Live data from Hacker News

“How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

seymourhersh.substack.com

21–30 of 1001 posts

Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

#21

Earlier 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. 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…

Germany gets its gas natural gas from Norway now. It would be unlikely that the U.S. would attack the gas supplies of a major NATO ally. Especially when that ally has been less than enthusiastic in helping Ukraine.

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/where-does-germany-s...

Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

#22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Germany gets its gas natural gas from Norway now. It would be unlikely that the U.S. would attack the gas supplies of a major NATO ally. Especially when that ally has been less than enthusiastic in helping Ukraine. https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/where-does-germany-s...

They get a lot from Norway because it is near and there are pipelines, but US' LNG exports to the EU are through the roof and will keep growing as things get organised.

Joe talks a lot:

"If Russia invades, that means tanks and troops crossing the border of Ukraine again, then there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2, we will bring an end to it." -- Joe Biden, Feb 2022, with the German's Chancellor standing next to him! [1]

So at the very least the US thought that they indeed had control over that "major NATO ally" and could make thinly veiled threats to their face. Why you think that the US would be above sabotage on a matter of strategic national interests is unclear.

[1] https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-joe-biden-vladimir...

Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

#23

Earlier 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…

[deleted]

Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

#24

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?

[flagged]

Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

#25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Germany gets its gas natural gas from Norway now. It would be unlikely that the U.S. would attack the gas supplies of a major NATO ally. Especially when that ally has been less than enthusiastic in helping Ukraine. https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/where-does-germany-s...

They get a lot from Norway because it is near and there are pipelines, but US' LNG exports to the EU are through the roof and will keep growing as things get organised. Joe talks a lot: " If Russia invades, that means tanks and troops crossing the border of Ukraine again, then there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2, we will bring an end to it. " -- Joe Biden, Feb 2022, with the German's Chancellor standing next to h…

On February 22, 2022 German Chancellor Scholz suspended certification of Nordstream2 following Russia formally recognizing Donetsk and Luhansk as republics. I believe that, but can’t find a confirming source, that Russia was obligated to make deliveries via Nordstream1 even though it did not have access to SWIFT. By it no longer being operational it was no longer required to make deliveries.

It is inconceivable that Biden made that comment without consulting Germany. Also it was primarily Nordstream1 that was attacked.

Gas prices spiked and it seems likelier that Russia was behind it. At least to me. I don’t know the truth of the matter.

Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

#29

[dead]

Would you please stop posting unsubstantive and/or flamebait comments? It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for, so we ban accounts that do it.

I actually just briefly banned your account, but had second thoughts because it's been around for a while and has also posted good comments. But if you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules and definitely stop posting like this, we'd appreciate it.

Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

#30
post #15
post #6

I 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.

Matt Taibbi is claiming that it is: https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1623352901111517185?t=b59...
Post reply on HN