[pelasaco]

just to be honest, the Pipelines explosion, had "Russia" written all over it, except after investigation, and a possible culprit, i.e not Russia, then nobody wanted to discuss about it anymore. I think the hysteria is too high, people are thirsty for War, looks like..

[oneshtein]

Delivery of Russian gas was stopped by Russia in violation of contract. European gas companies demands $20 billion in compensation. Nobody had incentive to blow up empty pipes except Russia.

Of course, Russians used false flag as usual, to blame Ukraine, but Ukraine doesn't hide successful attacks on Russian infrastructure, because Ukraine has legal right to defend itself.

[probably_wrong]

While a false flag operation cannot be ruled out, I don't think the case is as clear-cut as you suggest.

> Nobody had incentive to blow up empty pipes except Russia.

I disagree: Russian gas was the one leverage Russia had over Germany. Blowing the pipeline ensured that Germany wouldn't be able to get out of the conflict quietly - "Germany still receiving Russian gas" would not receive as much condemnation as "Germany repairs Russian gas pipeline".

> Ukraine doesn't hide successful attacks on Russian infrastructure, because Ukraine has legal right to defend itself.

True, but Ukraine doesn't have a legal right to sabotage the infrastructure of its allies. I live in Germany and I can tell you: that first winter was pretty bad for everyone, with plenty headlines about people who could no longer afford their heating costs. If it had been known that it was Ukraine's doing, popular support for the war would have sunk a lot.

[oneshtein]

European countries demand US$20 billion for undelivered gas from Russia[1].

Maybe, $20 billion is pocket money for you, but it's big money for Russia. A false flag operation is much much cheaper.

[1]: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/european-countries-demand-us-...

[deanCommie]

I wish people took this incident to realize that Germany should be investing in energy independence, the way France had.

[pelasaco]

how so, if Germany did shutdown almost all their nuclear power plants? Experts say that would be impossible to "simply turn it on back", because of lack of professionals capable to work on that and that each minute that we wait, harder will be to bring them back...

[trmaker103]

French nuclear industry maintains links with Russian giant Rosatom:

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/energies/article/2023/03/12/french...

What about the U.S., which is always holier than thou?

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/14/climate/enriched-uranium-...

The U.S. banned it this year, 2 years after Nordstream was blown up, to the amusement and applause from Nuland etc.

[nbman102]

That is a very abbreviated history. There are two pipelines, NS-1 and NS-2, both of which have two pipes each. NS-1 was operational until a turbine had to be repaired in Canada. The bureaucratic process to allow the repair was arduous, but finally it got done and chancellor Scholz did a photo-op in front of the repaired turbine.

Then the Russians played coy and came up with counter-bureaucratic reasons why the repaired turbine could not be installed. Presumably to put pressure on Germany, which was afraid of the 2022/2023 winter at the time.

Then two pipes of NS-1 and one pipe of NS-2 were blown up. Since no gas was flowing at the time, Russia had no reason to blow up its bargaining chip. Ukraine or the U.S. did have a reason.

Russia also delivered gas to Austria through a pipeline that goes through Ukraine and for which Ukraine collected transit fees until this year. Russia didn't shut down or blow up that pipeline.

From the point of view of the U.S. and Ukraine it does not make sense to blow up the Austrian pipeline because Austria is neutral anyway, so just let Ukraine collect the transit fees.

Germany of course must be pressured to be the second largest financial and weapons supporter for Ukraine, so hey, let's blow up the pipeline of our "ally".

Apart from Hersh's "the U.S. did it" theory, the Wall Street Journal recently blamed it on Zalushny. No other theories have emerged, but rest assured that if there were a credible Russia theory the Western press would shout it from the rooftops.

Putin has offered multiple times to either open the remaining pipe of NS-2 or to route gas via Turkey:

https://www.dw.com/en/putin-offers-europe-gas-through-nord-s...

[oneshtein]

Russia had $20 billion reasons to blow up their gas pipelines and blame Ukraine for that.

[holoduke]

You mean vice versa i assume.

[pelasaco]

> Of course, Russians used false flag as usual, to blame Ukraine, but Ukraine doesn't hide successful attacks on Russian infrastructure, because Ukraine has legal right to defend itself.

This is completely wrong. It involved German/Russian infrastructure, and if confirmed, it would rank as the worst terrorist act in the history of the FRG (Germany) since the Munich Olympic Games. In fact, it could, should, or would lead to the activation of Article 5, as one of NATO's members was attacked.

BTW from the Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream

" In June 2024 German authorities issued an arrest warrant for a Ukrainian national suspected of the sabotage.[13] "

This (in German) shed even more lights on that https://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/ukraine/roman-tscherwins...

[immibis]

A terrorist act is an act meant to cause terror. High natural gas prices, while they might be very inconvenient, are hardly terror in the same way as things usually described as terrorist acts, which usually involve civilians exploding at random.

[pelasaco]

that is your definition. BTW The department responsible for this case in Germany, is the anti-terrorism department.

https://www.zdf.de/nachrichten/politik/deutschland/nord-stre...

zdf is the german news broadcast.

[oneshtein]

So, this is one man, who bought, moved, and then installed 500kg of explosives in 4 places in front of a married couple, right?

[gruez]

>in front of a married couple

Is this supposed to imply the story is implausible because the couple wasn't in on the plot and would rat the third guy out? If so, all 3 are suspects and presumably are in on the plot, so this argument falls flat on its face.

[oneshtein]

Only one man is suspect, a married couple is not.

[gruez]

Says who? The DW article says otherwise.

>The two other suspects, a married couple who do not have warrants issued in their names, have denied knowing Z. and said that they were on vacation in Bulgaria when the attack took place.

[FrustratedMonky]

Wait. Wasn't it Ukraine that blew up the pipeline? I'm all for them defending themselves.

Are you saying it was actually Russia that did it? They blew up own pipeline?

[eps]

There's an outstanding German warrant for 3 Ukrainians in connection with the incident.

https://www.dw.com/en/nord-stream-explosions-germany-issues-...

[oneshtein]

> The two other suspects, a married couple who do not have warrants issued in their names, have denied knowing Z. and said that they were on vacation in Bulgaria when the attack took place.

[pelasaco]

> Wait. Wasn't it Ukraine that blew up the pipeline?

Yup, they did it. The question that is being investigated is if any other Country helped them or not.

[esarbe]

There's no actual evidence that Ukraine did it, lest alone solid proof.

Russia is a probable candidate.

[Cthulhu_]

The Dutch military intelligence agency MIVD had infiltrants in Ukraine after MH-17 of a plot to blow up the Nord Stream, they tipped off the CIA, who in turn warned Ukraine not to do it, three months before it happened; source [0], translation [1].

Germany has issued an arrest warrant for a Ukranian national [2] who along with two accomplices was on board the yacht Andromeda, which was located at the blast site days before the blast and on which traces of the same explosive was found as used on the pipelines, as well as DNA evidence.

I suppose it's not "actual evidence Ukraine did it", but it's more than enough evidence to make a Ukranian national that since fled back to Ukraine a suspect.

[0] https://nos.nl/artikel/2478770-vs-waarschuwde-oekraine-nord-... [1] https://nos-nl.translate.goog/artikel/2478770-vs-waarschuwde... [2] https://www.dw.com/en/nord-stream-explosions-germany-issues-...

[oneshtein]

> The two other suspects, a married couple who do not have warrants issued in their names, have denied knowing Z. and said that they were on vacation in Bulgaria when the attack took place.

:-/

So, one diver moved and installed 500kg of explosives in 4 places in front of a married couple?

[gruez]

>So, one diver moved and installed 500kg of explosives in 4 places in front of a married couple?

Are you taking the married couples' claims at face value? The article mentions two divers, not one.

[calmoo]

There is some pretty compelling evidence that it was Ukraine. The CIA even tipped Germany off about the potential saboteurs

https://archive.is/dPdoX

[esarbe]

What exactly is the evidence there? I read the article and all I see is hearsay.

German investigations found that the Andromeda trail leads to Russia[0].

[0] https://www.tagesspiegel.de/internationales/nord-stream-spur...

[gruez]

The "investigations" you reference were by German media, whereas the wsj article was allegedly from German authorities. Moreover, while you accuse the wsj article as "hearsay", the same is true for the tagesspiegel you linked. The crux of that article's claim is that the company that rented the yacht had Crimean owners with ties to Russia, but no proof was presented. We're asked to trust the journalists on that, just as we're asked to trust the wsj journalists on the facts of the German authorities' investigation.

[gruez]

Why is "solid proof" required for the claim that Ukrainian nationals did it, but "probable candidate" suffices for Russia?

[esarbe]

To attribute culpability, you need solid proof. I'm not saying that Russia did it - simply that there's enough evidence that Russia had means, motive and opportunity - which makes it a probable candidate.

[aa-jv]

>Nobody had incentive to blow up empty pipes except Russia.

Nonsense. Biden had a great deal of incentive to destroy that pipeline.

[aguaviva]

Biden had a great deal of incentive to destroy that pipeline.

But far too many more obvious counterincentives.

Unlike the Ukrainians, NATO/US were smart enough to see that blowing up NS2 would be hugely stupid, providing precisely zero strategic advantage while simply provoking Russia to respond assymetrically (in exactly the same way as it is apparently doing right now). In addition to the huge methane release.

So if anything, the standpoint of "incentives" points squarely in the opposite direction (that is, against the idea that the US/NATO must have done it).

[aa-jv]

Your belief in the infallible nobility of NATO belies a vested interest in ignoring its massive, undeniable war crimes, crimes against humanity and violations of human rights at massive scale, as an organization, this century.

>Unlike the Ukrainians, NATO/US were smart enough

I do not concur with this glib assessment one bit.

[aguaviva]

I said absolutely nothing about its "infallible nobility", of course.

Or even implying that sentiment.

[oneshtein]

LOL Biden has no balls to do that.

[aa-jv]

Had. NS2 was almost two years ago. Your current Biden assessment may be correct, but two years ago there was a great deal more lucidity, when he stated that "no matter what, the NS2 pipeline will not be allowed to persist" ..

[benterix]

> people are thirsty for War, looks like..

Nobody in the West wants any war. The usual tactics of Putin is to do what he wants whether on his or foreign soil, using poisoning etc. in a way that everybody knows it's him but he will politely deny. It's a kind of a silly game, the GRU could just have put a bullet in Lytvynenko's head but they choose a slow death to show off.

[pelasaco]

I’m not sure that no one wants a war. I can see some groups profiting from it.. I see some politicians being quite blunt about it—some in Germany, for instance, who are well-known lobbyists for the defense industry. Biden’s decision to allow the use of long-range weapons seems like a tactical political move designed to make Trump’s life significantly harder from day one. It feels irresponsible, as it appears that war is being used both to weaken the opposition and to enrich the defense industry.

[aftbit]

>Biden’s decision to allow the use of long-range weapons seems like a tactical political move designed to make Trump’s life significantly harder from day one.

I have a different take on this, basically parroting Perun on YouTube. The lame duck period is the perfect time for escalatory steps, as the Russians always have the option of waiting until the new administration comes into office rather than responding aggressively. Trump will be free to re-impose whichever restrictions he wants, but he'll be starting from a stronger position. He'll have the "stop UA use of long-range weapons" bargaining chip, _and_ he'll be able to relatively costlessly blame Biden for the "bad decision" of allowing them.

[kjkjadksj]

A war in europe is not going to be profitable squared against the damage it will do to the global economy. Thats why the middle eastern wars were attractive for American coalition members. Defense contractors profit. You can demo new tech and tactics. And whatever damage you do in that corner of the world won’t really impact anything at home.

[mciancia]

> people are thirsty for War, looks like

Russians, yes

[vasco]

I wish I lived in a world where it's so easy to know who is good and who is evil and to pinpoint them so well.

[peutetre]

You do. Russia's invasion of Ukraine is not an ambiguous war. Russia is plainly in the wrong.

[vasco]

I don't know what goes on to comment. I'm not there and I don't fool myself into thinking that I know geopolitics just because I read some articles. My comment was replying to someone who said the Russians are the war thirsty people of the world. It's a bit rich because, there's a bunch of other ongoing wars in the world and people aren't just "bad" or "good"

[Cthulhu_]

Objective facts though: Russia invaded Ukraine, in 2014 and 2022. There was no formal declaration of war. There were widespread and indiscriminate attacks on civilians.

Which parts of those are "good" in your opinion? Do you believe Russia's "denazification" claim?

There are no international laws that legitimized Russia's invasion of Ukraine. If Ukraine was in violation of something, there's procedures in place to declare war legitimately - but before that there's the nonviolent approach, which Russia skipped.

[vasco]

No parts of the war are good - I didn't make any claims about the Russian war, I don't know what caused it or why it's going on, and I don't like wars. I don't believe most claims by either side, I doubt there's advantage in revealing the real reasons by either side - the articles we read are to craft an opinion either to support one side or the other and I don't think it's that simple - that's my whole point. I don't need to think a war is legitimate to have a reaction to someone saying there's one country with warmonger people and one country without. In general I think it's normal to side with the invaded party and I'm personally inclined to support that side - but it doesn't mean I tell myself I'm making some informed decision.

[peutetre]

> I don't know what goes on to comment.

And yet you are commenting. Ignorance and a lack of curiosity are not compelling arguments.

Maybe it's time to grow up and start paying attention.

[FrustratedMonky]

Yeah.

Lot of Russian Apologist.

Russia invades Ukraine -> It is Biden's fault, he ordered it.

Russia actually invading and killing -> It was NATO's fault for discussing admission.

Like, Russia is actually 'doing the bad things'.

[pelasaco]

> Like, Russia is actually 'doing the bad things'.

Yes, Russia is doing bad things.. But do we really need or want a third World War because of it? It’s not Ukraine’s fault that Russia invaded, but Ukraine bears responsibility for having been so corrupt over the past 20 years and for being irresponsible given its proximity to Russia. We still don’t know how much of the aid sent to Ukraine is being lost to corruption... So I am not willing to fight this War.

[amanaplanacanal]

You should definitely stay home then. Other people are doing the fighting for you.

[FrustratedMonky]

What would Reagan have said to this?

"USSR, why bother pushing back, not my problem, can't I just go to the mall and hang out?"

[oneshtein]

This planet voted in UN that Russian Federation is aggressor. Which world you represent?

[limit499karma]

Maybe he is an Israeli.

[esarbe]

It is easy; nations that attack other nations unprovoked are "evil" (at fault).

Ukraine has never infringed on Russia's sovereignty or territorial integrity before it was attacked. Therefor this war is entirely Russia's fault.

The world is mostly shades of gray. But this case it black and white.

[wbl]

They murdered an entire town. Well several. Raped and tortured those they didn't kill. Kidnap children to Russianize them. Torture and kill POWs. The only difference between them and the Germans is that they haven't carried out industrial slaughter of Jews.

[pelasaco]

And now Germans are paying Ukraine bills. History is much more complicated than we think..

[stoperaticless]

> I wish I lived in a world where it's so easy to know who is good and who is evil

War and killings turn up the contrast, converting shades of gray to black and white, people to friends and enemies.

I rather would live in peacetime, where it’s less obvious who is good and who is bad.

[matt-p]

I think most reasonable people realise that was either the US or the UK.