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

261–270 of 439 posts

Re: Blowing holes in Seymour Hersh’s pipe dream

#261

Post by epistasis »

xyzelement wrote: post #189
mandevil wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

We don't need to speculate here, Putin has been quite open with his weird attempts at being a historian, that he openly publishes and which make his worldview extremely clear. Ignoring these works from his own hand, would be as hopeless as understanding Hitler's motivations without understanding Mein Kampf.

Putin views "Ukraine" as not a real nation, and Ukrainians as a subservient people that belong to the Russian empire and specifically to him, as the ruler of the Russian empire.

Too "close" to the West/NATO is not the real issueg, rather it's the audacity of a subservient race pretending that they don't owe everything to the racially superior Russians.

I run into this all the time with Russians, even here on HN. They view all Slavic people as "little Russians" and their personal serfs. All the other Slavic countries as "little Russias" that belong to their true master Slavic nation.

And this worldview is 100% consistent with Putin's actions. He never thought that Ukrainians could ever resist, because they are supposed to be inherently inferior to Russians. And for the moment, that is kinda working in Belarus, and it worked in Georgia, but Ukraine has been different. Ukraine has been preparing for the past 8 years, purging all the traitors from their army, and working on removing Russian corruption. And really Ukrainians are fundamentally different from Russians. Ukrainians experienced Stalin and thought about what they could do to prevent it in the future. Russians view the terribleness of bad leaders as something like the weather, or a natural disaster: they take no agency when it comes to their rulers, they are sheep, but they console themselves with their perceived racial superiority over the other subjects of the empire. The other subjects are not the same...

Re: Blowing holes in Seymour Hersh’s pipe dream

#262

Post by XorNot »

ballenf wrote: post #220
Analemma_ wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s a very straightforward and plausible rationale for Russia (specifically, Putin) to do it: coup-proofing by forced commitment to not turning the oil back on, like breaking your own steering wheel in a game of chicken and throwing it out the window. There are presumably elites in Russia who would like to see the war end and go back to business-as-usual so they can get their assets and incomes back, and blowing…

That is the strongest case, but I'm still confused by the seemingly conflicting claim that Putin is susceptible to a coup but only if there's a pipeline. Don't Russian elites have nearly as much to lose from this war continuing with or without a pipeline? What exactly would the pipeline change in the these elites calculus, willingness or ability to stage a successful coup? The pipeline repair cost estimates are much…

Why would you interpret that motive as "only" if there's a pipeline?

Think of a car seat belt: does it make you immune to dying in a car crash? No. It does however reduce the probability you will. So might removing a bunch of spikes glued to your steering wheel.

Similarly, what do you think a coup is? A coup is when guns get pulled in board rooms and people have to try and remove blood and bodies from the carpet. It's safe to say "the elites" don't plan one idly, and you know, if the stunning rate of Russian executives turning up having committed suicide off balcony's[1] is any indication, one real good way not be one of them is to rat out the people coming to you proposing a coup. Particularly if they're not able to promise big money in return.

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

Re: Blowing holes in Seymour Hersh’s pipe dream

#263

Post by thephyber »

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…

Agree with most of your conclusion.

Too many people are making assumptions that governments are giant monocultures that have all departments rowing in the same direction and don’t have some actors with perverse incentives. Nobody in any large organization would realistically make these assumptions.

My take on the war stems from a few facts that I now assume are true:

- RU has publicly stated multiple conflicting reasons for invading UA.

- RU doesn’t incentivize honest and open discussion about intelligence, risks, readiness, etc so intelligence analysts are probably scared to speak truth to their bosses. I remember reading a FB post son after the invasion that claimed an FSB/GRU analyst said as much in a Telegram channel (obviously unverifiable).

- RU’s capabilities have atrophied and are hampered by corruption of their military / industry

- RU isn’t a healthy society; it is largely dominated by wealthy energy magnates (and the politicians/military that enable them)

It’s possible, but not guaranteed that a nation state destroyed the pipeline. I’m curious what the possibilities are about an energy company that rivals Gazprom could/would destroy a rival’s distribution channel. Gazprom was already running those lines below capacity because of “turbine maintenance” issues.

That only complaint I have with your comment is the last sentence. It’s possible that none of the popular narratives are correct.

Re: Blowing holes in Seymour Hersh’s pipe dream

#264

Post by nwallin »

dmix wrote: post #17

If someone was feeding Hersh false information why would they reference the Alta class? Assuming it was some Intel op or some insider, did they just google some Norwegian navy ships that could plausibly fit the picture? Or did Hersh draw that connection himself? Hersh has been criticized for listening to cranks. Maybe some Intel officer (or adjacent gov/military worker) heard some rumours internally but there was com…

If the point is just to muddy the waters, you don't need a story that's airtight, it just needs to be convincing enough to spark peoples' biases.

If it's a crank, well, it's a crank. When I was in the Air Force, and still had a TS clearance, there was a friend+coworker of mine that was deep into conspiracy theories. Flat Earth, Moon Hoax, 9/11 truther, and a few others I don't remember. Everything we talked about he had loads of details. I knew it was all nonsense of course, because you're talking about flat earth and all that; if I didn't know he was a full blown conspiracy theorist? If I just knew he was a system administrator with a top secret security clearance attached to an intelligence squadron? And he was telling me a story about something the intelligence community did? He'd be very believable.

Re: Blowing holes in Seymour Hersh’s pipe dream

#265

Post by XorNot »

aetherson wrote: post #253
mandevil wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, I can tell a just-so-story as well. It's just that, like your explanation, it involves Putin making what seems to me to be a dumb decision. Some parts of game theory emphasizes ostentatious signaling that you can't turn back (e.g. 'win the game of chicken by clearly throwing your steering wheel out of the car before the game starts, so the other person KNOWS you can't turn' line of reasoning, which is stupid…

Would a coup struggle to get the goodwill of Europe? Kinda feels like they'd top themselves up on European goodwill just by, you know, removing Putin.

Goodwill from Europe is not currency, and they're also not stupid collectively: the most likely outcome of removing Putin is a power-struggle vacuum which you either think you can win, or plan to buy your way free of.

The problem with being part of a conspiracy to overthrow the leader of your country, is the only thing you really know about your co-conspirators is that they're traitors willing to stage a coup.

Re: Blowing holes in Seymour Hersh’s pipe dream

#266

Post by thephyber »

xyzelement wrote: post #189
mandevil wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Putin’s statement the night of the invasion: [1]

[1] https://www.c-span.org/video/?518097-2/russian-president-put...

Re: Blowing holes in Seymour Hersh’s pipe dream

#267

Post by uoaei »

yborg wrote: post #123
uoaei wrote: post #83

[flagged]

Because you hold a different view of an event doesn't make all other views part of some Illuminatus conspiracy.

Because someobe has an idea that their theory is smart, doesn't make their argument very good nor does it guarantee that they know what they're talking about.

The levels of hubris present in discourse like this, as regards the confidence with which people claim arguments in one direction or another, is absurd. Yet it runs rampant among the "rationalists" of HN constantly in the comments sections.

Re: Blowing holes in Seymour Hersh’s pipe dream

#268

Post by MarkMarine »

ggm wrote: post #241

Hersh is in the difficult position of needing to neither confirm nor deny his sources, because if he doesn't then no future internal leaker will talk to him: we're not going to find out "how he knows" because it kills his business. He's also like John Pilger and Glenn Greenwald very definitely bringing a specific world view to the table. Like the other two, that means his editorial has a direction. I don't personally…

Hersh also has a history of breaking stories that are true, like the My Lai massacre, Abu Ghraib, and other things. This counterpoint writer has none of the yank that Hersh has.

Has Hersh slipped in his age? I don’t know. But this nameless IC cutout who wrote this story has basically no credibility. Why should anyone listen to him?

Re: Blowing holes in Seymour Hersh’s pipe dream

#269

Post by thephyber »

aetherson wrote: post #253
mandevil wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, I can tell a just-so-story as well. It's just that, like your explanation, it involves Putin making what seems to me to be a dumb decision. Some parts of game theory emphasizes ostentatious signaling that you can't turn back (e.g. 'win the game of chicken by clearly throwing your steering wheel out of the car before the game starts, so the other person KNOWS you can't turn' line of reasoning, which is stupid…

Would a coup struggle to get the goodwill of Europe? Kinda feels like they'd top themselves up on European goodwill just by, you know, removing Putin.

A coup could result in a more or less desirable regime, from a western perspective.

I’ve read that Putin is getting lots of pressure from his extreme right that criticize him of half-assing the invasion and not being harsh enough on Ukrainian citizens. Be careful what you wish for when you consider a coup. It likely won’t be the intelligent moderates with peaceful sensibilities that do it. Those types have already left or are keeping their heads down.

Re: Blowing holes in Seymour Hersh’s pipe dream

#270

Post by halothane »

kurthr wrote: post #114
ad404b8a372f2b9 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you qualify Hersh as one of journalism's least trustworthy figures, it's impossible to take the rest of your comment at face value.

Well, in the last decade he's kinda blown it with multiple claims in Syria. Statements that are either unbelievable, undocumented and easily could be (like building locations), or basically falsified have really brought down his trust. Even if he's just getting bad information rather than coming from a particular angle, his readers deserve better vetting of the material. At some point it feels like he's being driven…

Haha, Bellingcat is your source vs a Pulitzer Prize journalist who may have fallen out of favor with a particular crowd, and you want the comment to be taken seriously? Not all us drink Koolaid. Here's a link to your link - about Brown Moses, an unemployed man from Leicester, England (https://www.cjr.org/business_of_news/bellingcat_brown_moses....)
Post reply on HN