Would NATO intervene in case of nuclear meltdown of power reactor?

Would plant going into meltdown trigger Article 5, and give casus belli for NATO to intervene?
https://www.the-sun.com/news/6076416/ukraine-nuclear-power-plant-shut-down-russia/

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    No but I have a nuclear shelter like most people here. If I have to sit in it for more than a week I am going to kill a Russian child to keep the cosmic balance.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    They already said that yes it would.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I wonder then if this is the reason US is telling everyone to clear out now.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Source?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        https://www.promoteukraine.org/us-uk-mps-emphasise-that-attack-on-zaporizhzhia-npp-would-be-breach-of-natos-article-5/

        It is just some politicians said it could or should. Not the government as a whole.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          So basically it's a nothingburger.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >fire damage
    Smoker gonna smoke!

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    No. Meltdowns are massively overrated by nuclear scaremongers.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      nice photoshop garden gnome..

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It's not a photoshop, just slightly misleading. Fukushima was mostly a spent fuel rods thrown around by steam explosion event with minimal core melting. An actual "oh my god it's forming an elephant's foot" meltdown at the ZNPP is almost impossible, but it if did happen would be catastrophic.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Even the Chernobyl incident did not produce more than 30 direct deaths and a meagre 4,000 over a period of 30 years.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Because it didn't reach groundwater. ZNPP is right on the banks of the Dniper.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Isn't water, like, a good shield against radiation? Life is not Fallout games.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >what is the difference between radiation and contamination

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >almost impossible
          And RBMk reactors do NOT explode. The Russians are in charge of the plant, all bets are off. The soldiers are probably swimming in the spent fuel pools and staring at the pretty blue lights.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            good thing Zap NPP is VVER-1000, then.
            >emergency UN SC meeting
            >Russia vetos Blue Helmets on Zap NP (UNUCFOR)
            >China abstains
            >General Assembly emergency meeting
            >If 2/3rds majority, UNUCFOR deploys

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Fukushima actually did have 3 meltdowns that penetrated through the reactor containment vessel.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          but it's the russians, they already almost fucked the entirety of Europe with Chernobyl, you'd think they would be very aware of the dangers of fucking with nuclear materials???

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Chernobyl was done by Ukrainians lol.
            I bet they don't want IAEA to visit the plant because it would show decades of ill maintenance putting it in critical condition, with Russian engineers saving it from disaster a few years down the line.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Ukraine was part of the USSR, dingus

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Russians were only about 51% of the USSR population.
                Blaming all failures of USSR on Russians is no more logical than blaming it all on women, since they also were 51% of the population.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Blaming retarded communist policies of USSR on Russians

                Imagine that.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                USSR is russia

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The risks from the ZNPP are relatively low unless someone dunks on the containment vessel with a 203mm AP round, but if it DID somehow meltdown it would poison the Dniper river basin and Black Sea

      The more likely radiation release is the spent fuel pond getting shelled though, not a meltdown.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        If Russia did something really fishy and stupid I wager the glowies and spooks already in Ukraine would foil it and the cover story will be Ukrainian speshul forces retaking the plant.

        >be Delta, ST6, SAS, Green Beret, GROM in Ukraine
        >suddenly get assigned a SAC officer plus a FBI nook expert
        >go full The Rock inside a nuclear powerplant
        >unlike the SEALs in the movie who got KWAB'd you actually succeed
        >you will never hear about the real mission until 5-8 years later when one of the ST6 guys signs a Hollywood book deal for it
        >Delta and SAS did everything but for whatever reason the ST6 guy (played by Chris Pratt) is the protagonist

        kek. you faggets..

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Do you have an actual argument or are you just going to call me a shill? And why do vatniks screech about Twitter and Reddit so much, and then source from them?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >checks source
          >endless rows upon rows of obsessive Covid articles and "muh libruls" with literally no comments, likes or retweets
          Did you really just use some rando screaming into the void for an audience of 1 as a source? At least use one of the popular lolcows that have some semblance of a following.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Fake, butt even if it was real, welcome to post truth gay, this has been a thing for about 20 years now, and you're a victim of the Russian/Chink/Indian branches attempts to demoralise Americans like yourself into thinking some nation is somehow gonna fix your country if you support it lmao.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      i love this fallacy that every death related to the nuclear industry is scrupulously recorded

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The nuclear industry is by far the most regulated industry in the world. If nuclear deaths are going unrecorded then deaths from coal and oil are going unrecorded by the thousands.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Would NATO intervene

    are you one of those murica fat retards and gay freedom fighters who believe that there will be NATO left after the launch of russian nuclear rockets? or are you just some fucking gay garden gnome slut thinking people can use tactical nuclear weapons in today cancer world?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous
    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >are you one of those murica fat retards and gay freedom fighters who believe that there will be NATO left after the launch of russian nuclear rockets?

      Do you think there will still be a Russia by the time we're through?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >I'M GONNA NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOK

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Russia has to spread its "5000 Nukes" across all NATO nations aka 30 Countries
      meanwhile NATO only has to aim its 5000 nukes at a single Country
      You really think you have a higher chance of walking away from this?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        166 nukes to each of 30 countries can do a lot of damage. Even one nuke can do a lot of damage.

        That said, I am more than willing to sacrifice NYC, SF, and DC in order to destroy Russia forever.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          That's not a sacrifice. That's a bargain, even if we lose.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I’ll throw in Denver Portland and Los Angeles as well.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Except most of russias nukes will be duds, some will detonate on russian soil, most will miss their targets etc.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Russia has to spread its "5000 Nukes" across all NATO nations aka 30 Countries

        Only nine actually. The three NATO nuclear powers, the United States, the United Kingdom, and France; and Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey which have nuclear sharing agreements with the United States. The remaining 21 have solely conventional forces that would likely be incapacitated in the event of a nuclear attack on the former nine anyway.

        The greatest hindrance to a Russian First Strike would be the fact that even if they caught NATO completely off-guard, the 15 minute window between ICBM launch and impact at their targets in the US is still ten minutes short of the American response time (it takes as little as five minutes between Presidential authorization and missiles leaving their silos), meaning that even in ideal circumstances, dozens, if not hundreds of American ICBMs would still get into the air before the Russians can take them out. That's nothing to say of the American/British/French submarine fleets out at sea and USAF strategic bombers that manage to get into the air , both would still be able to conduct a Second Strike all on their own.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You will destroy the ozone layer regardless and everyone will be starving for a long time.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Shoigu already said there will be no nuclear chimpout.
      And he has already survived two assassination attempts this year, so the other lackeys are scared of him.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Russia nukes some limp-wristed bankers
      I wish they would.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Actually it's the other wat around, Russia would be utterly destroyed, because Russia is essentially Moscow + St. Petersburg + rump state. There'd be some newly independent states left over, they'd be shitholes.
      Meanwhile Russia doesn't even have enough nukes to cover every major city in NATO alliance. And that's before they have to dedicate at least 10 to every US silo +nuclear capable airbase.
      So here's the thing, Russia can't kill NATO, but they can do some damage. They can make us REALLY pissed off. Like super pissed off. Like invade Russia to commit some righteous genocide pissed off. And the best part is, the people who would stop us, the rich urbanite liberal class? Yeah, you'd have most likely smeared most of them and the remainder would be even more furious than the rest of us.

      So yeah, please do it. I want you to do it.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >And that's before they have to dedicate at least 10 to every US silo +nuclear capable airbase.
        Well, no, you exaggerate. But they have a lot of targets in the US that need to be double or triple-tapped. They have just about enough to cover the US but not much more.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Interceptors will get at LEAST 50% of. Plus estimate a 10-20% failure rate. That's now 8-10 on every target you HAVE to hit.
          This is the real reason Russia spazzes out every time an anti-missile battery gets place in Eastern Europe, because every one means they have to dedicate additional warheads to high priority targets to make sure it gets hit.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    If Russia did something really fishy and stupid I wager the glowies and spooks already in Ukraine would foil it and the cover story will be Ukrainian speshul forces retaking the plant.

    >be Delta, ST6, SAS, Green Beret, GROM in Ukraine
    >suddenly get assigned a SAC officer plus a FBI nook expert
    >go full The Rock inside a nuclear powerplant
    >unlike the SEALs in the movie who got KWAB'd you actually succeed
    >you will never hear about the real mission until 5-8 years later when one of the ST6 guys signs a Hollywood book deal for it
    >Delta and SAS did everything but for whatever reason the ST6 guy (played by Chris Pratt) is the protagonist

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You are overestimating glowies. This is not Metal Gear.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >the "terrorists" in cs:go were actually just skii masked russians
      it all makes sense now

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >ST6 guy (played by Chris Pratt)
      >not played by Zelensky resuming his acting career after he leaves office

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >plus a FBI nook expert
      are you retarded?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Cod 4 pretty much had this as a mission.
      SAS and Marine Force Recon hit a nuke silo in Russia that was having somewhat of a civil war and aborted mid launch (unlikely) then the credits roll with a news presenter rolling a story that all Russia did was a satellite test to cover up the attempted launch of nukes

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      This. I guarantee Russian nook capability is non-existent at this point.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Makes me laugh whenever I see these pea brained assumptions, time and time again. Yes Russia is Africa tier, but if Norks can have functional nukes, then it won't take much to keep a small arsenal of under 100 functional, 50 or some shit, when there were literally several thousand up and running during the cold war.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    this is such a load of shit, it’s THE biggest nothingburger they could possibly come up with

    it can ONLY melt down if there is a runaway, uncontrolled fission reaction that melts its way out of the reactor. THAT can only happen if the engineers there are either retarded or evil enough to leave the reactors in operation once the russians decide to start shooting in their direction.

    all they have to do is turn the fucker OFF and it won’t be an issue. honesty that this is even being spun as a point of concern by the media is so demoralizing that not only are people THAT stupid, but the media knows it and knows that the idiots will listen to their fearmongering over anyone who can remember high school science

    INSERT RODS > TURN OFF REACTOR > CANNOT MELT DOWN

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Are the IAEA also demoralising alarmist idiots?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I don’t expect anything else from the average retarded public who thinks nuclear reactor shutdown = goes boom = we all dead. Such kind of dumbness should be classified as mental health problem.

      Meanwhile we paying high energy prices and nuclear is the only way for Europe unless you love Chinese and Russian cock.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Hello newfriend.
      You obviously have not followed the news about:
      >the russian troops shelling the controll building at the earliest opportunity, forcing the engineers to flee from it
      >the engineers having NO access to the plant for months now
      >the engineers specifically prevented from shutting down the reactors
      >the engineers specifically warning that the turbine buildings are used as ammo dumps
      >the engineers specifically warning that the plant will be disconnected from the grid in a way that will compromise some of the automated safety measures
      And here we are now, with the plant disconnected from the grid.
      It's obviously not going to explode, but a man-made incident now seems possible if not likely.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        oh. I’m retarded then. disregard my pointless venting over media hate.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Imagine believing a damm thing from russia's or ukraines mouth, everything you hear is propaganda

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Imagine being a vatty sympathizer

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            are you fucking retarded? I said don't believe anyone ,if you're not there yourself don't believe anything anyone says during a war you stupid moron, what you gonna believe jesus if he calls you a gay?

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Frankly that’s just retarded, might as well not fucking post. There’s skepticism and then there’s just retarded paranoia. Stop shitting up the thread.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                moron

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I'm not trusting "ukraine", I'm trusting my own experience with Soviet and Russian military and politicians.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          imagine being so schizo that you refuse to believe absolutely anything you hear secondhand and insist that anything you haven't personally investigated and seen firsthand must be lies

          How's that TempleOS going, Terry?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Cmon man Terry was 15 times the man this vatmoron is

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          We don't need to believe what they say, we need to look at all the damn footage on social media and use our autistic brainpower to sift out the lies by cross-referencing what is consistent.

          Seriously, in this day and age any armchair general can just sit back and browse Twatter and Chink Chonk and get a shitload of unfiltered intel.
          It's like how in Operation Desert Storm, the US Military kept an eye on a live feed from CNN, knowing that if it went down then the attack on some useful communications equipment was successful.

          What matters is making sure we can identify what is and isn't blatant propaganda, and if it is propaganda then try and pierce through the lies to find the truth.

          No matter how well a narrative is controlled, there will always be holes.
          Listening to lies will yield you equally as useful information as the truth when you know how to pick them apart.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >everywhere is like this
          shut the fuck up commie

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Imagine being such a newfag he didn't literally watch the Russians shelling the Nuclear facility LIVE on the nuclear facilities CCTV cameras

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            This was a fucking office building.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              All right you little fucking shit, I bet you won't even reply to this, but here is literally the link to the Youtube video where it was recorded LIVE.

              Пpямaя тpaнcляция пoльзoвaтeля Зaпopiзькa AEC

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                IT WASN'T THE REACTOR, IT WAS AN OFFICE BUILDING THE UKRAINIAN SOLDERS WERE HOLD UP IN
                YOU'RE A FUCKING RETARD WHO PROBABLY THINKS THE COOLING TOWERS WOULD EXPLODE IF YOU HIT THEM
                THE REACTOR ITSELF CANNOT EXPLODE AT ALL UNLESS THERE IS A RUNAWAY REACTION
                THIS ENTIRE CONTROVERSY IS FAKE

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                IT IS LITERALLY THE FRONT OF THE NUCLEAR PLANT. WHO GIVES A FUCK IF THEY'RE NOT SHOOTING DIRECTLY AT THE COOLING TOWERS WHEN THEY'RE FUCKING SHOOTING RPG'S ON A FUCKING NUCLEAR PLANTS PREMISIS. THE RUSSIANS MANAGED TO DAMAGE THE ELECTRICITY AND GOT SEVERAL OF THE COOLING TOWERS SHUT DOWN YOU FUCKING ASS VATNIK SUBHUMAN moron.

                https://i.imgur.com/gSTC16C.png

                >Lmao and I’m sure stopping the engineers from maintenancing the plant is perfectly fine too
                As a matter of fact, Ukrainian side opposed IAEA officials visiting the plant EXACTLY because they knew IAEA officials will find nothing wrong with the reactor and the way it's run, and that would expose piles of Ukrainian bullshit.
                Ukrainian Minister of Energy directly stated it in plain words.

                [...]
                If you watched it live, you'd know that Ukrainians shot first and Russians returned fire.
                At the office building they were shot at from.
                Shooting in the opposite direction away from the reactors.
                Using small caliber weapons only.

                [...]
                Hm, I wonder what's happening at 1:21:22.
                Could it be Ukrainians starting a firefight at the nuclear power plant?

                >Hm, I wonder what's happening at 1:21:22.
                >Could it be Ukrainians starting a firefight at the nuclear power plant?

                Ah yes, because who shot first matters, not the fact that Ukraine had to do everything within its power to keep a foreign invading enemy from taking control of the nuclear power plant that is absolutely vital to powering the region. Yes, if the Ukrainians hadn't shot first, the Russians would have totally been peaceful, stayed outside and just done nothing at all.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >he actually thinks the cooling towers will explode

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                It’s Russia, they’ll manage it somehow

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Cope. Nothing will happen.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Lmao classic response, but it gives away your from 4chan, used way too often

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >THEY'RE FUCKING SHOOTING RPG'S ON A FUCKING NUCLEAR PLANTS PREMISIS
                That's what Ukrainians did.

                >Ah yes, because who shot first matters
                Yes, it does.
                If they didn't start a firefight, Russians would have occupied the plant peacefully with no risk of a disaster.

                If Ukrainians were so worried about the plant safety, they could have ambushed the Russian convoy en route, outside the power plant premises.
                Instead, they intentionally put it at risk by starting the firefight right there, probably hoping that Russians will be hesitant to shoot back.

                >Shooting in the opposite direction away from the reactors.
                >Using small caliber weapons only.

                Seeing as how I watched RPG's slam directly into the Ukrainian positions while watching this spectacle live, I would say you are being a disingenuous fuck.

                [...]

                No-one is saying that you retard. However, damaging electrical cables and keeping Ukrainian nuclear plant workers from doing their job for months on end while installing no nuclear plant workers of your own is not a good thing. Nuclear power plants require a lot of on-going maintenance. It's about damaging the very fragile infrastructure of the surrounding area that can easily cause cooling towers to, y'know, not have COOLING.

                >RPG
                RPG is small caliber.
                Large caliber is artillery shelling.
                You know, the exact thing Ukrainians are using against enemy forces stationed at the nuclear plant right now.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                God damn the mental gymnastics

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                If anything serious happens, the engineers will just shut the reactor down. But nothing will happen, unless the Ukrainians decide to keep shelling the plant.

                I'm in awe at the /chug/ intellectuals. You know you guys have the mental capacity of the Russians? I mean, I assume most of you are, but still. It must be so much easier to live your life as retarded.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous
              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                The cum/chug/er yells out as he hit you

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous
              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                .

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous
              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Damn bro you got him to reply in all caps.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Damn bro you got him to reply in all caps.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Zero evidence for any of these things actually happening.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Zero physical evidence for the battle of Stalingrad.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >We literally watched the plant get shelled on webcams when the war started
          >there are literally videos of the inside of the plant being used as an ammo dump

          you're right anon there's no evidence at all

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      a scrammed reactor still needs active cooling (which means continuous power and constant maintenance) for weeks, and the fuel pond is vulnerable to loss of water (again, constant maintenance)

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    No, fuck off, not my problem yuropoors

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      pussy

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      literally your problem

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Would plant going into meltdown trigger Article 5, and give casus belli for NATO to intervene?
    Both the U.S. and Britain have already stated publicly that they would intervene if the orks make the Zap plant start leaking.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    NATO and Ukraine are the ones trying to start a nuclear meltdown. Why would they stop it?

    Boy, God really is gonna murder you for this. Absolute evil.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Trips and the Russians will regret blowing up the reactor after Moscow turns to ash.

  12. 1 month ago
    Mandick
    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous
  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    People here haven't read how Fukushima happened. Reactors have a ton of residual heat that needs to be cooled even when they shut down and if they lose all power between backup generators and the grid they can still cause containment breaches when shit starts melting.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Yes, which is the exact scenario engineers from Zaporozhye were warning about weeks ago.
      And now the plant is disconnected from the grid.

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Doubtful. But who knows, let's find out!

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I dunno about article 5 but a coalition of NATO members would definitely intervene.
    They need to get specialists and clean up teams to the site ASAP so they dont have time to deal with putins bullshit and will just kill or rout anything that poses a threat to the clean-up team which means at a minimum a no fly zone over south eastern Ukraine

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    NATO can barely organize itself for speedy mobilization for war due to its bureaucratic nature, let alone a nuclear meltdown.

    That, and a meltdown would have to be deliberately caused by an external entity to even qualify as an act of war.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >NATO can barely organize itself for speedy mobilization for war due to its bureaucratic nature, let alone a nuclear meltdown.

      NATO already mobilized back in February, there's tens of thousands of American troops sitting mere steps away from the Ukrainian border in Poland, waiting for the order.

      USAF response times are even shorter, being able to move to attack any target worldwide in a matter of minutes.

      >That, and a meltdown would have to be deliberately caused by an external entity to even qualify as an act of war.

      I'm pretty sure invading a sovereign country and sabotaging their nuclear power plants by holding their staff hostage and preventing them from so much as shutting down the reactors to prevent an accident is clear-cut "deliberately caused by an external entity".

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    As the Russians control this power plant and the only people who would shell it are Ukrainians the chances of NATO involvement are zero. Unless it;s to tell Ukraine to stop creating bad press I guess.

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Would plant going into meltdown trigger Article 5
    Against Ukraine?
    >we don't know who's shelling it but we know for sure they'll stop if Russia leaves the area

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Reminder that Russia is fully within their right to station military equipment in close proximity to the nuclear reactor, as long as this equipment isn't used to conduct or supply military operations - something Ukrainian side provided no evidence for.
    Shelling them is a war crime prohibited under Geneva Conventions.

    https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/Article.xsp?action=openDocument&documentId=3376730ECD9DF7B1C12563CD0051DD37
    >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, if such 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 of these works or installations shall not be made the object of attack if such attack may cause the
    release of dangerous forces from the works or installations and consequent severe losses among the civilian population.
    >The special protection against attack provided by paragraph 1 shall cease [...] for other military objectives located at or in the vicinity of these works or installations only if they are used in regular, significant and direct support of military operations and if such attack is the only feasible way to terminate such support.
    >Nevertheless, installations erected for the sole purpose of defending the protected works or installations from attack are permissible and shall not themselves be made the object of attack, provided that they are not used in hostilities except for defensive actions necessary to respond to attacks against the protected works or installations and that their armament is limited to weapons capable only of repelling hostile action against the protected works or installations.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Lmao and I’m sure stopping the engineers from maintenancing the plant is perfectly fine too, and letting the nuke plant go up will be fine too, because Blyyyaaat.

      Christ you rusmorons are shameless

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The Russian engineers working at the plant are not being prevented from doing anything.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Lmao and I’m sure stopping the engineers from maintenancing the plant is perfectly fine too
          Never happened.

          IT WASN'T THE REACTOR, IT WAS AN OFFICE BUILDING THE UKRAINIAN SOLDERS WERE HOLD UP IN
          YOU'RE A FUCKING RETARD WHO PROBABLY THINKS THE COOLING TOWERS WOULD EXPLODE IF YOU HIT THEM
          THE REACTOR ITSELF CANNOT EXPLODE AT ALL UNLESS THERE IS A RUNAWAY REACTION
          THIS ENTIRE CONTROVERSY IS FAKE

          https://i.imgur.com/gSTC16C.png

          >Lmao and I’m sure stopping the engineers from maintenancing the plant is perfectly fine too
          As a matter of fact, Ukrainian side opposed IAEA officials visiting the plant EXACTLY because they knew IAEA officials will find nothing wrong with the reactor and the way it's run, and that would expose piles of Ukrainian bullshit.
          Ukrainian Minister of Energy directly stated it in plain words.

          [...]
          If you watched it live, you'd know that Ukrainians shot first and Russians returned fire.
          At the office building they were shot at from.
          Shooting in the opposite direction away from the reactors.
          Using small caliber weapons only.

          [...]
          Hm, I wonder what's happening at 1:21:22.
          Could it be Ukrainians starting a firefight at the nuclear power plant?

          Lmao fucking vatniks

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Lmao and I’m sure stopping the engineers from maintenancing the plant is perfectly fine too
        Never happened.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Lmao and I’m sure stopping the engineers from maintenancing the plant is perfectly fine too
        As a matter of fact, Ukrainian side opposed IAEA officials visiting the plant EXACTLY because they knew IAEA officials will find nothing wrong with the reactor and the way it's run, and that would expose piles of Ukrainian bullshit.
        Ukrainian Minister of Energy directly stated it in plain words.

        Imagine being such a newfag he didn't literally watch the Russians shelling the Nuclear facility LIVE on the nuclear facilities CCTV cameras

        If you watched it live, you'd know that Ukrainians shot first and Russians returned fire.
        At the office building they were shot at from.
        Shooting in the opposite direction away from the reactors.
        Using small caliber weapons only.

        All right you little fucking shit, I bet you won't even reply to this, but here is literally the link to the Youtube video where it was recorded LIVE.

        Пpямaя тpaнcляция пoльзoвaтeля Зaпopiзькa AEC

        Hm, I wonder what's happening at 1:21:22.
        Could it be Ukrainians starting a firefight at the nuclear power plant?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Shooting in the opposite direction away from the reactors.
          >Using small caliber weapons only.

          Seeing as how I watched RPG's slam directly into the Ukrainian positions while watching this spectacle live, I would say you are being a disingenuous fuck.

          https://i.imgur.com/0IIsdKm.gif

          >he actually thinks the cooling towers will explode

          No-one is saying that you retard. However, damaging electrical cables and keeping Ukrainian nuclear plant workers from doing their job for months on end while installing no nuclear plant workers of your own is not a good thing. Nuclear power plants require a lot of on-going maintenance. It's about damaging the very fragile infrastructure of the surrounding area that can easily cause cooling towers to, y'know, not have COOLING.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >WHO GIVES A FUCK IF THEY'RE NOT SHOOTING DIRECTLY AT THE COOLING TOWERS
            You said it. Right here.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Lmao look at you just chopping at the bit waiting to respond, how’s /chug/?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Or maybe I just see the notification.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Because they don't NEED to shoot at the towers directly to cause DAMAGE. How hard is that to literally understand. Do you have any idea how complicated nuclear power plants are? How important it is to keep a nuclear power plant cool? How do you think it keeps cool?

              I mean you're a Vatnik, so I suppose you think magic

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                If anything serious happens, the engineers will just shut the reactor down. But nothing will happen, unless the Ukrainians decide to keep shelling the plant.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                What engineers? You think the Russians are sending nuke techs in? For fuck sake they dug up the dirt around red Forrest, what makes you think they’re maintaining the place?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                They already replaced the plant's staff, moron.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                proofs?
                >inb4 look it up yourself
                It’ll be too obvious but you’ll say it anyway.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous
              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Lmao well admittedly at least you didn’t say burden of proof is on me or something generic

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I wonder if we’re going to trigger the spam bot

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Why yes, proofs. You know, those things that are usually posted by the Ukrainian side more often than the Russian side? Obviously some said Ukrainian proofs turn out to be propaganda, but certainly not on the same level as the % of "truth" the Russian's put out.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                That good old Russian military standard, the best of the best with only the utmost in funding and training; surely they won't fuck up yet another nuclear facility and deny it ever happened.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                whats wrong with armored trains?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Ah yes, the "Russian" engineers, top of their class, most qualified and experienced nuclear reactor technicians the world has ever seen. I'm sure they'll have no trouble with maintaining the plant seeing as how under their watch the plant has lost more functionality as the months have gone by

                They already replaced the plant's staff, moron.

                And they've been doing a downright amazing job am I right? Not only has the plant been deteriorating, but has lost functionality and doesn't supply as much electricity to the region as before! Amazing job, excellent work.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Ah yes, the "Russian" engineers, top of their class, most qualified and experienced nuclear reactor technicians the world has ever seen.
                Show me a historical example of any team of engineers doing a better job on a nuclear plant under artillery shelling.

                Either way, the point is moot, since the plant is being operated by the usual Ukrainian team and not by Russians:

                Bullshit.
                Here's the original interview with the Ukrainian Minister of Energy.
                https://www.rbc.ua/rus/news/german-galushchenko-rech-povyshenii-tarifov-1649180207.html
                >This means that the IAEA goes to the Russians and says - we want to make an inspection at the station. The Russians take them there, they check and say that radiation and nuclear safety is ensured. But this looks absurd and contradicts all possible norms of international law in the field of nuclear energy.
                >Now we can only discuss a visit to the Chernobyl plant, since it has returned to Ukrainian control. And that's all for now. If there are intentions to visit the Zaporozhye station before Ukraine returns control over it, then this is not flirting - this is playing on a foreign field - on the Russian field. For me, this looks like an attempt to legitimize the presence of Russian troops at the ZNPP.
                He says that a visit to Zaporozhye plant is out of the question. Period.

                By the way, he also disproves the claims about Russians preventing Ukrainian engineers from working:
                >– Are the Russians operating the station?
                >– No, it is operated by our people - the personnel of Energoatom.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Lmao imagine thinking anyone cares what you say.

                Death to Russia and death to Putin.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                if they're russians engineers, then maybe
                just think about it
                maybe ask your fucking vatnik soldiers to mvoe the fuck out of plant zone so those imaginary ukrainians have no need to mindcontrol vatniks that shell it daily

                you know why people hate dicussing anything with vatnik? because your state media trained you to be a fanatical i mean pathrotic lie manufacture. In this single thread, you contradicted yourself more than 7 times already

                i'll leave it to you, since i don't expect proper reply, never got it since PrepHole was invaded by first vatnik decade ago. There's reason why even before the war none actually want to discuss anything with vatniks

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >it is Russians who are shelling Russian units at the plant
                >if Russians move out and plant is occupied by Ukrainian units, shelling will stop
                >because Russians exclusively shell Russians only and they will refuse to shell Ukrainian units

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >mvoe
                >a fanatical i mean pathrotic lie manufacture
                >even before the war none actually want to discuss
                Dude, calm down.
                I don't want you to have a fucking stroke over a lost argument.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >anon feels he has finished justifying Russian war crimes
                Any comments on the Russians storing military equipment in the Zaphorizhia plant? Now that we have video footage of it I would guess its difficult to deny, but I've been surprised before.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                It's legal. Shelling it is illegal. See

                Reminder that Russia is fully within their right to station military equipment in close proximity to the nuclear reactor, as long as this equipment isn't used to conduct or supply military operations - something Ukrainian side provided no evidence for.
                Shelling them is a war crime prohibited under Geneva Conventions.

                https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/Article.xsp?action=openDocument&documentId=3376730ECD9DF7B1C12563CD0051DD37
                >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, if such 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 of these works or installations shall not be made the object of attack if such attack may cause the
                release of dangerous forces from the works or installations and consequent severe losses among the civilian population.
                >The special protection against attack provided by paragraph 1 shall cease [...] for other military objectives located at or in the vicinity of these works or installations only if they are used in regular, significant and direct support of military operations and if such attack is the only feasible way to terminate such support.
                >Nevertheless, installations erected for the sole purpose of defending the protected works or installations from attack are permissible and shall not themselves be made the object of attack, provided that they are not used in hostilities except for defensive actions necessary to respond to attacks against the protected works or installations and that their armament is limited to weapons capable only of repelling hostile action against the protected works or installations.

                Care to comment on that?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Hold on - you're saying the Russians are allowed to store the equipment there because they aren't using it in the war? Because this would be excellent. Please say that this is something you believe to be true. God please say it. Type it out just as a quick demonstration that you have no intention of ever arguing in good faith over the course of your natural life.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                They won’t

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Yes.
                Russian forces stationed at the power plant include infantry, air defense, a handful of APCs and some supply trucks for these forces. In other words, a reasonably sized security force necessary to protect the nuclear power plant. This is in no uncertain terms allowed by the Geneva Conventions, and any serious damage dealt to the power plant while trying to attack this security personnel would be a war crime.

                Which is why Ukraine makes shit up about artillery units or munition depots located at the plant territory - these would have been valid targets for Ukrainian artillery. But they don't exist - despite all the video recordings, drone footage and satellite photos we have, nobody managed to catch one on camera.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >protect it

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                You suggest they just leave a nuclear power plant unguarded?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I’d suggest letting the country that actually owns it have it but I know you chimps will just scream it’s your so yeah
                >guard it

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                By your logic, it is outright impossible to ever capture a nuclear power plant in a war.
                That's absurd.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Do the world a favor and have a nice day vatmoron

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Another shill's butthole obliterated, nice.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                have a nice day

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Technically speaking capturing any territory via warfare is illegal.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                As if legality actually matters to them

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >guarding
                It's occupied territory of a sovereign nation. Its very presence is an act of aggression. If you drive tanks into another country they don't stop being part of the invasion force when they stop driving forward, they continue to be part of the invasion force until they return to your own territory. Every single piece of Russian military equipment in Ukraine is a constant ongoing act of aggression just as surely as an Abrams tank pointing a turret at the Kremlin would be. It doesn't matter if the driver put it in park. Your country is using a nuclear power plant to store and thereby protect part of your invading force and that definitely is a war crime. You don't have any guard duties in Ukraine that are not part of the invasion because you are not allowed to be in Ukraine.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Every war has an aggressor.
                Rules of war apply both to aggressor and to defender. Defender doesn't get the carte blanche to do whatever he wants just because he's a "good guy".
                Rules of war are perfectly clear on the topic of military action in the vicinity of nuclear plants. You will notice that the Geneva convention text linked above doesn't say anything about lawful owners, or defenders, or invaders. It says that it's fine to keep a security force at a nuclear plant (no matter if you are invader or defender) and it's not fine to shell them if it risks a nuclear incident (no matter if you are invader or defender).

                That's because the rules of law serve to minimize collateral damage and threat to civilians during the course of war.
                Stationing a security force at the nuclear plant reduces threat to civilians, so it's allowed.
                Shelling the nuclear plant increases threat, so it's forbidden.
                Pretty simple, one must be be either a retard or a shill to argue.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Stationing a security force at the nuclear plant reduces threat to civilians
                No it doesn't, and it especially doesn't if you start to use the power plant as an ammo dump because you hope they won't risk it with HIMARS.
                Because the presence of those forces increases threat to civilians, because that power plant is now a target -by virtue- of the forces stationed there.
                >Pretty simple, one must be be either a retard or a shill to argue.
                Cool, but I've just shown you to be wrong and a liar.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >No it doesn't
                Of course it does.
                If you don't guard it, then enemy force would reoccupy it and you'll have to start a fight in the vicinity of a nuclear plant to capture it again, which is risky.
                Not even mentioning a possibility of some schizo walking into unguarded plant and triggering a nuclear cataclysm for shits and giggles.
                >and it especially doesn't if you start to use the power plant as an ammo dump
                No argument here. How is it relevant?
                >Because the presence of those forces increases threat to civilians, because that power plant is now a target -by virtue- of the forces stationed there.
                Only if your enemy is a nuclear terrorist state blatantly disregarding the laws of war and survival instinct. Sadly, it seems to be the case.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Nuclear power plant shave civilian guards who did stay at their post. Your schizo argument doesn't hold water.

                >Only if your enemy is a nuclear terrorist state blatantly disregarding the laws of war and survival instinct. Sadly, it seems to be the case.
                By this logic, a SWAT team that assaults a flat to rescue a hostage is the aggressor and in the wrong. Because while the criminal is "guarding" the hostage, the hostage is safe, right? It's the SWAT team putting him in danger, not the guy holding a gun to his head with unknown plans.
                >No argument here. How is it relevant?
                Because Russia is storing munitions at the power plant.
                > nuclear terrorist state blatantly disregarding the laws of war
                We're talking about Russia here, right?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Nuclear power plant shave civilian guards who did stay at their post. Your schizo argument doesn't hold water.
                Schizos in a wartorn country are more dangerous than schizos in peacetime, as they have easier access to heavy weapons, and more motivation to act.
                Additional security is in order.
                >muh hostage
                A country is not a criminal.
                A hostage is not a nuclear plant.
                SWAT rescue operation is not a valid equivalent for levelling the house with artillery.
                An analogue is not an argument.
                >unknown plans
                The plan is well known, it's literally just owning the nuclear plant and living happily ever after.
                >Because Russia is storing munitions at the power plant.
                Prove it.
                >We're talking about Russia here, right?
                No, Ukraine. Get it together.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Schizos in a wartorn country are more dangerous than schizos in peacetime, as they have easier access to heavy weapons, and more motivation to act.
                Speculation, not an argument.

                >A country is not a criminal.
                We are seeing that Russia is both, pic related
                >A hostage is not a nuclear plant.
                In this case it is
                >SWAT rescue operation is not a valid equivalent for levelling the house with artillery.
                At some point the power plant has to be recaptured
                >An analogue is not an argument.
                It is when used to demonstrate the logical inconsistencies and fallacies of a position.
                >The plan is well known, it's literally just owning the nuclear plant and living happily ever after.
                Pic related, Russian general threatening to blow up the plant "Power plant will be Russia or nobody's".
                >Prove it.
                Putin promised to allow inspectors in a week ago. What's taking so long to let them in? If you have nothing to hide and just guarding it?
                >No, Ukraine. Get it together.
                No, it's Russia that's invading other countries, threatening other countries with nukes and holding a nuclear power plant hostage. Russia is the criminal here.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Pic related, Russian general threatening to blow up the plant "Power plant will be Russia or nobody's".
                this was debunked weeks ago anon: https://www.newsweek.com/russian-general-threatens-bomb-nuclear-power-plant-we-warned-you-1732328 but i guess ukraine can never lie?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Likely
                They're just covering themselves. Nobody who has dealings with Russia doubts their intent.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Likely
                as in: "you cognitive dissonance likely will never let you acknowledge an argument opposing your world view". at least your bargaining is better that frothing and name-calling of the other anons in this thread.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Speculation, not an argument.
                A perfectly reasonable one.
                Which is exactly why Geneva Conventions allows a military security force to be used.
                >We are seeing that Russia is both, pic related
                >Pic related, Russian general threatening to blow up the plant "Power plant will be Russia or nobody's".
                What we are seeing are hohol fakes.
                that Russians are storing ammo there
                >prove that they don't
                So you have nothing.
                >No, it's Russia that's invading other countries, threatening other countries with nukes and holding a nuclear power plant hostage. Russia is the criminal here.
                ...nothing but autistic screeching, that is.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Frothing, screeching, bargaining and insults
                I'm comfortable with your weak and reflexive attack.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Prove it.
                The final refuge of the lying russian scumbag.
                It's fine though, your country is being destroyed, in 10 years time there won't be a Russia. In 20 years my kids will ask me "Daddy, what were Russians?" and I will answer "They were nothing. Nothing at all." And I'll feel happy that my children don't need to worry about subhuman scum. :^)

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous
              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >security
                >Russian morons

                There is a reason their communist shithole collapsed.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Being the defender doesn't mean you can do what you want
                Agreed, but being the aggressor on foreign soil means your very presence is an act of aggression, regardless of whether are currently firing a weapon. Personally I don't believe there are any acceptable targets for an invading army in an unjust war of conquest, I consider every killing of soldiers or civilians by Russia within Ukraine to be an act of murder. I do understand that people heavily invested in Russia's acquisition of more land above any humanitarian concerns will see otherwise though.
                >You will notice that the Geneva convention text linked above doesn't say anything about lawful owners, or defenders, or invaders. It says that it's fine to keep a security force at a nuclear plant
                No it doesn't. It says "installations erected for the sole purpose of defending the protected works or installations from attack are permissible", and military vehicles part of an invasion force are not an erected installation. It also says The "Parties to the conflict shall endeavour to avoid locating any military objectives in the vicinity of the works of installations mentioned in paragraph 1" which Russia have not done, they've kept military equipment inside the facility as captured on video.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >and military vehicles part of an invasion force are not an erected installation
                Yes they are.
                A Russian military camp established with the purpose of defending the power station is a military installation permitted and protected by Geneva Convention.
                If your claim is that it wasn't established solely for defense, you need to prove it. So far no offensive actions on part of these military units have ever been recorded.
                And if your claim is that the members of an invading force can't be on defensive because they are committing an act of aggression anyway, that's a dumb claim, as it would imply that no invading force can ever capture and hold a nuclear power station under no circumstances - which is an unreasonable requirement which would have never been accepted by signatories of the Convention.

                >It also says The "Parties to the conflict shall endeavour to avoid locating any military objectives in the vicinity of the works of installations mentioned in paragraph 1"
                ...except for the case when it's an installation erected with the sole purpose of defending the power station, as explained in the very next sentence.

                Are you seriously trying to moralfag about a war in which the side you're shilling for has taken notes from Operation Reinhard? These chimps have been gangraping and massacring entire populations just because they're incompetent at basic warfare and can only take their aggression out on unarmed civilians. For all we know those "security forces" you're insisting must exist unmolested have been systemically raping every toddler in the area just for fun; as they've done before in this very fucking conflict and others before.
                >nuuu don't heccing fight back, just let us rape your women and children as we destroy your country
                God I hate vatnigs so much its unreal.

                >These chimps have been gangraping and massacring entire populations
                Spare me the hohol lies.
                They even fired the chief propagandist making these stories up, as they were too retarded and unbelievable even for hohols and made them look bad.

                >Rules of war
                Good thing this isn't war, but a special operation, and those aren't soldier, but a special looting, raping morons.

                Good think Geneva Conventions apply regardless.

                >We literally watched the plant get shelled on webcams when the war started
                >there are literally videos of the inside of the plant being used as an ammo dump

                you're right anon there's no evidence at all

                >We literally watched the plant get shelled
                Not what he said:
                >the russian troops shelling the controll building
                It was not the control building but a training center.
                >at the earliest opportunity
                As the last resort in response to enemy fire.
                >forcing the engineers to flee from it
                Didn't happen.

                >there are literally videos of the inside of the plant being used as an ammo dump
                No there aren't. There's video of some cargo trucks inside, "they are filled with ammo" is pure speculation with no basis in reality whatsoever.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >the russian military updating its mass grave protocols 3 weeks before invading is a lie
                >satellite footage of mass graves under Russian control are lies
                >the dozens of civilian corpses lying in the streets of Russian occupied towns for WEEKS before Ukrainian forces took them back are lies
                https://twitter.com/sumlenny/status/1510169194465271812
                Geneva Convention only works if both sides honor it; Russians lost that privilege the instant they launched an unjustifiable invasion and attacked civilians on day one.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >people die in war
                >Russia prepared for it
                Shocking. What does this have to do with the topic?
                >Geneva Convention only works if both sides honor it
                Lol, lmao. I'd pay to see you try this defense at a tribunal.

                And using the NPP as cover for an artillery firebase, ammo dump etc. is a warcrime and if the other side then blows it up it's your responsibility and you're the one on the hook for it. And yes, The russomorons are using the plant as an artilelry firebase and ammo dump, no matte rhow hard vatmoron shills like you are trying to deny it.

                >The russomorons are using the plant as an artilelry firebase and ammo dump, no matte rhow hard vatmoron shills like you are trying to deny it
                morons are using your asshole as a cum dump, no matter how hard you try to deny it.
                Ukrainians have been claiming that NPP is used as a firebase or an ammo dump for weeks now yet they failed to produce a single shred of evidence, despite the fact it's arguably the single most closely monitored patch of land in their country, watched by everything from insider recordings to drones and satellites. In a case like this, the absence of evidence becomes evidence of absence.

                https://i.imgur.com/G4VYjal.jpg

                Vatnig what would military cargo trucks be carrying? Because if its the Russians its one of 4 possibilities: underage sex slaves, looted goods, faulty equipment, or ammo.
                Rape/looting isn't protected by the conventions (and they wouldn't in the first place because this isn't a legal war) and the rest are all equipment used to illegally a piece of infrastructure solely to endanger nearby civilians.

                >Vatnig what would military cargo trucks be carrying?
                Food, retard, food.
                I'm ready to believe that you sustain yourself by guzzling copious amounts of cum, but normal people require normal food.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                die in war
                prepared for it
                Yeah interesting how so many civilians die with their hands bound in Russian occupied areas.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                What's actually interesting is how there wasn't a published investigation which can precisely list the number of victims, the circumstances and causes of their deaths.
                It's been five months since Ukrainians retook Bucha, more than enough time for this kind of thing, yet no new details have surfaced after the initial claims.
                Surely the story wasn't swept under the rug because the autopsy results were showing a picture that looks really bad for Ukrainians?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I wonder why there isn't a precise count of civilians deaths in the middle of an active invasion where one side is notorious for targeting clearly identified civilians.
                Really makes one think

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >five months is enough time to carry out comprehensive investigations into thousands of deaths, recover bodies from mass graves and underneath collapsed buildings, and gain permission from all of their families to publish their names and the circumstances of their death, in a country under constant missile attack, when you are busy fighting a war
                Maybe not. Actually, when has this ever happened before? Give a similar example from a country under attack and when the first report containing all that detail was released

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Actually thinking on it now you're even more retarded than before.
                The Holocaust is a historically documented event with irrefutable proof of millions of civilian deaths and the investigation for that has taken decades, we may never know the full tally of how many were murdered because of the scale and efforts taken to conceal it. Mass graves of hundreds are still being discovered in cities like Brest, Belarus to this day.
                It will take years to figure out just how many lives have been destroyed by the Siberian rape apes.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >entire village populations being executed under military occupation is normal goy, don't look into it
                What doesn't it have to do with the topic when you're trying to insist the conventions apply here?
                >tribunal
                Honestly just execute the Russians after this is over. They're going to just repeat their shenanigans, interfere in their elections, subvert their leadership, and we'll have another Orange Revolution where some russoid stages another terrorist regime to execute civilians in Donbass yet again.
                >food
                You mean the food they looted from stores/houses because their rations expired years ago? I know your kind aren't used to logistics (how did you think an invasion without a supply chain beyond 3 days would work) but real life isn't call of doody where ammo is refilled between cutscenes. Ammo's heavy. Very heavy. Troops aren't lugging even a week's supply in a ruck and calling it that.
                And why would it ONLY be food retard? Scratch the 4 options: its probably all of them at once.
                I'm ready to believe your pay per post has increased to 200 rubles ($3.29)

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Ok, it's just incoherent seething at this point.

                I wonder why there isn't a precise count of civilians deaths in the middle of an active invasion where one side is notorious for targeting clearly identified civilians.
                Really makes one think

                Except there was no fighting on the Kiev front for five months, and nothing could have interfered with the investigation.
                And the investigation did start, and we even got some new information from it, except the new information was
                >a significant share of victims, maybe even the majority, were killed by artillery (Ukraine immediately fell back to their default claim of "it was Russian artillery shelling their own positions", but only retards believe it)
                >the ones who had clear signs of execution turned out to be illegal combatants caught in the act and not civilians
                and then suddenly complete media silence befell the Bucha massacre. Funny isn't it.

                >five months is enough time to carry out comprehensive investigations into thousands of deaths, recover bodies from mass graves and underneath collapsed buildings, and gain permission from all of their families to publish their names and the circumstances of their death, in a country under constant missile attack, when you are busy fighting a war
                Maybe not. Actually, when has this ever happened before? Give a similar example from a country under attack and when the first report containing all that detail was released

                >thousands of deaths
                Not even the most bold Ukrainian claims list thousands of deaths.
                >Give a similar example from a country under attack
                Beslan, the full list of the victims with causes of death was ready within a week.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                No rebuttal to any of that? But you were so comfortable waxing on about convention this and that: are your english skills limited?
                >no fighting for five months
                They attacked Kyiv in late July so that was a lie.
                You mean the flechette rounds by Russian artillery, which is a clear violation of the convention you're clinging to so autistically. And no, most victims were executed by gunshots.
                Calling the 4yo child you raped and execute an "illegal combatant" doesn't make it justifiable Ivan; the Nazis called their victims in Operation Reinhard "partisans" as they executed them. These were also unarmed men, women, and children.
                Maybe they stopped talking about it on Russian sources but the developed world hasn't forgotten.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >No rebuttal to any of that?
                >kill all russians russiagate terrorism rotten rations russians are shelling themselves calloduty ur a shill

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >buzzword spam
                Its easier to type out the approved terms on your cheatsheet than address why targeting children is bad.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                That's because they have no justifications

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Oh they do, its just admitting their true nature of "rape feel good" would out them; they did it in Berlin, they did it to the Chechens, and they're doing it again.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Vatnig what would military cargo trucks be carrying? Because if its the Russians its one of 4 possibilities: underage sex slaves, looted goods, faulty equipment, or ammo.
                Rape/looting isn't protected by the conventions (and they wouldn't in the first place because this isn't a legal war) and the rest are all equipment used to illegally a piece of infrastructure solely to endanger nearby civilians.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >If your claim is that it wasn't established solely for defense, you need to prove it. So far no offensive actions on part of these military units have ever been recorded.
                Actually, I don't. Innocent until proven guilty is a legal principle applied to civilians, it's not a principle that applies to hostile invading forces when the claim is actually falsifiable. It's on Russia to prove that they are not storing equipment or supplies for the Russian army there in any of those military Z trucks or supply crates caught on video, and to prove that those forces are not involved in any of the attacks against nearby Ukrainian forces, by allowing regular inspections. If it's difficult, tough shit, leave the country and return to Russia. Even in a reasonably justifiable war you absolutely should not occupy a nuclear power plant if you don't have decisive control of the entire surrounding area.
                And before you bother, no, saying you will allow an inspection is not the same as actually allowing it, and an inspection of the safety of the plant is not the same as an inspection of whether they are storing weapons there.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Actually, I don't.
                Yeah ok, have fun, I'm not wasting time arguing with this shit.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Fair enough. I think there's some humane outdoor holding facilities with optional work experience opportunities in North Korea that people are alleging have "poor conditions". Maybe you can go defend those instead.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >So far no offensive actions on part of these military units have ever been recorded

                Since when is invading a country and killing its citizens not an offensive action?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Vatmoron can't read
                Many such cases, sad!

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Are you seriously trying to moralfag about a war in which the side you're shilling for has taken notes from Operation Reinhard? These chimps have been gangraping and massacring entire populations just because they're incompetent at basic warfare and can only take their aggression out on unarmed civilians. For all we know those "security forces" you're insisting must exist unmolested have been systemically raping every toddler in the area just for fun; as they've done before in this very fucking conflict and others before.
                >nuuu don't heccing fight back, just let us rape your women and children as we destroy your country
                God I hate vatnigs so much its unreal.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Sure, just like that Kuwait woman falsely testified before the Senate that Iraqi troops had removed babies from incubators and left them to die.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Sorry it was who destroyed my faith in all sources of information outside of Russia, not

                >a lie was told 30 years ago by the Kuwaiti ambassador to the US
                >therefore present day UN human rights investigations cannot be trusted
                Yes indeed good argument, you have been very helpful today, please send me the post-demoralization questionnaire to fill out

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                This you?
                We literally have footage of you apes attacking toddlers; there's well known photos of executed child victims in basements held by Russoid troops.
                >muh Iraq
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Black folks
                Your responses to being called out have never changed, you're incapable of learning.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >I invented a new word for when people point out that I'm being a hypocrite
                >so now people aren't allowed to point out that I'm being a hypocrite

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >a lie was told 30 years ago by the Kuwaiti ambassador to the US
                >therefore present day UN human rights investigations cannot be trusted
                Yes indeed good argument, you have been very helpful today, please send me the post-demoralization questionnaire to fill out

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Rules of war
                Good thing this isn't war, but a special operation, and those aren't soldier, but a special looting, raping morons.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                And using the NPP as cover for an artillery firebase, ammo dump etc. is a warcrime and if the other side then blows it up it's your responsibility and you're the one on the hook for it. And yes, The russomorons are using the plant as an artilelry firebase and ammo dump, no matte rhow hard vatmoron shills like you are trying to deny it.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          moron, Ukraine didn't oppose the IAEA looking at the plant, they opposed the IAEA agents coming from Russian territory to check it out.

          There was zero opposition to IAEA officials coming from EU territory to check it out

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Bullshit.
            Here's the original interview with the Ukrainian Minister of Energy.
            https://www.rbc.ua/rus/news/german-galushchenko-rech-povyshenii-tarifov-1649180207.html
            >This means that the IAEA goes to the Russians and says - we want to make an inspection at the station. The Russians take them there, they check and say that radiation and nuclear safety is ensured. But this looks absurd and contradicts all possible norms of international law in the field of nuclear energy.
            >Now we can only discuss a visit to the Chernobyl plant, since it has returned to Ukrainian control. And that's all for now. If there are intentions to visit the Zaporozhye station before Ukraine returns control over it, then this is not flirting - this is playing on a foreign field - on the Russian field. For me, this looks like an attempt to legitimize the presence of Russian troops at the ZNPP.
            He says that a visit to Zaporozhye plant is out of the question. Period.

            By the way, he also disproves the claims about Russians preventing Ukrainian engineers from working:
            >– Are the Russians operating the station?
            >– No, it is operated by our people - the personnel of Energoatom.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              No one care, death to Russia and death to the tyranny of Putin

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Westoid calling someone else a tyrant

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Death to Putin and death to Russia, go on, threaten us with your nooooks.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Lmao imagine thinking anyone cares what you say.

                Death to Russia and death to Putin.

                Eбaть жмыхнyлo бpaтaн.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Death to Putin and death to Russia and its moon runes

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                easiest way for you shills to go off-script is to link you the truth. fucking ukrainian scumbags.

        • 1 month ago
          /out/ie

          >Ukrainians shot first and Russians returned fire
          Stick to your side of the border and nobody shoots at all, Ivan.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            too bad ukraine didn't stick to it's side of the border with donbass people's republic.

            • 1 month ago
              /out/ie

              >dumbass people's republic
              No such thing. It's all Ukraine as per the Accords signed by Russia in 1991.
              Ivan, stick to your side and the shooting stops today.

    • 1 month ago
      /out/ie

      >Reminder that Russia is fully within their right to station military equipment in close proximity to the nuclear reactor
      Not if the nuclear reactor is on the clay of another sovereign nation, dummy.

  20. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Lmao either they left or are mass replying

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It's all so tiring. I know it's the entire point of their tactics to purposefully be retarded, bait people into correcting them, claim more retarded things, get more corrected, etc etc, but I'm done with it for this night as it's 2AM my time.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Eh I’m a night owl so it’s fun this time of night when there’s nothing to do, just shitpost back at them

  21. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why is Ukraine shelling it? It makes zero sense for Russia to shell their own base.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Literally nobody has more incentive to kill Russians than other Russians
      It might not even be an official order, it could just be the artillery crews are convinced that irradiating their comrades will leave them with more expired rations.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Why is Ukraine shelling it?
      it isn't

  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >meltdown
    nothing burger if there is a containment building

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I think I can see why people would be nervous about a Ukrainian nuclear power plant built the same era as Chernobyl being shelled when it hasn't been shut down for 40 years.

  23. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The only metdown we will see is the one you PrepHoleope chuds will have when Russia wins and it will be glorious.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      God you know they have nothing the second trannies get mentioned

  24. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    They should and claimed they would but they would not

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Well, it hasn’t so..

  25. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    https://ippnweupdate.files.wordpress.com/2022/08/nuclear-famine-2022.pdf

  26. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    You know none of this would have happened if russians had just stayed on their side of border.
    Just throwing this out there. I think russians might be a bit slow minded.

  27. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    https://twitter.com/TpyxaNews/status/1563128379183751168
    Eat shit ivan

  28. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Would NATO intervene
    No they are gays who will only make fake flashwave memes

  29. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    nato should intervene, but while ukrainians continue shelling the plant, they are supposed to be nato allies, so it's awkward.

  30. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    R*ssian brought 10 chemical laboratories to Melitopol, this is necessary in case of rescuing their offices in case of radiation emissions at the ZNPP

    • 1 month ago
      /out/ie

      If i know my Russians, it's a bunch of empty containers with maybe a few dried up wet wipes.

  31. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Will nato help freezing euros this winter?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Two more winters amirite?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      How will you cope when Europe is fine and Russia has alienated it's primary customer?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/kG2CBts.jpg

      Two more winters amirite?

      I have to say it is really hillarious listening to russian mutts claiming that we are going to freeze to death while their fifth column - Greens, socialist and other eco wankers, are shrieking that we will all burn to death due to global warming.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Every single soiboi in western europe has to take cold showers
      >T levels go through the roof
      I don't see how that's a loss, anon.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The majority of French reactors under extended maintenance are expected to come back online before december.
      French gas reserves are also 90% full and increasing, many Euro countries and Germany trail behind but this winter should be covered.
      https://agsi.gie.eu/

  32. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Probably something like "let nuclear engineers come to the plant or we force you to let them". Then destroying every military asset in zap overnight if they refuse.

  33. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    https://www.rt.com/russia/561609-nuclear-plant-shelled-again/

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >rt.com

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous
        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          https://i.imgur.com/DzLDOya.png

          i too welcome RT as reliable source

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      i too welcome RT as reliable source

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >using RT unironically
      Fuck off vatmoron

  34. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Not even the most bold Ukrainian claims list thousands of deaths.
    Across the region, yes, there are thousands of cases that need investigating:
    https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2022/6/21/inside-ukraine-war-crimes-investigations
    Not all of them are deaths but the investigators look at everything. While the country is being invaded.
    >Beslan, the full list of the victims with causes of death was ready within a week.
    Show evidence that Beslan was accompanied by dozens of other attacks spread out over hundreds of square miles of territory that was filled with land mines by the invading force, and that Russia was being invaded on multiple fronts by a more powerful nation and subjected to thousands of missile strikes while they carried out the Beslan investigation. Or just say you're aware that it isn't remotely comparable. Either one.

  35. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Something terrible is clearly happening to the Russian war effort over this coming weekend for there to be this amount of sperging out.

Your email address will not be published.