4 ms·

Given Russia's staggering incompetence, can we rule out the possibility that they simply didn't know what they were shooting at?

by _xcs4 4y ago

pydry 4y ago
- dvfjsdhgfv 4y ago
  There would be no any shelling if Putin hadn't invaded Ukraine - it's that simple.
  - polotics 4y ago
    The Russian army parking any asset close to the power plant reactors is basically using all of the downwind population as human shields. Thyroid cancer much, Vlady?
  - pydry 4y ago
    I never doubted this for a second. Nonetheless, acts of aggression have never been treated as an excuse to commit war crimes by any state.
- yucky 4y ago
  >* The IAEA pointedly avoided mentioning the shelling (not clear why). This is the first I've heard this, any good sources on why/how they managed to avoid mentioning the very reason they were there in the first place? Because knowing the position of the International community on who is right/wrong in this war, it seems very telling that the IAEA would ignore the shelling of the nuclear plant unless their findings suggest Ukraine really was at fault and they wanted to provide cover. Or am I missing something..?
  - pydry 4y ago
    I misspoke above - they did mention shelling offhand and in the abstract but they made zero comment about: * whom they thought was responsible. * any attempts they made to discover who was responsible. * any evidence they had seen, not seen, asked for or not been given access to. If their genuine, honest conclusion was "we are still not sure who did it" then the appropriate response would be to admit that and to lay out the evidence they had seen. For whatever reason they chose to boil their assessment down to "shelling happened" and avoid pointing fingers. I can see why Russia interpreted that as a green light to shell Pivdennoukrainsk.
Arnt 4y ago
No. Not rule out. Since they've aimed at a lot of infrastructure, it's reasonably to assume that they knew it's critical infrastructure and wanted to hit that. Russians camped at Chernobyl, after all. The people who made the decision to shell this reactor might not have much idea that nuclear power generation involves fission and radiation and those sciencey things.

Given Russia's staggering incompetence, can we rule out the possibility that they simply didn't know what they were shooting at?

by _xcs4 4y ago

Given Russia's staggering incompetence, can we rule out the possibility that they simply didn't know what they were shooting at?

pydry 4y ago

dvfjsdhgfv 4y ago
There would be no any shelling if Putin hadn't invaded Ukraine - it's that simple.
- polotics 4y ago
  The Russian army parking any asset close to the power plant reactors is basically using all of the downwind population as human shields. Thyroid cancer much, Vlady?
- pydry 4y ago
  I never doubted this for a second. Nonetheless, acts of aggression have never been treated as an excuse to commit war crimes by any state.
yucky 4y ago
>* The IAEA pointedly avoided mentioning the shelling (not clear why). This is the first I've heard this, any good sources on why/how they managed to avoid mentioning the very reason they were there in the first place? Because knowing the position of the International community on who is right/wrong in this war, it seems very telling that the IAEA would ignore the shelling of the nuclear plant unless their findings suggest Ukraine really was at fault and they wanted to provide cover. Or am I missing something..?
- pydry 4y ago
  I misspoke above - they did mention shelling offhand and in the abstract but they made zero comment about: * whom they thought was responsible. * any attempts they made to discover who was responsible. * any evidence they had seen, not seen, asked for or not been given access to. If their genuine, honest conclusion was "we are still not sure who did it" then the appropriate response would be to admit that and to lay out the evidence they had seen. For whatever reason they chose to boil their assessment down to "shelling happened" and avoid pointing fingers. I can see why Russia interpreted that as a green light to shell Pivdennoukrainsk.

Arnt 4y ago

No. Not rule out. Since they've aimed at a lot of infrastructure, it's reasonably to assume that they knew it's critical infrastructure and wanted to hit that. Russians camped at Chernobyl, after all. The people who made the decision to shell this reactor might not have much idea that nuclear power generation involves fission and radiation and those sciencey things.