Comments by "Alexey 9" (@Fillipok) on "Jake Broe" channel.

  1. Okay, that is, the situation is this: 1. Washed away the fortifications of the RF Armed Forces on the low left bank 2. Flooded two cities under the control of the Russian Federation on the low left bank (cities and villages on the high right suffered less) 3. It is possible that water will stop flowing to Crimea again 4. Restarting the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant (under Russian control) will be very difficult, if not impossible (it needs water for cooling) Well, yes - the dam was already harassed by Himars, finding out its strength, which was written about six months ago by The Washington Times. Conclusion - the Russian Federation blew up the dam. Borrell figured out everything in the morning and blamed whoever was needed for everything. Hydraulic genius. If anything, I don't know what happened to the dam. So far, the most reasonable thing I have read is that the dam has not been serviced for more than a year, it was hit with Himars by the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the bridge over it was blown up during the retreat of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, before that, the Armed Forces of Ukraine had been pounding on the bridge across the dam for many days. During the high water, the dam was kept on parole, and now it could collapse because of anything - for example, some large debris that hit it. (Surprisingly, even Ruslan Leviev adheres to this version - google who it is). Here the obvious analogy is the Ludendorff Bridge over the Rhine. The Americans captured it on March 7, 1945, after which the Germans tried for ten days to destroy the bridge with all their might, using V-2s, jet bombers, and even, it seems, their version of kamikaze. The bridge stood, and then collapsed without any German raids in the middle of the day - the fatigue of the structure affected. There is one convincing argument in favor of this version: judging by satellite images, the dam began to collapse on June 1st. A spillway near the S-shaped bridge grew that day, and the bridge itself collapsed on June 2, before the dam broke. Now it seems that the explosion was not particularly useful to both sides, although to varying degrees. The Armed Forces of Ukraine have temporary difficulties with forcing the Dnieper, but, firstly, from all that is known, they were not going to force the Dnieper - and did not have the means for this, and secondly, the water will leave and the Dnieper will return to the channel, but the fortifications of the Armed Forces are being built The RF has already been washed away. Secondly, it washed away the islands, for which the Armed Forces of Ukraine fought for a lot of time. But it takes two to fight - the RF Armed Forces also fought for them. Finally, thirdly, although the right bank is higher, a lot more people simply live on it, so in the flood zone on the right bank, as a result, even more people may end up (although the situation there is still much less difficult: the lion’s share falls on one district of Kherson - Shipbuilder, from which it is not particularly difficult to evacuate people - there is a large city nearby that will not flood the whole. This is incomparable with the severity of the situation in Novaya Kakhovka and Alyoshki, where not only the cities themselves were flooded, but everything around them). The argument that on May 31 the government of the Russian Federation adopted a resolution that suspends the technical investigation of accidents in hydraulic structures "due to military operations, sabotage and terrorist acts," which means that the Russian Federation blew up, is also not convincing. In Kyiv, they can also read the news, and if they were preparing a sabotage, then it is logical that it should have been carried out immediately after the adoption of such a law - here our beloved legislators could miraculously set themselves up. Although such an explanation hardly passes the test of Occam's razor. There is, however, a simpler explanation. The decision was adopted after it became known about the deplorable state of the same Kakhovka dam. The spillway was opened on June 1 precisely because they were waiting for a decision: it was necessary to open in any case, too much water had accumulated, but “on the ground” they understood that the opening could lead to the collapse of the dam, and therefore refused to take responsibility. That is why the decision was made.
    1