3 ms·

Rio Doce was 43.7 million cubic metres and 18 deaths. If someone blows up Kakhovka dam in Ukraine, it'll be about 18e9 m3, hundreds of thousands dead, wholesal

by lstodd 4y ago

Rio Doce was 43.7 million cubic metres and 18 deaths. If someone blows up Kakhovka dam in Ukraine, it'll be about 18e9 m3, hundreds of thousands dead, wholesale destruction of everything downstream, shutdown of every energy plant that uses the resevoir for cooling, not to mention the hydroelectic station, and untold damage when winds blow the exposed sediment all over the steppe. Which is one of the most productive agricultural areas in the world. So? This Kakhovka dam is a legitimate military target as the last remaining supply route for russian troops in/around Kherson.

bobthepanda 4y ago
Not a dam, but such a military strategy has already happened and was extremely foolish. Intentionally breaching the dikes of the Yellow River killed nearly a million people, displaced several million more, and was a contributing factor to people turning towards the Chinese Communists and away from the KMT.
jefftk 4y ago
> This Kakhovka dam is a legitimate military target Not under the Geneva Convention "Works and installations containing dangerous forces, namely dams, dykes and nuclear electrical generating stations, shall not be made the object of attack, even where these objects are military objectives, if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe losses among the civilian population." https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule42_sectiona https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul...
- PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
  And what would be the consequences should, say, Russia attack, say, the Kakhovka dam? Consequences, that is, for the attacker? More sanctions? Direct military action against a major (or any) nuclear power? Condemnation and isolation for decades or longer?
  - jefftk 4y ago
    My parent was saying that it was a legitimate target. I agree that if Russia decides to give up on the Geneva convention our options aren't great.
- lstodd 4y ago
  You know, Geneva Convention can't divert a bomb. Couple of 1000lb bombs misplaced, some confusion and you can't stop it, only watch. Has to be a very unfortunate hit, but shit happens. Compared to that, the Zaporoshya nuclear plant will just shut down as designed even if hit in all its reactors; release maybe a week's worth radiation, completely harmless, and then sit still. And it's just upstream. Think about it. So-called 'green energy' bears so much more hazards.
- pvaldes 4y ago
  After thousands of war crimes identified, Russians have let crystal clear that they piss on the Geneva Convention. They have violated yet the Geneva convention (and its laws that oblige to hummanitary treatment of civils in a war) countless times in a few months, and at a level rarely seen before.
LorenPechtel 4y ago
There's a dam in the US that's an even bigger issue if it were to go.

by lstodd 4y ago

bobthepanda 4y ago

Not a dam, but such a military strategy has already happened and was extremely foolish. Intentionally breaching the dikes of the Yellow River killed nearly a million people, displaced several million more, and was a contributing factor to people turning towards the Chinese Communists and away from the KMT.

jefftk 4y ago

> This Kakhovka dam is a legitimate military target Not under the Geneva Convention "Works and installations containing dangerous forces, namely dams, dykes and nuclear electrical generating stations, shall not be made the object of attack, even where these objects are military objectives, if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe losses among the civilian population." https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule42_sectiona https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul...

PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
And what would be the consequences should, say, Russia attack, say, the Kakhovka dam? Consequences, that is, for the attacker? More sanctions? Direct military action against a major (or any) nuclear power? Condemnation and isolation for decades or longer?
- jefftk 4y ago
  My parent was saying that it was a legitimate target. I agree that if Russia decides to give up on the Geneva convention our options aren't great.
lstodd 4y ago
You know, Geneva Convention can't divert a bomb. Couple of 1000lb bombs misplaced, some confusion and you can't stop it, only watch. Has to be a very unfortunate hit, but shit happens. Compared to that, the Zaporoshya nuclear plant will just shut down as designed even if hit in all its reactors; release maybe a week's worth radiation, completely harmless, and then sit still. And it's just upstream. Think about it. So-called 'green energy' bears so much more hazards.
pvaldes 4y ago
After thousands of war crimes identified, Russians have let crystal clear that they piss on the Geneva Convention. They have violated yet the Geneva convention (and its laws that oblige to hummanitary treatment of civils in a war) countless times in a few months, and at a level rarely seen before.

LorenPechtel 4y ago

There's a dam in the US that's an even bigger issue if it were to go.