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

171–180 of 1001 posts

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

#171

Post by thwayunion »

hef19898 wrote: post #140
vanviegen wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

You can easily imagine any of the Baltic states, Poland, Ukraine (with some local help) or even Finland, Swede or Norway doing the deed. Or, since the pipelines are well known and not difficult to reach, basically everyone with access to explosives, a boat a divers with explosives skills. None of which is particularly hard to come by.

At that moment in the war, even Putin had a lot of strong motivations -- lock out the option of bringing Nord Stream back online and close to door on de-escalation. As a side-benefit, the possibility of driving a wedge into NATO. I also found https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34713402 interesting. Who knows.

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

#172

Post by The_Colonel »

justsomehnguy wrote: post #156
The_Colonel wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't be surprised if Germany OKayed it (IF USA did it). Germany returning to Nord Stream would be a disaster for everybody (including Germany). Paradoxically, removing Nord Stream from the consideration helped Germany and its political situation. I always thought it's more likely that somebody from the West did it, since from my perspective it helped West and not Russia. But what's confusing me is the rather mu…

Because without an indisputable evidence it would only play for "RUSSIANS DID IT" narrative, "See! Because they say it was US means it was themselves!".

Russian propaganda machine keeps spouting lies about everything without much regard to credibility (firehose of lies), it's actually difficult to orient yourself in all the contradictory propaganda narratives.

It's just strange they keep largely silent on this, even though it seems like a golden opportunity. Why are they not attacking German society with "Americans are trying to freeze you, they blew up the pipes"?

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

#173

Post by [deleted] »

isoprophlex wrote: post #57
dang wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please make your substantive points without snark or flamebait. This topic is obviously as inflammable as it gets. More at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34712496

Off topic but I really hope you wrote "obviously inflammable" there because this is a about gas pipes blowing up Pun intended or not, it's got me laughing

[deleted]

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

#174

Post by partiallypro »

jessaustin wrote: post #63
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #40

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Where is the evidence ?

[flagged]

> Literally no one outside Europe and North America (or maybe Australia?) ever believed it was anyone besides USA and its vassals. Only people who are constantly dosed with USA war media bullshit consider this an "extraordinary claim". Not all of us are that foolish, however.

This is completely irrelevant. Some people in Iran and Russia think the US is run by Satan. That doesn't make it so. Being anti-US is very in vogue, but that doesn't change the fact that your post offers no evidence itself and neither does this article.

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

#175

Post by pphysch »

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

JFK was one of many contemporaneous high-profile political assassinations that share a common theme -- those assassinated were strong leaders that basically opposed the global ambitions of the growing transatlantic military-industrial-white-supremacist complex.

JFK, RFK, Dag Hammarskjöld, MLK, Malcom X, Patrice Lumumba, Thomas Sankara, et al. to just name a few.

When you put it all together in historical context, it seems improbable that these were random unrelated events that just happen to advance the interests of a very powerful class that felt victimized by the end of European imperialism/American slavery and the rise of Communism and the Global South.

Otto Skorzeny is emblematic of the character that was central to this history.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Skorzeny

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

#176

Post by VincentEvans »

Gazprom, Russian gas monopoly, has on Kremlin’s orders first threatened to, and then suspended gas supplies to Europe in an attempt to blackmail it to stop supporting Ukraine under a threat of, as they put it, “freezing Europe”. In the process unilaterally breaking existing delivery contracts. There were no Western sanctions targeting Russian gas - it was entirely a political operation initiated by Russian government, “weaponizing energy supplies” as it often referred to, in the course of hybrid war.

Kremlin has miscalculated - Europe was able to largely avoid the intended crisis, while simultaneously Gazprom lost its largest market. The pivot from Russian supplies did come at a significant cost though.

Now that the Western sanctions are strangling Russian economy - if Gazprom wanted to come back to European market - they would be first greeted by billions of dollars of contract charges in arbitration courts.

It has long became obvious that Gazprom will likely attempt to use claims of force majeure to try to avoid financial penalties. And as it became customary for Russia - start preparing fertile ground in the courts of public opinion by planting various stories misdirecting the blame and muddying the waters.

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

#177

Post by weatherlight »

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…

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

This topic in not "evidence of some interesting new phenomenon."

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

#178

Post by hackandthink »

sschueller wrote: post #111
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.

Yes, it seems really hard to keep things secret. I guess it would be easier for a country known to kill journalists (thinking of Russia here, Assange is alive).

And everything is recorded nowadays. (people like Biden are great security risks)

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

#179

Post by PonySoldier »

twblalock wrote: post #80
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…

If anyone else had written this, would it be significant? Wouldn't it just be written off as a conspiracy theory that provides little to no evidence for its claims? If the only thing that gets this on HN is Seymour Hersh's reputation (which has lately become somewhat questionable) then you might want to reconsider. Plus, the quality of the comments has not been very good so far.

This gatekeeping is ridiculous. This is the same guy who unveiled the atrocities that occured during the My Lai massacre and at Abu Ghraib, both of which painted the US Gov/military in a terrible light.

This is an actual case of speaking truth to power. He clearly (and rightfully IMO) does not trust the US government and his "somewhat questionable" and recent work has continued that trend. Is it any surprise that the same institutions/people that continuously carry water for the government now rush to label him a conspiracy theorist?

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

#180

Post by nindalf »

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 there’s no sugarcoating this - you’ve got it wrong on this one. I say this as a supporter of your moderation policies in general. The sooner you reverse this decision, the better for everyone.
Post reply on HN