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

Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

forsvaret.dk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

811–820 of 1001 posts

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#811

Post by anovikov »

thiagoharry wrote: post #578
yznovyak wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Common theme I've heard here (Kyiv, Ukraine) is that this sabotage is in Putin's direct interest. There are rumours of political infighting among Russia's leaders and that there are several factions trying to seize power, however since there is no clear winner, those guys need powerful allies, EU being a very important one. The idea is that Europe really wants to buy Russian gas, but not from Putin, so if Russia some…

Why is Putin direct interest destroy a source of income and leverage to the country!?!? Now Germany can buy gas from 2 sources: Ukraine and USA. This explanation makes no sense to me.

Because Putin's interest is Putin, not Russia.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#812

Post by int_19h »

phpthrowaway99 wrote: post #525
migro23 wrote: post #513

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People need to stop thinking of 'Russia' (or any other country for that matter) as a single monolith. For example, a possible motive that may be bad for Russia but good for Putin is that maybe he wants to deter any would be assassination attempt coming from within the Kremlin by making it abundantly clear that there will be no going back to business as usual if he was to be eliminated. Blowing up the Nord Stream pipe…

This could be the same for the US or Ukraine. So considering that, all things being equal, it sounds pretty terrible for the main Russian goals, so I'm going to say no it wasn't Russia.

Nobody knows what the "main Russian goals" are. I mean, I'd hope that nobody is taking this whole "denazification" business seriously.

There's a very real possibility that the actual goal of this entire mess is/was for Putin to get into the history textbooks as one of the great Russian leaders before he dies from cancer (or whatever it is that he has).

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#813

Post by hackerlight »

cyber_kinetist wrote: post #28
wongarsu wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sabotage makes sense, but by whom? Surely Russia has no interest in sabotaging the pipelines that give them leverage over Europe. Without the pipelines, the whole "you lift the sanctions, we deliver natural gas" game is gone. Even if unlikely to happen, it would have been an important psychological and political factor over the winter. Meanwhile European powers don't seem to have an incentive. They would benefit from…

Quoted post unavailable.

It's not a proxy war. It's just a war. Russian imperialism is what caused the war. Don't take away their credit and give it to the US.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#814

Post by spaceheater »

apexalpha wrote: post #263
kstenerud wrote: post #90

If I were a betting man, I'd put my money on Poland. The Polish prime minister immediately called "sabotage" and fingered Russia, while everyone else is still saying "it could be sabotage but we need to investigate first". Russia wants the taps capable of being turned ON at their discretion, not permanently broken. This hurts their bargaining position in a big way because they've just lost their biggest source of lev…

There's no way Poland pulls this off. If ANY of the government members EVER leak this their position in the EU is done for. It's a direct act of aggression. This would be an extremely dumb move by Poland.

Those who have something to lose would not have done it (aka the countries that need the gas, or the country that provides it). Poland is a very interesting idea, since even if they are caught, they are the ones providing the gas to Europe now, and refusing to deal with them is not an option.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#815

Post by newZWhoDis »

kstenerud wrote: post #90

If I were a betting man, I'd put my money on Poland. The Polish prime minister immediately called "sabotage" and fingered Russia, while everyone else is still saying "it could be sabotage but we need to investigate first". Russia wants the taps capable of being turned ON at their discretion, not permanently broken. This hurts their bargaining position in a big way because they've just lost their biggest source of lev…

All of this, but it was the French. They have tons of nuclear capability, good subs, and a top-5 intelligence agency few know exists.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#816

Post by nradov »

OrvalWintermute wrote: post #769
trasz wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China is already dictating the price - it’s been like this even before war. Without gas they have no reason to tolerate Putin.

> Without gas they have no reason to tolerate Putin. Nope. If you think about this on a geopolitical scale, China has every interest in wanting their Northern border with Russia secure, and to advance the Chinese Belt & Road initiative, and collaborate on non-USD currency trading, and other things that make them both sanctions resistant. China also wants Russian Technology where they still hold leadership positions.…

Even if China manages to conquer Taiwan (they don't yet have enough amphibious lift capacity to make it stick), the important fabs are likely to be wrecked. And even if China manages to capture some equipment intact, they won't be able to operate it without support from ASML and other foreign vendors.

US politicians have finally woken up to the risk of being dependent on China for strategically important semiconductors, hence the support for measures like the CHIPS Act. The window for China to be able to credibly threaten us with sanctions is rapidly closing.

https://usafacts.org/articles/whats-in-the-recently-passed-c...

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#817

Post by int_19h »

pphysch wrote: post #429
throwrqX wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why people here seem to think Russia is acting rationally. The fact they continue the invasion when losing is clearly irrational. They threaten mass nuclear bombardment of Europe nearly daily. I don't see any long term rationality in Putin's government in the slightest. There will be no salvaging the relationship between Germany and Russia for a long time unless Putin gets replaced, even during win…

> I don't understand Have you genuinely attempted to understand the Russian perspective in all this? Like listened to what Moscow has been saying for the last decade? Have you ever read a single one of Putin's speeches, for example? Reading Anne Applebaum screeds in The Atlantic is not seeking understanding, by the way. How can you understand something if you don't attempt to understand it? > What evidence is there f…

I'm Russian (both ethnically and citizenship).

The Russian perspective is basically, "we had an awesome empire, now we want it back". All the rhetoric about teh evil NATO etc is just dressing that up.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#818

Post by hackerlight »

It's so easy to spin a just so story around incentives to think anyone is responsible.

US did it because their gas industry want to sell to Europe, and also Biden was clipped saying he can stop NS2.

Russia did it because the repair costs are low and hence the distrust propaganda value is worth that cost, and because EU is going to stop buying their gas anyway so may as well capitalize on the sunk cost.

Forgetting incentives for a minute and instead looking at recent patterns of behavior and reckless disregard for both others as well as self-preservation, my default assumption is that Russia did it. This is the best lens to use when the incentive picture is murky, because it clearly is murky here.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#819

Post by int_19h »

sam_lowry_ wrote: post #414
vintermann wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an interesting possibility I hadn't thought of. Can a faction really blow up an undersea pipeline in three places at once, though?

If that fraction is FSB management, why not? Rumor is, there is enormous pressure on Putin to cede power to Patrushev son. This may be part if a plan to force him into quitting

I can't help but recall that Igor Strelkov - the guy who, by his own admission, "started the war" (back in 2014, by occupying Slavyansk and Kramatorsk) - is ex-FSB, and ostensibly still very well connected there. And he is very much a hardliner wrt continuing the war, even if it means taking on NATO.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#820

Post by hackerlight »

lm28469 wrote: post #678
_kbh_ wrote: post #182

A plausible theory for why Russia has done this could be to avoid fines. It is likely that Russia has agreements with steep penalties for if they voluntarily don't provide gas like they agreed too (like what they are doing with Nord Stream 1). Blowing large holes in the pipelines could allow Russia to claim that they cannot provide gas because the pipelines are broken, effectively avoiding the fines.

So illgellay invading a country is no big deal but a fine for breach of contract would warrant what could be seen as an act of war on a nato country ?

They also really don't want to default on their foreign debt. What's your point?
Post reply on HN