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

331–340 of 1001 posts

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

#331

Post by mzs »

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…

But do you know a little bit about how shaky Seymour Hersh's later writing has been:

>… But his allegations are largely supported only by two sources, neither of whom has direct knowledge of what happened, both of whom are retired, and one of whom is anonymous. The story is riven with internal contradictions and inconsistencies.

>The story simply does not hold up to scrutiny — and, sadly, is in line with Hersh's recent turn away from the investigative reporting that made him famous into unsubstantiated conspiracy theories.

https://www.vox.com/2015/5/11/8584473/seymour-hersh-osama-bi...

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

#332

Post by Ancalagon »

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…

Dang, the question mark is not significant enough in my mind to present this story in a proper light. I think you should preface the title with "Theory:", "Hypothesis:", or some other disclaimer to immediately signify to the readers that it does not have substantial evidence to back up its extraordinary claims.

I respect and appreciate your opinions on all things HN related, but in this instance I think we need to make readers more urgently aware.

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

#333

Post by mrguyorama »

rank0 wrote: post #60
dragonwriter wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you look at all the players, their interests, and their capabilities, I think the most logical conclusion is that the US likely did it. I disagree. The most logical explanation is tha Russia did it as a capacity demonstration and threat against Baltic Pipe to pressure contries in the region regarding Ukraine, but that, like all their threats against the West over Ukraine policy so far, the threat was hollow.

You think Russia tried to send a message by……destroying its own infrastructure?! It was their biggest leverage over the EU. Now it’s gone and there’s no possibility of restoring Russian gas flows to the EU. If they were gonna destroy critical international infrastructure wouldn’t it make more sense to blow up something else?

It's important to point out here that Russia has done MANY brainless things during this war, things that actively harmed their position in the world. Miscalculating an attempt to change the calculus is definitely a possibility.

Or Russia did it for the internal audience: "Look at what they did the big evil US just wants europe to suffer we are the best"

I'm not sure it makes sense for either the US or Russia to have done it. I bet it was some smaller NATO country or ukraine just whistling in the corner and giggling a little as everyone points fingers.

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

#334

Post by Snitch-Thursday »

threeseed wrote: post #325
dang wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've answered that question repeatedly in this thread already. If you read those comments and have a question I haven't addressed, I'd like to know what it is. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34713787 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34713529 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34713479 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34712496

The HN guidelines are clear about political topics. Is there a change to the guidelines and should we expect you to not override the ranking system for opposing view points.

> The HN guidelines are clear about political topics.

I agree with that guideline. I don't want HN in general to devolve into standard tribal mudslinging.

But I don't believe this is the standard 'breaking news' chum of the day, mostly because of the reputation of the author, though I readily admit the sensationalist title is click-baity.

So far (7 hours after this was first posted) most comments seem to be complaining that the HN users can't flag this away. I found the story interesting, it makes you think about just what the USGov is doing, if it's true or not is somewhat immaterial...the story was an interesting read, whether it was a non-fiction story or not.

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

#336

Post by pillefitz »

LarryMullins wrote: post #236
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…

> I believe it is an overtly hostile action against EU citizens and, particularly, Germans, who will suffer the most economically. In the scenario where America did it, I think there is a strong argument to be made that it was in the long-term interests of EU citizens, despite causing them some short-term discomfort. They never should have started this pipeline project in the first place, buying energy from Russia ma…

We were quite happy with cheap energy and it was great to have a choice between Russian gas and American LNG, until that option disappeared.

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

#337

Post by dang »

threeseed wrote: post #288
h2odragon wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interests me too. You're always free not to read this article or thread.

Dang is manually influencing the ranking system. So this is not necessarily what is interesting to everyone.

Yes, moderators moderate this site. This has been true from the beginning, 15+ years ago.

Your comment suggests an assumption that without moderation, the ranking system would indicate "what is interesting to everyone". That assumption isn't just wrong, it's super wrong. Here are some past comments about that, if anyone cares: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so.... The short version is that without moderation, the site would be dominated by the same few hot stories repeated ad nauseum, plus an endless supply of riler-uppers. This is no way to optimize for what is interesting to everyone. As I said elsewhere in a reply to you, there are tradeoffs along every axis of this thing.

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

#338

Post by lr1970 »

erentz wrote: post #55
mytailorisrich wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you look at all the players, their interests, and their capabilities, I think the most logical conclusion is that the US likely did it. Of course this is not evidence but this the sort of operation where success means no evidence (at least no evidence available to the public at large as it is possible and, one might hope, likely that neighbouring countries know).

Why leave one of the brand new, larger pipelines undamaged, so that Russia could then offer after the event to work with Germany to activate it? Which naturally they did. This pipeline had been completed but activation was stopped due to the start of the war. If Germany had capitulated and activated it with Russia that would be a major political win for Russia and blow for the suggested goals of the US and other alli…

> Why leave one of the brand new, larger pipelines undamaged ...

Two possibilities:

(1) explosive charge malfunctioned

(2) make plausible arguments that it was Russia who did it

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

#339

Post by nabla9 »

This is a phenomenon.

People who did good work and have fame are getting old. Instead of retiring they just start to do sloppy work, or fall prey to people who exploit their reduced cognitive capacity. They get publicity because internet has no editors.

Hersh is 85. He has been on decline for some time.

Remember Michael Atiyah few years back. One of the greatest mathematicians in the last century. He claimed he solved the Riemann hypothesis little before he died. It was clear that he was in cognitive decline, but media and social media had their day.

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

#340

Post by donohoe »

I take this with a grain of salt. The 'source' (or sources) here are un-named and unclear if just the one or more.

The author, Seymour Hersh, has accused the Obama administration of lying about the events surrounding the death of Osama bin Laden, and disputed the claim that the Assad regime used chemical weapons on civilians in the Syrian Civil War.

This all sounds very plausible. It may even be true, but I do not trust the messenger that much.

Post reply on HN