5 ms·

The glowies faked the transponders! They faked the satellite imagery too! And they even faked the witnesses and photographers who saw the ship! Case closed.

alienicecream 4y ago
I don't think it really matters if Hersh's story is correct in all the details, or if it was done in a completely different way. So I don't really understand the zeal which people have to poke holes in it. What matters is motive, means and opportunity and only a few nations, all in NATO, have all three. And no one in NATO is going to do anything like this without making sure they get approval from the US first. That's pretty much all you need to know.
- tptacek 4y ago
  This is a non-statement. NATO is 29 other countries besides the US, all with their own motives, and you can contrive of motives for every other global power with the means to blow up a pipeline; the "opportunity" part of it doesn't even make sense.
  - alienicecream 4y ago
    You find it plausible that a global power outside of NATO would commit an act of international terrorism like this, blowing up the critical industrial infrastructure of a NATO member and everyone would just let it slide? Or that any one of 29 NATO member countries would do this acting all on their own?
    - tptacek 4y ago
      I think we have zero information and zero clues about who did this and trying to reason axiomatically about it, as HN is wont to do, isn't going to get us any closer to the truth.
      - alienicecream 4y ago
        That's exactly what reasoning axiomatically does, it gets you closer to the truth. It gets you from "I don't know anything" to "these are the plausible theories". I wonder why you think that allowing people to speculate based on these "axioms" is so dangerous? If they're wrong, they're just wrong aren't they? As to clues, there are plenty. Biden proclaiming that he would put an end to Nord Stream 2 is a clue. That no one seems to be in a big rush to find out who did it given the scale of this and that it destroyed important infrastructure of a NATO member is a clue. That "there is no evidence that Russia did it" as the Swedish investigators said, is a clue.
        mannerheim 4y ago
        Which axiom gets you that it must have been a state actor who did it?
        alienicecream 4y ago
        For me it's the one where governments with the most capable intelligence agencies in the world are quiet about who committed an act of international terrorism against an important piece of industrial infrastructure at the bottom of the ocean. One largely owned by Germany, a key NATO member. If this was some eco terrorism (imagining for a moment that they would have the means to procure the explosives and expertise to blow up a concrete encased pipeline at the bottom of the sea), it would present a serious risk for oil and gas infrastructure everywhere. It would not be taken lightly.
        mannerheim 4y ago
        And Germany somehow knows who does this in your story and keeps quiet because...
        pvg 4y ago
        In 2014 there was a sabotage operation against a munitions depot in Vrbětice in the Czech republic, a NATO member. There was no official attribution for half a decade. Lack of immediate attribution as a basis for assigning responsibility seems mostly cherrypicking and vibes.
    - ceejayoz 4y ago
      > critical industrial infrastructure of a NATO member That's a very odd description of a never-functional, decertified piece of infrastructure owned and constructed by a sanctioned geopolitical foe.
    - mopsi 4y ago
      > You find it plausible that a global power outside of NATO would commit an act of international terrorism like this, blowing up the critical industrial infrastructure of a NATO member and everyone would just let it slide? Plausible? It has happened many times. In 2014, Russian military intelligence operatives blew up ammo depots in Czech Republic and nothing happened. Ammo stored there was to be sold to Ukraine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Vrb%C4%9Btice_ammunition_warehouses_explosions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Vrb%C4%9Btice_ammunition_...
- mannerheim 4y ago
  I haven't seen any convincing evidence only a state actor could be responsible.
- mcguire 4y ago
  Yeah, well. Some of us are kind of fond of evidence and not just vibes.

alienicecream 4y ago

I don't think it really matters if Hersh's story is correct in all the details, or if it was done in a completely different way. So I don't really understand the zeal which people have to poke holes in it. What matters is motive, means and opportunity and only a few nations, all in NATO, have all three. And no one in NATO is going to do anything like this without making sure they get approval from the US first. That's pretty much all you need to know.

tptacek 4y ago
This is a non-statement. NATO is 29 other countries besides the US, all with their own motives, and you can contrive of motives for every other global power with the means to blow up a pipeline; the "opportunity" part of it doesn't even make sense.
- alienicecream 4y ago
  You find it plausible that a global power outside of NATO would commit an act of international terrorism like this, blowing up the critical industrial infrastructure of a NATO member and everyone would just let it slide? Or that any one of 29 NATO member countries would do this acting all on their own?
  - tptacek 4y ago
    I think we have zero information and zero clues about who did this and trying to reason axiomatically about it, as HN is wont to do, isn't going to get us any closer to the truth.
    - alienicecream 4y ago
      That's exactly what reasoning axiomatically does, it gets you closer to the truth. It gets you from "I don't know anything" to "these are the plausible theories". I wonder why you think that allowing people to speculate based on these "axioms" is so dangerous? If they're wrong, they're just wrong aren't they? As to clues, there are plenty. Biden proclaiming that he would put an end to Nord Stream 2 is a clue. That no one seems to be in a big rush to find out who did it given the scale of this and that it destroyed important infrastructure of a NATO member is a clue. That "there is no evidence that Russia did it" as the Swedish investigators said, is a clue.
      - mannerheim 4y ago
        Which axiom gets you that it must have been a state actor who did it?
        alienicecream 4y ago
        For me it's the one where governments with the most capable intelligence agencies in the world are quiet about who committed an act of international terrorism against an important piece of industrial infrastructure at the bottom of the ocean. One largely owned by Germany, a key NATO member. If this was some eco terrorism (imagining for a moment that they would have the means to procure the explosives and expertise to blow up a concrete encased pipeline at the bottom of the sea), it would present a serious risk for oil and gas infrastructure everywhere. It would not be taken lightly.
        mannerheim 4y ago
        And Germany somehow knows who does this in your story and keeps quiet because...
        pvg 4y ago
        In 2014 there was a sabotage operation against a munitions depot in Vrbětice in the Czech republic, a NATO member. There was no official attribution for half a decade. Lack of immediate attribution as a basis for assigning responsibility seems mostly cherrypicking and vibes.
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    > critical industrial infrastructure of a NATO member That's a very odd description of a never-functional, decertified piece of infrastructure owned and constructed by a sanctioned geopolitical foe.
  - mopsi 4y ago
    > You find it plausible that a global power outside of NATO would commit an act of international terrorism like this, blowing up the critical industrial infrastructure of a NATO member and everyone would just let it slide? Plausible? It has happened many times. In 2014, Russian military intelligence operatives blew up ammo depots in Czech Republic and nothing happened. Ammo stored there was to be sold to Ukraine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Vrb%C4%9Btice_ammunition_warehouses_explosions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Vrb%C4%9Btice_ammunition_...
mannerheim 4y ago
I haven't seen any convincing evidence only a state actor could be responsible.
mcguire 4y ago
Yeah, well. Some of us are kind of fond of evidence and not just vibes.