5 ms·
It would be very counter to the suggested goals of the US for it to demolish just 3 of the 4 pipelines. Leaving one of the brand new, larger pipelines untouched
by erentz 4y ago
It would be very counter to the suggested goals of the US for it to demolish just 3 of the 4 pipelines. Leaving one of the brand new, larger pipelines untouched. A pipeline that had just been completed but the activation of which had been put on hold due to the start of the war. Only so that Russia could turn around after the event and offer to jointly activate this new pipeline with Germany. An act that had Germany capitulated would be a major political win for Russia, and blow to the suggested US goals.
- anonporridge 4y agoThis is potentially the best counter argument I've seen so far. Do you have a source with stats that suggest that certifying the new line faster would have increased the total flow potential more than the other 3 combined?
- jacknews 4y agoPerhaps the explosives misfired. Or they're still there waiting to be triggered. It makes no sense for Russia to destroy infrastructure that delivers it's own products. It makes every sense for US to cripple Russian gas supply to Europe in the future, to be replaced by abundant US fracking gas. US has long bemoaned Europe's 'dependence' on Russian gas (or maybe 'independence' from US-controlled oil/gas). Now the US holds the leash again.