“We’re getting dangerously close to a nuclear accident,” IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi said following multiple attacks against the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine.

The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency said attacks against Europe’s largest nuclear power plant have put the world “dangerously close to a nuclear accident”.

Without attributing blame, IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi said his agency has been able to confirm three attacks against the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant since 7 April.

“These reckless attacks must cease immediately,” he told the Security Council on Monday. “Though, fortunately, they have not led to a radiological incident this time, they significantly increase the risk … where nuclear safety is already compromised.”

    • ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      NATO should have been in this war from the start. This is the same shit we saw at the beginning of WW2.

    • Neuromancer
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      7 months ago

      And I should at that point. I’m strongly opposed to US troops in Ukraine to fight the war.

      That said, attacking the power plant is a red line for me. That is an attack on the world.

      • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        I figure NATO will declare a humanitarian mission and send troops in. And since it’s a war zone…

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          NATO will declare a humanitarian mission and send troops in

          Do they even bother with that shit anymore?

          We’ve got half a dozen humanitarian disasters the world over, from Haiti to Sudan to Myanmar, and NATO seems completely asleep at the switch.

          • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Cause for action. NATO countries surround Ukraine and will get radiation from a melt down. Thier presence gives Russia a political problem. Controlling a nuclear disaster and creating a safe zone is justifcation.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              7 months ago

              NATO countries surround Ukraine and will get radiation from a melt down.

              They’re already eating shit from the refugee crisis, the impact on waterways caused by that dam explosion, and the flood of food exports that have cratered European agricultural markets.

              Controlling a nuclear disaster and creating a safe zone is justifcation.

              How will NATO soldiers create more of a safe zone than their Ukrainian peers?

              Ukrainians had NATO weapons, under the guidance of NATO military specialists, with NATO surveillance, and NATO special forces augmenting their troop base. What secret sauce does a 19-year-old French grunt enjoy that a 26-year-old Ukrainian grunt lacks?

              • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                What secret sauce? Numbers. NATO has a half million troops. Thelargest air and Navy. Russia don’t want none of that.

                • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  NATO has a half million troops.

                  Ukrainian Defense Ministry statistics say the country’s military had nearly 800,000 troops in October. That doesn’t include National Guard or other units. In total, 1 million Ukrainians are in uniform, including about 300,000 who are serving on front lines.

                  This, after over two years of continuous conflict.

                  A new influx of NATO soliders would still be operating under the same failed military strategy. They’d be faced with the same stacked up Russian defense - layer after layer of land mines and bunkers and artillery support - that will eviscerate those 500,000 NATO troops unless they can figure out how to dance between shards of shrapnel.

                  Russia don’t want none of that.

                  If NATO states committed their full allotment of troops to the Ukrainian front, that would mean pulling soldiers out of the African and Middle Eastern and East Asia conflict zones. That would mean more Revolutionary Governments joining Niger and Mali and Burkina Faso, more uncontested rocket strikes in the Gulf of Adan, and more opportunities for Chinese naval vessels to encircle Taiwan.

                  All so Zelensky can… what? Retake Bakhmut? The city that didn’t matter?

      • lltnskyc@monero.town
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        bring NATO into the war

        [it?] should at that point

        That said, attacking the power plant is a red line for me. That is an attack on the world.

        Are you suggesting that NATO joins Russia in fighting Ukraine due to Ukraine doing “an attack on the world”? I don’t see this happening…
        Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant was seized and is controlled by Russia for more than 2 years now. So the attacks are coming from Ukrainian side. You do understand that, do you?

          • lltnskyc@monero.town
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            There is a possibility that this a false flag, sure!
            But to claim that something is a false flag you need to back it up with something better than “they did that in the past so this surely must be it”, don’t you think?
            When countries A and B are at war, and there’s an attack happening on the territory of country B, is your first thought “this must be a false flag” or “this must be an attack by country A”?

        • PlutoniumAcid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          I think you read that the wrong way 'round. It makes sense to me, in the context of being against the stupid Russians.

            • PlutoniumAcid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              Because Russia deliberately attack the power plant, that is an attack on the world. It seems to me that you read it as if Ukraine did this attack?

              • lltnskyc@monero.town
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                7 months ago

                I did not read that “Ukraine did this attack”, as a matter of fact article does not say who attacked it, because they “lack evidence”.
                It’s just the only way I see how one can believe that the attack was done by Russia, is a conspiracy theory that Russia attacks its own territory.
                On the other one, Ukraine attacking it is perfectly logical because they are attacking a territory of their enemy that they do not control.

                • The Octonaut@mander.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Do you understand that Ukraine does not see the south of its own country as “enemy territory”?

                • PlutoniumAcid@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  It’s simple. Ukraine is fighting to get their home land back. They are smart and will not destroy the power plant. This is undeniable fact.

                  On the other hand, Russia is driven by a power hungry maniac, and they have shelled the plant before. They also had their troops dig trenches in the irradiated soil - poor sods will all die from cancer, if not from acute lead poisoning. This is also undeniable fact.

                  If we agree on this, let’s have a discussion. If not, I will consider you an unusually eloquent but still Russian troll and block you for wasting my time.

            • Neuromancer
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              7 months ago

              The fact you said it was Ukraine when the article says otherwise.

              • lltnskyc@monero.town
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                7 months ago

                The article does not say otherwise.
                The article says

                The remote-controlled nature of the drones that have attacked the plant means that it is not possible to determine who launched them

                So you would rather believe a conspiracy theory (or what else would you call that?) that Russia is repeatedly (!) attacking itself, it’s own territory that it controls for more than 2 years, than that Ukraine is attacking the territory of its enemy?

                • Neuromancer
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  It isn’t Russian territory. It’s occupied Ukraine.

      • AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        7 months ago

        The new IKEA “Rêaktør” ships flat in one single box. Customers can assemble it with the provided hex wrench and models with enriched Uranian start at only $99.99!

        • rmuk@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          This item comes in several packages. Please remember to scan your bags.

          Are your dreams bigger than your car? We can now deliver and assemble your furniture, toys and civil infrastructure same day, starting at €3,950,000,000.00.⁹⁵

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      At some point, I see these articles and think “Surely this means we need a ceasefire”. Then I get into the comments and read “This is why we need to give Ukraine hydrogen bombs” and all I can do is shake my head.