3 ms·
Classic scare tactic. Station your troops on someone else’s border and suicide them. That sends the message that friendly fire can become invasion fire. Makes
by avgcorrection 4y ago
Classic scare tactic. Station your troops on someone else’s border and suicide them. That sends the message that friendly fire can become invasion fire.
Makes perfect sense.
- gambiting 4y agoI mean, those pipes were clearly not going to be used anytime soon. It's not like they blew up anything that was actively making them any money, nor did they sacrefice their own troops to do this like you compare to. It's a good target because it sends a message but it's pretty useless otherwise.
- avgcorrection 4y agoCompare it to blowing up a ghost town near Finland, then. No one would be scared of a military managing to destroy something on their own soil. In fact, a better theory for you would be to claim that Russia did it in order to make it look like sabotage from the EU/America. Just a propaganda exercise since the pipeline is “useless” to them right now in any case. But you are clearly so desperate that you just go for the first cartoonish theory that you can come up with.
- gambiting 4y ago>> But you are clearly so desperate that you just go for the first cartoonish theory that you can come up with. That is very uncalled for. I really feel like this is a direct threat to Poland, but obviously I'm talking about it from a perspective of a Pole. Maybe if you live elsewhere you just don't feel that way - but I don't see any reason to describe this theory as "cartoonish". >>No one would be scared of a military managing to destroy something on their own soil. Yeah, except that pipeline wasn't destroyed on Russia's own soil, was it?