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

Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 1001 posts

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#291

Post by consumer451 »

petre wrote: post #128
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> what's left? The other pipelines. Their shadow oil fleet. There are lots of options. But to my knowledge, only the British, French and Americans are capable of the long-range clandestine operations.

Their shadow oil fleet is operated by third parties and shell companies. We are dealing with a mafia state here. https://windward.ai/knowledge-base/illuminating-russias-shad...

They are planning on this:

> Parliament calls for an EU crackdown on Russia’s ’shadow fleet’

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20241111IP...

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#292

Post by bigiain »

fuoqi wrote: post #253
TechDebtDevin wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Well, to be fair, it's suspiciously close in time to the recent US/UK/France permission to use long-range missiles against the Russian territory. So it may be indeed a transparent hint towards them from Russia regarding how asymmetric response could look like.

And from a day or two ago:

"Navy undersea cable showdown on Britain's doorstep: Warship forces Russian spy ship out of the Irish Sea after it was spotted over critical subsea cables - miles from UK coast" -- https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14090489/russian-sp...

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#293

Post by tmnvix »

rdtsc wrote: post #82

> "it’s obvious this wasn’t an accidental anchor drop.” If it's "he who shall not be named", gotta admit, that's a clever strategy: ramp up sabotage and see how NATO/EU will feel about their "red lines", and how well does that article 5 really work in practice. Is it worth more than the paper it's printed on? Let's find out! People have been laughing at the West crossing multiple Russian "red lines" and the Russians…

Ask yourself, when was the last time a nation officially declared war?

It doesn't happen anymore for legal reasons.

NATO will 100% not be the first to declare war despite even very serious provocations. Maybe they'll take a leaf out of Russia or Israel's book and declare a 'special' or 'limited' operation though...

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#294

Post by tmnvix »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #113
rdtsc wrote: post #82

> "it’s obvious this wasn’t an accidental anchor drop.” If it's "he who shall not be named", gotta admit, that's a clever strategy: ramp up sabotage and see how NATO/EU will feel about their "red lines", and how well does that article 5 really work in practice. Is it worth more than the paper it's printed on? Let's find out! People have been laughing at the West crossing multiple Russian "red lines" and the Russians…

> yet NATO/EU just looks weak and pathetic in the process Really? Russia, with the 6th largest army in the world, had to pull in Iran and Pyongyang to not get invaded by the 13th largest [1][2]. Moscow is being a nuisance. That doesn't make NATO or Europe look weak, it makes Russia look pathetic. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of... [2] https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/13/world/europe/uk…

It looks more like they are just winning their war by the most effective means they have at their disposal.

To say that Russia is just being a nuisance.... They have just won a war. That is clear as day now.

Trump's election is the nail in the coffin. Immediately we saw Schultz call Putin and Zelensky declare that the war will be over early next year - implying a negotiated settlement.

It's done. The Russians won. Exactly what they won is all that is to be decided.

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#297

Post by mschuster91 »

Probably yet another case of fish trawlers or some dumbass freighter captain not reading the sea charts before dropping their anchor.

I'm all for finally showing the Russians a response for their covert warfare... but this is not the right opportunity. This kind of situation happens many times every year (and the causes are almost always the same, with a few cases of submarine landslides or seismic events).

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#298

Post by dang »

azeirah wrote: post #97
lxgr wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also sends two messages: "We can do this to any of your cables", and "we're willing to" – with an implied "we could easily do it to all of them at the same time". And the last scenario is the real problem: While there are enough cable repair ships to continuously handle a normal rate of simultaneous peak failures, fixing multiple cuts can quickly exceed their capacity. (There's nothing that says an attacker can on…

[flagged]

Ok, but please don't post unsubstantive comments to Hacker News.

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#299

Post by gorbachev »

Etheryte wrote: post #242
staplung wrote: post #63

It's worth mentioning that cable breakages happen quite often; globally about 200 times per year [1] and the article itself mentions that just last year, two other cables and a gas pipeline were taken out by an anchor. The Gulf of Finland is evidently quite shallow. From what I understand, cable repair ships are likely to use ROVs for parts of repair jobs but only when the water is shallow so hopefully they can figur…

This is a misleading framing. The two cables last year were not taken out by an anchor as an accident, it was literally a ship putting down its anchor just before the cable and then dragging it over the cable. In other words, sabotage. There's no point in trying to color any of this with rose tinted glasses when it's clear who's done it and why.

[flagged]

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#300

Post by valval »

polotics wrote: post #85
meiraleal wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Nato is a defensive alliance against any offensive act. Russia, ...as in: the mafia of the few profiteering rulers currently at the helm, is not fighting back anything. Firstly, its mad Ukrainian adventure has meant it has made its border very defence-free on its border with Nato countries. Secondly, it is constantly attacking in hybrid warfare mode, paying local lowlife to do propaganda graffiti and sabotage. The ap…

Are you seriously telling me that the opposing side would care about what an alliance calls themselves? Hitler could call the axis powers a defensive allience and it wouldn’t make it so. Cmon, this is basic reasoning that most 10 year olds would grasp.

NATO has engaged in a dozen wars and conflicts as aggressors.

Post reply on HN