9 ms·

> Are we at the point we should start suspecting sabotage? What possible reason would the Russians have to sabotage their own side of their won space craft? T

> Are we at the point we should start suspecting sabotage? What possible reason would the Russians have to sabotage their own side of their won space craft? The only real outcomes would be either having to launch an additional spacecraft to get their people back or suffering the indignity of the US bringing their people back on a US vehicle. If they don't want to be there, it'd be pretty easy to cite something about US/NATO involvement in Ukraine and just abandon ship. They don't need some sort of elaborate gimmick which also happens to paint them in a pretty incompetent light, in order to do that.

hutzlibu 4y ago
Well, sabotage could also have been done by the other side, to point out the russian incompetence and drive them out even earlier, but the risk/reward does not make this likely.
- nordsieck 4y ago
  > Well, sabotage could also have been done by the other side, to point out the russian incompetence and drive them out even earlier, but the risk/reward does not make this likely. 1. NASA wants Russia to maintain a presence on the ISS. Many of the necessary functions for operating the ISS are spread across both the US (international) and Russian sides. If the Russians left, that would dramatically complicate operations. 2. How would the US even get to the spacecraft in question? It's not like someone could casually take a stroll around the station and pop in a hole with a drift and hammer. 3. Even if the US could access the spacecraft in question, it's not obvious to me that US Astronauts would actually do the deed instead of blowing a whistle. It's not like they're CIA operatives. There's a great deal of camaraderie between the personnel of each side.
  - khuey 4y ago
    4. The Soyuz that had the first coolant leak had an American astronaut on board. Why would the US risk its own people?
    - dmurray 4y ago
      That seems like the weakest argument against it. If we're talking about the kind of shadowy secret agents who will sabotage a $150 billion project (most of which was paid by their own side) as a manoeuvre in a complicated geopolitical game, surely they're not above sacrificing a few innocent lives for it.
  - upsidesinclude 4y ago
    >NASA wants Russia to maintain a presence NASA is not the DOD >drift and hammer Adding incompatible ionic compounds causes material failure >It's not like they're CIA operatives Hmm that's a pretty strange assumption to make.
  - wongarsu 4y ago
    NASA isn't in the business of sabotaging, that would be the CIA. That means that 1. NASA cares about keeping the ISS alive, the CIA might have other priorities and care more about how this humiliates Russia much more than NASA 2. I would be more surprised if there were no CIA agents in the manufacturing pipeline of Soyuz spacecraft, never mind the launch site. Just strategically weaken some parts so they fail in orbit. 3. So let's use CIA operatives I'm not saying it was the CIA. The CIA has motive and capability to do it. But it could as well be Russian corruption somewhere in the supply chain, or just bad luck
    - juve1996 4y ago
      Seems unlikely, There's little to gain from this. There are far larger propaganda victories already that actually matter to the populace.
    - ufmace 4y ago
      Seems like a pretty wacky thing to do IMO. Maybe the CIA does have some operatives in the Russian aerospace industry. But why would any such operatives risk exposing themselves by sabotaging hardware going to the ISS? Just for a rather contrived plan to make the Russians look incompetent while putting American astronauts at risk too? Surely the CIA can come up with better ways to make the Russians look incompetent without putting carefully established agents at risk. Or they can just do nothing, since the Russians seem to have little trouble displaying ineptitude without any assistance.
- LarryMullins 4y ago
  Sabotage might also be performed by a disgruntled / disturbed worker, not working for either 'side'.
latchkey 4y ago
> What possible reason would the Russians have to sabotage their own side of their won space craft? Some people believe the Nord pipeline blowup was self-sabotage. Update: I did not say I believe this myself. I'm just using this as a counter argument to say that the reasons might not be obvious at first glance and people tend to believe all sorts of things.
- karpierz 4y ago
  ... because it gets them out of contractual obligations to deliver gas.
  - bigdict 4y ago
    But… they want to sell gas.
    - bandyaboot 4y ago
      Right up until they prefer to deliver retribution by withholding gas.
      - bigdict 4y ago
        Right, but the weapon is not the cutting of the supply, it's the threat. The fear that comes with uncertainty. There is no uncertainty when the pipeline is damaged irreparably.
        bandyaboot 4y ago
        Russia had already been increasingly cutting gas supplies to Europe before the Nordstream pipeline was sabatoged. They weren’t just threatening.
        bigdict 4y ago
        If that's true, why blow up your own infrastructure when you can just cut the supply?
bombolo 4y ago
> What possible reason would the Russians have to sabotage their own side of their won space craft? Same reason why they blew up their own pipeline (they didn't but our propaganda must paint them as complete morons).
philwelch 4y ago
“The Russians”? No. “Some guy in Russia?” Lots of reasons why some guy in Russia might be mad and try and sabotage a Russian spacecraft. OTOH, Russia also has a sordid history of unsubstantiated accusations of sabotage to cover up for their own incompetence.

hutzlibu 4y ago

Well, sabotage could also have been done by the other side, to point out the russian incompetence and drive them out even earlier, but the risk/reward does not make this likely.

nordsieck 4y ago
> Well, sabotage could also have been done by the other side, to point out the russian incompetence and drive them out even earlier, but the risk/reward does not make this likely. 1. NASA wants Russia to maintain a presence on the ISS. Many of the necessary functions for operating the ISS are spread across both the US (international) and Russian sides. If the Russians left, that would dramatically complicate operations. 2. How would the US even get to the spacecraft in question? It's not like someone could casually take a stroll around the station and pop in a hole with a drift and hammer. 3. Even if the US could access the spacecraft in question, it's not obvious to me that US Astronauts would actually do the deed instead of blowing a whistle. It's not like they're CIA operatives. There's a great deal of camaraderie between the personnel of each side.
- khuey 4y ago
  4. The Soyuz that had the first coolant leak had an American astronaut on board. Why would the US risk its own people?
  - dmurray 4y ago
    That seems like the weakest argument against it. If we're talking about the kind of shadowy secret agents who will sabotage a $150 billion project (most of which was paid by their own side) as a manoeuvre in a complicated geopolitical game, surely they're not above sacrificing a few innocent lives for it.
- upsidesinclude 4y ago
  >NASA wants Russia to maintain a presence NASA is not the DOD >drift and hammer Adding incompatible ionic compounds causes material failure >It's not like they're CIA operatives Hmm that's a pretty strange assumption to make.
- wongarsu 4y ago
  NASA isn't in the business of sabotaging, that would be the CIA. That means that 1. NASA cares about keeping the ISS alive, the CIA might have other priorities and care more about how this humiliates Russia much more than NASA 2. I would be more surprised if there were no CIA agents in the manufacturing pipeline of Soyuz spacecraft, never mind the launch site. Just strategically weaken some parts so they fail in orbit. 3. So let's use CIA operatives I'm not saying it was the CIA. The CIA has motive and capability to do it. But it could as well be Russian corruption somewhere in the supply chain, or just bad luck
  - juve1996 4y ago
    Seems unlikely, There's little to gain from this. There are far larger propaganda victories already that actually matter to the populace.
  - ufmace 4y ago
    Seems like a pretty wacky thing to do IMO. Maybe the CIA does have some operatives in the Russian aerospace industry. But why would any such operatives risk exposing themselves by sabotaging hardware going to the ISS? Just for a rather contrived plan to make the Russians look incompetent while putting American astronauts at risk too? Surely the CIA can come up with better ways to make the Russians look incompetent without putting carefully established agents at risk. Or they can just do nothing, since the Russians seem to have little trouble displaying ineptitude without any assistance.
LarryMullins 4y ago
Sabotage might also be performed by a disgruntled / disturbed worker, not working for either 'side'.

latchkey 4y ago

> What possible reason would the Russians have to sabotage their own side of their won space craft? Some people believe the Nord pipeline blowup was self-sabotage. Update: I did not say I believe this myself. I'm just using this as a counter argument to say that the reasons might not be obvious at first glance and people tend to believe all sorts of things.

karpierz 4y ago
... because it gets them out of contractual obligations to deliver gas.
- bigdict 4y ago
  But… they want to sell gas.
  - bandyaboot 4y ago
    Right up until they prefer to deliver retribution by withholding gas.
    - bigdict 4y ago
      Right, but the weapon is not the cutting of the supply, it's the threat. The fear that comes with uncertainty. There is no uncertainty when the pipeline is damaged irreparably.
      - bandyaboot 4y ago
        Russia had already been increasingly cutting gas supplies to Europe before the Nordstream pipeline was sabatoged. They weren’t just threatening.
        bigdict 4y ago
        If that's true, why blow up your own infrastructure when you can just cut the supply?

bombolo 4y ago

> What possible reason would the Russians have to sabotage their own side of their won space craft? Same reason why they blew up their own pipeline (they didn't but our propaganda must paint them as complete morons).

philwelch 4y ago

“The Russians”? No. “Some guy in Russia?” Lots of reasons why some guy in Russia might be mad and try and sabotage a Russian spacecraft. OTOH, Russia also has a sordid history of unsubstantiated accusations of sabotage to cover up for their own incompetence.