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

511–520 of 1001 posts

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

#511

Post by mc32 »

selimthegrim wrote: post #109
mc32 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this turns out to be right --and we don't have conclusive evidence, but this would upset the current narrative. Why would Russia be an idiot to shoot itself in the foot (cui bono) and blow up their leverage; though in international affairs the unimaginable is possible, so yeah they may have done it to themselves -though to outsiders it would seem illogical If true though, it would be as big as the Gulf of Tonkin i…

Russia would be an idiot to start a war with Ukr…oh wait a minute

Robbing a bank is stupid... and people do it. But one usually does not use one's own check to write the hold-up note. Sure, it happens, but not typically.

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

#512

Post by ravi-delia »

hedora wrote: post #437
LarryMullins wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not unsourced, the source is being kept private. That may not seem like a meaningful difference but there is a difference. And that difference is the reason Seymour Hersh's reputation is relevant.

Does it actually say that anywhere? I read the first half of the article, and skimmed the second. It doesn't claim to be sourced from anywhere, and the only paragraph that discusses sources and fact checking is when they point out the White House says the entire article is a work of fiction. It doesn't present any evidence that it happened (other than that the US has a big swimming pool that the navy trains in), and…

It claims that the info came from someone "with direct knowledge of the operational planning"

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

#513

Post by VintageCool »

marginalia_nu wrote: post #422
thwayunion wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At that moment in the war, even Putin had a lot of strong motivations -- lock out the option of bringing Nord Stream back online and close to door on de-escalation. As a side-benefit, the possibility of driving a wedge into NATO. I also found https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34713402 interesting. Who knows.

Putin was already effectively doing that, by demanding payment in rubles and making weird terms. If Putin wanted to shut down Nordstream, he'd just stop sending gas. What was Europe going to do, sanction him more? I can see the US doing it as they've been vocal opponents to nordstream since its inception, I can see Ukraine wanting to do it although I doubt they'd have the resources, might also have been some other ro…

The "Putin did it" hypothesis was that he did it to prevent internal replacement. Suppose that some Russian rival wanted to replace him. They could kill or imprison Putin, end the war in Ukraine, restart the gas pipelines, and have a lot of gas money from Europe to distribute to supporters.

Destroying the pipelines removed the potential reward for an internal rival to replace him.

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

#514

Post by Animatronio »

partiallypro wrote: post #56
cpursley wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It absolutely does. Blowing up the pipeline took away Russias ability to hold the EU hostage with the energy card.

The pipeline was already not operational. What are you missing? If you think the US had a profit motive (which it seems you are saying this), NATO is much much more profitable than gas which will be diversified over time. So why would they risk the entire NATO alliance for this? Again, the theory makes no sense.

You are missing the very, very obvious fact that NS could have become operational at any point. Taking it out physically means that it's impossible without lengthy and costly repairs. The profit motive is there - diversification (if possible) takes time. Companies can and do take advantage of that.

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

#516

Post by indymike »

jdhn wrote: post #404
indymike wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why is that weird? Assuming this is true, there would be rather many people with such knowledge. One of them may feel the need to talk. The level of detail about the operation is basically, some divers from the US Navy attached bombs to the pipeline during a military drill that were detonated with magical sonobouy signals according to some professor who said that might work. Another red flag: The vast majority of t…

>and not who is benefited by the destruction of the pipeline. The article itself said that Norway would benefit from the destruction of the pipe line.

> The article itself said that Norway would benefit from the destruction of the pipe line.

This does not make the article more credible, in fact, it detaches the beneficiary one more degree from the actor.

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

#517

Post by strangattractor »

thwayunion wrote: post #150
mmastrac wrote: post #97

It's a great story, but it's all unsourced and could be a decent Tom Clancy story at best. You could probably write a similar one with Russia or German agents as the key players and be just as convincing. The only anchor in reality appears to be Biden suggesting that they knew how to take it out which seems like a pretty weak place to build a large story. What I find particularly odd is that this entire thing appears…

> The only anchor in reality appears to be Biden suggesting that they knew how to take it out which seems like a pretty weak place to build a large story. I'd bet my last dollar that at least four nations had "blow up Nord Stream to force continued conflict" contingency plans. Who did it? Germany, Russia, USA, Ukraine, or a curve ball from the one of the Nordic or Baltic states? We'll probably never know, and none of…

I think we left out extraterrestrial aliens.

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

#518

Post by sampo »

dang wrote: post #34

All: Whether he is right or not or one likes him or not, Hersh reporting on this counts as significant new information ( https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... ), so I've turned off the flags on this submission. If you're going to comment in this thread, please make sure you're up on the site guidlelines ( https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html ) and note this one: " Comments should…

> Hersh reporting on this counts as significant new information

This is from 2015:

"The way to understand Hersh is to visualize most of his sources as Michael Scheuer-like individuals. It is not difficult to find such people in the intelligence world: obsessive, frustrated idiot savants who perceive themselves as stymied by the paper pushers, the bureaucrats"

"Hersh’s problem is that he evinces no skepticism whatsoever toward what his crank sources tell him, which is ironic considering how cynical he is regarding the pronouncements of the U.S. national security bureaucracy. Like diplomats who “go native,” gradually sympathizing with the government or some faction in the host nation while losing sight of their own country’s national interest, Hersh long ago adopted the views of America’s adversaries and harshest critics."

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2015/05/seymour-hershs-u...

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

#519

Post by spoiler »

ohmaigad wrote: post #447
spoiler wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you're right. I honestly don't know. But I only have so much time in a day to veryfy everything. I'm talking from memory of course, but this Ukraine invasion didn't "come out of the blue" AFAIK. Here's a collection of sources compiled by someone on Quora. I dont know how biased or accurate this person is. However, there were other instances that made me think this isn't so black-and-white or "clean" as I'd like…

Just by peaking over the Quora article it is enough to say it is a Russian propaganda piece, things like some UA nazis (Russians also have some nazi admirers), the "referendums" and so on. Even if these referendums were legit, does it really trump a nations sovereignty (I am talking from my own experience as a lot of Russians were imported and locals deported in my country during the Soviet occupation and these peopl…

Ah, I am still not fully convinced the situation is so clear even after reading the BI article...

There is definitely propganda on both sides (and how much of it is true is hard to tell). Russia isn't the only one with a propaganda machine, if anything the US is much more successful at it than Russia could ever hope to be.

I encourage you to read more of the Quora article, even if I appreciate that some of the stuff in the article might be hard to stomach, since you seem emotionally closer to the issue than I do. I believe a lot of it is very unlikely to stem from Russian propaganda.

Some of the stuff you attributed (eg you mentioned tribalism and spite) to Russia isn't unique to them or their politics; it's just a very primitive part of human nature that we still struggle with.

And to close with a tangent: it's always good to keep in mind that nobody (neither you or I) is immune to propagand; especially when it's pushed by state actors with a larger agenda. This is why I often indulge in reading stuff I don't agree with (within reason). Does give me a bit of cognitive dissonance occasionally, but alas.

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

#520

Post by 0xDEF »

Modern Norway is one of the wealthiest and most developed societies that has ever existed. To give an example: Their population is only 5.4 million but they are the third biggest market for premium/luxury electric vehicles after the US and China.

Why would people living in what is an actual paradise on Earth risk all that by blindly following Joe Biden's orders to shoot at Russia?

Sorry but the Norwegian involvement claim doesn't pass the smell test.

Post reply on HN