causing a nuclear disaster would help with this how?
The plant is located near the front lines, along a probable route to the Sea of Azov. Blowing it up creates an obstacle, making advances and supplies more difficult.
When you hold part of your opponents country that means you’re winning.
That’s a stretch. Like Germany was winning WW2 until it was kicked out of France.
True, it’s probably the best Russia can achieve but far from their goals. And they’ve been losing ground steadily now.
Right, but they are not, they are
barely holdinglosing ground.Removed by mod
And causing a nuclear disaster would help with this how? PS: When you hold part of your opponents country that means you’re winning.
The plant is located near the front lines, along a probable route to the Sea of Azov. Blowing it up creates an obstacle, making advances and supplies more difficult.
That’s a stretch. Like Germany was winning WW2 until it was kicked out of France.
True, it’s probably the best Russia can achieve but far from their goals. And they’ve been losing ground steadily now.
They have a child-like mentality. If they can’t have it, then blow it up. Now no one gets it.
Please explain your argument, I do not think it makes any sense but instead dangerously misjudges the Russian government/military.
Assuming they have a child-like mentality: