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

381–390 of 1001 posts

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

#381

Post by ttctciyf »

oezi wrote: post #372
ttctciyf wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder what Biden was referring to when he stated > "If Russia invades, that means tanks or troops crossing the border of Ukraine again, then there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it." > When asked how, the president says, "I promise you, we will be able do that." (C-SPAN: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OS4O8rGRLf8 )

Like the Europeans, Biden miscalculated that income via Nordstream would be crucial to Russia. Nobody would have predicted that the Russians are so crazy to cut off Europe on their own in an attempt to force them (Germany in particular) into submission. Alas that didn't work as European customers saved on Gas and shouldered the increase in cost.

Prima facie, in the context of Hersh's story, it sounds a lot like there's a plan to blow up the pipeline, doesn't it?

I'm anticipating there are more plausible explanations of what his words "We will bring an end to it" might refer to, and was hoping replies might provide them.

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

#382

Post by oezi »

weatherlight wrote: post #261

Not a few hours later, 17 hours apart. No military is going to arrange for two pipes in the same general area to be destroyed 17 hours apart. 17 hours to find the second floating sonar device. 17 hours to get caught with your pants down. I'm saying this as former US military here. the Idea that in the middle of a OPORD, of any kind, POTUS would come in last minute and change a detail, like an explosive on a timer (fa…

Since it was established that the destruction was caused by explosives, what is your argument?

The US is too competent to do such a bad job (17 hours apart and only 3 of 4 pipes destroyed)?

Does this imply we have a rogue actor or insufficiently equipped one to blame? Who?

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

#383

Post by anigbrowl »

cdelsolar wrote: post #326
ohmaigad wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> These tensions have been brewing between NATO (mostly America) and Russia for at least a decade. It's unfortunate that the situation escalated in Ukraine though, which AFAIK is the victim in the scheming and plotting of those two powers. As a person from Eastern Europe this is literal Russian propaganda or in simple words - dogshit. You know why somebody like Baltic countries wanted to get in NATO? Because Russia w…

why is this downvoted/flagged?

Because a rude word is often used as an excuse to dismiss the whole argument.

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

#384

Post by trwhanh »

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.

What else can you do with this article? We don't know if the source is correct, but it is clearly notable.

Wasn't Watergate also reported relying on a single source (deep throat)?

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

#385

Post by jjtheblunt »

LarryMullins wrote: post #18
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.

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.

> it would be foolish

or would it be prudent to wait for evidence, to err on the side of caution ?

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

#386

Post by Maursault »

hef19898 wrote: post #287
readonthegoapp wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a) I don't understand the relevance at all to Hacker News. There are plenty of interesting things going on in the tech world that aren't making the front page. an incredible amount of tech is involved in these pipelines, building them, blowing them up, figuring out who blew them up, etc. the war/defense industry is the foundation of all US technology: https://thirdworldtraveler.com/Chomsky/PentagonSystem_Chom.h... uk…

Blowing them up requires either a shaped charge or C4 or some other explosive. Hardly high tech.

How about a torpedo? I seriously doubt:

     1) The US would wait 7 months after Russia invaded Ukraine
     2) The US would risk Navy divers for such a petty operation achievable without risking valuable personal
     3) The US would not simultaneously detonate (17 hour delay between? wtf)
     4) President Biden would not have immediately after taken the opportunity to interrupt broadcast and cable programming to remind us how tough he is.
When you ask yourself who hates the Russians more than anyone else in the world, and when that coincidentally happens to be the same as who benefits economically the most from NS1 & NS2 destroyed, there's only one answer[1], and it isn't Norway, and it isn't Denmark, and it can't be the US. Russia annoys the US, but the US and its citizens do not hate Russia. And US benefits exactly nothing economically from this, and in a global economy, it probably hurts US.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic_Pipe

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

#387

Post by kersplody »

If any part of Hersh's claims are true, which I doubt, the U.S. Senate and House U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence will demand immediate classified hearings with DoD & IC since this was done all wrong.

If they don't demand them (SSCI is still rather bipartisan) within 24-48 hours, you know it's complete BS.

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

#388

Post by mzs »

atdrummond wrote: post #295
mzs wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Nobody wants to publish him because of the treatment the LRB received the last few times they lent him their imprimatur.

LRB was rightfully skewered. They did not apply customary rules such as:

- only use unnamed sources if no other sources will come forward

- highest levels of editorial and legal need to approve

- fact checkers vet the info

A gracious interpretation is that not being a paper of note in news LRB were unaware and published what did not pass rudimentary scrutiny possibly because editors were star struck. A cynical interpretation is that they had motivation to look the other way.

In any case, journalistic outlets had largely long stopped running Hersh because he was penning unsubstantiated and illogical conspiracy theories.

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

#389

Post by jjtheblunt »

pillefitz wrote: post #345
twoquestions wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My thoughts exactly. If this is true and more evidence comes out, the usual suspects will be screaming it from the rooftops, if not this narrative will die in obscurity. There's been a lot of misinformation about this war, and a bunch of people who for a variety of reasons want to blame the US for it and are willing to believe some incredible things if they support that narrative.

It's really not far fetched to believe the US did it - or any Eastern European country, for that matter.

Polish GROM could easily do it

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

#390

Post by tikwidd »

dang wrote: post #240
keithwhor wrote: post #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.

It's no such admission. In fact it's the opposite, because if we thought the story didn't belong on HN, nothing would be easier than to let it sink without a trace. I think the story belongs on HN because I know a little bit about the historical significance of Seymour Hersh and I think the appearance of this story is intellectually interesting. Maybe I'm the only commenter who feels that way, since most appear only…

Thanks for standing by your principles on this one dang.

I was hoping there would be some discussion of the SONAR buoy remote detonation story - is it plausible (from a technical perspective)? Has it been done before?

Post reply on HN