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

911–920 of 1001 posts

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#911

Post by Animatronio »

londons_explore wrote: post #883
Animatronio wrote: post #691

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. NS1 and/or NS2 were ready to reopen according to Putin if Europe were to lift sanctions. 2. EU is trying to stop being reliant on Russian gas, so far it isn't fait accompli. 3. Based on 1+2 we could assume someone wants to push EU as far away from Russia as possible as fast as possible(regarding gas supplying, to be clear) So again, who profits and has the means to do accomplish such feat: 1. USA: very vocal again…

> has the means and maybe motivation to do so. How hard is it to destroy a pipeline? Do you actually need an underwater UAV, or might lowering explosives on a rope and a timer from a small boat do the job? Remember - water transmits compression waves really well, and the pipe is the only compressible thing around. The sea there is only 200 meters deep, so lowering it on a rope at slack tide and with a good GPS on the…

Relatively hard to get right. You have to deploy a ship (maybe merchant ship) and a specialized crew to the actual location, undetected, at the right time. A lot can go wrong.

I suppose Austria, Hungary, Romania, Czechia, et al do not have the resources to pull this off. Remember, it's only been a couple of months that this gas stand-off is this tense. The only countries in Europe who have the means to act fast on this are the UK, France, Italy, Spain, maybe Greece (I don't think any of them would do it - there's no reason for it whatsoever), and Poland.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#912

Post by tgv »

seydor wrote: post #490
tgv wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of these make much sense. It's pretty idle to speculate, and the list is most likely incomplete and inaccurate. It only feeds the trolls. Then again, this whole thread is full of fingerpointing without evidence. If HN can't contain itself, what won't the twitter and facebook, and –may God forget– Truth Social do?

OK so instead of speculating , what are people to do? Stare with open mouths to what end?

Yes, please. There are already flagged remarks here. I'm sure twitter is a cesspool blaming everyone from the Jews to the Dutch. That behavior has already created large problems in society. Let's not aggrevate them.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#913

Post by MichaelCollins »

origin_path wrote: post #278
tgv wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of these make much sense. It's pretty idle to speculate, and the list is most likely incomplete and inaccurate. It only feeds the trolls. Then again, this whole thread is full of fingerpointing without evidence. If HN can't contain itself, what won't the twitter and facebook, and –may God forget– Truth Social do?

Note that NS2 has also been destroyed, and that's even more recent than NS1. It was definitely sabotage, it can't be anything else given the timing, and it has to be state sponsored given that the pipelines are under the ocean. Berlin apparently thinks it would require submarines or special forces. US / Ukraine are unfortunately the only states for which this makes sense (perhaps US with back-room permission from som…

> This makes the USA the prime suspect by far, worryingly and alarmingly.

I don't find that worrying or alarming. It would mean the administration knows what they're about and are taking proactive measures to take options off the table for Germany and Russia.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#914

Post by Roark66 »

marshray wrote: post #472
Roark66 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

I don't really disagree with your information or analysis, but it was very unhelpful to start out accusing someone of being a "troll".

Ok, if you feel offended I'm sorry. It's just the way you written the first sentence to someone with local knowledge was quite polarizing.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#915

Post by Roark66 »

fmajid wrote: post #902
axus wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I liked the theory that Russia did it as a warning that they can blow up Poland's pipeline anytime.

That’s absurd, like cutting your nose to spite your enemy’s face. Putin would have sabotaged the Polish pipeline instead of his own, after all it’s not as if Russian-Polish relations can sink any lower.

Yes, as absurd as let's say attacking the only country in the world that has a large percentage of population that actually supports you(many people in Eastern Ukraine speak Russian at home)?

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#916

Post by pydry »

labster wrote: post #847
csomar wrote: post #831

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting you wrote a very long response and yet you presented no concrete arguments that the US could be behind this. We can agree that most EU countries will not support such an incident. The only two countries who have the technical capability and the political reasons are the USA and Russia. Both are evil and ready to blow the world for their own gains. > why would they take the risk to destroy the pipelin…

That’s because there are no reasons for the US to do it. Europe is staying aligned just fine right now. Germans think Russia is an unreliable business partner, and don’t want to deal with them again. Germany is already expanding LNG port capacity to buy more North American gas. It would be a tremendous risk to be discovered; Denmark could trigger Article 5 against the United States. The US needs to show strength in A…

>That’s because there are no reasons for the US to do it.

As said before, it would be to prevent Germany from caving and turning the taps back on in winter when they are desperate for gas.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#917

Post by guilhas »

jupp0r wrote: post #711
guilhas wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure that is correct, the companies contractually responsible for the nordstream 1 turbine maintenance/repair were European and Canadian, that were refusing to repair them because of the sanctions on Russia https://www.reuters.com/article/ukraine-crisis-nordstream-si... https://financialpost.com/commodities/energy/oil-gas/germany... https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/ukrainian-group-sue-...

Strangely, gas turbines supplying Hungary which showed a more friendly posture towards Russia didn't break all of a sudden... I obviously can't prove that the Russia controlled companies that operated this equipment deliberately broke anything but in the past outages like this were relatively rare.

The thing is that it was a scheduled maintenance. So presumably it was expected

But you can theorize that Russians were being too picky with the repairs which normally possible wouldn't

But even if they did, EU and Canada withholding the turbine is playing to their game, don't see the purpose

Still, anything is possible... cloak and daggers

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#918

Post by foverzar »

smsm42 wrote: post #634
cdash wrote: post #614

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They stopped sending gas over on Nord Stream 1 with the excuse of maintenance and repairs specifically as leverage for Germany to sign off on opening their brand new pipeline Nord Stream 2 for business. Now, both pipelines have been blown up. It doesn't make any sense for it to have been Russia.

Why not? If it is stopped by the Russian order, Russians violated the contract. If it is stopped because unknown terrorists blew up the pipeline, it's force majeure, Gazprom is in the clear. Also, they have one more pipeline left. Which they are also threatening to - guess what? - shut down. https://www-moscowtimes-ru.translate.goog/2022/09/27/gazprom... Doesn't make sense for it to be Russia? Or does it now?

> Why not?

Because they had spend years and huge monetary investments to build it.

That would be one insanely expensive spectacle.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#919

Post by inferiorhuman »

vintermann wrote: post #900
inferiorhuman wrote: post #852

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is Putin direct interest destroy a source of income and leverage to the country!?!? Because there's no political will to re-open it for the time being. Pushing the narrative that this was an American action benefits Putin in two ways: - Spreads discontent in Germany (and elsewhere). While the EU is okay shutting down NS 1+2 for now if things are particularly bad this winter (weather, value against the dollar, inf…

This is the classical conspiratorial judo-move. Who does this benefit? It seems to benefit A in every meaningful way, but that's too obvious, so clearly it's B doing it to make A look bad! False flag! Usually it's Russia doing this kind of rhetorical judo move. But this clearly benefits Norway, Ukraine, the US and maybe the Baltics in roughly that order, and hurts Russia, Germany and to some extent Netherlands. If yo…

Russia condemned the attacks the fastest so it must be the Americans! Boris Badenov, you may be on to something yet.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#920

Post by foverzar »

ordu wrote: post #726
thiagoharry wrote: post #585

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This makes no sense. Without the gas, Russia loses leverage and there would be no dependence of Russian hydrocarbons. Germany always could buy more expensive gas from Ukraine and USA, and now they have no other choice.

The whole war makes no sense. Putin had lost his senses. 1. Putin seriously cite Dugin[1]. Putin acts like he believes this bullshit. 2. There was a lot of people who on different occasions told "Putin wouldn't do that, it would make no sense", so then Putin could prove them wrong later by doing it. This war is one of examples of that kind. Or MH17: why to hit a plane with a missile? There was no sense in it. But it…

> 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, the more the assertions are based on values and politics rather than reality, the less sense it would make.

> 1. Putin seriously cite Dugin[1]. Putin acts like he believes this bullshit.

You didn't link an actual reference, just Dugin's wikipedia page.

> Or MH17: why to hit a plane with a missile? There was no sense in it. But it just happened.

Ukraine had been conducting air strikes over that territory at that time.

Post reply on HN