Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

forsvaret.dk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

801–810 of 1001 posts

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#801

Post by cjbgkagh »

Symmetry wrote: post #464
eloff wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So that doesn't look like an accident. I have difficulty imagining accidental ignition in an underwater gas pipeline. Where would the oxygen come from? Plus it's more than one explosion on the same day - can't be a coincidence. The next question is, who did it? It doesn't seem like something in Russia's interest, they've been wanting to get that pipeline approved and operational. They invested huge sums of money to b…

The problem is that the technical resources required to pull something like this off don't seem to be all that high. You need a ton or so of explosives which is the hard part, a delayed fuse, a water proof container, a camera and light that work underwater, and some winches to deploy the camera and then the bomb. It wouldn't surprise me if almost every nation in Europe could pull this off if they put their minds to i…

I think the real reason states don't typically do this is that we rely on undersea cables and pipelines for a lot so it is not a good idea to throw stones from glass houses.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#802

Post by cjbgkagh »

formerly_proven wrote: post #202
eloff wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So that doesn't look like an accident. I have difficulty imagining accidental ignition in an underwater gas pipeline. Where would the oxygen come from? Plus it's more than one explosion on the same day - can't be a coincidence. The next question is, who did it? It doesn't seem like something in Russia's interest, they've been wanting to get that pipeline approved and operational. They invested huge sums of money to b…

> The next question is, who did it? It doesn't seem like something in Russia's interest, they've been wanting to get that pipeline approved and operational. They invested huge sums of money to build it after all. NS2 never entering service was settled for good over 200 days ago. NS1 has been shut down by Russia, but it was at best dubious before this whether it would ever be used operationally again.

Nothing in politics is settled for good.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#803

Post by oofbey »

AbrahamParangi wrote: post #127
wongarsu wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sabotage makes sense, but by whom? Surely Russia has no interest in sabotaging the pipelines that give them leverage over Europe. Without the pipelines, the whole "you lift the sanctions, we deliver natural gas" game is gone. Even if unlikely to happen, it would have been an important psychological and political factor over the winter. Meanwhile European powers don't seem to have an incentive. They would benefit from…

I think it actually was Russia because Russia has really reliably misjudged its position and resources. I see no reason to think they wouldn’t do this self-destructive thing when they’ve done so many other self-destructive things. The videos coming out of the conscription paint a fairly incredible picture.

Exactly. Russian policy frequently follows this philosophy of "a sinking tide lowers all boats, so long as ours is lowered a little bit less, we win." They're happy to burn the world down as long as they end up a little less burnt than everybody else. Does it make sense? Probably not. But that's how they've been acting.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#804

Post by wonderwonder »

OrvalWintermute wrote: post #747
WinstonSmith84 wrote: post #666

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like on any crime scene, who profits from the crime? Well, a few things first: 1- NS1 along NS2 are (were) shutdown and clearly these were not going to re-open, not before the end of the war - not politically acceptable for Putin, even less for Germany 2- The war is going to last for many more months (best case scenario) or a year or two or ... No matter how long it will really last, Europe, after having survived Win…

> 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. Blowing up their (now useless) pipeline is in line with another desperate move: at least try to make something useful out of it. If Russia loses the war, Putin is just dead (at least pol…

Russia has over 50k KIA and have lost many thousands of heavy vehicles, aircraft and even battleships. Hundreds of these vehicles are now being used against them by the Ukrainians. Russia may get support from Iran or N. Korea but so what? The support is in the form of equipment generations behind what is being delivered to Ukraine by the US and on tap to arrive from Europe. They are about to send 300k untrained men in as cannon fodder. These men will just be chewed up. Ukraine will definitely experience setbacks but Russia is going to be set back as a regional power for at least a generation. Thousands of men are fleeing Russia to avoid being drafted. Ukraine has reclaimed thousands of square KM of terrain in the last few weeks.

The Russian gas pipelines were just destroyed; meaning that for Europe, yielding to Putin's energy blackmail is not even an option anymore, he has nothing to offer now. They will support Ukraine as they find other energy partners. Italy just secured a source from N. Africa. The US will now become a major energy supplier to Europe, costing the Russians long term. The Russian economy is flailing and they cannot even replace parts required to keep their vehicles running.

Most importantly on a global scale, the illusion that they are a near US military peer has been destroyed. Sweden and Finland shrugged at Russian threats and joined NATO. Russia has been exposed as a weak, poorly led military that would get steam rolled by Europe even without US boots on the ground. The united states would obliterate them. The only card they have is nukes, besides that they are weak. Russia likely becomes a vassal state to China.

If this is Russia winning then yes, you are correct.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#805

Post by SanjayMehta »

kibwen wrote: post #778
SanjayMehta wrote: post #725

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia could have just turned off the tap. The sabotage ensures Europe can't back off from the US sanctions now. Wrecks Germany's economy, thereby eliminating a rival. VW et al are already talking about moving production to the US. And Biden promised to take care of NS 2 back in February itself. https://youtu.be/OS4O8rGRLf8

This is tinfoil-haberdashery. No, Biden did not authorize a clandestine attack on Russian infrastructure just to boost the US auto industry, nor did he subtly broadcast his nefarious intent months ago as part of some game to throw red meat to the conspiratorialists, Q-style. The US would have nothing to gain and everything to lose by engaging in such an action, and has absolutely no impetus to since it already curren…

Putin is acting as irrationally as JFK did during the Cuban missile crisis.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#806

Post by davrosthedalek »

WinstonSmith84 wrote: post #666
thiagoharry wrote: post #578

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is Putin direct interest destroy a source of income and leverage to the country!?!? Now Germany can buy gas from 2 sources: Ukraine and USA. This explanation makes no sense to me.

Like on any crime scene, who profits from the crime? Well, a few things first: 1- NS1 along NS2 are (were) shutdown and clearly these were not going to re-open, not before the end of the war - not politically acceptable for Putin, even less for Germany 2- The war is going to last for many more months (best case scenario) or a year or two or ... No matter how long it will really last, Europe, after having survived Win…

There is also China and maybe India. With the pipeline gone for good, Russia has to sell to them. No other market.

But all this speculation depends on how damaged the pipeline is. I haven't seen any info on how long a repair would take.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#807

Post by hackerlight »

throwawaydad12 wrote: post #739
woodruffw wrote: post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a serious stretch to read this as threatening an attack on the pipeline itself. Not only is it from over 6 months ago, but it doesn't make any sense: NS2 is controlled by the Germans themselves, and there's no strategic value in blowing it up rather than just turning it off (or on). The more sensible interpretation is that Biden was threatening to fully support Germany's plans to become energy independent. And t…

The strategic value to the US is that it completely removes the possibility that Germany will negotiate with Russia to turn the pipelines back on. Or, alternatively, it's a strategic benefit to Russia to plant the idea of US treachery in the minds of the Germans. I have no opinion and doubt we'll ever know what actually happened. Definitely sabotage, though.

Really, either speculation is equally valid (or should I say, invalid) without:

(1) An understanding of the facts of how successful the EU has been at diversifying away from Russian gas and whether NS2's natural demise was all but an inevitability.

(2) How much the repairs will cost.

If the repair costs are low, it's probably Russia, because of the propaganda value.

If NS2's demise was highly likely, again probably Russia because they're leveraging a sunk cost to their benefit which is just smart.

But so many people are making confident assumptions about (1) and (2) in this thread. If you don't know the answer to those questions, stop forming strong opinions!

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#808

Post by Kukumber »

optimiz3 wrote: post #798
Kukumber wrote: post #748

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't say "please", it makes you look like someone who want to censor critical thinkers Provide counter-arguments, sources and materials that can help educate the people you think are wrong in their analysis and research I do my best to document and source my claims, and you know that since you checked my past comments, i do my homework And no i'm not pro-russian, it's called impartiality

1. The current administration in the United States is in general anti-fossil fuel development. 2. The United States is already at max capacity for its export capabilities. There is no incremental supply to satisfy demand. 3. Destroying foreign supply when demand can't be met only serves to destroy demand because it forces the market to move to alternatives (case in point: OPEC and how they try to not let oil prices g…

Well, Biden doesn't seem to agree with you

https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1490792461979078662

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#809

Post by hackerlight »

kstenerud wrote: post #90

If I were a betting man, I'd put my money on Poland. The Polish prime minister immediately called "sabotage" and fingered Russia, while everyone else is still saying "it could be sabotage but we need to investigate first". Russia wants the taps capable of being turned ON at their discretion, not permanently broken. This hurts their bargaining position in a big way because they've just lost their biggest source of lev…

  "Russia wants the taps capable of being turned ON at their discretion, not permanently broken."
There's two assumptions embedded in this sentence.

Firstly, who is saying it is permanently broken? If the repairs are cheap, Russia may decide the cost of that is worth the amount of distrust it has introduced.

Secondly, how do you know that Russia hasn't decided that NS2 will become a sunk cost, due to the way that EU has committed to diversifying away from Russia? If Russia has decided that NS2 is a sunk cost, it's actually optimal to destroy it if destroying it gives some value.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#810

Post by hackerlight »

mmastrac wrote: post #27
wongarsu wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sabotage makes sense, but by whom? Surely Russia has no interest in sabotaging the pipelines that give them leverage over Europe. Without the pipelines, the whole "you lift the sanctions, we deliver natural gas" game is gone. Even if unlikely to happen, it would have been an important psychological and political factor over the winter. Meanwhile European powers don't seem to have an incentive. They would benefit from…

Europe didn't need the gas [1] [2]. Russia has nothing to lose by sabotaging it. Don't forget that Russia had already slowed/slopped NS1 by this point. [1] https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/15747542772681031... "Those shipments are enough to cover a complete halt in Russian pipeline flows from Oct. 1." [2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-27/europe-is... (paywalled version of the original quot…

Also, if Russia can easily repair this damage, it isn't really jeopardizing NS2. People here are assuming that this is the end of NS2. What a propaganda coup if the repairs are fairly cheap and they can sow this much distrust for that small financial cost.
Post reply on HN