Russia Masses Military Equipment Near Ukraine Borders: A Prologue to WWIII?

[DarkHunter]

20 minutes ago, Occult1 said:

That is why nuclear power is a terrible energy choice. It leaves you vulnerable to natural disasters and... war.

Or Russia could follow the Geneva conventions and not attack a nuclear power station.

[jmccr8]

2 hours ago, Myles said:

Don't you think it is likely that Russia will make these soldiers rejoin the effort?

Hi Myles

They very well could, doesn’t mean that they might drive out every morning to get a good parking spot and walk to go home every night after a hard days work.

Interviews with prisoners as saying they don’t want to fight and urging others not shoot or war with the Ukraine. With the Ukrainians involving mothers is a good or move, mothers are the connections in neighborhoods and families that unite communities. I can remember in my youth if your mom was calling out for you any female in the neighborhood would be singing your name and knew who you belonged to.

[+susieice]

Some good news I hope. No increase in radiation has been detected from the damaged reactor and according to the US Dept of Energy, the other 5 reactors are being shut down.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-nuclear-power-plant-fire-russian-shelling/

[Occult1]

31 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

Or Russia could follow the Geneva conventions and not attack a nuclear power station.

Except that the fire broke out outside the Ukrainian nuclear plant in a training building. So there is no evidence that the nuclear power station was directly attacked.

No essential equipment has been damaged, no change reported in radiation levels according to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Edited March 4, 2022 by Occult1

[+susieice]

1 minute ago, Occult1 said:

Except that the fire broke out outside the Ukrainian nuclear plant in a training building. So there is no evidence that the nuclear power station was directly attacked.

Don't bet on that either.

[DarkHunter]

7 minutes ago, Occult1 said:

Except that the fire broke out outside the Ukrainian nuclear plant in a training building. So there is no evidence that the nuclear power station was directly attacked.

No essential equipment has been damaged, no change reported in radiation levels according to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

The training facility is still on the nuclear power plant's grounds, even then just cause the only reported fire was at the training facility still doesnt change that Russia attacked a nuclear power plant and did it in violation of the Geneva convention.  Then again Russia has committed a large amount of war crimes already that will have Russian generals and Russian politicians under constant threat of being arrested, assuming they survive the war and dont end up like the Russian major general killed Thursday afternoon Ukranian time.

[Occult1]

13 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

 still doesnt change that Russia attacked a nuclear power plant and did it in violation of the Geneva convention.

Can you prove that Russia deliberately attacked the nuclear power plant and that the action was not between combatants?

''Protocol I of the 1949 Geneva Convention “restricts attack against dams, dikes, and nuclear power stations, if ‘severe’ civilian losses might result from flooding or radioactivity.”

The nuclear reactors were not in any danger, contrary to speculations and propaganda online.

Edited March 4, 2022 by Occult1

[DarkHunter]

5 minutes ago, Occult1 said:

Can you prove that Russia deliberately attacked the nuclear power plant and that the action was not between combatants?

''Protocol I of the 1949 Geneva Convention “restricts attack against dams, dikes, and nuclear power stations, if ‘severe’ civilian losses might result from flooding or radioactivity.”

The nuclear reactors were not in any danger, contrary to speculations and propaganda online.

If you want to play the quoting game of the Geneva convention then let's quote the whole thing

"Works or 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,ifsuch attack may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe losses among the civilian population. Other military objectives located at or in the vicinity ofthese works or installations shall not be made the object ofattack ifsuch attack may cause the release of dangerous forces from the works or installations and consequent severe losses among the civilian population."

It's pretty clear the Russian military once again broke the Geneva conventions, but go ahead and continue to defend Russian war crimes.  Atleast you stopped claiming Kyiv was within hours of falling and the Ukranian state on the verge of capitulation after a week of being wrong.

[Guest Xetan]

Unfortunately, the idea of law-abiding warfare is mainly wishful thinking. It seems like self-delusion to insist that "war crimes" or treaties detailing "acceptable warfare" really mean anything... Villains do not care to abide by the standards of others.

[ExpandMyMind]

2 hours ago, DarkHunter said:

The attack on the nuclear reactor directly violates one of the Geneva conventions.  Cant remember which one but essentially you cant attack a nuclear power plant unless its majority production on a regular basis directly aids in military operations and the only way to stop its aid is by doing an attack on the nuclear power plant itself.

Off the top of my head the list of Russian war crimes involves firing on civilians, firing on medical personnel, bombing hospitals, purposefully targeting residential areas with artillery, disguising soldiers as non-combatants for military operations, using vehicles marked with the red cross for military operations, some reports of child soldiers (unconfirmed but the soldier looked less than 16 from the pic I saw), and forcing non-combatants into combat operations.  I probably missed a few, not sure if they use thermobaric weapons in a city yet or not, if they have that's another war crime.

Rape. You forgot rape.

[DarkHunter]

2 minutes ago, ExpandMyMind said:

Rape. You forgot rape.

I did forget that one

[DarkHunter]

5 minutes ago, Xetan said:

Unfortunately, the idea of law-abiding warfare is mainly wishful thinking. It seems like self-delusion to insist that "war crimes" or treaties detailing "acceptable warfare" really mean anything... Villains do not care to abide by the standards of others.

Regardless of how the invasion ends the military and political leadership will never be able to safely leave Russia for the rest of their lives.  Even going to a Russia friendly country that wouldn't extradite them they would run the risk of a complication arising and being forced to stop in a country that would arrest them immediately.  Even then there is always the risk of getting kidnapped and dropped off in a country that would arrest them for the war crimes they have committed.

While these treaties and conventions cant do much to stop war crimes from being committed, violating them still has real consequences.

[Occult1]

23 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

If you want to play the quoting game of the Geneva convention then let's quote the whole thing

"Works or 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,ifsuch attack may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe losses among the civilian population. Other military objectives located at or in the vicinity ofthese works or installations shall not be made the object ofattack ifsuch attack may cause the release of dangerous forces from the works or installations and consequent severe losses among the civilian population."

Seems to me that if Russia wanted to blow the whole thing off, nuclear reactors and all they would do it.

It doesn't look like a deliberate attack, not by a long shot. It did basically zero damage to the nuclear power plant.

Edited March 4, 2022 by Occult1

[DarkHunter]

1 minute ago, Occult1 said:

Seems to me that if Russia wanted to blow the whole thing off, nuclear reactors and all they would do it.

It doesn't look like a deliberate attack, not by a long shot. It did basically zero damage to the nuclear power plant.

It's still a war crime committed by Russia.  What you think or feel means nothing as Russia very clearly and obviously violated the Geneva convention.

[Guest Xetan]

15 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

violating them still has real consequences.

The consequences of which are typical of war, though. There isn't anything special about them. One side's leaders will be imprisoned or otherwise ended, and the people they have wronged will not welcome them. I mean... they won't be allowed into the houses they set on fire? No ****, right? The constant hand-wringing about imaginary laws is just silly. It just seems like it's attempting to define scenarios where ordering the slaughter of thousands of people isn't evil and situations where it is, when it's just always evil.

[+susieice]

According to CNN, the fire at the nuclear plant is now extinquished. The reactors are being shut down.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/03/europe/zaporizhzhia-nuclear-power-plant-fire-ukraine-intl-hnk/index.html

[+Hammerclaw]

8 hours ago, Nuclear Wessel said:

I hope Putin's death is not a swift, painless one.

Swift and immediate would be just fine, for me. Still, don't think that Russian ultranationalist territorial ambitions are the exclusive prerogative of Vlad the Invader. Russia feels naked and alone, stripped of its satellite States. Russia's population, by itself, is less than 150 million and it's surrounded by countries--some more populous--that don't exactly have fond memories of their past relationship under Bolshevik hegemony with Russia.

[Black Red Devil]

I've read some expert opinions on why Putin invaded the Ukraine.  Apparently he's trying to create a safety buffer between Russia and his enemies.  If you look at a world map and know a bit about modern Russian history you can easily figure out where Putin is going with all of this anti-western rhetoric.  Somehow he has mentally reverted to some 20th century Soviet Union paranoia thinking the west is out to get him, so he's basically tried to ensure there was a buffer between unfriendly nations and Russia. 

I suppose having a buffer country would help in a conventional invasion (of Russia) if it was ever to occur, but in a nuclear war with NATO a buffer between with Russia would make little difference.  For example a nuke on a ICBM from the UK would reach Russia in 20 minutes.  From Russia to the US West Coast in 30 minutes.  Nevertheless, I really think he wants to create a friendly buffer and stick Russian basis on them with nukes similar to NATO.  Tall task IMO.  Russia is basically surrounded by (starting from North of Europe and going anti-clockwise):

• Finland (friendly to the west)
• Estonia (NATO)
• Latvia (NATO)
• Ukraine (wants to join NATO)
• Turkey (NATO on the other side of the black sea)
• Georgia (controlled by Russia)
• Azerbaijan (friendly to Russia who supplies them with military aid)
• Kazakhstan (friendly to Russia)
• China (allies of Russia)
• Mongolia (very dependant on China)
• North Korea (very dependant on China)

Therefore, out of these Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Ukraine and Turkey are adversaries and too close for confort as far as Putin is concerned.  He can probably deal with Turkey after annexing Crimea where the main Russian naval base is located (Sevastopol).

So what's left?  The Ukraine, Finland and the two Baltic States, Estonia and Latvia.  Even if he does conquer the Ukraine, I highly doubt he could do the same in Finland or the Baltic States.  The Soviets have already failed in a war against Finland in 1939 but obviously these are different times and I believe Finland is now currently thinking about joining NATO.  The Baltic States are part of NATO.  

If these opinions are correct and if Putin is determined to do what they're suggesting, we're probably looking at WWIII between NATO (and alliies) and Russia (and allies).  If China allies with Russia (which I doubt) it would be bloody.

Then again, Putin might just stop at the Ukraine as a lesson for NATO to understand there is a sphere of territorial influence they must not cross. 

Hopefully he gets taken out before all this conundrum.

 

 

 

 

•  

[itsnotoutthere]

https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/if-putins-a-war-criminal-what-about-blair/

[+Nuclear Wessel]

6 hours ago, Occult1 said:

Except that the fire broke out outside the Ukrainian nuclear plant in a training building. So there is no evidence that the nuclear power station was directly attacked.

No essential equipment has been damaged, no change reported in radiation levels according to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

That is actually untrue. I was watching a live feed as it happened, and you could very clearly see rounds hitting the building. They were firing into the building itself.

[ExpandMyMind]

12 minutes ago, itsnotoutthere said:

https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/if-putins-a-war-criminal-what-about-blair/

Whataboutism is pointless. And boring.

[+susieice]

13 minutes ago, Nuclear Wessel said:

That is actually untrue. I was watching a live feed as it happened, and you could very clearly see rounds hitting the building. They were firing into the building itself.

I posted a link in here from NBC that says they hit one of the reactors. Can't confirm it but it's possible. The fire is now out with no increase in radiation noted and all the reactors have been shut down.

[Myles]

So I assume Russia will shut down the power plant thus cutting power to many in Ukraine.

It is going slow and with many casualties, but Russia is taking over the Ukraine.

[+susieice]

4 minutes ago, Myles said:

So I assume Russia will shut down the power plant thus cutting power to many in Ukraine.

It is going slow and with many casualties, but Russia is taking over the Ukraine.

No Ukraine shut them down. The Russians shelled it but they did not take it.

Edited March 4, 2022 by susieice

[itsnotoutthere]

56 minutes ago, ExpandMyMind said:

Whataboutism is pointless. And boring.

And inconvenient.