10 ms·

Intelligence Suggests Pro-Ukrainian Group Sabotaged Pipelines

25 points by kreeben 4y ago

r721 4y ago
Weird article: >U.S. officials said that they had no evidence President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine or his top lieutenants were involved in the operation, or that the perpetrators were acting at the direction of any Ukrainian government officials. >U.S. officials said there was much they did not know about the perpetrators and their affiliations. The review of newly collected intelligence suggests they were opponents of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, but does not specify the members of the group, or who directed or paid for the operation. >Officials who have reviewed the intelligence said they believed the saboteurs were most likely Ukrainian or Russian nationals, or some combination of the two.
- roundandround 4y ago
  This sounds similar to the nonsense that packets from China mean Chinese attackers.. Every country is capable of recruiting people who speak Russian and/or Ukrainian, and many wanted no way back. If these people are government independent in origin, it still wouldn't surprise me if it later comes out that multiple governments had infiltrators to the group that were the only ones pushing hard enough to make it happen.. I think the FBI realized that some "militant" student groups were almost entirely passive aside from FBI and police sponsored infiltrators.
- KarlKemp 4y ago
  It could also be some Russian opponent of Putin, maybe in business or someone like Nawalny.
- we_never_see_it 4y ago
  >Officials who have reviewed the intelligence said they believed the saboteurs were most likely Ukrainian or Russian nationals, or some combination of the two. This actually validates my thesis that Russia was behind the attack to blame Ukraine. It is also very concerning that this type of "intel" only came into light after Republicans took control of the house. There is no word how much Trump and Republicans have influenced this "intel".
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    While the intelligence (like law enforcement) community is very heavily Republican, there is very little reason to suspect that the Republican's majority in the House has a substantial impact on the internal political bias in executive branch agencies.
  - vintermann 4y ago
    If Russia was behind this attack to blame Ukraine, isn't it weird that they blamed UK first, then (after Hersh's article) Norway and US? In fact, even now, they're refusing to accept the theory that Ukraine was involved. I think you should question your thesis.
wunderland 4y ago
[flagged]
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
  > Is that a tongue-in-cheek way of saying the US? No. > U.S. officials said no American or British nationals were involved. > U.S. officials have not stated publicly that they believe the operation was sponsored by a state. > U.S. officials who have been briefed on the intelligence are divided about how much weight to put on the new information. > U.S. officials said the new intelligence reporting has increased their optimism that American spy agencies and their partners in Europe can find more information, which could allow them to reach a firm conclusion about the perpetrators.
- credit_guy 4y ago
  Hersh's theory was thoroughly debunked [1]. See also our own HN comments on this [2], [3]. [1] https://oalexanderdk.substack.com/p/blowing-holes-in-seymour-hershs-pipe https://oalexanderdk.substack.com/p/blowing-holes-in-seymour... [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34821872 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34821872 [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34743078 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34743078
  - r721 4y ago
    Oliver Alexander already did a thread on NYT article btw: https://twitter.com/OAlexanderDK/status/1633138513934798856 https://twitter.com/OAlexanderDK/status/1633138513934798856
    - we_never_see_it 4y ago
      Thank you for posting this link. I am abslutely certain some Russian double agents are trying to smear Ukraine. And the timing of this article is very suspcious. We only see this intelligence months later when Republicans have taken over the house. I want to see investigation on how much Republicans have influenced this "intel".
- 4y ago
we_never_see_it 4y ago
We all know what Russia and Putin are capable of. It must be some Russian separatist groups in Ukraine pretending to be pro-Ukraine had sabotaged the pipelines. We are in the midst of another disinformation campaign by Russia.
- unmole 4y ago
  What exactly does Russia accomplish by blowing up the pipeline?
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
    I don't like this line of thought because people and nations are not perfectly logical. People and nations sabotage and act against their own best interests all the time for dick measuring reasons. It still comes down to fallible humans making the decisions.
    - unmole 4y ago
      So, we make up whatever narrative we want that aligns with our existing biases even when it makes no sense?
      - 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
        We don't make anything up. We try to stick to facts rather than psychoanalyze fallible, impulsive, irrational humans.
        kubectl_h 4y ago
        The facts are that the two countries that stand to gain the most from blowing up the pipeline are the Ukraine and the United States. Russia has very little to gain.
        2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
throwaway4good 4y ago
These Ukranians are really punching above their weight ...
texaslonghorn5 4y ago
> U.S. officials declined to disclose the nature of the intelligence, how it was obtained or any details of the strength of the evidence it contains. They have said that there are no firm conclusions about it, leaving open the possibility that the operation might have been conducted off the books by a proxy force with connections to the Ukrainian government or its security services. There's very little of substance in this article, since it doesn't disclose the intelligence or the officials making the judgement. So it comes across as "x refused to comment, y refused to comment, but we wanted to break the story first so trust me bro"
- mzs 4y ago
  More details in German reporting today: https://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2023-03/nordstream-2-ukraine-anschlag https://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2023-03/nordstream-2-ukr... > Das Kommando soll den Ermittlungen zufolge am 6. September 2022 von Rostock aus in See gestochen sein. Die Ausrüstung für die Geheimoperation sei vorher mit einem Lieferwagen in den Hafen transportiert worden, heißt es. Im weiteren Verlauf ist es den Ermittlern den Recherchen zufolge gelungen, das Boot am folgenden Tag erneut in Wieck (Darß) und später an der dänischen Insel Christiansø, nordöstlich von Bornholm, zu lokalisieren. Die Jacht sei dem Eigentümer im Anschluss in ungereinigtem Zustand zurückgegeben worden. Auf dem Tisch in der Kabine haben die Ermittler den Recherchen zufolge Spuren von Sprengstoff nachweisen können. Nach Informationen von ARD-Hauptstadtstudio, Kontraste, des SWR und der ZEIT soll ein westlicher Geheimdienst bereits im Herbst, also kurz nach der Zerstörung, einen Hinweis an europäische Partnerdienste übermittelt haben, wonach ein ukrainisches Kommando für die Zerstörung verantwortlich sei. Danach soll es weitere geheimdienstliche Hinweise gegeben haben, die darauf hindeuteten, dass eine proukrainische Gruppe verantwortlich sein könnte.
amai 4y ago
"There are a few things in this series of events that don’t quite add up on the surface. - Why only 3/4 pipes targeted? - Why NS2 targeted 80km away from NS1? - No evidence of post blast investigation inspecting NS2 and removing unexploded charges." https://twitter.com/OAlexanderDK/status/1633142899931004932 https://twitter.com/OAlexanderDK/status/1633142899931004932
- croes 4y ago
  Maybe they didn't have time to target all four pipes or couldn't get enough explosives or or or. Even plans with a lot more money, planning and time aren't executed perfectly. Edit because of one comment suggesting it was a russian group pretending to be Ukrainian: Maybe it was a Ukrainian group pretending to be russian that's why they only blew up 3 pipes.
- vintermann 4y ago
  * The obvious theory for that is that not all went according to plan. * There is an area between the two blast sites where fishing and anchoring is restricted, due to large amounts of chemical weapons being dumped there after WW2. So it makes some sense, if you assume the saboteurs wanted to avoid creating a toxic disaster. Though, why not just blow up all of them in the same location? that's a good question... But it's confusing no matter who you think was behind it. Probably down to poor decision-making, whoever did it. BUT, you can assume they were very powerful and confident in their abilities, because surely blowing up a pipeline in two different spots is much harder than just one. (So not six guys in a yacht.) * The third point isn't even really a point.
amai 4y ago
"Swedes urge patience and calm in Nord Stream blast probe" : https://euobserver.com/nordics/156748 https://euobserver.com/nordics/156748
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
TurkishPoptart 4y ago
https://web.archive.org/web/20230307153248/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/07/us/politics/nord-stream-pipeline-sabotage-ukraine.html https://web.archive.org/web/20230307153248/https://www.nytim...
0xDEF 4y ago
>Officials who have reviewed the intelligence said they believed the saboteurs were most likely Ukrainian or Russian nationals, or some combination of the two. Early in the war a Russian ex-Gazprom oligarch defected to the Ukrainian side where he funds the "Freedom of Russia Legion", a group of Russian nationals fighting on the Ukrainian side.
- vintermann 4y ago
  That's nice, but that such people exist is not remotely evidence that they were involved. Even if you buy the German newspaper's six men in a yacht theory, why weren't they caught? There was apparently a military exercise in the area at the time they would have placed the bombs. I don't think being a Gazprom exec gives you the skills to pull off an operation of this scale without anyone even noticing.
mobilio 4y ago
Link: https://archive.md/yDil6 https://archive.md/yDil6
steponlego 4y ago
[flagged]
- misja111 4y ago
  [flagged]
misja111 4y ago
The amount of denial on this forum is amazing. If it wasn't already clear enough earlier that the one party that did not have any interest in blowing up NS was Russia, by now it should be even more obvious. And it was even more clear which parties did have a huge interest in the elimination of the pipeline. At this point there is only one country that will apply for an independent investigation at the UN (Russia). Guess why. (Disclaimer: I'm certainly not pro-Russia, but IMO that doesn't mean that we have to try to twist every fact until it suits our world view)
danoni 4y ago
"By Adam Entous, Julian E. Barnes and Adam Goldman" "Reporting was contributed by Rebecca R. Ruiz, Erika Solomon, Melissa Eddy, Michael Schwirtz and Andrew E. Kramer." "What we consider before using anonymous sources. Do the sources know the information? What’s their motivation for telling us? Have they proved reliable in the past? Can we corroborate the information? Even with these questions satisfied, The Times uses anonymous sources as a last resort. The reporter and at least one editor know the identity of the source."
steponlego 4y ago
Why'd it get flagged? This is the new narrative after all.

25 points by kreeben 4y ago

r721 4y ago

Weird article: >U.S. officials said that they had no evidence President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine or his top lieutenants were involved in the operation, or that the perpetrators were acting at the direction of any Ukrainian government officials. >U.S. officials said there was much they did not know about the perpetrators and their affiliations. The review of newly collected intelligence suggests they were opponents of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, but does not specify the members of the group, or who directed or paid for the operation. >Officials who have reviewed the intelligence said they believed the saboteurs were most likely Ukrainian or Russian nationals, or some combination of the two.

roundandround 4y ago
This sounds similar to the nonsense that packets from China mean Chinese attackers.. Every country is capable of recruiting people who speak Russian and/or Ukrainian, and many wanted no way back. If these people are government independent in origin, it still wouldn't surprise me if it later comes out that multiple governments had infiltrators to the group that were the only ones pushing hard enough to make it happen.. I think the FBI realized that some "militant" student groups were almost entirely passive aside from FBI and police sponsored infiltrators.
KarlKemp 4y ago
It could also be some Russian opponent of Putin, maybe in business or someone like Nawalny.
we_never_see_it 4y ago
>Officials who have reviewed the intelligence said they believed the saboteurs were most likely Ukrainian or Russian nationals, or some combination of the two. This actually validates my thesis that Russia was behind the attack to blame Ukraine. It is also very concerning that this type of "intel" only came into light after Republicans took control of the house. There is no word how much Trump and Republicans have influenced this "intel".
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  While the intelligence (like law enforcement) community is very heavily Republican, there is very little reason to suspect that the Republican's majority in the House has a substantial impact on the internal political bias in executive branch agencies.
- vintermann 4y ago
  If Russia was behind this attack to blame Ukraine, isn't it weird that they blamed UK first, then (after Hersh's article) Norway and US? In fact, even now, they're refusing to accept the theory that Ukraine was involved. I think you should question your thesis.

wunderland 4y ago

[flagged]

2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
> Is that a tongue-in-cheek way of saying the US? No. > U.S. officials said no American or British nationals were involved. > U.S. officials have not stated publicly that they believe the operation was sponsored by a state. > U.S. officials who have been briefed on the intelligence are divided about how much weight to put on the new information. > U.S. officials said the new intelligence reporting has increased their optimism that American spy agencies and their partners in Europe can find more information, which could allow them to reach a firm conclusion about the perpetrators.
credit_guy 4y ago
Hersh's theory was thoroughly debunked [1]. See also our own HN comments on this [2], [3]. [1] https://oalexanderdk.substack.com/p/blowing-holes-in-seymour-hershs-pipe https://oalexanderdk.substack.com/p/blowing-holes-in-seymour... [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34821872 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34821872 [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34743078 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34743078
- r721 4y ago
  Oliver Alexander already did a thread on NYT article btw: https://twitter.com/OAlexanderDK/status/1633138513934798856 https://twitter.com/OAlexanderDK/status/1633138513934798856
  - we_never_see_it 4y ago
    Thank you for posting this link. I am abslutely certain some Russian double agents are trying to smear Ukraine. And the timing of this article is very suspcious. We only see this intelligence months later when Republicans have taken over the house. I want to see investigation on how much Republicans have influenced this "intel".
4y ago

we_never_see_it 4y ago

We all know what Russia and Putin are capable of. It must be some Russian separatist groups in Ukraine pretending to be pro-Ukraine had sabotaged the pipelines. We are in the midst of another disinformation campaign by Russia.

unmole 4y ago
What exactly does Russia accomplish by blowing up the pipeline?
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
  I don't like this line of thought because people and nations are not perfectly logical. People and nations sabotage and act against their own best interests all the time for dick measuring reasons. It still comes down to fallible humans making the decisions.
  - unmole 4y ago
    So, we make up whatever narrative we want that aligns with our existing biases even when it makes no sense?
    - 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
      We don't make anything up. We try to stick to facts rather than psychoanalyze fallible, impulsive, irrational humans.
      - kubectl_h 4y ago
        The facts are that the two countries that stand to gain the most from blowing up the pipeline are the Ukraine and the United States. Russia has very little to gain.
        2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago

throwaway4good 4y ago

These Ukranians are really punching above their weight ...

texaslonghorn5 4y ago

> U.S. officials declined to disclose the nature of the intelligence, how it was obtained or any details of the strength of the evidence it contains. They have said that there are no firm conclusions about it, leaving open the possibility that the operation might have been conducted off the books by a proxy force with connections to the Ukrainian government or its security services. There's very little of substance in this article, since it doesn't disclose the intelligence or the officials making the judgement. So it comes across as "x refused to comment, y refused to comment, but we wanted to break the story first so trust me bro"

mzs 4y ago
More details in German reporting today: https://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2023-03/nordstream-2-ukraine-anschlag https://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2023-03/nordstream-2-ukr... > Das Kommando soll den Ermittlungen zufolge am 6. September 2022 von Rostock aus in See gestochen sein. Die Ausrüstung für die Geheimoperation sei vorher mit einem Lieferwagen in den Hafen transportiert worden, heißt es. Im weiteren Verlauf ist es den Ermittlern den Recherchen zufolge gelungen, das Boot am folgenden Tag erneut in Wieck (Darß) und später an der dänischen Insel Christiansø, nordöstlich von Bornholm, zu lokalisieren. Die Jacht sei dem Eigentümer im Anschluss in ungereinigtem Zustand zurückgegeben worden. Auf dem Tisch in der Kabine haben die Ermittler den Recherchen zufolge Spuren von Sprengstoff nachweisen können. Nach Informationen von ARD-Hauptstadtstudio, Kontraste, des SWR und der ZEIT soll ein westlicher Geheimdienst bereits im Herbst, also kurz nach der Zerstörung, einen Hinweis an europäische Partnerdienste übermittelt haben, wonach ein ukrainisches Kommando für die Zerstörung verantwortlich sei. Danach soll es weitere geheimdienstliche Hinweise gegeben haben, die darauf hindeuteten, dass eine proukrainische Gruppe verantwortlich sein könnte.

amai 4y ago

"There are a few things in this series of events that don’t quite add up on the surface. - Why only 3/4 pipes targeted? - Why NS2 targeted 80km away from NS1? - No evidence of post blast investigation inspecting NS2 and removing unexploded charges." https://twitter.com/OAlexanderDK/status/1633142899931004932 https://twitter.com/OAlexanderDK/status/1633142899931004932

croes 4y ago
Maybe they didn't have time to target all four pipes or couldn't get enough explosives or or or. Even plans with a lot more money, planning and time aren't executed perfectly. Edit because of one comment suggesting it was a russian group pretending to be Ukrainian: Maybe it was a Ukrainian group pretending to be russian that's why they only blew up 3 pipes.
vintermann 4y ago
* The obvious theory for that is that not all went according to plan. * There is an area between the two blast sites where fishing and anchoring is restricted, due to large amounts of chemical weapons being dumped there after WW2. So it makes some sense, if you assume the saboteurs wanted to avoid creating a toxic disaster. Though, why not just blow up all of them in the same location? that's a good question... But it's confusing no matter who you think was behind it. Probably down to poor decision-making, whoever did it. BUT, you can assume they were very powerful and confident in their abilities, because surely blowing up a pipeline in two different spots is much harder than just one. (So not six guys in a yacht.) * The third point isn't even really a point.

amai 4y ago

"Swedes urge patience and calm in Nord Stream blast probe" : https://euobserver.com/nordics/156748 https://euobserver.com/nordics/156748

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

TurkishPoptart 4y ago

https://web.archive.org/web/20230307153248/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/07/us/politics/nord-stream-pipeline-sabotage-ukraine.html https://web.archive.org/web/20230307153248/https://www.nytim...

0xDEF 4y ago

>Officials who have reviewed the intelligence said they believed the saboteurs were most likely Ukrainian or Russian nationals, or some combination of the two. Early in the war a Russian ex-Gazprom oligarch defected to the Ukrainian side where he funds the "Freedom of Russia Legion", a group of Russian nationals fighting on the Ukrainian side.

vintermann 4y ago
That's nice, but that such people exist is not remotely evidence that they were involved. Even if you buy the German newspaper's six men in a yacht theory, why weren't they caught? There was apparently a military exercise in the area at the time they would have placed the bombs. I don't think being a Gazprom exec gives you the skills to pull off an operation of this scale without anyone even noticing.

mobilio 4y ago

Link: https://archive.md/yDil6 https://archive.md/yDil6

steponlego 4y ago

[flagged]

misja111 4y ago
[flagged]

misja111 4y ago

The amount of denial on this forum is amazing. If it wasn't already clear enough earlier that the one party that did not have any interest in blowing up NS was Russia, by now it should be even more obvious. And it was even more clear which parties did have a huge interest in the elimination of the pipeline. At this point there is only one country that will apply for an independent investigation at the UN (Russia). Guess why. (Disclaimer: I'm certainly not pro-Russia, but IMO that doesn't mean that we have to try to twist every fact until it suits our world view)

danoni 4y ago

"By Adam Entous, Julian E. Barnes and Adam Goldman" "Reporting was contributed by Rebecca R. Ruiz, Erika Solomon, Melissa Eddy, Michael Schwirtz and Andrew E. Kramer." "What we consider before using anonymous sources. Do the sources know the information? What’s their motivation for telling us? Have they proved reliable in the past? Can we corroborate the information? Even with these questions satisfied, The Times uses anonymous sources as a last resort. The reporter and at least one editor know the identity of the source."

steponlego 4y ago

Why'd it get flagged? This is the new narrative after all.