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

Blowing holes in Seymour Hersh’s pipe dream

oalexanderdk.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 439 posts

Re: Blowing holes in Seymour Hersh’s pipe dream

#181

Post by pohl »

xyzelement wrote: post #169
pohl wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“They” in your 2nd paragraph is probably making it hard to reason out. You’re imagining Russia to be a nation with somewhat rational self interest, right? It isn’t. Russia today is Vladimir Putin serving Vladimir Putin’s interests. He is desperately trying not to be ousted after having stepped on his own dick in Ukraine. Destroying his own asset could have been motivated by wanting to reduce the value of what a would…

I am curious: how do you know this, and is this logical? IE, how do you know what Putin is doing and how he's thinking? What give you that insight? And - even assuming you do, does this make sense? Who is the "would be challenger" who would say "well, damn. I am going to oust Putin and take over the world's largest country, but ... nah, not gonna bother without Nordstream"?

You’re right. Clairvoyance is the only way one could possibly infer anything. My bad.

Re: Blowing holes in Seymour Hersh’s pipe dream

#182

Post by ceejayoz »

steponlego wrote: post #179
ceejayoz wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sure it will be as exciting as that time Colin Powell held up the little vial of fake anthrax there.

Yeah DOD has a long, long track record of lying to everybody's face, then pretending it didn't harm what was left of their reputation. Remember the incubator babies, the yellow cake, etc? LOL

All true. Odd to have a blind spot on Russia lying in similar fashion, though.

Re: Blowing holes in Seymour Hersh’s pipe dream

#183

Post by EdwardDiego »

steponlego wrote: post #176
ceejayoz wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They stopped it from coming online months before the explosions. It was decertified in Feb 2022, and NordStream 2 AG went bankrupt a week later. Sanctions are a way of stopping things.

[flagged]

Huh, you're on a first name basis with the President? Or is that just a rhetorical device?

Re: Blowing holes in Seymour Hersh’s pipe dream

#185

Post by cma »

steponlego wrote: post #170
xyzelement wrote: post #157

I didn't read Hersh's essay, I did read this and found it logical. BUT independently from these two writeups, the thing that doesn't make any sense is the idea that Russian would blow up their own pipeline. It is an asset they fully control. The idea that they damaged their own asset "to show the world they are serious" or whatever is about as likely as "to threaten Alice, Bob shot off his own foot." Is it possible?…

[flagged]

Here's the video of him saying it Feb 7 2022. He could have been referring to decertifying it, which happened shortly after, since someone asks how they could do it given it is under German control and blowing it up doesn't require it to be under your own control.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4BuMaGlKp0&t=1m50s

Re: Blowing holes in Seymour Hersh’s pipe dream

#186

Post by hutzlibu »

andrewflnr wrote: post #164
hutzlibu wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Only if you're very lucky do you actually know any of these things." No, if someone is spreading false information, then this gives the solid information, that this source is tainted. And everything else is speculation, yes.

You mean you know the outlet is unreliable, if they do it enough times. By "source" I assumed you meant the source of the story, about whom we still know nothing.

I was refering literally to this statement.

"You can't draw conclusions of any kind from false information; that's the problem with false information."

My point simply being, that you get information from false information, regarding the source of the false information. Philosophical and apparently out of place.

Re: Blowing holes in Seymour Hersh’s pipe dream

#188

Post by thoeiu4oi234 »

stephc_int13 wrote: post #154

I've read both this paper and the original Seymour Hersh article. I found the abundance of details a bit weird, to be honest, but not enough to discount the credibility of the thesis. On the other hand, this paper is poorly constructed, mostly using straw man techniques and sleight of hands to discredit the original paper. I think it's doing the opposite of what it is trying to achieve, adding free publicity on top.

I don't know about you, but I find these "pro-West" side to be quite specious in their arguments. What idiot really believes that Russia of all people would want to kill their own golden goose ?

The argument these geniuses are implicitly making is that either Russians (or more euphemistically "Putin") is a raging lunatic, or that their readers so utterly dim-witted that they'll believe any shit that they'll spin.

OTOH, US/UK... has a very long history of false-flags and extremely sophisticated psychological warfare, esp. given the international dominance of the English language.

Re: Blowing holes in Seymour Hersh’s pipe dream

#189

Post by xyzelement »

mandevil wrote: post #167
xyzelement wrote: post #157

I didn't read Hersh's essay, I did read this and found it logical. BUT independently from these two writeups, the thing that doesn't make any sense is the idea that Russian would blow up their own pipeline. It is an asset they fully control. The idea that they damaged their own asset "to show the world they are serious" or whatever is about as likely as "to threaten Alice, Bob shot off his own foot." Is it possible?…

As I've argued before, the issue here is that invading Ukraine doesn't really make any sense from the Russian perspective. They've lost so much money in trade, their army is shattered, their soft-power is in shambles, and they've pissed off even the Russian speaking parts of Ukraine that used to view them as friends. This is why there was a lot of dissension in the West over a year ago about whether the Russians woul…

I think Russians can articulate a logical reason for the war: in their perception, Ukraine was becoming unacceptably close to the West/NATO and they took a gamble to prevent it. Whether the gamble will pay off, we'll see. But I can follow the logic - risk for a chance at upside.

What's the upside of blowing up your own pipeline and then denying it?

Re: Blowing holes in Seymour Hersh’s pipe dream

#190

Post by jjtheblunt »

pohl wrote: post #181
xyzelement wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am curious: how do you know this, and is this logical? IE, how do you know what Putin is doing and how he's thinking? What give you that insight? And - even assuming you do, does this make sense? Who is the "would be challenger" who would say "well, damn. I am going to oust Putin and take over the world's largest country, but ... nah, not gonna bother without Nordstream"?

You’re right. Clairvoyance is the only way one could possibly infer anything. My bad.

Not true. You could be Putin in which case you would know.
Post reply on HN