6 ms·

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGk1si6dOKU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGk1si6dOKU

dmix 3y ago
Attempting to stop an incomplete pipeline commercial deal that the US was already protesting long before the war is different than bombing an existing pipeline involving one of NATOs most important members, on sea territory of another NATO member, just because a war started. It’s plausible but highly unlikely. The evidence points to Ukrainian saboteurs on a rented yacht anyway.
- DontchaKnowit 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - ceejayoz 3y ago
    > Biden literally said on camera that if Russia invades Ukraine, the US would blow up the pipeline. This is a lie. The actual quote is: "There will be no longer be a Nord Stream 2. We will put an end to it." They successfully did so well before the explosions; its certification was suspended in February, and the company was insolvent by March. https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/exclusive-nord-stream-2-owner-considers-insolvency-after-pipeline-halt-sanctions-2022-03-01/ https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/exclusive-nord-stream... Blowing something up isn't the only way to get rid of something (just ask the mice formerly inhabiting my basement); the actual quote can easily be read as "we'll sanction them and anyone else who does business with them into the stone age".
    - miroljub 3y ago
      > The actual quote is: "There will be no longer be a Nord Stream 2. We will put an end to it." There is a saying: "The emperor only has to hint, the wealthy can order, and the robber must kill." So yes, someone interpreted the hint and gave an order, so someone did it.
      - ceejayoz 3y ago
        There's no doubt someone gave an order. What's in question is who, and the list of people with means, motive, and opportunity is fairly long, including the option of a false flag operation. Claiming Biden "literally" promised to blow it up is a clear falsehood.
        miroljub 3y ago
        > Claiming Biden "literally" promised to blow it up is a clear falsehood. You want to say that the video where he gives a promise that he "has means" and "will find a way" to stop the pipeline is a deep fake?
        ceejayoz 3y ago
        It's not a deep fake. It (ahem) literally doesn't say what's asserted upthread. "Sanctions" are means and a way to stop something. The West ended Nord Stream 2 by March of 2022; the company went into insolvency, fired its workers, had its pipeline decertified, and was sanctioned into the ground. Politicians use this sort of language regularly. For example: https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4227533-trump-campaign-calls-on-rnc-to-put-an-end-to-future-debates/ https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4227533-trump-campaign... > Trump campaign calls on RNC to ‘put an end’ to future debates to ‘train our fire’ on Biden Is Trump proposing blowing up the debate venue? Obviously not.
      - hef19898 3y ago
        And the commander in chief of the world's strongest military does this on TV? And not through, I don't know, existing channels, official and otherwise?
    - somenameforme 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - ceejayoz 3y ago
        Nothing in the extended quote changes the point. At no point did Biden say how this would be performed, and again, Nord Stream 2 was "ended" - bankrupt, sanctioned, workers fired, and decertified - by March. Note that the reporter's objection was the pipeline being "within Germany's control", to which the answer is pretty obviously "put diplomatic pressure on Germany". Which is precisely what happened: February 2022: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/02/23/statement-by-president-biden-on-nord-stream-2/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases... > As I said when I met with Chancellor Scholz earlier this month, Germany has been a leader in that effort, and we have closely coordinated our efforts to stop the Nord Stream 2 pipeline if Russia further invaded Ukraine. Yesterday, after further close consultations between our two governments, Germany announced that it would halt certification of the pipeline. But hey, you think Russian elections in Crimea are fair and accurate. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34708598 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34708598
        somenameforme 3y ago
        Its certification being suspended was just that - a suspension, which could have been reenabled at the German government's discretion. Since Germany has tried to operate without cheap Russian gas, their economy has since fallen into recession with some extreme inflation, such as ~20% for foodstuffs. And these consequences could have been, more or less, foreseen. If that pipeline was there, there would would be major political pressure on Scholz to get the gas flowing. But without it? Not only was it a severe economic blow to Russia, but it left Germany dependent upon the US for gas, and also helped minimize the risk of internal pressures pushing Germany to cooperate with Russia.
        ceejayoz 3y ago
        > If that pipeline was there, there would would be major political pressure on Scholz to get the gas flowing. Nah. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream_2 "In October 2022, Russia confirmed that Pipe B of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline escaped destruction, and offered to resume gas supply to Europe (which was promptly declined by Berlin)."
    - DontchaKnowit 3y ago
      Huh alright. thanks for the info.
  - petre 3y ago
    He said something in the lines of "there will be no longer a North Stream 2, we will bring an end to it". He did not say how, just "I promise you we'll be able to do it". https://m.youtube.com/shorts/FVbEoZXhCrM https://m.youtube.com/shorts/FVbEoZXhCrM

dmix 3y ago

Attempting to stop an incomplete pipeline commercial deal that the US was already protesting long before the war is different than bombing an existing pipeline involving one of NATOs most important members, on sea territory of another NATO member, just because a war started. It’s plausible but highly unlikely. The evidence points to Ukrainian saboteurs on a rented yacht anyway.

DontchaKnowit 3y ago
[flagged]
- ceejayoz 3y ago
  > Biden literally said on camera that if Russia invades Ukraine, the US would blow up the pipeline. This is a lie. The actual quote is: "There will be no longer be a Nord Stream 2. We will put an end to it." They successfully did so well before the explosions; its certification was suspended in February, and the company was insolvent by March. https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/exclusive-nord-stream-2-owner-considers-insolvency-after-pipeline-halt-sanctions-2022-03-01/ https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/exclusive-nord-stream... Blowing something up isn't the only way to get rid of something (just ask the mice formerly inhabiting my basement); the actual quote can easily be read as "we'll sanction them and anyone else who does business with them into the stone age".
  - miroljub 3y ago
    > The actual quote is: "There will be no longer be a Nord Stream 2. We will put an end to it." There is a saying: "The emperor only has to hint, the wealthy can order, and the robber must kill." So yes, someone interpreted the hint and gave an order, so someone did it.
    - ceejayoz 3y ago
      There's no doubt someone gave an order. What's in question is who, and the list of people with means, motive, and opportunity is fairly long, including the option of a false flag operation. Claiming Biden "literally" promised to blow it up is a clear falsehood.
      - miroljub 3y ago
        > Claiming Biden "literally" promised to blow it up is a clear falsehood. You want to say that the video where he gives a promise that he "has means" and "will find a way" to stop the pipeline is a deep fake?
        ceejayoz 3y ago
        It's not a deep fake. It (ahem) literally doesn't say what's asserted upthread. "Sanctions" are means and a way to stop something. The West ended Nord Stream 2 by March of 2022; the company went into insolvency, fired its workers, had its pipeline decertified, and was sanctioned into the ground. Politicians use this sort of language regularly. For example: https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4227533-trump-campaign-calls-on-rnc-to-put-an-end-to-future-debates/ https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4227533-trump-campaign... > Trump campaign calls on RNC to ‘put an end’ to future debates to ‘train our fire’ on Biden Is Trump proposing blowing up the debate venue? Obviously not.
    - hef19898 3y ago
      And the commander in chief of the world's strongest military does this on TV? And not through, I don't know, existing channels, official and otherwise?
  - somenameforme 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - ceejayoz 3y ago
      Nothing in the extended quote changes the point. At no point did Biden say how this would be performed, and again, Nord Stream 2 was "ended" - bankrupt, sanctioned, workers fired, and decertified - by March. Note that the reporter's objection was the pipeline being "within Germany's control", to which the answer is pretty obviously "put diplomatic pressure on Germany". Which is precisely what happened: February 2022: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/02/23/statement-by-president-biden-on-nord-stream-2/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases... > As I said when I met with Chancellor Scholz earlier this month, Germany has been a leader in that effort, and we have closely coordinated our efforts to stop the Nord Stream 2 pipeline if Russia further invaded Ukraine. Yesterday, after further close consultations between our two governments, Germany announced that it would halt certification of the pipeline. But hey, you think Russian elections in Crimea are fair and accurate. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34708598 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34708598
      - somenameforme 3y ago
        Its certification being suspended was just that - a suspension, which could have been reenabled at the German government's discretion. Since Germany has tried to operate without cheap Russian gas, their economy has since fallen into recession with some extreme inflation, such as ~20% for foodstuffs. And these consequences could have been, more or less, foreseen. If that pipeline was there, there would would be major political pressure on Scholz to get the gas flowing. But without it? Not only was it a severe economic blow to Russia, but it left Germany dependent upon the US for gas, and also helped minimize the risk of internal pressures pushing Germany to cooperate with Russia.
        ceejayoz 3y ago
        > If that pipeline was there, there would would be major political pressure on Scholz to get the gas flowing. Nah. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream_2 "In October 2022, Russia confirmed that Pipe B of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline escaped destruction, and offered to resume gas supply to Europe (which was promptly declined by Berlin)."
  - DontchaKnowit 3y ago
    Huh alright. thanks for the info.
- petre 3y ago
  He said something in the lines of "there will be no longer a North Stream 2, we will bring an end to it". He did not say how, just "I promise you we'll be able to do it". https://m.youtube.com/shorts/FVbEoZXhCrM https://m.youtube.com/shorts/FVbEoZXhCrM