Russia’s invasion into Ukraine

[the ocean 67,601]

i’m gonna pretend that the last few posts do not exist because everyone knows how hard it is to detect sarcasm over text

 

is there anything else of note besides russia moving west or is that the only thing right now?

 

edit: + the nuclear plants at risk duh knew that but forgot to add it

[Rorman Nockwell 56,971]

1 hour ago, House of Balloons said:

 

there's no 'nuclear power plant risk' whatsoever, those claims are just shameless bait to lead the west into war with russia 

I mean idk about a risk of deliberate sabotage, but it is definitely dangerous for nuclear reactors to be without power.

Chernobyl and Fukushima both melted down because of loss of power - at Chernobyl, it was an experiment that involved lowering the power, and at Fukushima, it was caused by the Tohoku disaster. 

Russia itself actually still has a couple of RBMK reactors (the flawed Chernobyl type) in operation which is dangerous as fuck, too, so clearly nuclear safety isn't a priority. 

[house of balloons 12,795]

Just now, Rorman Nockwell said:

I mean idk about a risk of deliberate sabotage, but it is definitely dangerous for nuclear reactors to be without power.

Chernobyl and Fukushima both melted down because of loss of power - at Chernobyl, it was an experiment that involved lowering the power, and at Fukushima, it was caused by the Tohoku disaster. 

Russia itself actually still has a couple of RBMK reactors (the flawed Chernobyl type) in operation which is dangerous as fuck, too, so clearly nuclear safety isn't a priority. 

Not anymore. Nuclear power plants, even the ones that support RBMK reactors, have been all renewed in a manner that the core would automatically shut itself down and/or run coolant into itself to avoid a meltdown during steam explosions/power shutdowns etc. There's really no risk at all surrounding modern nuclear plants. Ukraine has been playing that card for a while now to drag in the west, it got to a point where a minister spewed some wild shit about a plant exploding on twitter, and got called out for being a dumb ass. 

[Rorman Nockwell 56,971]

9 minutes ago, House of Balloons said:

Not anymore. Nuclear power plants, even the ones that support RBMK reactors, have been all renewed in a manner that the core would automatically shut itself down and/or run coolant into itself to avoid a meltdown during steam explosions/power shutdowns etc. There's really no risk at all surrounding modern nuclear plants. Ukraine has been playing that card for a while now to drag in the west, it got to a point where a minister spewed some wild shit about a plant exploding on twitter, and got called out for being a dumb ass. 

They've undergone "modifications" but it's not like safety compliance measures are transparent and verifiable when they're in an authoritarian country, so I have my doubts tbh. 

To be fair, Ukraine has had to deal with Chernobyl-related issues for over 30 years and it's cost a lot in both coins and human life. I haven't read those tweets or anything, but I don't think it's unreasonable to be concerned about a reactor that still requires specialised maintenance and attention to keep it stable. 

Maybe the threat is being exaggerated but it also isn't non-existent. 

[house of balloons 12,795]

Just now, Rorman Nockwell said:

They've undergone "modifications" but it's not like safety compliance measures are transparent and verifiable when they're in an authoritarian country, so I have my doubts tbh. 

To be fair, Ukraine has had to deal with Chernobyl-related issues for over 30 years and it's cost a lot in both coins and human life. I haven't read those tweets or anything, but I don't think it's unreasonable to be concerned about a reactor that still requires specialised maintenance and attention to keep it stable. 

The modifications were supervised by the IAEA, so I highly doubt there was any serious fraud going on. And while I'm not trying to underplay the Chernobyl incident and the human loss it left behind, but you have to take it in context of the cold war and the nuclear energy stigma that took place back then (and still does to this day). Every information we got about it, especially from the west, was greatly exaggerated for obvious reasons, while others were just buried, like the fact that the other 3 reactors remained operating till 2000, and that there was a FIFTH reactor under construction. 

[Terrence Loves Me 72,892]

not this still going on

[house of balloons 12,795]

1 hour ago, the ocean said:

i’m gonna pretend that the last few posts do not exist because everyone knows how hard it is to detect sarcasm over text

 

is there anything else of note besides russia moving west or is that the only thing right now?

 

edit: + the nuclear plants at risk duh knew that but forgot to add it

no they're not but do contribue why you think they are instead of just putting it out there like solid fact 

[Rorman Nockwell 56,971]

2 hours ago, House of Balloons said:

The modifications were supervised by the IAEA, so I highly doubt there was any serious fraud going on. And while I'm not trying to underplay the Chernobyl incident and the human loss it left behind, but you have to take it in context of the cold war and the nuclear energy stigma that took place back then (and still does to this day). Every information we got about it, especially from the west, was greatly exaggerated for obvious reasons, while others were just buried, like the fact that the other 3 reactors remained operating till 2000, and that there was a FIFTH reactor under construction. 

I respectfully disagree with most of this, 'lloons.

It doesn't matter if the IAEA supervised it; they are ultimately not there for the day-to-day supervision and maintenance (especially now - can't see them letting anyone in to check). Maybe I'm a cynic but the Russian government isn't exactly known for being spot-on or transparent with such things.

I mean I didn't exist at that time (and I don't think you did either) so idk about at the time and what was said, etc, but nobody nowadays talks about the ongoing impacts in Ukraine and Belarus. Large swathes of land left empty, increased incidence of cancers (especially thyroid cancers - the scar for the operation is even called "the Belarusian necklace" because so many people have it), and so forth. I have a friend from Belarus and she told me about how she used to go on paid trips abroad when she was a child, with the idea of giving her body a rest from the radiation.

The other reactors remained operational mostly because electricity is a necessity and the financial situation in Ukraine in the 90s was dire. It wasn't great in Russia, either, but Russia took the lion's share of the Soviet treasury and largely left the other ex-republics to fend for themselves. It's not as if Ukraine could afford to build another plant - all of the plants it has were built in the 70s/80s. Chernobyl reactors 5 and 6 were almost complete when the disaster at #4 happened, and the construction was cancelled prior to Ukraine gaining independence, so I don't think that is relevant.

ETA: anyways I don't think Russia is going to purposely blow up a nuclear plant or anything, but the Russian personnel who are taking these plants over are not trained to run nuclear power plants - they are military. So the risk lies in the fact that the Ukrainian personnel who ARE trained may not be able to do their jobs effectively. And, of course, if there is fighting around a plant, that's always a risk.

[house of balloons 12,795]

6 minutes ago, Rorman Nockwell said:

I respectfully disagree with most of this, 'lloons.

It doesn't matter if the IAEA supervised it; they are ultimately not there for the day-to-day supervision and maintenance (especially now - can't see them letting anyone in to check). Maybe I'm a cynic but the Russian government isn't exactly known for being spot-on or transparent with such things.

I mean I didn't exist at that time (and I don't think you did either) so idk about at the time and what was said, etc, but nobody nowadays talks about the ongoing impacts in Ukraine and Belarus. Large swathes of land left empty, increased incidence of cancers (especially thyroid cancers - the scar for the operation is even called "the Belarusian necklace" because so many people have it), and so forth. I have a friend from Belarus and she told me about how she used to go on paid trips abroad when she was a child, with the idea of giving her body a rest from the radiation.

The other reactors remained operational mostly because electricity is a necessity and the financial situation in Ukraine in the 90s was dire. It wasn't great in Russia, either, but Russia took the lion's share of the Soviet treasury and largely left the other ex-republics to fend for themselves. It's not as if Ukraine could afford to build another plant - all of the plants it has were built in the 70s/80s. Chernobyl reactors 5 and 6 were almost complete when the disaster at #4 happened, and the construction was cancelled prior to Ukraine gaining independence, so I don't think that is relevant.

I appreciate the time you take to actually defend your stance and share your thoughts rather than indulging  in the upvote mining circlejerk this forum has become. You're still one of my favorite members for a reason.  

As you said, I didn't exist during the time of the incident, and I'm not much of a historian either and so I could only rely on he-said-she-said to make sense of how the tragedy affected the area and the people. What we do know for sure is that the 4 nuclear plants that are currently operating in Ukraine all have VVER reactors, which, as I mentioned earlier, are built to shut down immediately after loss of coolant. They're also crazily contained to avoid any offsite leaking (which was a condition to ex-soviets for possible EU admissions) and, unlike an RBMK, it doesn't have any graphite (which was responsible for a great deal of radiation toxicity in Prepyet). My point is that, afaik, Ukrainian nuclear plants are nowhere in danger. There's not one scenario where a VVER reactor could go wrong, unless you drop a nuclear bomb on top of it, in which case a meltdown will be the least of your problems lol. Even if the Russian RBMKs were really shady, despite having been modified to add containment structures and switch to a negative void coefficient, that wouldn't really matter. Putin has no interest hijacking his own plants. 

 

[Rorman Nockwell 56,971]

39 minutes ago, House of Balloons said:

I appreciate the time you take to actually defend your stance and share your thoughts rather than indulging  in the upvote mining circlejerk this forum has become. You're still one of my favorite members for a reason.  

As you said, I didn't exist during the time of the incident, and I'm not much of a historian either and so I could only rely on he-said-she-said to make sense of how the tragedy affected the area and the people. What we do know for sure is that the 4 nuclear plants that are currently operating in Ukraine all have VVER reactors, which, as I mentioned earlier, are built to shut down immediately after loss of coolant. They're also crazily contained to avoid any offsite leaking (which was a condition to ex-soviets for possible EU admissions) and, unlike an RBMK, it doesn't have any graphite (which was responsible for a great deal of radiation toxicity in Prepyet). My point is that, afaik, Ukrainian nuclear plants are nowhere in danger. There's not one scenario where a VVER reactor could go wrong, unless you drop a nuclear bomb on top of it, in which case a meltdown will be the least of your problems lol. Even if the Russian RBMKs were really shady, despite having been modified to add containment structures and switch to a negative void coefficient, that wouldn't really matter. Putin has no interest hijacking his own plants. 

 

Yeah, so we agree that Putin isn't looking to deliberately sabotage any nuclear plants - the radioactive cloud from Chernobyl made it to Russia and beyond, and while he's a horrible human, he isn't stupid.

I only raised the issue of Russia's RBMK plants to point out that nuclear safety probably isn't one of Russia's highest priorities, given that they are still using this flawed technology (albeit with modifications). They could afford to have decommissioned theirs by now, if they'd wanted to - and it's a concern to have Russian military personnel in charge of Ukraine's plants. But a war's a war, and I daresay Ukraine has more pressing problems rn, unfortunately.

Spoiler

upvote mining circlejerk (you're not wrong)

 

[The Siren 30,526]

This thread derailed so hard i-

[Blue Ink 5,908]

6 hours ago, The Siren said:

This thread derailed so hard i-

As awful as it sounds, people get used to bad news, no matter how bad. Even the word news, I mean is this war still news? Putin is an ass and the Ukrainians suffer because of it, that's not new anymore.

We've been discussing every aspect of this war and possible outcomes here. 

The only thing we haven't discussed is how this is going to end and what are they gonna do with Putin afterwards. He obviously has to go...

[the ocean 67,601]

6 hours ago, The Siren said:

This thread derailed so hard i-

 

yep 

 

27 minutes ago, BlueINK said:

As awful as it sounds, people get used to bad news, no matter how bad. Even the word news, I mean is this war still news? Putin is an ass and the Ukrainians suffer because of it, that's not new anymore.

We've been discussing every aspect of this war and possible outcomes here. 

The only thing we haven't discussed is how this is going to end and what are they gonna do with Putin afterwards. He obviously has to go...

 

tbh yeah i mean what is there to talk about anymore? doesn't mean that it doesn't matter but it's nothing new at this point

 

also i think the thread started to go into the direction of how putin has to go and that's where it completely derailed

[The Siren 30,526]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10603045/Putin-places-head-FSBs-foreign-intelligence-branch-house-arrest.html

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russian-spy-chiefs-putin-security-b2034350.html

https://news.yahoo.com/putin-offers-battle-hardened-fighters-181458635.html

[Rorman Nockwell 56,971]

25 minutes ago, The Siren said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10603045/Putin-places-head-FSBs-foreign-intelligence-branch-house-arrest.html

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russian-spy-chiefs-putin-security-b2034350.html

https://news.yahoo.com/putin-offers-battle-hardened-fighters-181458635.html

The FSB do the novichok-ing so who will novichok the FSB 

 

[Blue Ink 5,908]

4 hours ago, The Siren said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10603045/Putin-places-head-FSBs-foreign-intelligence-branch-house-arrest.html

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russian-spy-chiefs-putin-security-b2034350.html

https://news.yahoo.com/putin-offers-battle-hardened-fighters-181458635.html

I read about this too.

And while Putin is sulking about not being God yet, innocent people are dying every day. Just heard the news about a pregnant woman and her unborn child dying after the bombing of their tenement. 

At this point I expect his daughters to get rid of him if his minions can't do it. Seriously.

[The Siren 30,526]

14 minutes ago, BlueINK said:

I read about this too.

And while Putin is sulking about not being God yet, innocent people are dying every day. Just heard the news about a pregnant woman and her unborn child dying after the bombing of their tenement. 

At this point I expect his daughters to get rid of him if his minions can't do it. Seriously.

i love the idea of an assassination-by-the-family moment

[Blue Ink 5,908]

4 minutes ago, The Siren said:

i love the idea of an assassination-by-the-family moment

Is it wrong, wrong that I think it's kind of fun when they hit him in the back of the head with a gun? 

[The Siren 30,526]

1 minute ago, BlueINK said:

Is it wrong, wrong that I think it's kind of fun when they hit him in the back of the head with a gun? 

[Rorman Nockwell 56,971]

This woman protested during a live broadcast on Russia 1 which is one of the main state-owned TV channels

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-03-15/anti-war-protester-russian-television-stop-war-twitter-arrest/100909998

Brave af. I hope she's OK, though.