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

631–640 of 1001 posts

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

#631

Post by reducesuffering »

nostromo123 wrote: post #562
reducesuffering wrote: post #487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> all state controlled media from Russia has been completely censored in the west. What ridiculous hyperbole. My RT.com is working just fine. Medvedev and Russian Government account is still on Twitter shouting garbage...

rt.com does not work in Austria.

That's unfortunate domains are being blocked in your country, but not relevant to GP's outlandish comment.

Let's break this down...

> all state controlled media from Russia has been completely censored in the west.

> all

No.

> completely censored

No.

> in the west

No.

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

#632

Post by [deleted] »

slantedview wrote: post #612
drewda wrote: post #541

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seymour Hersh has decades of credibility from reporting the My Lai Massacre to the abuses at Abu Graib. But he does often rely on sources who remain anonymous: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seymour_Hersh#Use_of_anonymous... I did find it interesting in that Wikipedia article to read that The New Yorker's editor insists on knowing the identify of all of the anonymous sources that Hersh has used when his reporting is p…

Biden stated last year: "If Russia invades [Ukraine] there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it." [1] This was a clear threat, clear as day, that the US could destroy Nordstream. It should surprise nobody that the US was involved. Since Nordstream was destroyed amidst public pressure from US energy companies who wanted to takeover the European energy market, the US has become the world's lead…

[deleted]

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

#633

Post by cycomanic »

tlear wrote: post #450
oezi wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

He is right that sonar buoy detonation thing sounds like absolute bullshit. Incredibly risky and 17 hours.. I mean you want to do this, send a submarine, it fires few torpedoes. No more pipeline. Fast, simple, reliable. Let's say I am a Ukranian patriot, with few million in the bank. I bet given few month I could put together a team of divers to plant some C4 with a simple timer and blow this thing to hell. Or Polish…

Yeah right, and you would be picked up by a Russian patrol boat pretty quickly. The article doesn't insinuate that the operation itself is difficult, but to do it without anyone detecting it and not leaving enough of a trace that things can be tracked back to you.

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

#634

Post by slantedview »

coffeebeqn wrote: post #628
slantedview wrote: post #612

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Biden stated last year: "If Russia invades [Ukraine] there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it." [1] This was a clear threat, clear as day, that the US could destroy Nordstream. It should surprise nobody that the US was involved. Since Nordstream was destroyed amidst public pressure from US energy companies who wanted to takeover the European energy market, the US has become the world's lead…

It’s not out of the realm of possibility but that statement is hardly an admission of future sabotage. I would imagine the US has more tools than deep sea bombing to convince their allies. Very high risk operation

Sure, a threat is not an admission of guilt. But I think most people were unaware of this statement, and how aggressive the US' posture towards the pipeline was, which is important context for this article.

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

#635

Post by coffeebeqn »

peanuty1 wrote: post #536
linkjuice4all wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why just those countries? Surely some countries in the middle east would be interested in opening and supplying petro products to a new market. What about China? Maybe they're interested in division and weakening their nearest neighbor so they could buy up all the gas? There are too many players with varying interests at different levels to just go off of someone's reputation and an unnamed source. Perhaps Biden or s…

Are any middle eastern militaries competent enough to blow up the Nord Strom pipeline and cover their tracks?

Israel, Iran, Turkey, the gulf states have the money to pay someone who’s good

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

#636

Post by MasterYoda »

xg15 wrote: post #535

I find it extremely jarring how many reputable western media outlets immediately jumped to the conclusion that Russia did it even though that made zero sense - but absolutely refused to even consider the possibility that the US or another western state could have done it. But at this point, the article is basically "cool story, bro". The only independently verifyable bits are the public statements of Biden, Nuland, e…

It make sense. russia's agenda is to destabilize Europe. And they were the only ones who had anything directly to gain from it with certainty as they wanted to create an energy crisis in Europe. They knew that after the EU sanctions, Nord stream would be a dead project after their illegal invasion. By blowing up what now had no real long term economic value, they created uncertainty and it helped to get the energy prices to skyrocket in Europe and they succeeded in their goal of destabilizing Europe's energy market. All the Russians want is to create as much havoc for the West they can and create conflicts and make west weak, just of that reason it make totally sense to blow it up.

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

#637

Post by dmatech »

dang wrote: post #320
hef19898 wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But we do have a proofen and working mechanism: Flagging. If the submission doesn't get flagged, cool. If it does, it does. I don't see a reason to intervene here.

Unfortunately it's not that simple. The flagging system works well, arguably better than the upvoting system does, but you can't just rely on these systems in an unsupervised way—it leads to suboptimal outcomes. Another way of putting this is that moderation is necessary to jig the software+community systems out of their failure modes. You can of course argue that I've made a wrong call in this case, but the point I'…

I see far more bickering over whether or not this article is appropriate than actual discussion of the article, which is unfortunate. Unsubstantiated claims can be dismissed, but there's no requirement to do so. The NS2 destruction itself is a notable story, and it's worth discussing as resource dependence is important.

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

#638

Post by pessimizer »

beebmam wrote: post #614
GAN_Game wrote: post #582

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> his claim that the US never killed Osama bin Laden You give a link but it is nowhere in that link. I watched an interview where Hersh talked about how the US killed bin Laden. Hersh has always said this. Hersh did do reporting that countered parts of the US government story about bin Laden. Namely the idea no high Pakistani army/intelligence/government official knew where bin Laden was in Pakistan. As well as some…

Seymour Hersh regarding the Osama bin Laden raid, in which the terrorist leader was killed in 2011: "Nothing's been done about that story, it's one big lie, not one word of it is true". Later on in 2013, he changed his claim, such that he admitted some of the story is true, that is, that the terrorist leader was killed, after he encountered pushback. Source: https://dailycaller.com/2013/09/27/hersh-slams-us-media-cla…

That quote doesn't say that the US didn't kill Bin Laden. You're implying that by adding an unnecessary parenthetical "in which the terrorist leader was killed in 2011."

There's nothing simpler and better for your case than typing the quote where he said the thing you say he said. Otherwise, you're actively spreading misinformation on social media, and intentionally using rhetorical games to obscure the lack of evidence you're offering to support it. That's conscious spreading of misinformation.

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

#639

Post by jeltz »

trwhanh wrote: post #420
VincentEvans wrote: post #176

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…

I question this theory. Russia had already throttled NS 1 and was playing games with the turbine certification. I'm not so sure that they would have had to pay damages. It is true that they were pressuring Germany to certify NS 2 (one explanation is that NS 1 had long term contracts whereas NS 2 would have been higher spot prices). But the danger of NS 2 certification would also support the U.S. involvement theory. T…

> Another such investigation was the sinking of the MS Estonia

Stop believing conspiracy theories. The investigation into the sinking was well executed and most likely correct. Estonia was also never covered, they started the work and then aborted it.

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

#640

Post by coffeebeqn »

mmastrac wrote: post #211
rsync wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"You could probably write a similar one with Russia ..." I disagree - there is no credible motive here for Russia and, in fact, the outcome was directly opposed to every outcome they are, or were trying, to achieve. Not only do I, as a US citizen, believe that the US perpetrated this act but further: I believe it is an overtly hostile action against EU citizens and, particularly, Germans, who will suffer the most eco…

There are plenty of credible motives for Russia to do this (some even listed in this thread), but they are all just as weakly supported as this theory.

Just mistrust and finger pointing among the western alliance is one. Turns out everyone wanted it gone- except maybe a few Russian assets like Orban
Post reply on HN