Mystery leaks (sabotage) hit Russian (Nordstream 1 and 2) undersea gas pipelines to Europe

They hate it when you do that. Using little things like facts and reality to debunk the propaganda of the troll farmers.

 

Sure there is motive -- and crying "NO NO NO" while running around in circles salivating on self is not an argument to the contrary.

 

I don't - but, it is a whole lot more likely than Russia

There were nato ships in the area as well .. "Just before explosions detected"

 

There was some fools running around .. and no matter what happened .. they cried "Russia Russia Russia" -- do not listen to these people -- they are idiots who do not know what an argument is.

 

Yeah, you can see that here on these forums. The usual propaganda trolls spew one thing and then a week later flip a 180 and spew the exact opposite as if no one can remember their old position. They just post anything to sew division and create doubt or conflict. They have been doing this since 2014 when Russia shot down that Dutch airliner and then spewed all sorts of contradictory conspiracy theories trying to muddy the waters and obscure Russia's guilt.

 

do you have a prejudice to ppl who froth at the mouth!

 

What a dumb claim. The pipelines were both closed so Russia destroying them doesn't effect anything. The EU is already buying LNG from anyone who would sell it to them.

European states are going to be fine. New supply chains will be sorted out, new infrastructure built, and domestic production prioritized despite the anti-science stupidity of the far left ecoweenies. The only one who will get hurt long term is Russia because they will be locked out of every where because they have proven to be untrustworthy and unreliable.

You guys shot yourself in the foot and the economic damage is going to haunt you for a long time.

 

Russia is the guilty party.

The Washington Post
Opinion | Russia is the most likely culprit of Nord Stream pipeline sabotage

". . . The assumption among European officials is that Russia is responsible, and that makes sense. No other nation would have both the motive and the means for an attack. The means are easy: Moscow could have sent an undersea drone, as reported by the Times of London, or a submarine with Naval Spetsnaz (special forces) frogmen to plant the charges. The motive is more speculative, because it would seem counterproductive for Russia to sabotage its own pipeline.

But Russia has a long history of using gas interruptions as a geopolitical tool. Indeed, the Kremlin had already announced in early September that the Nord Stream 1 pipeline would be closed indefinitely for repairs, in a move that was widely interpreted as an attempt to ratchet up the pressure on Europe to stop supporting Ukraine. (The Nord Stream 2 pipeline, completed last year, has not opened — and likely never will.)

Mark Galeotti, a British expert on Russian criminal and security affairs (subjects that are closely intertwined), argues in the Spectator that the pipeline attack was a warning shot from Putin: If the Russians could sabotage Nord Stream 1 and 2, they could do the same to the new Baltic Pipe carrying Norwegian natural gas from the North Sea to Poland or to the many underwater internet pipelines upon which the United States and Europe so heavily depend. Other Russia analysts, including Dmitri Alperovitch, agree that the Kremlin is the culprit. . . . "


Russian Sabotage Of The Nord Stream Pipeline Marks A Point Of No Return

". . . One may be tempted to ask why would the Russians bother with sabotage and denial? After all, hostility towards Ukraine and Europe is neither novel nor secret. The shutoff of gas from sabotage does not fundamentally change Russia’s stated aims or enacted strategy. The answer lies in the strength of Western financial institutions, Russia’s lack of leverage or soft power, and the devastating impacts sanctions are having against Russia. If Nord Stream is shut down suddenly through “force majeure”, a sudden uncontrollable stop that is the fault of neither party, then Russia can void its obligations towards European stakeholders without legally breaking contracts, thus dodging the many penalties in doing so.

The other great reason Putin is expending so much effort in pursuit of such a transparent strategy lies in his domestic vulnerability. By ending all possible routes for gas delivery resumption with the West and making rapprochement more difficult, Russian oligarchs who have not yet fallen out of a window, but may still be wavering in their dedication to Putin, have no choice to acquiesce to his leadership. . . . "

 

this is looking bad for you guys too. its going to be cold in poland this winter.

 

I notice you didn't deny any of the points he raised. Largely because you probably can't.

 

Poland's storages are full along with just about every other EU country other than Austria. Further more there is now plenty of LNG coming in so supply is secure if higher in price. Sorry, but Putin's game failed.

 

Russian doctrine places a great deal on language and land. If you speak Russian, you are Russian and in their eyes you should be looking eastward towards Russia. Russian history regarding territory is that everything in Europe is rightfully Russian belonging.

That's not tied to the Soviet Union and is more about the ideology over there.

To them, at least part of Germany, like Ukrain is Russian. It will ALWAYS be Russian. And it's only because of poor choices and failure that it isn't part of Russia.

 

not for long, idont envy you. idid read that some african charity was saving up to buy some radiators for you guys in eastern europe. maybe you can get some sent to you in poland..

 

That is the excuse they try to us to justify their wars of expansion and annexation. Really what the Russians are trying to do is reach defensible geographic barriers so they can forward deploy static forces to plug those gaps. That would buy them some time even as their demographics collapse making it impossible for them to do mass mobilization like in WW1 and WW2. The problem is this means Russia wants to co quer 300 million people but their corrupt and incompetent military can't even handle 40 million Ukrainians.

 

I am in California not eastern Europe. Also, Norway is a major oil and gas producer and exporter so they will be just fine. Poland has a pipeline which delivers gas directly from Norway plus it has LNG facilities because the Poles always knew Russians were liars and untrustworthy.

You don't even think out your propaganda, do you?

 

im a military analyst for the most powerful nation in the world.

 

Only one who is living in a necessary illusion fairy tale would take US media opinion seriously on the question of who done it. What did you expect Forbes/Wapo to say "It was likely the Pentagon" ?

better come up with an answer mate .. as this question coming back at ya .. har har har .. I smell NIB poppage (Necessary Illusion Bubble)

 

Ok So we’ll the. stop running around in circles salivating , that is not becoming of embers here on this board.

 

No! That was a sign by Putin that he can damage a pipeline. The pipeline he damaged is not being used to transfer gas at this time. That is an example of what a Satanic evil mind like Putin’s can concoct.

 

Doubtful. Also Russia is not the most powerful country in the world.

 

Study some history before you opine. The US is a responsible member of the good countries of the world we do not do crap like that. An oligarch would so which Russian oligarch did it?

 

Following Mark Twain, I face the coming resolution of this question with the calm confidence of a Christian holding four aces.

 

And they gambled over Christs Robe ...but that did not change the fact that there was a crucifixion taking place - nor does the over-confidence of the novice bode well.

Now tell me .. did you expect "Forbes" to put forth the opinion " USA did it" ?

 

Starlink is far more bandwidth-limited than you seem to realize. The other satellite-based ISPs have even more limited (dramatically more limited) capabilities than Starlink.

Here, read this: Each StarLink satellite has 16 beams and can serve 2000+ users

Compare that with this:

source: The global internet is powered by vast undersea cables. But they're vulnerable. | CNN

Look, I'm basically a Musk groupie. I'm a huge fan of SpaceX and Starlink. In fact, my family just purchased and installed two starlink terminals: one for an RV and one for a remote cabin in southern Utah. It was pretty awesome to be able to make WiFi calls from the middle of the wilderness.

But anyone who think they're going to be able to handle even a fraction of the data load that undersea cables carry today is simply ignoring reality. StarLink has not been designed or built to handle that volume of data. Nowhere near it, in fact.