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

851–860 of 1001 posts

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#851

Post by ajross »

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.

> Why is Putin direct interest destroy a source of income and leverage to the country!?!?

The logic isn't unreasonable. Nordstream is very clearly NOT a source of income, currently. But it could be, if Putin were deposed. Now the Russian gas interests are stuck with Putin, they don't win anything (in the near term) via a coup.

Add to that that clandestine adventurism like this is very much Putin's MO and not the USA's (we do our adventurism with giant flags and 24/7 news coverage), and... it seems the most reasonable guess.

Really the US doesn't have that much interest here, certainly not enough to provoke further escalation. If Ukraine were to straight up fall to Russia, we'd deal with it. That's what we all assumed was going to happen back in the spring anyway.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#852

Post by inferiorhuman »

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.

  Why is Putin direct interest destroy a source of income and leverage to the country!?!?
Because there's no political will to re-open it for the time being. Pushing the narrative that this was an American action benefits Putin in two ways:

- Spreads discontent in Germany (and elsewhere). While the EU is okay shutting down NS 1+2 for now if things are particularly bad this winter (weather, value against the dollar, inflation) being able to turn on pipeline again is a relief valve. Blowing it up and blaming the Americans makes it easy to push a narrative that lack of independence from America is putting the EU (especially Germany) at risk.

- While it would be really hard to spin an American attack on NS 1+2 as a rationalization for escalating the war (e.g. nukes), it does create a nice narrative that America is actively hurting Russia unfairly. Sanctions are a lot easier to lift than that pipeline is to repair. That kind of narrative could help popularize recruitment.

Look. Russia is already losing their war badly. The Russian draft is wildly unpopular and the US stands to lose a lot by antagonizing the American left (over environmental issues), Germany, and even Russia. If blaming America can help staunch the mass exodus in Russia and undermine NATO unity then blowing up the pipeline is a small price to pay.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#853

Post by r00fus »

sschueller wrote: post #521
aredox wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is in Russia's interest: this is their last warning before the North Sea pipelines blow up too.

Yet it was the United States president that told a German reporter that NS2 will never go online and the US will see to that. Pres. Biden: "If Russia invades...then there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it." Reporter: "But how will you do that, exactly, since...the project is in Germany's control?" Biden: "I promise you, we will be able to do that." abcn.ws/3B5SScx

So? that already happened. It's offline by German decision, requested by the US/Ukraine.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#854

Post by ordu »

phire wrote: post #830
ordu wrote: post #726

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole war makes no sense. Putin had lost his senses. 1. Putin seriously cite Dugin[1]. Putin acts like he believes this bullshit. 2. There was a lot of people who on different occasions told "Putin wouldn't do that, it would make no sense", so then Putin could prove them wrong later by doing it. This war is one of examples of that kind. Or MH17: why to hit a plane with a missile? There was no sense in it. But it…

It makes sense to stop selling gas to the EU, but Russia already did that weeks ago. What makes little sense is then blowing up the pipeline. Russia were already not selling gas, why would they take the extra step of blowing up the pipeline? That removes it as possible leverage for future negotiations. And if you have the capability to blow up pipelines, why not blow up all the other pipelines transporting gas from S…

My experience of such discussions hints that they lead nowhere. It is a classical mystery. It is impossible to solve without additional information. But if we need to guess based on our current knowledge, then Putin is the best bet: he is a liar, he disrespect all the rules, he likes sudden unexpected moves, he likes to act undercover. I know no other entity that can have reasons to blow up pipelines who matches better.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#855

Post by 2-718-281-828 »

Invictus0 wrote: post #764
2-718-281-828 wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but it's a theory as of now and hence a "conspiracy theory". I'd like to mention that for me "conspiracy theory" is not a term I frown upon. It's been labelled as something equivalent to "dangerous tin foil hat bullshit" by some politicians and news outlets who'd like us to believe that history unfolds linearly and obviously.

"For me the word doesn't mean what everyone else thinks it means"

nice try, buddy ;)

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#856

Post by mytailorisrich »

nradov wrote: post #654
mytailorisrich wrote: post #543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ukraine has a sea coast and a Navy, so I have no doubt that they have combat divers. Thus the only issue would be a logistic one. My take is that it is trivial to send people to the Baltic along with access to diving equipment and boats. Via sea route it should also be very doable to ship explosives. So it is at least plausible.

Any sort of underwater demolitions is pretty much the opposite of "trivial". How much diving have you done? The real world isn't like a James Bond movie.

I didn't say that underwater demolition was trivial.

I said that they surely had military trained in that sort of thing. Actually they even seem to have a 1st Underwater demolitions Unit, so...

It's getting those people to the Baltic that seems trivial to me. That does not mean I am accusing them, but that means they are on my list of suspects.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#857

Post by mytailorisrich »

mort96 wrote: post #617
mytailorisrich wrote: post #546

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

They said Putin's interest, not Russia's interest. Don't make the mistake of assuming Putin will act in accordance with Russia's interests.

The key point is that "they" is the Ukrainian war propaganda machine, which is obviously not a reliable source of news or analysis.

It is also a classic propaganda technique to differenciate between the awful dictator and its poor people/country.

I do not know what happened and if it was deliberate it is not obvious who did it. People should be prudent and not buy into propaganda from either side.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#858

Post by chroma »

some0x80070005 wrote: post #528
bradgessler wrote: post #310

Does anybody know what this means in terms of bringing the pipeline back online? I'm assuming it's filling with seawater, which seems like it would cause all sorts of problems between the salt and debris. Is it a matter of repairing the breaches, removing the water, cleaning the pipeline out, and pressurizing it or is this pipeline effectively destroyed?

Due to the special inside coating to reduce friction, seawater ingress would mean the abandonment of the pipeline. It’s just not possible to fix the line without just replacing the entire thing. I theorize it’s possible to run at severely reduced flow rates if they were able to get the water out, but that seems unlikely since the receiving facilities are not designed to handle the tremendous amount of water that woul…

Is that bit about the coating true? Wikipedia’s article on submarine pipelines says that the inside of petroleum pipelines are not coated. Pipelines are damaged due to accident or natural disaster, so it seems very odd to me that a pipeline would be impossible to repair.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_pipeline

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#859

Post by segah »

int_19h wrote: post #823
segah wrote: post #75

Might be shocking to some, but not all of Russia is one people. There are multiple interests there among country's leaders. And one such interest: to get rid off Putin's regime quickly. One way of doing this is to prevent any notion of "restorable" economic relationships with Europe under Putin. Without Gas, who needs Putin's Russia... A prediction: we will see more of such actions in the coming months, leading to th…

Without gas, Russia is in a worse position at the negotiating table, since it cannot promise to resume shipments in return for removal of sanctions. This is actually something that the pro-war faction (and Putin personally) would love. Conversely, the elites who want to revert back to status quo before the war would never do this.

This is not correct.

Gas supplies are controlled by state-owned corporation. Putin and this corporation are one. There is no multi-factions within this organization. It is 100% under Putin's governance. If there was interest to cut supplies, they would have done this publicly. And they have the PR/Media to spin the story however they want.

On the other hand, elites don't benefit from this gas supply. For example, it keeps Ruble unreasonably high for their own exports. And it keeps the government under Putin's control (Gas finances the war as well as his pockets). And undermining gas supplies, creates a consensus among elites that Putin will not be able to sustain the economy for very long. Once there is a consensus, it is much easier to move against Putin.

In simple terms, like any Middle Eastern Dictator economy, Russian dictatorship is managed through government-controlled oil supplies, which elites don't have direct control over. If oil supplies are taken out of the equation, the economy collapses unless elites take over to manage it with alternative methods.

Bottom line, if gas stops flowing from Russia, elites (technology ceos, aluminium exporters, bankers, etc) gain back control.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#860

Post by SanjayMehta »

adventured wrote: post #733
bulbosaur123 wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

USA wants to exports its LNG to Europe. It makes a lot of economical sense.

For what? $30 billion in extra LNG exports to Europe per year? The US is approaching having a $30 trillion economy. Apple does $387b in sales. Who cares about $30 billion at the scale the US operates at? Should the US blow up SAP for the benefit of Microsoft or Oracle? They're a lot more important economically than LNG exports.

30 billion is peanuts, agreed. But look at the intangible benefits of wrecking Germany's economy.

Last week the WSJ reported on industries moving to the US. Easier than getting production back from China, eh?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/high-natural-gas-prices-push-eu...

Post reply on HN