Live data from Hacker News

“How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

seymourhersh.substack.com

121–130 of 1001 posts

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

#121
An unsubstantiated story that’s presented as if it’s fact doesn’t really belong on Hacker News. The fact the submission has to be edited to include a question mark when the source material does not is an implicit admission of such by the moderation team. Why it hasn’t been removed I have no idea.

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

#122
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…

Since when does HN allow not only unsourced claims, but unsourced claims about massive geopolitical sabotage operations?

> Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle

You're just baiting everyone in this comments section. How long have you been moderating this site? Have you ever seen a post like this cultivate a productive comments section?

> Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon.

Evidence? I don't see much evidence of anything here

> Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, bots, brigading, foreign agents and the like

This last one you are guilty of, maybe this post was being flag brigaded for a reason

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

#123
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…

Good call. Like it or not, reputation counts for a lot. Particularly in reporting of matters the government prefers remain private.

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

#124

It's a great story, but it's all unsourced and could be a decent Tom Clancy story at best. You could probably write a similar one with Russia or German agents as the key players and be just as convincing. The only anchor in reality appears to be Biden suggesting that they knew how to take it out which seems like a pretty weak place to build a large story. What I find particularly odd is that this entire thing appears…

> What I find particularly odd is that this entire thing appears to be based on a single, unnamed source "with direct knowledge of the operational planning".

Why is that weird? Assuming this is true, there would be rather many people with such knowledge. One of them may feel the need to talk. Would you expect such a source to be named?

Also, I find it a lot easier to imagine why the US would want to do this, than why Russia or Germany would want to do this.

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

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To make absolutely sure Germany does not go behind the US and makes a deal with Russia irregardless of the situation in Ukraine. Backstap before the others can backstap you.

Alternative hypothetical take - US did it on behalf of German government to avoid the potential political meltdown. Removing this toxic option removed a path to split the society and politics.

If that is the case then there are way more conspirators and the likelihood of the facts getting out are much higher.

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

#126
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…

I'm honestly really shocked by your stance on this. Regardless of whether or not this information is credible, this seems like text book flame war kindling. In the past, I've thought HN's policy of "you can discuss things like this in other forums" was wise and I've been corrected by it myself many times. Why wouldn't that apply in this case?

One thing that makes this distinct from much of said kindling is that it hasn't been reported on before. This isn't someone coming into an unrelated comment thread and commenting "9/11 was an inside job!"

I would encourage any who disagree to consider truly why this reporting upsets them.

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

#127
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think Russia tried to send a message by……destroying its own infrastructure?! It was their biggest leverage over the EU. Now it’s gone and there’s no possibility of restoring Russian gas flows to the EU. If they were gonna destroy critical international infrastructure wouldn’t it make more sense to blow up something else?

If what you say is true, why has Russia blown up their own pipelines twice before?

Can you share details?

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

#128
post #55

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. 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).

Why leave one of the brand new, larger pipelines undamaged, so that Russia could then offer after the event to work with Germany to activate it? Which naturally they did. This pipeline had been completed but activation was stopped due to the start of the war. If Germany had capitulated and activated it with Russia that would be a major political win for Russia and blow for the suggested goals of the US and other alli…

Another thing that gets overlooked is that in the months prior to the explosion, Russia had cut off the gas and lied about the reasons why it was cut off twice. Europe kept asking them to send the gas Russia had agreed to send, and Russia kept making up false excuses for not sending it. And then the pipelines exploded, giving them an actual excuse.

The pipe that survived? It would need Germany to backtrack on sanctions to open it. Russia said the gas was ready to flow as soon as they did so.

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

#129
None of this is proof, of course. But it logical. Who else would do it? And why?

I think it's great the topic has been brought up again. This was a major event that somehow got swept away like nothing happened. The propaganda machine even tried to sell it as Russians blowing up their own pipe. Cause you know, at this point they could be blamed for the most ridiculous thing and it would still "track" because crazy.

What really matters is who else here in Europe helped them. And why. Norway stands to gain but did they help with the sabotage? Things don't look good at all. I am scared. Russia is just across the black sea. I don't want war

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

#130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Except the OPCW says themselves they have grounds to believe Assad did it. Any "leaks" were part of an ongoing investigation, and not conclusive. I'm absolutely baffled how naive people are in defense of people like Assad & Putin.
Post reply on HN