Nordstream: An Accident? • Hacker News Board

Re: Nordstream: An Accident?

#41

Post by seydor » Fri, Sep 30, 2022, 2:22 PM UTC

howmayiannoyyou wrote: post #28

seydor wrote: post #7

To be honest, people dont seem to care too much who did it. It was russia: what are they gonna do, sanction them? It was the US: what are russians gonna do, go to war with the west? Whoever did this, they solved a Godrian knot. Imagine going into winter with one pipeline being the lifeline of europe. [My conspiracy theory: this was a arranged via secret negotiations between US and Russia. They want an end to the war…

That was never a possible outcome. Pipelines transiting Belarus and Ukraine remain operational and AFAIK in-service. Who did it does matter. If Russia didn't self-sabotage they may feel some obligation to retaliate proportionally against someone else's energy infrastructure.

If they wish to retaliate, all the need to do is destroy their own infrastructure

Re: Nordstream: An Accident?

#42

Post by namaria » Fri, Sep 30, 2022, 2:22 PM UTC

cinntaile wrote: post #20

nix23 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The weight of the random-press aka "we don't know it, but the CIA already told us that could happen in the future, and therefore it must be true and it was russia" sound's like a big minus weight.

I think we are fairly certain it's not an accident?

Certainty is not advisable at this time.

Re: Nordstream: An Accident?

#43

Post by MichaelCollins » Fri, Sep 30, 2022, 2:23 PM UTC

rfrey wrote: post #22

Ekaros wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And who actually gains from this in the long run... Certainly not Germany or Russia... Should make it pretty clear. It could be UK as tradition of breaking down Europe, but they are having enough issues that the timing is entirely wrong... I don't think China cares, so maybe Arabs, but I doubt. Only really leaves USA and we know what they have historically been up to.

There is exactly one imperialist aggressor in this conflict, and it isn't the US.

You're implicitly assuming that the destruction of the pipeline was an imperial act of aggression, rather than a response to imperial aggression. I don't think that's a sound assumption.

Re: Nordstream: An Accident?

#44

Post by dividedbyzero » Fri, Sep 30, 2022, 2:23 PM UTC

m000 wrote: post #15

> No military is going to arrange for two pipes in the same general area to be destroyed 17 hours apart. This is only true if the operation was conducted in hostile waters. Just saying.

Even in hostile waters, why not? Doing it this way does send a message and sows uncertainty, i.e. was whoever did this able to place explosives on the second one under the eyes of several militaries?) and can be accomplished by using timed fuses.

Re: Nordstream: An Accident?

#45

Post by mdemare » Fri, Sep 30, 2022, 2:23 PM UTC

Interesting! I didn't realize how accident-prone these pipelines were.

An accident would explain the glaring absence of an actor with both motive and opportunity.

Re: Nordstream: An Accident?

#46

Post by behaveEc0n00 » Fri, Sep 30, 2022, 2:25 PM UTC

RajT88 wrote: post #13

namaria wrote: post #8

Unqualified opinions are cheap. This random internet guy thinks sabotage is unlikely on the Nord Stream incident based on what is published on news websites? This has a weight of exactly zero.

The old adage, "Opinions are like assholes; everyone's got one" comes to mind.

The opinion this is cheap talk might be a shitty one?

Gas line works fine for years, suddenly during regional conflict it goes tits up?

A dying country whose leadership seems intent on putting it out of its misery sending its potential fathers to a meat grinder, a history of stupid big picture choices, angry at the world for not letting it conquer it might partake in environmental sabotage.

It’s a lot less on the nose than nukes; if we can’t have imperialist nation state, no one can!

The holocaust is proof of human indifference to each other’s existence. What do a bunch of old turds care about intentional environmental destruction?

Re: Nordstream: An Accident?

#47

Post by lesuorac » Fri, Sep 30, 2022, 2:25 PM UTC

T-zex wrote: post #39

jcranmer wrote: post #18

There is at least one factual inaccuracy here--Nordstream 1 was not cut off after Russia's invasion of Ukraine. It was running at more or less usual capacity until early June, when the flow was cut by about 60%. It was then shut off in July for regular yearly maintenance window. It returned at 40% capacity for a while, before being slowed to 20% capacity in late July, and then shut off again at the end of August. So…

And NS2 was not operational at all, therefore the accident hypothesis is less likely there.

I dunno, I always thought it made it more likely. Funding for NS2 has dried up so whose going to bother leaving their nice warm hut to go do required maintenance?

Re: Nordstream: An Accident?

#48

Post by namaria » Fri, Sep 30, 2022, 2:25 PM UTC

jcranmer wrote: post #18

There is at least one factual inaccuracy here--Nordstream 1 was not cut off after Russia's invasion of Ukraine. It was running at more or less usual capacity until early June, when the flow was cut by about 60%. It was then shut off in July for regular yearly maintenance window. It returned at 40% capacity for a while, before being slowed to 20% capacity in late July, and then shut off again at the end of August. So…

We have no reason to assume we even know all the possibilities. Neither Russia nor NATO are monoliths. We don't even know potentially how many actors we should take into account.

Re: Nordstream: An Accident?

#49

Post by IAmGraydon » Fri, Sep 30, 2022, 2:25 PM UTC

rmind wrote: post #27

So far the most plausible theory is that Russia sabotaged the pipelines for two reasons [1]: 1) to claim force majeure and avoid massive penalties Gazprom would have to pay for the breach of contract (we are talking billions here; now they just blame the West and good luck proving in courts who actually did it); 2) to further blackmail and coerce the European nations (particularly Germany and Italy) who depend on Rus…

>to further blackmail and coerce the European nations (particularly Germany and Italy) who depend on Russian gas to stop supporting Ukraine.

How? This has literally removed their ability to blackmail Europe, as it's not even an option anymore.

Re: Nordstream: An Accident?

#50

Post by rmind » Fri, Sep 30, 2022, 2:26 PM UTC

cpursley wrote: post #38

rmind wrote: post #27

So far the most plausible theory is that Russia sabotaged the pipelines for two reasons [1]: 1) to claim force majeure and avoid massive penalties Gazprom would have to pay for the breach of contract (we are talking billions here; now they just blame the West and good luck proving in courts who actually did it); 2) to further blackmail and coerce the European nations (particularly Germany and Italy) who depend on Rus…

Your theory just doesn't check out. With the pipelines destroyed, Russia can't blackmail the EU with energy as easily as they could before. And why would they destroy infrastructure that they poured billions into when they could have just turned off the taps any time they pleased? The pipelines now being destroyed is a really bad thing for Russia, a worse thing for the EU and a great situation for the USA (and Poland…

Because they would have to pay billions for not delivering the gas due to the breach of contracts. Legally, you cannot turn off the taps just because.

Moreover, Russia can still supply very significant quantities of gas via Belarus and Ukraine, so they retain the leverage to blackmail the EU.