Maybe the answer isn‘t clear cut. The place is a warzone and the dam could be collateral damage. Both sides probably damaged the dam before it collapsed, unintentionally or not. Whether russia or ukraine dealt the last blow is still unknown. If it even was intentional we don‘t know. But of course both sides will point fingers with their respective propaganda. I refuse to believe anything unless there‘s proof.

[–] m532@lemmy.ml -3 points 1 year ago

The European parliament is involved in the war with leopard tanks, only unafilliated parties can be are trustworthy.

[–] gnuhaut@lemmy.ml -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A bit premature, since nobody seems to know what exactly happened. They'd need to actually do an investigation and build a case, instead they just do a vote based on vibes.

[–] Oxossi@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Europe is actively involved in the war, you can't expect neutrality from them.

[+] brain_in_a_box@lemmy.world -6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I look fowards to seeing them suddenly decide it wasn't a war crime in six months when it comes out Ukraine did it. It's hilarious how fast people have memory holed Nordstream.

[–] antik@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Username checks out

[–] brain_in_a_box@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago

Profile picture checks out.

[–] 133arc585@lemmy.ml -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Do you have an actual retort? Nordstream was the responsibility of the USA (and Ukraine by extension). Both of these instances seem very similar, and given that one party has a history of doing exactly this sort of thing and then proceeding to blame the other party, I'm not sure how you can be so certain one way or the other.

This is not to mention that the linked article (from what I skimmed on the horrible website) doesn't even include any "evidence"; the vote was not based on facts or evidence turned up via investigation and was therefore premature and not founded in reality.

[–] antik@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I don't really care what Ukraine does to defend its country mate. We in Europe were depending too much on Russian oil, which directly funds the Russian government. And look, it was a few rough months with increased gas prices but that made governments all over Europe realise they had to diversify. Can't blame Ukraine for trying everything in its power to stop the warmongers. It's not like they're bombing civilians.

But sure compare that to flooding complete cities.

[–] 133arc585@lemmy.ml -4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

I'm not sure you understood my comment, or maybe I'm not understanding yours.

Can’t blame Ukraine for trying everything in its power to stop the warmongers.

From where I stand, it seems they are more than happy to themselves be warmongers (that is, prolong the war), as long as they think they can win (or can convince those supporting them that they can win). But that's not the topic of that comment.

Russia was likely not responsible for flooding cities via the destruction of the dam. Considering how recent it is nobody can be certain, but things point not towards Russia but towards Ukraine.

I brought up the USA/Ukraine destruction of the Nordstream pipeline as evidence that they are perfectly willing to do this exact thing and lie about it^1.

Here's a quick overview and a more in-depth look at why it seems unlikely that it wasn't Ukraine's doing.

[–] antik@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

By "prolong the war" you actually mean "defend their borders" but cool. How dare they not roll over, have they learned nothing about the goodwill and trustworthiness of the Russian government after Crimea in 2014?

Perhaps I should've said "invaders" instead of warmongers, I'll give you that.

[–] 133arc585@lemmy.ml -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

By “prolong the war” you actually mean “defend their borders” but cool

No, in fact I do mean "prolong the war". Defending the borders is prolonging the war. The only act that is not prolonging the war is ending the war. You can't euphemize it.

Edit to add: Not sure why you bring up Crimea, if over 95% of the votes are to return to Russian control in a referendum, how can you imply it was not an act of "goodwill and trustworthiness".

If you want to talk about being untrustworthy, acting without goodwill, and outright deceitfulness, you'd need to simply realize that a USA-backed coup in 2014 caused problems, and now the USA is somehow supposed to be seen as acting with goodwill here. It should be transparent the motives of the USA, especially to those it doesn't care that die in its proxy war.

[–] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago

Also obligatory reminder that they admitted they have plans to blow up the dam and were attacking it with missiles in the past

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/12/29/ukraine-offensive-kharkiv-kherson-donetsk/

It's not even the first time UA blown up their own dam (among other things):

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/27/world/europe/ukraine-russia-war-flood-infrastructure.html

Not to mention it was strategically important target for Russia. Combined with what you linked, anyone still blaming Russia have to have serious problems with their cognitive ability.

Or be openly a side in the conflict, like the European Parliament.

[–] gary_host_laptop@lemmy.ml -3 points 1 year ago

From the look of their replies you can see they're not interested in an actual debate, they will just repeat the same tired argument over and over again. Next thing you know they will call you a "tankie".

load more comments