6 ms·

I totally agree. I can’t believe anyone could have seriously thought Russia would sabotage their own infrastructure, yet this was the leading theory on mainstre

I totally agree. I can’t believe anyone could have seriously thought Russia would sabotage their own infrastructure, yet this was the leading theory on mainstream news

Spooky23 4y ago
Why not? I’m sure some oligarch buddy of Putin made a lot of dollars on the price effects. I don’t know or care, but the number of bots that appeared after this happened makes it seem more like a Russian coverup than an American one.
om2 4y ago
Russia doesn’t own the pipeline. And they used the damage to Nordstream 1 as an excuse to demand that Germany accept supply through Nordstream 2. Russia had in any case turned off all supply via NS1 to Germany. So no real harm to Russia and strengthens their energy blackmail position.
- miguelazo 4y ago
  While the pipeline is technically owned by some Swiss holding company, Russia still invested billions in its construction and will now lose billions more in lost revenue, not to mention German strategic dependence on Russia. The idea that there’s no real harm to Russia is patently absurd.
dislikedtom2 4y ago
It's a classic. Attack yourself and blame the other guy. This is how wars often start. The problem is that these cases are purely speculative, when executed right.
- ohiovr 4y ago
  Doesn't always work. Zelensky tried to ignite a nuclear war but was told by Biden to sit down and shut the fuck up.
welterde 4y ago
The configuration of blowing up NS1 fully and NS2 half-way has quite a few upsides for Russia: getting out of contracts without voiding them, improving the internal political situation (in case anyone wants to create a coup and then start selling gas again) or sending a message (a norway-poland pipeline was opened just one day before NS was blown up)
- miguelazo 4y ago
  Upsides for Russia? Really? Getting out of contracts? LOL! Pretty sure those would be irrelevant given all the sanctions. Let’s check the upsides for Russia: losing $10 billion+ of investment, billions in future revenue, and ending Germany’s strategic dependence. And you think they care about “contracts”? Amazing. https://fair.org/home/us-medias-intellectual-no-fly-zone-on-us-culpability-in-nord-stream-attack/ https://fair.org/home/us-medias-intellectual-no-fly-zone-on-...
  - cycomanic 4y ago
    Can you stop the hyperbole?! Yes they definitely care about contracts, if they don't honour contracts even in the situation of sanctions confidence in doing business with them would plummet, also in Asia etc.. This is how the modern world works. You notice that when Russia turned off the gas before, they never said, "because we want to screw you", but instead cited maintanance. If they could just turn off the tap without reason and contracts be damned, why would they do that?
    - miguelazo 4y ago
      War and acts of God render most contracts moot. It’s a silly argument. And plenty of countries (smartly) renege on contracts all the time for even less dramatic reasons and do not suffer long, if at all, in the international capital markets. IMF/World Bank are not as important as they used to be. Compared to China, they’re now bit players. This is how the modern world works. Russia cited maintenance when turning off NS1 because they probably had maintenance to do that was difficult in a war zone. Also, NS1 traverses Ukraine, and they had previously accused Ukraine of siphoning. It’s in Russia’s interest to make its gas delivery reliable— that’s how you keep Europe dependent. The US wanted to end that dependence and ramp up US LNG market share. https://peoplesworld.org/article/pipeline-ploy-how-u-s-natural-gas-interests-are-fueling-the-ukraine-crisis/ https://peoplesworld.org/article/pipeline-ploy-how-u-s-natur...
twaw 4y ago
Ukraine can use a EU court to confiscate NS, so it better for RF to damage it own property to avoid that.
- miguelazo 4y ago
  This makes no sense. Ukraine is going to magically conjure the gas to put in NS1 for delivery to Europe? Also, you do realize that NS2 isn’t actually owned by Russia? I doubt the Swiss holding company is going to let the “EU court” confiscate its property, damaged or not.
pessimizer 4y ago
It's obvious that's what Russia would do. Between their constant shelling of their own positions and launching missiles into Poland to trigger Article 5, they're clearly completely suicidal.
- sixQuarks 4y ago
  Is this satire? Genuinely asking. Ukraine is the one that hit Poland with missiles. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/11/18/ukraine-missile-poland-nato-russia/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/11/18/ukraine-miss...
- miguelazo 4y ago
  LOL— shelling their own positions? Like the nuclear plant they’re occupying? Wow, the Russiagate brain rot is worse than I thought. And truly embarrassing that you’re still pushing the line that Russia launched the missiles into Poland.
  - sixQuarks 4y ago
    Propaganda is one helluva drug. It's worse today then I ever imagined.
libertine 4y ago
They literally destroyed their economy and wiped out decades of diplomacy and trust... and you can't believe they blew up a bit of a pipe to pressure the market and Germany? I don't think you're seeing things in perspective and the scale of the events.
- sixQuarks 4y ago
  Biden LITERALLY was quoted saying that we will take out the pipeline, when further asked about it, he said "I promise you, we will be able to do it". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVbEoZXhCrM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVbEoZXhCrM You probably haven't seen this because the mainstream never shows it when talking about the pipeline sabotage.
  - cycomanic 4y ago
    Funny thing though, he was talking about NS2 which was left partly intact.
  - 2devnull 4y ago
    Since the invasion he has made multiple diplomatically problematic misstatements that the state department had to walk back. Banking on American presidents’ “tough talk” will bankrupt you quickly. Given his cognitive state we can’t know, but why would he disclose this if it were actually on the todo list? It just doesn’t work that way. But really, the question isn’t if we could or would, but if we did. Those are majorly different questions.
  - miguelazo 4y ago
    Isn’t it amazing how you get downvoted for bringing up obvious facts? The other striking thing about Biden’s declaration that the US would end Nordstream is that the German head of state was standing right next to him when he said it. Tells you everything you need to know about the relationship and sadly, the subservience of the German government.
    - sixQuarks 4y ago

I totally agree. I can’t believe anyone could have seriously thought Russia would sabotage their own infrastructure, yet this was the leading theory on mainstream news

Spooky23 4y ago

Why not? I’m sure some oligarch buddy of Putin made a lot of dollars on the price effects. I don’t know or care, but the number of bots that appeared after this happened makes it seem more like a Russian coverup than an American one.

om2 4y ago

Russia doesn’t own the pipeline. And they used the damage to Nordstream 1 as an excuse to demand that Germany accept supply through Nordstream 2. Russia had in any case turned off all supply via NS1 to Germany. So no real harm to Russia and strengthens their energy blackmail position.

miguelazo 4y ago
While the pipeline is technically owned by some Swiss holding company, Russia still invested billions in its construction and will now lose billions more in lost revenue, not to mention German strategic dependence on Russia. The idea that there’s no real harm to Russia is patently absurd.

dislikedtom2 4y ago

It's a classic. Attack yourself and blame the other guy. This is how wars often start. The problem is that these cases are purely speculative, when executed right.

ohiovr 4y ago
Doesn't always work. Zelensky tried to ignite a nuclear war but was told by Biden to sit down and shut the fuck up.

welterde 4y ago

The configuration of blowing up NS1 fully and NS2 half-way has quite a few upsides for Russia: getting out of contracts without voiding them, improving the internal political situation (in case anyone wants to create a coup and then start selling gas again) or sending a message (a norway-poland pipeline was opened just one day before NS was blown up)

miguelazo 4y ago
Upsides for Russia? Really? Getting out of contracts? LOL! Pretty sure those would be irrelevant given all the sanctions. Let’s check the upsides for Russia: losing $10 billion+ of investment, billions in future revenue, and ending Germany’s strategic dependence. And you think they care about “contracts”? Amazing. https://fair.org/home/us-medias-intellectual-no-fly-zone-on-us-culpability-in-nord-stream-attack/ https://fair.org/home/us-medias-intellectual-no-fly-zone-on-...
- cycomanic 4y ago
  Can you stop the hyperbole?! Yes they definitely care about contracts, if they don't honour contracts even in the situation of sanctions confidence in doing business with them would plummet, also in Asia etc.. This is how the modern world works. You notice that when Russia turned off the gas before, they never said, "because we want to screw you", but instead cited maintanance. If they could just turn off the tap without reason and contracts be damned, why would they do that?
  - miguelazo 4y ago
    War and acts of God render most contracts moot. It’s a silly argument. And plenty of countries (smartly) renege on contracts all the time for even less dramatic reasons and do not suffer long, if at all, in the international capital markets. IMF/World Bank are not as important as they used to be. Compared to China, they’re now bit players. This is how the modern world works. Russia cited maintenance when turning off NS1 because they probably had maintenance to do that was difficult in a war zone. Also, NS1 traverses Ukraine, and they had previously accused Ukraine of siphoning. It’s in Russia’s interest to make its gas delivery reliable— that’s how you keep Europe dependent. The US wanted to end that dependence and ramp up US LNG market share. https://peoplesworld.org/article/pipeline-ploy-how-u-s-natural-gas-interests-are-fueling-the-ukraine-crisis/ https://peoplesworld.org/article/pipeline-ploy-how-u-s-natur...

twaw 4y ago

Ukraine can use a EU court to confiscate NS, so it better for RF to damage it own property to avoid that.

miguelazo 4y ago
This makes no sense. Ukraine is going to magically conjure the gas to put in NS1 for delivery to Europe? Also, you do realize that NS2 isn’t actually owned by Russia? I doubt the Swiss holding company is going to let the “EU court” confiscate its property, damaged or not.

pessimizer 4y ago

It's obvious that's what Russia would do. Between their constant shelling of their own positions and launching missiles into Poland to trigger Article 5, they're clearly completely suicidal.

sixQuarks 4y ago
Is this satire? Genuinely asking. Ukraine is the one that hit Poland with missiles. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/11/18/ukraine-missile-poland-nato-russia/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/11/18/ukraine-miss...
miguelazo 4y ago
LOL— shelling their own positions? Like the nuclear plant they’re occupying? Wow, the Russiagate brain rot is worse than I thought. And truly embarrassing that you’re still pushing the line that Russia launched the missiles into Poland.
- sixQuarks 4y ago
  Propaganda is one helluva drug. It's worse today then I ever imagined.

libertine 4y ago

They literally destroyed their economy and wiped out decades of diplomacy and trust... and you can't believe they blew up a bit of a pipe to pressure the market and Germany? I don't think you're seeing things in perspective and the scale of the events.

sixQuarks 4y ago
Biden LITERALLY was quoted saying that we will take out the pipeline, when further asked about it, he said "I promise you, we will be able to do it". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVbEoZXhCrM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVbEoZXhCrM You probably haven't seen this because the mainstream never shows it when talking about the pipeline sabotage.
- cycomanic 4y ago
  Funny thing though, he was talking about NS2 which was left partly intact.
- 2devnull 4y ago
  Since the invasion he has made multiple diplomatically problematic misstatements that the state department had to walk back. Banking on American presidents’ “tough talk” will bankrupt you quickly. Given his cognitive state we can’t know, but why would he disclose this if it were actually on the todo list? It just doesn’t work that way. But really, the question isn’t if we could or would, but if we did. Those are majorly different questions.
- miguelazo 4y ago
  Isn’t it amazing how you get downvoted for bringing up obvious facts? The other striking thing about Biden’s declaration that the US would end Nordstream is that the German head of state was standing right next to him when he said it. Tells you everything you need to know about the relationship and sadly, the subservience of the German government.
  - sixQuarks 4y ago