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

“How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

seymourhersh.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 1001 posts

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

#111

Post by sschueller »

hackandthink wrote: post #92

I once read (Don DeLillo?): The John F. Kennedy assassination could not have been a conspiracy, some conspirator would have spoken sooner or later (maybe on his/her death bed). This is obviously not a lone perpetrator, so the truth will come out. But it may take decades, e.g.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_incident

Maybe not today with the internet and the speed at which this stuff gets out. Things get hacked and documents leak digitally which is way easier than someone breaking into a physical building and riffling through old documents. Additionally as we have seen with Trump, Biden and Pence it appears that the way the administration deals with secret documents can be quite sloppy.

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

#112

Post by miguelazo »

partiallypro wrote: post #84
miguelazo wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exposing uncomfortable truths about the US/NATO dirty war in Syria hardly constitutes “defending Assad.” Highly recommend the entire LRB series. https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v38/n01/seymour-m.-hersh/mil...

He actually did though. Saying the Syrian rebels gassed themselves (common Assad talking point [ https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v35/n24/seymour-m.-hersh/who... ] parroted by people like Tulsi Gabbard/Tucker/etc), and also said the Pentagon had a secret agreement with Assad and Putin to undermine Obama. He also offered absolutely no evidence of any of this.

The OPCW leaks confirmed that the “rebels” staged gas attacks. That has never been refuted by anyone— only attacks against the messengers, similar to yours.

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

#113

Post by twoquestions »

dang wrote: post #34

All: Whether he is right or not or one likes him or not, Hersh reporting on this counts as significant new information ( https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... ), so I've turned off the flags on this submission. If you're going to comment in this thread, please make sure you're up on the site guidlelines ( https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html ) and note this one: " Comments should…

What's with the question mark in the title? Hersh certainly doesn't frame this as a question.

Unless it's a miskey of some kind which sounds like the most plausible explanation.

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

#114

Post by [deleted] »

erentz wrote: post #47
LarryMullins wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

He's lost his credibility over the years. Which is likely why this didn't get published by NY Times. It's long but after reading this ask why you would believe this man who, in this new article, is making plenty of assertions all based on quotes from a single anonymous source. https://www.vox.com/2015/5/11/8584473/seymour-hersh-osama-bi...

[deleted]

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

#115

Post by mzs »

dang wrote: post #34

All: Whether he is right or not or one likes him or not, Hersh reporting on this counts as significant new information ( https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... ), so I've turned off the flags on this submission. If you're going to comment in this thread, please make sure you're up on the site guidlelines ( https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html ) and note this one: " Comments should…

Typically three unnamed sources with domain knowledge are required. It's telling that no editor chose to run this and Hersh has to self-publish. I wish you would reconsider the folks flagging this.

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

#116

Post by kibwen »

mc32 wrote: post #74
syzarian wrote: post #2

Seymour 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 this turns out to be right --and we don't have conclusive evidence, but this would upset the current narrative. Why would Russia be an idiot to shoot itself in the foot (cui bono) and blow up their leverage; though in international affairs the unimaginable is possible, so yeah they may have done it to themselves -though to outsiders it would seem illogical If true though, it would be as big as the Gulf of Tonkin i…

The Gulf of Tonkin involved the US claiming that a US ship was fired upon as a pretense to declare war in retaliation. The idea here is that the US blew up a Russian pipeline in order to... what? Declare war on Russia in retaliation for Russia's own pipeline being destroyed? This makes no sense unless you're accusing Russia of blowing up the pipeline.

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

#117

Post by hef19898 »

torstenvl wrote: post #71
dang wrote: post #34

All: Whether he is right or not or one likes him or not, Hersh reporting on this counts as significant new information ( https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... ), so I've turned off the flags on this submission. If you're going to comment in this thread, please make sure you're up on the site guidlelines ( https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html ) and note this one: " Comments should…

Dan, I respectfully ask you to reconsider. This is a poorly-sourced speculative piece of propaganda and clearly goes against site guidelines. You repeat, above, that HN is not for nationalist flamewar, and requires substance. But this post is nationalist flamewar and isn't substantive. Allowing it while shutting down similar content from the opposite perspective is... unsettling.

Man, the aithor (no idea who that is...) should write a spy novel around this. As a fictional setting it would be great! As anything else, not so much.

Heck, the Baltic states, along with Poland and the Scandinavian countries, have some of the best naval divers and EODs on the planet, virtue of having the priviledge of cleaning two world wars worth of mines, bombs and torpedoes from the Baltic sea...

This piece should be flagged to death, especially since it is, giving it the most (and IMHO undeserved) credit pure speculation.

Edit: Just looked Seymore Hersh up, now I know why the name rang a bell. Well, for My Lai he had proof and sources, didn't he?

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

#118

Post by partiallypro »

pasquinelli wrote: post #87
partiallypro wrote: post #42

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. How so? The pipeline(s) was/were already off, so the US and Norway already had a new customer because of this. If the US risked blowing up the pipeline(s) (which was already not delivering,) it would put NATO in jeopardy which is explicitly against US interests and WAY more valu…

it prevents the pipeline from being turned back on. what's the benefit to russia if russia did it?

I'm not making a claim that Russia did it, but they would have -more- to gain than the US would have to lose if the US were found to have actually done it...given it would upend and basically destroy NATO and completely isolate the US from its own allies. Hence the theory doesn't hold water.

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

#119

Post by rfoo »

erentz wrote: post #102
mytailorisrich wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both NS 1 and NS 2 were sabotaged. The US have been hostile for a long time to Germany getting closer to Russia. The war in Ukraine has just been a convenient event to push their strategic agenda forward and so far, irrespective of those pipelines, it has been very good for the US.

Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 are not just two pipelines. It's four total. The two pipelines of Nord Stream 1 were demolished. But only one of the pipelines of Nord Stream 2 was demolished, the second was untouched. https://www.dw.com/en/putin-offers-europe-gas-through-nord-s...

Without going meta, how about ... the bomb just didn't work?

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

#120

Post by pphysch »

zzleeper wrote: post #107
Khelavaster wrote: post #79

This is the same journalist who broke news about Mai Lai, reported in-depth on Abu Ghraib, and much more. Serious, serious news.

And is the same guy who has been going into crazy conspiracy theories over the last ten years or so

Questioning the narratives around the ongoing Syrian Dirty War is not a "crazy conspiracy theory".
Post reply on HN