perhaps more info came out
How often are there no Russian ships in the Baltic?
you’ve heard/read plenty of dumber things, you just chose to believe them rather than consider that they are dumb.
russians were not profiting from the pipeline at the time of explosion, and really their profits were dwindling since the invasion in 2022. NS1 was in an unscheduled shutdown initiated by the russian side, and NS2 was not certified for operation. the explosion of NS1 was supposedly meant to cause panic and an emergency certification for NS2, which would have brought new natgas supply contracts at higher prices.
it did turn out to be a dumb plan, because it simply pushed europe to reject russia’s gas earlier than everyone thought was even possible
There’s 43 warships in the Baltic Sea fleet. Plus support ships.
this thread is unfortunately not the trove of hard evidence we wish it was.
a diving operation like that is not possible by private divers on a recreational yacht. it requires very specialized equipment and training.
I don’t know about accepted. I gave it a little more credence than Hersh’s story bc at least there was some real evidence. My estimate was and is the Russians most likely did it. Motive can be disputed but they definitely had one imo. They had the means. Now opportunity is verified.
Did the US have a motive? Are Russian interests diametrically opposed to US interests? What’s the Russian motive again?
Time for the “I don’t have a coherent argument so let’s ask 40 questions” play
3 Likes
To answer my own questions, yes, of course the US had motive. Biden and Nuland say they’re going to stop the pipeline one way or another. Nuland and Blinken talk about how pleased they are the the pipeline is blowed up. That demonstrates that it benefits the US government; high ranking government officials are glad it happened. The US motive is obvious: blowing up the pipeline keeps the Germans from caving to high gas prices this winter or next winter. If the pipeline is operational there would be pressure from the German/European people to open the gas up, which Russia could use as leverage to try to wedge Europe away from America. A secondary benefit is to US and Norwegian gas companies: as Blinken said, this presents a tremendous opportunity for the US.
What’s the Russian benefit? I can certainly see the harm, as outlined above. Russian interests being diametrically opposed to US interests, it removes the leverage Russia had over Europe. It removes the option of having the cheap gas flow to Europe in exchange for European concessions in the Ukraine war. And I’m struggling to even articulate a possible motive for Russia. False flag operation, trying to frame the US?
Those things are constantly changing. At the time, it would have been, to borrow Hersh’s favorite argument, stupid for the US to do it. Maybe the US did a stupid thing. It can’t be dismissed so I give it maybe 10%.
The pipelines weren’t even operating. Not much profit or even the prospect of profit there. Putin wanted to threaten Europe with freezing to death and intimidate them so as to discourage aid to Ukraine. If you’re afraid of losing and ending up like Gaddafi, that’s a damn good motive.
Exactly? So why the hell would he blow up the means to ease that threat when he control the valve? Closing a valve is reversible, blowing up the pipeline isn’t. With the pipeline reversibly shut down, Putin has leverage over Europe. With it irreversibly blown up he loses that leverage.
It is reversible though. Nord Stream wasn’t needed to supply gas in the first place. The main benefit, beyond fraud, was bypassing Ukraine. Win in Ukraine and transit suddenly isn’t a problem. Consider sabotage a way of going all-in if you want. Like Cortez burning his ships or whatever.
citation?
this is incorrect. closing the valve can be irreversible, if the consumer signs a contract to buy somewhere else. blowing up the pipeline is not a total loss of the pipeline, it can in fact be repaired, but only with russian involvement.
Which of these things do you think is easier to reverse:
- Blowing up a pipeline
- Closing a valve
1 Like
hard to say, has the valve been exercised regularly? Do you have a pipe wrench? Some screwloose? Did you use thousands of pounds of schooner-borne bulk explosives to blow up the pipeline?
it’s not black and white like that, one is strictly easier than the other. e.g. it is much harder to do long-term business with russia after they turn off the valve, half the world was already discussing the probability that russia will use its pipelines as leverage. it is still possible to do business with russia if the pipe is supposedly damaged by a nebulous third party.
here’s another hypothetical example. if blowing up the pipeline eventually leads to the fall of the putin regime, it is easier to restore trade with russia then, rather than after giving in to russia’s gas demands which would solidify putin’s rule for another decade.
The question is, which is more profitable?
Anyway, the Kremlin drone thing is the bigger story today. Idk what’s going on, it seems weird how the drone explodes before impact, but something similar happens in this video of an attack on an oil facility. Maybe an air defense rocket hit an incoming drone here but I don’t see it.
https://twitter.com/COUPSURE/status/1653762654656249862?s=20
Russia says it was US through their Ukrainian puppet. Ukraine and US say no.
ISW says false flag. But ISW gets some criticism.
https://twitter.com/Nrg8000/status/1653969926661742593?t=_FNdV0Bq1VrINmA_o17LDg&s=19
But at least they’re not as bad as Hersh.
https://twitter.com/Nrg8000/status/1653971502340112385?t=5raxoE55bvQ7ChiPcoLjIw&s=19