Manhattan said:

---

The Debt said:

---

Definitely Not A Cop said:

---

Just saw a 4th leak is reported.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/9/29/fourth-leak-detected-at-nord-stream-pipelines-in-baltic-sea

What advantage would the US have in doing this? And why would they only blow holes in places under US control?

Wouldn't this be a massive f-up that would turn most of NATO against us?

---

Europe could have normalized relationship with Russia after the Donbas states' referenda. The Zelensky fanbois say this is impossible but FFS look at how fast European nations gobbled up Russian oil once the prohibition hit at the start of the war. It lasted less than a week. Then Gazprom made their work around and European nations were playing ball, working around "official policy".

The US is simply removing the possibility of a separate peace. That's the purpose. An isolated Europe means they have to come to us. Because they infrastructure to mend with Russia is gone.

---

1. Normalized after Ukraines surrender? lol.
2. The US would have done this by hacking either the pipeline itself or turning off the power. You don't even need stuxnet for this as you just need to turn it off, not blow it up.

---

1. I never said surrender. You need to realize Ukraine had a deal on the table back in April to allow these Russian majority regions to be autonomous, and Ukraine was not allowed to join NATO and Russia would pull back all military to its own border. The reports is that the UK and the US blew up that deal that Zelensky was willing to take.

So my question to you, Manhattan, is can you conceive of a situation where Ukraine and Russia conflicts end and both Kiev and Moscow remain intact? If so, then you would recognize that you using the word "surrender" was just hyperbole. If not, then well we got problems beyond semantics.


2) the US doesn't need stuxnet to turn it off, nor does Russia need sabotage to turn it off. It WAS ALREADY OFF. And this is what the Russophobes on this board don't understand about international relations: the concept of the status quo. Go study the Cold War and you will see this concept everywhere. When nothing is happening everyone is at relative peace, but when an event shifts the presumptions of the peace, the peace is in perile.

Now clearly we are not in a state of peace, but the paradigm and the conventions of this war were set. Russia and ukraine are using military means to dispute land. Interested 3rd parties were going to influence the war with material to their allies and use economic levers to hurt their enemies.

Under those rules we have grown accustomed to. That's the reality. The pipeline was shut off as part of the interested 3d parties policies.

Germany and Russia did not make a show of it. Russia didn't destroy it back then out of spite, or craze as some people ascribe to Putin. Because Russia intends at some point in the future (say 2 years say 20 years if that makes you happy) to continue to fuel Germany. As long as it remains intact, commerce is a possibility.

So who benefits from its destruction? Germany certainly doesn't. Russia doesn't, you just wiped off their best bargaining chip. The obvious answer is NATO or a nato-partner. Germans are waking up to the fact the coalition isn't acting in their best interests. And we are demanding frozen Germans for the sake of russian-majority provinces that voted for independence from Ukraine in 2018. Like it or not, russians stuck in the border of ukraine don't want to be raped and tortured by ukrainians. Silly concept. But that has been their reality since 2014.

So Germans understand the situation and don't want Germans dying this winter because NATO wants to stick it to Putin.

Betoisafurry said:

---

pic.twitter.com/aJu8F5MXSl

— The_Real_Fly (@The_Real_Fly) September 29, 2022

---

They weren't undetected. There are reports of Russian ships and subs in the area.

Definitely Not A Cop said:

---

Betoisafurry said:

---

pic.twitter.com/aJu8F5MXSl

— The_Real_Fly (@The_Real_Fly) September 29, 2022

---

They weren't undetected. There are reports of Russian ships and subs in the area.

---

Lol ok buddy. Keep waving that Ukrainian flag proudly.

cone said:

---

so long as the pipeline physically exists, the leverage exists

especially when there's no gas flowing currently. hacking the pipeline to close a shut valve? what does that demonstrate?

hacking the pipeline to shut off gas after hostilities have ended and gas is promised to flow again would be extremely belligerent to the people of Europe wanting/needing that gas

no, this was the proper time to destroy the pipeline to remove all leverage. and it needed to be physically damaged.

---

I understand your point, but there are other ways to transport natural gas, right? Except now it just got more expensive when/if Europe needs it.

for those thinking the US had a hand in the op for sabotage

what's the end game for the US in this proxy war? regime change? is that even possible?

prolong the war - with what ultimate goal in mind?

there's no way to cordon off Russian hydrocarbon from Europe into perpetuity. so what's the grand strategy long-term?

Betoisafurry said:

---

Definitely Not A Cop said:

---

Betoisafurry said:

---

pic.twitter.com/aJu8F5MXSl

— The_Real_Fly (@The_Real_Fly) September 29, 2022

---

They weren't undetected. There are reports of Russian ships and subs in the area.

---

Lol ok buddy. Keep waving that Ukrainian flag proudly.

---

Me pointing out your meme is incorrect means I support US involvement in Ukraine?

Already laid it out: Biden set this up inadvertently months ago with his idiotic assertion the USA could absolutely shut down NS2. He might have meant the agreement but it could easily be interpreted as the pipeline itself.

A few months later NATO is helping Ukraine turn the tide with loads of financial and material support and they're calling Russia's bluff and not buying gas through the pipeline or submitting to pressure or enticement with energy supply.

Russia presently has an economically nearly useless set of pipelines, but a definite need to cause NATO any problems it possibly can, economically or politically.

Why not anonymously damage the pipeline and start a propaganda campaign blaming America, given Biden's reckless statement, and see if they can create a wedge issue between the USA and Europe over unilaterally interfering with energy policy and supply. No big loss to Russia who had much different short term problems, and the potential disruption of NATO could be very beneficial.

There's a very rational explanation for Russia to have done this.

Then add that it creates a short term no going back challenge for Germany particularly and NATO generally in regards to energy for a few months. Maybe this raises energy prices more globally, which could help Russia in other markets, and maybe it impairs the ability of NATO economically to have as many resources to help Ukraine for a while.

that plus the LNG regas terminals haven't been built

it's insane to imagine that Europe is going to be supplied by LNG rather than pipeline gas long-term

Gotcha, thanks.

there's a far more compelling rational explanation as to how this sabotage has absolutely damaged short and medium-term Russian leverage over Western Europe

so at the absolute bare minimum that has to be granted

your explanation can compete with that one, but the counterpoint can't be ignored.

the end result of this is Germans shivering through the winter with no real recourse

so who benefits from that?

to me the most plausible, rational belligerent would be Poland or Ukraine

but UKR can't take a piss without asking the US for permission

i don't know enough about Poland to understand their willingness to take international prestige risks and **** over the Germans

cone said:

---

for those thinking the US had a hand in the op for sabotage

what's the end game for the US in this proxy war? regime change? is that even possible?

prolong the war - with what ultimate goal in mind?

there's no way to cordon off Russian hydrocarbon from Europe into perpetuity. so what's the grand strategy long-term?

---

The regime in power has used the war in Ukraine for an excuse for almost everything negative occurring domestically caused by their ******ed policy positions - rising gas prices, inflation, food cost, printing money to send over there, sending weapons to distract from their failures. Most rational people knew that these problems were already occurring prior to Russia's invasion of Ukraine, but the regime in power relies on myopic, basically ******ed people, to win votes.

They are still faltering on an almost hysterical level. They can't tell the truth at all, they have no wins, Brandon asked where a certain house member was at a public event when she died in a car accident 2 months ago and he gave remarks to her, but forgot she was dead somehow, and an election is coming up in 6 weeks.

What is the ultimate goal in mind? To not lose the midterms. So use the Russian Invasion as an excuse as to why times are so hard for the common people. The Ukes are on the offense and the war, Russia is conscripting vodka-drunk civilians to go get blown up by NATO weapons. The war could have been pretty close to resolution.

Blowing up the pipeline keeps Europe pot-committed when they get desperate for energy when it gets cold. That's it. That's the reason.

cone said:

---

the end result of this is Germans shivering through the winter with no real recourse

so who benefits from that?

---

Two pipeline that were providing zero gas to Europe over the last month being eliminated doesn't really change things in the short term. The Russians have plenty of capacity in their other lines to handle the gas they are sending to Europe now, and what they are likely to send in the future.

It definitely removed that enticement option but Germany and the rest of Europe have been claiming they have secured sufficient supplies and reserves in the short term, and didn't seem to be budging much on the issue.

I'm not discounting other possibilities but to me, in the big picture, Russia is still the prime suspect.

The USA also would have been much more careful to make it appear to be an accident or technical failure, had we done it. Making it an obvious sabotage wouldn't serve our interests at all, particularly if some evidence eventually made it clear who it was that did it.

i just have a hard time believing in that sort of recklessness

lack of imagination on my behalf

Quote:

---

but Germany and the rest of Europe have been claiming they have secured sufficient supplies and reserves in the short term

---

do you believe that? does short-term extend into December?

Quote:

---

The USA also would have been much more careful to make it appear to be an accident or technical failure, had we done it. Making it an obvious sabotage wouldn't serve our interests at all, particularly if some evidence eventually made it clear who it was that did it.

---

i completely agree with this

cone said:

---

i just have a hard time believing in that sort of recklessness

lack of imagination on my behalf

---

There is a 40 year history to the type of recklessness that Brandon is capable of.

If you are surprised, that's on you, who likely voted for him, for not doing your research.

cone said:

---

there's a far more compelling rational explanation as to how this sabotage has absolutely damaged short and medium-term Russian leverage over Western Europe

so at the absolute bare minimum that has to be granted

your explanation can compete with that one, but the counterpoint can't be ignored.

---

Destruction of a gas pipeline that isn't shipping gas doesn't really change the equation at all. Russia has played its embargo card. They only get to play it once. They have no more leverage.

Quote:

---

what they are likely to send in the future.

---

well that's kind of a tautology now

Ukraine reconstruction deal is coming. But it’s really a Rothschild Energy pipeline and LNG ports for Odessa And Mariupol. We said Kissinger would cut Nordstrom in Geneva in July. Triple the price of gas and sell East med LNG. pic.twitter.com/FUCDl1ZGWV

— George Webb - Investigative Journalist (@RealGeorgeWebb1) September 28, 2022

Quote:

---

Destruction of a gas pipeline that isn't shipping gas doesn't really change the equation at all. Russia has played its embargo card. They only get to play it once. They have no more leverage.

---

i completely disagree with this

cone said:

---

Quote:

---

what they are likely to send in the future.

---

well that's kind of a tautology now

---

No, it's not. By using gas as a weapon, Putin forced Europe to look elsewhere. It's as simple as that. Destruction of these pipelines doesn't change that at all. Europe was always going to buy less Russian gas in the future. They are craven, but not completely stupid.

you know, when i got into the LNG sector 15 years ago, i didn't realize it was going to be like this

may you live in interesting times

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Seems like Russia saw an opportunity to make Biden's reckless statement a reality and then launch a propaganda campaign to drive a wedge between political factions in Europe and the USA over supposed US energy policy meddling. The pipelines weren't making any money but they could still be useful for propaganda.

It's a very viable and reasonable explanation.

---

Y'all are crazy. Y'all want it to be Russia and don't want it to be the United States so y'all are believing crazy ideas. The entire world knows it was us. The only people denying we were involved are Americans.

Yes our country is being ran by evil evil people. Does it shock you they do evil things? And endanger the lives of millions if not billions of people? They've been saying for years depopulation! Depopulation! We are on the verge of it.

Quote:

---

They are craven, but not completely stupid.

---

They're also about to be really cold and without industrial capacity for a little while.

Quote:

---

Y'all are crazy. Y'all want it to be Russia and don't want it to be the United States so y'all are believing crazy ideas. The entire world knows it was us. The only people denying we were involved are Americans.

---

why can't it be neither party?

cone said:

---

for those thinking the US had a hand in the op for sabotage

what's the end game for the US in this proxy war? regime change? is that even possible?

prolong the war - with what ultimate goal in mind?

there's no way to cordon off Russian hydrocarbon from Europe into perpetuity. so what's the grand strategy long-term?

---

Breaking NS means there is no chance for Russian fuel to flow west for a year or so. Yes there are pipelines not in the sea that can flow, but NS 1 and 2 were major.

What's the endgame for the US? That depends on what the values of our leaders are. If what we can see from them is an indication of their intentions, they want to continue to expand NATO and all the "values" that go with it.

Prolonging the war isn't about defeating Putin, it's about money. Ever see Lord of War and at the end you learn the major countries who sell arms sit on the UN security council. They perpetuate conflict because it's good for Lockheed (et al.) The more conflict the more the gears of war get greased. This, in a round about way, ends up aiding our allies like Germany.

I think NATO knows Ukraine is a lost cause, despite the sitreps. No one is honest about the amount of casualties the Ukr military has sustained. It's really not good. And once these Donbas regions are accepted into Rus (rather than autonomous states as Rus pushed for from the beginning) any attack on Donetsk et al. is an attack on Russia proper. And Putin has already made it clear that they have other rungs of deployment (special operation to partial mobilization to full mobilization).

cone said:

---

Quote:

---

The USA also would have been much more careful to make it appear to be an accident or technical failure, had we done it. Making it an obvious sabotage wouldn't serve our interests at all, particularly if some evidence eventually made it clear who it was that did it.

---

i completely agree with this

---

Fan fiction. We had navy boats and planes sitting right above it when it happened. We don't care. We aren't even denying it. Why? Because the rulers that be want escalation.

cone said:

---

Quote:

---

They are craven, but not completely stupid.

---

They're also about to be really cold and without industrial capacity for a little while.

---

Yes, that's true. They backed themselves into that predicament by being dependent on Russian gas. Now that Putin has made clear that he will use energy supplies as a weapon, they have no choice but to find alternative suppliers. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

Yukon Cornelius said:

---

cone said:

---

Quote:

---

The USA also would have been much more careful to make it appear to be an accident or technical failure, had we done it. Making it an obvious sabotage wouldn't serve our interests at all, particularly if some evidence eventually made it clear who it was that did it.

---

i completely agree with this

---

Fan fiction. We had navy boats and planes sitting right above it when it happened. We don't care. We aren't even denying it. Why? Because the rules that be wwnt escalation.

---

But all that does is escalate Europe against the US. What do we get out of that?

And we have denied it.

cone said:

---

Quote:

---

Y'all are crazy. Y'all want it to be Russia and don't want it to be the United States so y'all are believing crazy ideas. The entire world knows it was us. The only people denying we were involved are Americans.

---

why can't it be neither party?

---

It can be alot if people. But right now all evidence points to US and zero points to Russia but people keep saying Russia because of muh feelings.

Russia is bad. Yes. But not all bad deeds are done by Russia.

Yukon Cornelius said:

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Seems like Russia saw an opportunity to make Biden's reckless statement a reality and then launch a propaganda campaign to drive a wedge between political factions in Europe and the USA over supposed US energy policy meddling. The pipelines weren't making any money but they could still be useful for propaganda.

It's a very viable and reasonable explanation.

---

Y'all are crazy. Y'all want it to be Russia and don't want it to be the United States so y'all are believing crazy ideas. The entire world knows it was us. The only people denying we were involved are Americans.

Yes our country is being ran by evil evil people. Does it shock you they do evil things? And endanger the lives of millions if not billions of people? They've been saying for years depopulation! Depopulation! We are on the verge of it.

---

You shouldn't be throwing around the label crazy. Something about glass houses.

Yukon Cornelius said:

---

cone said:

---

Quote:

---

Y'all are crazy. Y'all want it to be Russia and don't want it to be the United States so y'all are believing crazy ideas. The entire world knows it was us. The only people denying we were involved are Americans.

---

why can't it be neither party?

---

It can be alot if people. But right now all evidence points to US and zero points to Russia but people keep saying Russia because of muh feelings.

Russia is bad. Yes. But not all bad deeds are done by Russia.

---

Absolute 100% bull*****

The Biden administration is too stupid to pull off something like this even if they wanted to. Your boy Putin did it for the obvious reasons that everyone can see.