Can someone explain why would they blow up inoperational pipeline that Germany even said is not planning to operate in near future? And if they would have remote explosive wouldn't it make more sense to explode it in the moment of starting the pipeline to make it look more like an accident?
“How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”
11–20 of 1001 posts
Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”
#12Seymour doesn’t provide any proof or any evidence. It’s argument by assertion. What he writes is plausible but without any sources or other corroborating evidence. I think it more believable that Seymour has been paid to write this by a Russian aligned entity. I don’t know the truth of the matter and Seymour could be right. We just can’t tell from the evidence provided.
If you look at all the players, their interests, and their capabilities, I think the most logical conclusion is that the US likely did it. Of course this is not evidence but this the sort of operation where success means no evidence (at least no evidence available to the public at large as it is possible and, one might hope, likely that neighbouring countries know).
I think it’s plausible that Putin wanted it done. It got Russia out of a contractual obligation and greater isolation of Russian companies makes the oligarchs’ position tied to Putin. The oligarchs can’t go to the West since they’ve been sanctioned and their companies are increasingly barred from doing business in the West. That isolation makes their fortunes tied to Putin’s survival. Think Cortex burning the ships.
In a personalist authoritarian regime the rationality of actions sometimes depends on wether or not the dictator is being rational on a given day.
Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”
#13Seymour doesn’t provide any proof or any evidence. It’s argument by assertion. What he writes is plausible but without any sources or other corroborating evidence. I think it more believable that Seymour has been paid to write this by a Russian aligned entity. I don’t know the truth of the matter and Seymour could be right. We just can’t tell from the evidence provided.
If you look at all the players, their interests, and their capabilities, I think the most logical conclusion is that the US likely did it. Of course this is not evidence but this the sort of operation where success means no evidence (at least no evidence available to the public at large as it is possible and, one might hope, likely that neighbouring countries know).
> If you look at all the players, their interests, and their capabilities, I think the most logical conclusion is that the US likely did it.
I disagree.
The most logical explanation is tha Russia did it as a capacity demonstration and threat against Baltic Pipe to pressure contries in the region regarding Ukraine, but that, like all their threats against the West over Ukraine policy so far, the threat was hollow.
Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”
#14I agree that sources should be given. But this is the name of a famous journalist, so instead of flagging the article, perhaps the Substack people could weigh in: a) Is this the real Seymour Hersh? b) If so, perhaps people should ask him for sources.
You won’t need a source once the news comes out. This little text bomb thrown by CIA at the Executive can only mean that the Swedes have found conclusive evidence. https://www.rferl.org/a/nord-stream-sabotage-investigation-r... Please note that Radio Free Europe is run by CIA.
> This little text bomb thrown by CIA at the Executive can only mean that the Swedes have found conclusive evidence.
That’s a bizarre interpretation, since what the Swedish government says in that article, which is no different than non-US-government news source reporting on the same Swedish statement, is additional evidence of sabotage but no evidence of by whom.
> Please note that Radio Free Europe is run by CIA.
No, its run by a private 501(c)3 that used to be (more thab 59 years ago) covertly funded by the CIA, but is now overtly funded by the federal government through the Broadcasting Board of Governors.
Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”
#15I agree that sources should be given. But this is the name of a famous journalist, so instead of flagging the article, perhaps the Substack people could weigh in: a) Is this the real Seymour Hersh? b) If so, perhaps people should ask him for sources.
> Is this the real Seymour Hersh?
I feel like too many outlets are glossing over this question and are reporting it as fact that he wrote it. I haven't found a single confirmation that he actually did so if anyone has one I'd love to see it.
Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”
#16> My Lai was first revealed to the American public on November 13, 1969—almost two years after the incident—when Hersh published a story through the Dispatch News Service. The article threatened to undermine the U.S. war effort and severely damage the Nixon presidency. Inside the White House, officials privately discussed how to contain the scandal. On November 21, National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger emphasized that the White House needed to develop a "game plan", to establish a "press policy", and maintain a "unified line" in its public response to the incident. The White House established a "My Lai Task Force" whose mission was to "figure out how best to control the problem", to make sure that administration officials "all don't go in different directions" when discussing the incident, and to "engage in dirty tricks". These included discrediting key witnesses and questioning Hersh's motives for releasing the story. What soon followed was a public relations offensive by the administration designed to shape how My Lai would be portrayed in the press and understood among the American public.
Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
You won’t need a source once the news comes out. This little text bomb thrown by CIA at the Executive can only mean that the Swedes have found conclusive evidence. https://www.rferl.org/a/nord-stream-sabotage-investigation-r... Please note that Radio Free Europe is run by CIA.
> This little text bomb thrown by CIA at the Executive can only mean that the Swedes have found conclusive evidence. That’s a bizarre interpretation, since what the Swedish government says in that article, which is no different than non-US-government news source reporting on the same Swedish statement, is additional evidence of sabotage but no evidence of by whom. > Please note that Radio Free Europe is run by CIA. N…
The article was -just- a link to the latest official news. Yes, I am implying that whoever is “the source” for Mr. Hersh knows much more than you and I and the internet about this matter.
Just do a ctrl-f on “the source” on the OP. And read those lines. That’s the message.
Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”
#18Seymour doesn’t provide any proof or any evidence. It’s argument by assertion. What he writes is plausible but without any sources or other corroborating evidence. I think it more believable that Seymour has been paid to write this by a Russian aligned entity. I don’t know the truth of the matter and Seymour could be right. We just can’t tell from the evidence provided.
Seymour Hersh has a very credible background and reputation. Assuming he is still lucid in his age, hasn't become a senile puppet of a ghost writer, then it would be foolish to write off his claims just because he isn't telling you who his source is.
Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you look at all the players, their interests, and their capabilities, I think the most logical conclusion is that the US likely did it. Of course this is not evidence but this the sort of operation where success means no evidence (at least no evidence available to the public at large as it is possible and, one might hope, likely that neighbouring countries know).
> If you look at all the players, their interests, and their capabilities, I think the most logical conclusion is that the US likely did it. I disagree. The most logical explanation is tha Russia did it as a capacity demonstration and threat against Baltic Pipe to pressure contries in the region regarding Ukraine, but that, like all their threats against the West over Ukraine policy so far, the threat was hollow.
The US have been overtly against those pipelines and the close relations between Germany and Russia, including and especially energy dependency. In fact, a major win of the US so far in the Ukraine war has been the Europeans' and especially Germany's shift in gas supplies from Russia to themselves.
Russia destroying their own pipelines (both NS 1 and the new NS 2 were sabotaged) looks like them shooting themselves in both feet at once. Like doing 'capacity demonstration' by nuking the Kremlin... They could, but would that be a likely scenario?
Many, if not most, expert observers strongly suspect the US for a reason.
Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”
#20Seymour doesn’t provide any proof or any evidence. It’s argument by assertion. What he writes is plausible but without any sources or other corroborating evidence. I think it more believable that Seymour has been paid to write this by a Russian aligned entity. I don’t know the truth of the matter and Seymour could be right. We just can’t tell from the evidence provided.
Seymour Hersh has a very credible background and reputation. Assuming he is still lucid in his age, hasn't become a senile puppet of a ghost writer, then it would be foolish to write off his claims just because he isn't telling you who his source is.
His reporting on Syria lost him some credibility. It appears from my perspective that he has a bias toward always thinking the U.S. is the culprit. Given the power of the U.S. and it’s history of shenanigans he’ll often times be right.
https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/2018-07-22/ty-article-opinio...