Russia reducing its presence at nuclear plant, says Ukraine (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 2 years ago by ciko22i3@sopuli.xyz to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml

25 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Muntjac@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago

Grossi asserted that he "didn't see that kind of development" on the ground, but also that "anything can happen, that is what worries me".

IAEA is not confirming it, but I think it's a stretch to get "pure deranged nonsense" from that quote.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml -5 points 2 years ago

Thinking that Russia would blow up a nuclear power plant that Russia controls is deranged nonsense.

[-] Muntjac@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago

...in your opinion. As per your link, the IAEA does not share your certainty.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml -4 points 2 years ago

In the opinion of any sane person, and what IAEA says is that there is no substance to the conspiracy theory being peddled here.

[-] Muntjac@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago

It is fascinating how personal biases shape our communications and beliefs.

[+] PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@lemmy.ml -6 points 2 years ago

i've seen this guy in many ukraine related threads shilling for the ruskies

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml -3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Right, Russia just keeps blowing up their own pipelines dams and nuclear power plants. Imagine being a grown ass adult and actually believing that. When nord stream was blown up all the imbeciles in the west screeched that it was Russia who did it. Now slowly admissions are coming out that it wasn't Russia. Yet, here we are again each time a piece of infrastructure Russia controls, people inexplicably think that Russia destroyed it.

[+] PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@lemmy.ml -7 points 2 years ago

The leading theory with the nord stream pipeline explosion is that putin ordered it to make "business as usual" not an option for those in russias political sphere who would have prefered the resumption of gas to europe over Putins goals in Ukraine. no pipeline, no way back. ultimately no one knows for sure who did it but thanks for bringing it up.

"Now slowly admissions are coming out that it wasn't Russia."

nope. Russia is still the lead suspect.

Russia blew up the nova khakovka dam in an attempt to stop Ukrainians launching amphibious assaults accross the dniepr and taking their land back.

Now that Ukrainians have a foothold on the left bank of the dniepr near Kherson all of a sudden there is talk of a radiation release from the NNP conveniently placed westwards of kherson with easterly and south easterly prevailing winds.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml -1 points 2 years ago

Perhaps that's the leading theory on 4chan or wherever you get your news from, but none of the mainstream western media suggests anything of the sort. In fact, the latest western theory is actually that Ukraine did it:

The European intelligence made clear that the would-be attackers were not rogue operatives. All those involved reported directly to Gen. Valery Zaluzhny, Ukraine’s highest-ranking military officer, who was put in charge so that the nation’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, wouldn’t know about the operation, the intelligence report said..

Thanks for letting me know that there is no point continuing this discussion since I'm talking to a conspiracy theorist as opposed to a rational and informed person.

[-] PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@lemmy.ml -4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

A basic search debunks a lot of what is in that article

They further cited a named lieutenant commander of the Danish navy and analyst at the Royal Danish Defence College for several reasons why it is not credible that such a small vessel was used for the sabotage. The force of the explosion and the widely dispersed debris implies that several hundreds of kilograms of explosives were used, an amount that is impractical to transport with such a small sailboat. Secondly, it is surprising that traces of explosives were found on the yacht, since in this case clearly no homemade explosive device was used. Thirdly, accurately placing the explosives on the bottom above the pipeline at 60–80 meters depth from a small surface vessel is practically impossible. The skepticism was shared by a named former chief analyst of the Danish Defence Intelligence Service now senior analyst in the Danish think tank Europa. The naval officer instead speculated that a submarine was used to place the explosives and pointed out that a sonar-equipped submarine can, with relative ease, accurately place a naval bottom mine with 500 kg of explosives.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Nord_Stream_pipeline_sabotage#Involvement_by_Ukraine