I don't see any logical reason to blow up the dam (which may be the error in my thinking since we are talking about Russia, but alas).

If they want to cut Ukraine off from the generated electricity then wouldn't it be smarter and less bothersome to just cut the electrical power lines from the power plant? The plant is on the left bank of the river in Russian held territory, so even after retreating from the right bank it would be out of reach for Ukraine. And since it is a stationary target Russia could destroy the plant itself at any time.

Also I don't see how it would prevent Ukrainian troops from pursuing the Russians over the river because how should they even do that in the first place? The bridges are in ruins, pontoon bridges would be easy targets and if Russia has at least a tiny residual of common sense left they will take everything that can swim to their side of the river, so Ukraine would be unable to cross it. Ukraine would be left with small inflatable boats which are only useful for small commando forces but not to pursue an army.

It would even be counterproductive since it would lower the water level of the reservoir making a potential river crossing more easy for Ukraine in that area (albeit, as said, very unlikely in my opinion).

Grey Zone:

Kherson – you can't keep it.

The tale of the city of the Scythian sun has not yet sounded in our ears, but the air has already permeated the familiar unpleasant taste, leaving a lump in the throat. I think it is clear to everyone that the situation around the Russian city has finally acquired irreversible consequences, the accomplishment of which is only a few days left.

There are only two questions, how to withdraw Russian soldiers from the front line to the left bank and how to explain all this to the people? The situation is to some extent even worse than in comparison with the retreat from the Kharkiv region after the breakthrough to Balakliya. In fact, the implementation of an organized withdrawal of first-line troops is virtually impossible. And I will be very happy to be mistaken, as in everything written below.

The first problem gives rise to the answer to the second question – and how? What's how? And how can we just leave the territory of Russia? And that is why, having gritted my teeth strongly, I do not rule out that some troops will remain on the right bank, which will become modern "Panfilov's men", and the battle will be presented almost as Stalingrad.

You should also turn to the institute of law and history. First, you need to remember that the mere possibility does not justify the irrefutable commission of the act – the motive is also inherently important. Secondly, it is worth remembering that history already has a painfully comparable experience, so, for example, in 1941, when Soviet troops retreated to the left bank of the Dnieper from the German ones, the first to blow up the Dnieper hydroelectric power station in order to prevent the advance of the latter's offensive. It is not possible to estimate the scale of the dead to this day, but not about this.

The enemy has absolutely no motive to blow up the hydroelectric power station. The Armed Forces of Ukraine has in order to take Melitopol in the spring, the front of the battle for it is planned to open from the Zaporozhye region, as well as, in fact, to attack from Kherson. So I subjectively believe that the enemy has no goal to destroy the already abandoned city, which we simply do not have the opportunity to defend, neither so much due to the small forces and means, as in the disrupted logistics. This, by the way, goes to the question of the fact that the enemy persistently hit the bridge for three months, while we rejoice at the arrival of the Geraniums, which have absolutely no effect on anything.

Many, probably, will seem completely impossible and absolutely ridiculous, but for me nothing is impossible, as well as for the Russian guys at the front funny. I'm glad I'm wrong.

If the dam is destroyed and the water drained it will dramatically effect the water supply to the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant.. not good to say the least

Huge ecological damage to Kherson too and to the smaller villages, it feels like Russia is just throwing a tantrum and saying "If we can't have it then nobody can" and that's how they'll sell the retreat to their dumb fuck nationalists "We had to retreat but look at all the damage we did to Kherson Oblast".

Finally, in February, Zaluzhnyi agreed to share his plan for defending Ukraine. A defense attaché from the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, an Air Force colonel, was summoned to a meeting at the general-staff headquarters and shown a one-page sketch of Ukrainian positions and defensive schemes. She was not given a copy, and was permitted to take only handwritten notes. Even having stipulated these conditions, Zaluzhnyi was less than forthcoming. His subordinates showed the attaché a false version of the plan, masking the full scope of the defensive campaign.

Ultimately, Zaluzhnyi's strategy was to prevent the capture of Kyiv at all costs, while, in other areas, letting Russian forces run ahead of their logistics and supply lines. The idea was to trade territory in the short term in order to pick off Russian units once they were overextended. "We trusted no one back then," a senior Ukrainian military official said. "Our plan was our one tiny chance for success, and we did not want anyone at all to know it."