foverzar

42 ms·

481.
by foverzar 4y ago
It might feel a lot, but is still such a small fraction. Comparing it with Russian force in Ukraine is hardly a compliment to it's size, IMO. I just don't really understand why would one assume that such near-to-margin-of-error nu
482.
by foverzar 4y ago
IMO, these bitter-sweet kind of "freedom fighting" narratives just too rarely represent real life, and the iceberg of this conflict is surely huge. There is too much "nothing happened at Tienanmen Square" kind of stuff f
483.
by foverzar 4y ago
Why imply that Ukrainians motivation somehow excludes NATO from the equation? NATO provides intelligence, training, counsel and supplies. You can't just pretend it's not involved and that at some point this war didn't become
484.
by foverzar 4y ago
It tells us nothing, really. Hundreds of thousands is <1% It might only surprise people, who can't quite wrap their heads around the fact that other people are individuals with their own opinions, regardless of geography.
485.
by foverzar 4y ago
Random people believe whatever they believe, it would be weird to assume that everyone has a consolidated perspective. Most people hardly understand the nuances between "war", "military operation" or "proxy war&quot
486.
by foverzar 4y ago
SPF and DKIM were kinda supposed to solve this problem. In fact, gmail generally classifies email without it as spam. I guess a remaining reasonable thing to do for Gmail and such is to label emails from known important authenticated domain
487.
by foverzar 4y ago
> because it would certainly mean being driven out of NATO There is no practical way to drive the US out of NATO, without disbanding NATO altogether.
488.
by foverzar 4y ago
> It just seems entirely unlikely the US would destroy the pipeline knowing they can't supply immediate relief. Eh, if you live in the US-centric info-sphere, you'd likely have that kind of a "good faith" opinion, but
489.
by foverzar 4y ago
Trans-Siberian pipeline explosion of 1982, anyone?
490.
by foverzar 4y ago
> Russia has lost nothing in leverage Russia has lost the option to provide extra of that much needed gas to Europe, along with billions and years of investments into that infrastructure. > but Putin has now gained leverage internally
491.
by foverzar 4y ago
Source?
492.
by foverzar 4y ago
So what was the solution in the end? Cuz currently I only see everyone being afraid to even acknowledge that gas reserves are merely a buffer. I suspect this "figured out" might as well be yet another soothing post-truth.
493.
by foverzar 4y ago
Do they thought? When was the last time you heard Europe operating independently, or god forbid, not inline with the Five Eyes intelligence agencies?
494.
by foverzar 4y ago
> but the risks of blowback should it be caught would make it too risky It's the same risk for every suspect, so it's not really a counterpoint.
495.
by foverzar 4y ago
> It would be a tremendous risk to be discovered; This isn't really a counterpoint, since it's all the same risk for every potential suspect.
496.
by foverzar 4y ago
If you include the risk of getting caught, then it seems like no one did is, as it is the same risk for everyone.
497.
by foverzar 4y ago
> 2- Russia: they are losing the war and now throwing conscripts with not a day of training on the front. That's pretty desperate move to say the least. Whenever they escalate, they see that as a chance to break unity among the west
498.
by foverzar 4y ago
The infrastructure isn't free. The gas flowing through it also isn't free. Years and billions were invested in that infrastructure. IMO, the sheer cost would make that an overly-elaborate spectacle.
499.
by foverzar 4y ago
> Their assets would be property of the state Their assets would be property of their inheritors, just as everywhere else.
500.
by foverzar 4y ago
Can it? If the seawater had filled the pipeline, it is likely irreparable.
501.
by foverzar 4y ago
> The whole war makes no sense It makes all the sense. The problem is that most don't care for reality or other side's points, but would rather make assumptions based on impressions, based on propaganda narratives. Obviously, t
502.
by foverzar 4y ago
> Why not? Because they had spend years and huge monetary investments to build it. That would be one insanely expensive spectacle.
503.
by foverzar 4y ago
He meant what he had said and that is that the US will prevent the pipeline from working properly. We have no information to reason about how it was meant to be achieved then or how far would one go in case of some contingency. We can infer
504.
by foverzar 4y ago
> Max Blumenthal is a Russian propagandist who is a regular guest on Russian state backed networks such RT and Sputnik. He is an American, and he had also worked with Al Jazeera, The New York Times and a few other wide-known and reputabl
505.
by foverzar 4y ago
Well, these go more or less in line with my impression that European restrictions are the cause of most disruptions of normal operations, from maintenance to payment. Add to that the NS2 pipeline, that could have been started, but never was
506.
by foverzar 4y ago
Thanks, I'll definitely thoroughly. I can already see that it doesn't actually say "Russian troops raped and tortured children in Ukraine". May I ask why did you decide to lie and misrepresent the report? Would be curiou
507.
by foverzar 4y ago
> Add to that that clandestine adventurism like this is very much Putin's MO and not the USA's Clandestine adventurism is not the USA's, really??? > we Oh, that explains it. Cuz "we" are always the good guys!
508.
by foverzar 4y ago
You forgot about all the other pipelines from Russia to Europe.
509.
by foverzar 4y ago
Do you have a point? You are being real vague and non-specific. What "problems" are you referring to specifically? It would be nice to read some source, cuz to my knowledge there are quite a lot of warranty nuances - it would be c
510.
by foverzar 4y ago
The main source of Russian gas in Europe was (and presently is) the Soviet pipeline system running through Ukraine. So basically Europe will still continue to receive a huge fraction of Russian gas, but it would all run essentially throu

More ›