negative on the Russian side but not on the other. Regardless of your opinion (I don't have one tbh), bias is bias. Report the whole news, please.

-11 ( +12 / -23 )

Has it been established who blew up the nordstream?

-7 ( +12 / -19 )

What evidence beyond a few words?

-2 ( +13 / -15 )

"The evidence clearly suggests..."

-5 ( +9 / -14 )

The Russians commit an extra of eco-terrorism in support of an illegal invasion?

No! It can’t be!.

Next their going to say that Putin is a war criminal.

Oh, wait…

9 ( +16 / -7 )

"... they have still managed to fail spectacularly."

This 'spectacular failing' seems to be reflected neither on a map nor in terms of Ukrainian troop losses, the latter which may actually be part of the Russian strategy.

-3 ( +9 / -12 )

"panic?"

> Correct

They were not afraid to absorb huge losses while on the offensive but were in panic to be on the defensive?

Ukraine counteroffensive must be overwhelming.

-8 ( +9 / -17 )

Being outnumbered in terms of troops and hardware also does not matter?

Russia has had an advantage in hardware (not so sure about troops) since the beginning of the war and they have still managed to fail spectacularly. You have to be in the right place, know how to use the hardware, and have the morale to do so.

3 ( +13 / -10 )

If the terrorist defensive line is punctured it doesn't matter what the distance is.

Being outnumbered in terms of troops and hardware also does not matter?

-7 ( +9 / -16 )

@AmpasToday 03:58 pm JST

If the terrorist defensive line is punctured it doesn't matter what the distance is.

4 ( +16 / -12 )

"panic?"

Correct.

8 ( +19 / -11 )

The Russian fascists destroyed it in a panic to slow the Ukrainian counteroffensive.

panic?

-11 ( +10 / -21 )

It does if they were at risk of losing the Crimean peninsula by losing the land bridge.

The distance between Crimea and the front line is:

(a) 20 - 30 km

(b) 30 - 40 km

(c) 40 - 50 km

(d) 50 - 60 km

Basil Fawlty writing for the New York Times is more likely than Ukraine retaking Crimea.

Answer to the above question: d.

-12 ( +13 / -25 )

What's the evidence?

-3 ( +15 / -18 )

 if they were at risk of losing the Crimean peninsula by losing the land bridge.

But they arent.

the advance from the offensive is still being measured in meters.

-17 ( +11 / -28 )

The Russian fascists destroyed it in a panic to slow the Ukrainian counteroffensive. Crimea will be liberated so it seems also a scorched earth strategy as the tinpot Russian army continues to implode...

7 ( +22 / -15 )

@AmpasToday 03:36 pm JST

Because Russia destroying infrastructure that provides water to Russian-controlled Crimea makes so much sense.

It does if they were at risk of losing the Crimean peninsula by losing the land bridge.

2 ( +19 / -17 )

would we expect anything else from The NY Times?

so the CNN story that it collapsed was false? They said they had satellite pictures showing it happened over several days.

-9 ( +19 / -28 )

Because Russia destroying infrastructure that provides water to Russian-controlled Crimea makes so much sense.

-7 ( +17 / -24 )

The New York Times telling people what Basil Fawlty would have said was, “the bleedin’ obvious.”

7 ( +17 / -10 )

Putin and its cronies are thugs

8 ( +20 / -12 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites