6 ms·

I think there is a non-zero chance the culprit has already been identified privately, but won't be identified publicly (at least for many years) for political r

I think there is a non-zero chance the culprit has already been identified privately, but won't be identified publicly (at least for many years) for political reasons. There is little to no utility in publicly naming and shaming the culprit if the culprit is your ally or partner; doing so won't bring the pipe back, and would weaken public support for the alliance. Besides a principled commitment to truth for the sake of truth, there would be no rational reason to publicly blame your ally even if you're certain your ally did it.

zdragnar 4y ago
Even blaming an enemy will be derided by many as propaganda, and any evidence dismissed as fake.
permo-w 4y ago
yeah it’s probably the US that benefits most from it and the CIA certainly isn’t above this kind of thing, but a Western govt coming out and accusing the US of this would be a very poor choice
- Mutjake 4y ago
  The gas was already off, so what would’ve the US exactly achieved with it, accounting for the non-trivial risk of getting caught?
  - MichaelCollins 4y ago
    Keeping the gas off.
  - permo-w 4y ago
    as far as I know, the gas was not off; massive quantities of gas were released. I recall reading about bubbles 1km in diameter
    - skissane 4y ago
      From what I understand, the pipe was full of mostly stationary gas - it wasn’t flowing at an economically significant rate. That is effectively “off”
    - miguelazo 4y ago
      Pressurized with methane, now released to the atmosphere. It was actually one of the greatest ecological crimes of the century.
      - LargoLasskhyfv 4y ago
        It depends. See https://gcaptain.com/greenpeace-finds-north-sea-gas-leak-caused-by-offshore-blow-out/ https://gcaptain.com/greenpeace-finds-north-sea-gas-leak-cau...
- amanaplanacanal 4y ago
  I'm curious, why do you think the US benefits the most from this? I would think Ukraine.
  - mhermher 4y ago
    Prevent negotiations between Russia and Germany particularly. Then sell exorbitantly priced US LNG to a captive Europe. All of which is basically happening now.
    - Isinlor 4y ago
      If we are speculating without any basis then why not Turkey or Qatar? Please, stop speculating without any basis. You can make a case for basically anyone who trades gas or had any issues with Russia.
  - permo-w 4y ago
    escalation of the crises in Europe, which historically - see: WW2 - has massively benefited the US. more incentive to import American gas. damage Russia; the US objected to Nord Stream in the first place. also can be used as justification to increase support for what is essentially a proxy war in Ukraine the EU/US economic stratosphere is not necessarily a zero-sum game, but in general if Europe’s economy separately takes a hit, the US gets stronger
  - eternalban 4y ago
    Almost all nearby players had motives. Russia benefits if they can spin it as US action, as the damage to US alliance and trust relationships are huge and definitely strategic goals and gains for them. For a while in the beginning, when it wasn't clear that a functioning (but unused) pipeline remained, Russia was off the suspect list. But it turned out the sabotage missed a pipe and that fact keeps Russia high on the suspect list. As for US, Germany had already given in to the US pressure and nixed the pipeline and made the gas deals. Why would US go and blow it up? It is possible, but makes little sense. Whoever did this did so knowing that US will ultimately be blamed. Biden kinda set US up for that with veiled threats regarding NS before the Russian invasion. It's either Russia or UK/Ukraine, is my guess.
- nyolfen 4y ago
  ukraine itself (or perhaps a close intelligence ally like lithuania), with its constant pressuring of the west to escalate the conflict (including calls for direct strikes on russia), seems like the most likely candidate. there were backchannel efforts between germany and russia to open negotiations prior to the sabotage -- removing NS gas from the equation entirely for germany takes some of the wind out of those sails. besides this we have seen a great deal of ukrainian sabotage of other russian assets and infrastructure in recent months.
  - MichaelCollins 4y ago
    Ukraine had the strongest motive, but the least technical ability (to do this specifically) of all the suspects, including Russia.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - Gibbon1 4y ago
      I think Ukraine isn't as backwards as people assume. And also has legal justification since they are at war with Russia. A crass motive is blowing up a pipeline that wasn't being used forces Russia to devote military resources to protect their oil and gas infrastructure elsewhere.
      - ASalazarMX 4y ago
        Western support of Ukraine is supposedly conditioned to defense of their own territory, not attacking Russian territory. This would be outside of that condition, so if they did it, it's best to keep it under. It's more telling if they don't say, that would mean a Russian or Russian-allied operation is unlikely, because there is no political cost for shaming them even more.
        nyolfen 4y ago
        NS was not on russian territory, it was sabotaged in international waters just a few km outside of danish territory
- miguelazo 4y ago
  It would be an excellent choice. The CIA is out of control. And this stuff will only get worse the longer there are no consequences for rogue actors.
  - permo-w 4y ago
    for purely economic self-interest, it would be a terrible choice. perhaps if the EU got together and came out with a statement, it would be viable. but pissing off the Americans is on no lone Western state's bucket list
- Isinlor 4y ago
  If we are speculating without any basis then why not Turkey, Qatar, China or Azerbaijan? Maybe Iran? They are all profiting from either selling their own gas or reselling Russian gas. After deep reflection my bet is on Venezuela. They are in the worst shape so they will benefit the most. /sarcasm Please, stop speculating without any basis. You can make a case for basically anyone who trades gas or had any issues with Russia.
  - permo-w 4y ago
    cut the snarky tone. if you disagree, you disagree. say that, don’t be unpleasant
  - rsj_hn 4y ago
    How many of these nations - Had naval ships in the region at the time of the sabotage, conducting tests of remote controlled underwater exploding drones? - were previously caught with such a drone (seafox) sitting underneath the same pipeline that was blown up, and in the same location, in 2015? https://www.pipeline-journal.net/news/explosive-laden-drone-found-near-nord-stream-pipeline https://www.pipeline-journal.net/news/explosive-laden-drone-... https://www.investmentwatchblog.com/gazprom-just-released-these-photos-of-a-nato-seafox-drone-that-was-found-right-next-to-nord-stream-1-in-2015-the-drone-failed-to-detonate https://www.investmentwatchblog.com/gazprom-just-released-th... - have a history of blowing up pipelines, including previously blowing up a Russian pipeline? - had a chief executive declare that said they "have the means" to put an end to the pipeline, even though it was not in their territorial waters and they had no legal means to do it? I mean, you can argue that it's speculation, but to argue that it's speculation without basis is false. This is a highly monitored part of the Baltic Sea, right next to a Danish island, in the Swedish exclusive economic zone, and close to a Polish NATO base. It's not the middle of nowhere. It's not some place where we don't know who was there. We know who had ships there at the time of the sabotage, and who had the technical means to do it. That's when you start getting into debates about US versus UK, but not Azerbaijan versus Venezuela.
    - Isinlor 4y ago
      In the exercise took part Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Sweden, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States. https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2022/06/baltops-22-multinational-exercise-kicks-off-in-the-baltic-sea/ https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2022/06/baltops-22-mult... Seafox is German produced and operated by United States, United Kingdom, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, Belgium, Japan. Blowing up pipelines? Russia? https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-says-russian-troops-blow-up-gas-pipeline-kharkiv-2022-02-27/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-says-russian-tr... Nord Stream 2 has damaged the West enough. Time to put an end to it. by Polish and Ukrainian Foreign Ministers: https://www.politico.eu/article/nord-stream-2-pipeline-has-damaged-the-west-enough-time-to-put-an-end-to-it/ https://www.politico.eu/article/nord-stream-2-pipeline-has-d... So, your "basis" did not narrow down it too much for me.
- hackeraccount 4y ago
  I'm as a paranoid about the CIA as the next guy but the idea that they would try something like this without political cover seems unlikely to me. Further the idea the Joe Biden would even come close to signing off on this doesn't seem like any version of him. Maybe if he's genuinely off the rails and K. Harris or the Sec. Def. really is running things - maybe then I'd believe this but failing that I can't imagine him being that kind of person or anyone in the chain signing off on this without him on board. If it was the US - and I think the chance of it not coming to light if it was to be vanishingly small - I would be really interested in the details. I would expect someone handing it to Biden as a fair acompli and him just going with it.
- tim333 4y ago
  The US is probably the biggest beneficiary but might have asked friends to help out so they weren't so obvious. I'm not totally ruling out the Russian allegation that it was a UK/Ukrainian job, presumably with the UK advising and Ukraine doing. Still who knows?
jl2718 4y ago
Yes there is. Government is not supposed to be a self-serving entity. Government is there to serve the people. Democracy is meaningless without transparency.
- MichaelCollins 4y ago
  That's basically just a restatement of the "principled commitment to truth for the sake of truth" motive for naming your own ally as the culprit. I think/hope Germany/Sweden/etc are too smart for that.
  - jl2718 4y ago
    Bizarre response. It reads like you're implying that an ally of "Germany/Sweden/etc" did it.
slim 4y ago
maybe the culprit could pay for europeans heating energy bills this winter?

zdragnar 4y ago

Even blaming an enemy will be derided by many as propaganda, and any evidence dismissed as fake.

permo-w 4y ago

yeah it’s probably the US that benefits most from it and the CIA certainly isn’t above this kind of thing, but a Western govt coming out and accusing the US of this would be a very poor choice

Mutjake 4y ago
The gas was already off, so what would’ve the US exactly achieved with it, accounting for the non-trivial risk of getting caught?
- MichaelCollins 4y ago
  Keeping the gas off.
- permo-w 4y ago
  as far as I know, the gas was not off; massive quantities of gas were released. I recall reading about bubbles 1km in diameter
  - skissane 4y ago
    From what I understand, the pipe was full of mostly stationary gas - it wasn’t flowing at an economically significant rate. That is effectively “off”
  - miguelazo 4y ago
    Pressurized with methane, now released to the atmosphere. It was actually one of the greatest ecological crimes of the century.
    - LargoLasskhyfv 4y ago
      It depends. See https://gcaptain.com/greenpeace-finds-north-sea-gas-leak-caused-by-offshore-blow-out/ https://gcaptain.com/greenpeace-finds-north-sea-gas-leak-cau...
amanaplanacanal 4y ago
I'm curious, why do you think the US benefits the most from this? I would think Ukraine.
- mhermher 4y ago
  Prevent negotiations between Russia and Germany particularly. Then sell exorbitantly priced US LNG to a captive Europe. All of which is basically happening now.
  - Isinlor 4y ago
    If we are speculating without any basis then why not Turkey or Qatar? Please, stop speculating without any basis. You can make a case for basically anyone who trades gas or had any issues with Russia.
- permo-w 4y ago
  escalation of the crises in Europe, which historically - see: WW2 - has massively benefited the US. more incentive to import American gas. damage Russia; the US objected to Nord Stream in the first place. also can be used as justification to increase support for what is essentially a proxy war in Ukraine the EU/US economic stratosphere is not necessarily a zero-sum game, but in general if Europe’s economy separately takes a hit, the US gets stronger
- eternalban 4y ago
  Almost all nearby players had motives. Russia benefits if they can spin it as US action, as the damage to US alliance and trust relationships are huge and definitely strategic goals and gains for them. For a while in the beginning, when it wasn't clear that a functioning (but unused) pipeline remained, Russia was off the suspect list. But it turned out the sabotage missed a pipe and that fact keeps Russia high on the suspect list. As for US, Germany had already given in to the US pressure and nixed the pipeline and made the gas deals. Why would US go and blow it up? It is possible, but makes little sense. Whoever did this did so knowing that US will ultimately be blamed. Biden kinda set US up for that with veiled threats regarding NS before the Russian invasion. It's either Russia or UK/Ukraine, is my guess.
nyolfen 4y ago
ukraine itself (or perhaps a close intelligence ally like lithuania), with its constant pressuring of the west to escalate the conflict (including calls for direct strikes on russia), seems like the most likely candidate. there were backchannel efforts between germany and russia to open negotiations prior to the sabotage -- removing NS gas from the equation entirely for germany takes some of the wind out of those sails. besides this we have seen a great deal of ukrainian sabotage of other russian assets and infrastructure in recent months.
- MichaelCollins 4y ago
  Ukraine had the strongest motive, but the least technical ability (to do this specifically) of all the suspects, including Russia.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - Gibbon1 4y ago
    I think Ukraine isn't as backwards as people assume. And also has legal justification since they are at war with Russia. A crass motive is blowing up a pipeline that wasn't being used forces Russia to devote military resources to protect their oil and gas infrastructure elsewhere.
    - ASalazarMX 4y ago
      Western support of Ukraine is supposedly conditioned to defense of their own territory, not attacking Russian territory. This would be outside of that condition, so if they did it, it's best to keep it under. It's more telling if they don't say, that would mean a Russian or Russian-allied operation is unlikely, because there is no political cost for shaming them even more.
      - nyolfen 4y ago
        NS was not on russian territory, it was sabotaged in international waters just a few km outside of danish territory
miguelazo 4y ago
It would be an excellent choice. The CIA is out of control. And this stuff will only get worse the longer there are no consequences for rogue actors.
- permo-w 4y ago
  for purely economic self-interest, it would be a terrible choice. perhaps if the EU got together and came out with a statement, it would be viable. but pissing off the Americans is on no lone Western state's bucket list
Isinlor 4y ago
If we are speculating without any basis then why not Turkey, Qatar, China or Azerbaijan? Maybe Iran? They are all profiting from either selling their own gas or reselling Russian gas. After deep reflection my bet is on Venezuela. They are in the worst shape so they will benefit the most. /sarcasm Please, stop speculating without any basis. You can make a case for basically anyone who trades gas or had any issues with Russia.
- permo-w 4y ago
  cut the snarky tone. if you disagree, you disagree. say that, don’t be unpleasant
- rsj_hn 4y ago
  How many of these nations - Had naval ships in the region at the time of the sabotage, conducting tests of remote controlled underwater exploding drones? - were previously caught with such a drone (seafox) sitting underneath the same pipeline that was blown up, and in the same location, in 2015? https://www.pipeline-journal.net/news/explosive-laden-drone-found-near-nord-stream-pipeline https://www.pipeline-journal.net/news/explosive-laden-drone-... https://www.investmentwatchblog.com/gazprom-just-released-these-photos-of-a-nato-seafox-drone-that-was-found-right-next-to-nord-stream-1-in-2015-the-drone-failed-to-detonate https://www.investmentwatchblog.com/gazprom-just-released-th... - have a history of blowing up pipelines, including previously blowing up a Russian pipeline? - had a chief executive declare that said they "have the means" to put an end to the pipeline, even though it was not in their territorial waters and they had no legal means to do it? I mean, you can argue that it's speculation, but to argue that it's speculation without basis is false. This is a highly monitored part of the Baltic Sea, right next to a Danish island, in the Swedish exclusive economic zone, and close to a Polish NATO base. It's not the middle of nowhere. It's not some place where we don't know who was there. We know who had ships there at the time of the sabotage, and who had the technical means to do it. That's when you start getting into debates about US versus UK, but not Azerbaijan versus Venezuela.
  - Isinlor 4y ago
    In the exercise took part Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Sweden, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States. https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2022/06/baltops-22-multinational-exercise-kicks-off-in-the-baltic-sea/ https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2022/06/baltops-22-mult... Seafox is German produced and operated by United States, United Kingdom, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, Belgium, Japan. Blowing up pipelines? Russia? https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-says-russian-troops-blow-up-gas-pipeline-kharkiv-2022-02-27/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-says-russian-tr... Nord Stream 2 has damaged the West enough. Time to put an end to it. by Polish and Ukrainian Foreign Ministers: https://www.politico.eu/article/nord-stream-2-pipeline-has-damaged-the-west-enough-time-to-put-an-end-to-it/ https://www.politico.eu/article/nord-stream-2-pipeline-has-d... So, your "basis" did not narrow down it too much for me.
hackeraccount 4y ago
I'm as a paranoid about the CIA as the next guy but the idea that they would try something like this without political cover seems unlikely to me. Further the idea the Joe Biden would even come close to signing off on this doesn't seem like any version of him. Maybe if he's genuinely off the rails and K. Harris or the Sec. Def. really is running things - maybe then I'd believe this but failing that I can't imagine him being that kind of person or anyone in the chain signing off on this without him on board. If it was the US - and I think the chance of it not coming to light if it was to be vanishingly small - I would be really interested in the details. I would expect someone handing it to Biden as a fair acompli and him just going with it.
tim333 4y ago
The US is probably the biggest beneficiary but might have asked friends to help out so they weren't so obvious. I'm not totally ruling out the Russian allegation that it was a UK/Ukrainian job, presumably with the UK advising and Ukraine doing. Still who knows?

jl2718 4y ago

Yes there is. Government is not supposed to be a self-serving entity. Government is there to serve the people. Democracy is meaningless without transparency.

MichaelCollins 4y ago
That's basically just a restatement of the "principled commitment to truth for the sake of truth" motive for naming your own ally as the culprit. I think/hope Germany/Sweden/etc are too smart for that.
- jl2718 4y ago
  Bizarre response. It reads like you're implying that an ally of "Germany/Sweden/etc" did it.

slim 4y ago

maybe the culprit could pay for europeans heating energy bills this winter?