Nord Stream

[Josh]

Lusitania II.

[appleman2006]

Lusitania II.

Sorry I am not following. Are you saying this was simply a breakdown in technology?

[Josh]

Lusitania II.

Sorry I am not following. Are you saying this was simply a breakdown 8n technology?

The Lusitania was the excuse for starting World War I. Many decades later, what actually happened was far different than the story the Allies claimed.

[ken_sylvania]

Latest reporting is that there were Russian warships sighted in that area in the days leading up to the sabotage.

But the area was under the control of the US allies. And the US natural gas sales may benefit from it.

The sabotage was in international waters that are transited by dozens of Baltic Feet Russian warships on a regular basis as they pass from Russian Navy ports at St. Petersburg out to the Baltic and North Sea.

So it is entirely normal and common for Russian warships to pass through that location. And it is not "controlled" by NATO. It is international waters.

If Russian warships are commonly in the area, what is the significance of having sighted them in the area in the days before the rupture? Or were the Baltic Feet spotted playing Baltic Footsie in the exact area? Maybe they tripped?

[temporal1]

Time will reveal all.

Enough facts are already available.
Only intelligence will reveal all, and that is generally lacking in modern humanity, unfortunately.

i believe Franklin must be correct on this.
Those involved know what they did, gov “intelligence” has eyes+ears, they’re keeping watch, AND, for anything missed, they have forensics.

This may be a mystery to most for decades/centuries, but, “Enough facts are already available.”
In time, we’ll be told what to think and do.

[Falco Underhill]

Joe Biden discussing Nord Stream back in January 2022



Joe Biden discussing Nord Stream today



Those sneaky Russians must have sabotaged it themselves!

[RZehr]

It just doesn't make sense to me that Russia would bother with it. It is so much easier to simply keep the valve off. Additionally, take a look on a map at where the leaks are. They are in a place that is much, much, less convenient for Russia to do it than for the West. I think the motivations given that would point to Russia are pretty weak. Russia loses all leverage that these gas lines offer. Pending further information, I'm not at all convinced that Russia did it. For me, that leaves number 2 or 3 as the likely culprits.

- With Germany seemingly not wanting to fight, the USA could be removing the option of Russian gas from Germany in order to take that off Germanys war calculation. Showing Germany that they will not under any circumstances benefit from Russian gas, so don't even try to stay in Russias good graces. With winter coming on, Europe is going to need gas, and could lose there resolve in the face of a cold winter.
- The US can make more gas sales.
- The US for years has opposed and sanctioned these pipelines.
- Biden openly warned that if Russia attacked Ukraine, that the US would keep the pipelines from being used.
- Flip the script, and lets say that the US was piping gas to Germany, and there was sabotage near Russia. And that the Russian President had promised that they would stop the pipeline if the US sent arms to Ukraine. Would we believe Russia did it? Or would we think that it made sense that the US did it?

So what exactly are the logical reasons that would motivate Russia to do this? And are they really, on a level, unbiased playing field, more probable than other possibilities?

[Ken]

It just doesn't make sense to me that Russia would bother with it. It is so much easier to simply keep the valve off. Additionally, take a look on a map at where the leaks are. They are in a place that is much, much, less convenient for Russia to do it than for the West. I think the motivations given that would point to Russia are pretty weak. Russia loses all leverage that these gas lines offer. Pending further information, I'm not at all convinced that Russia did it. For me, that leaves number 2 or 3 as the likely culprits.

- With Germany seemingly not wanting to fight, the USA could be removing the option of Russian gas from Germany in order to take that off Germanys war calculation. Showing Germany that they will not under any circumstances benefit from Russian gas, so don't even try to stay in Russias good graces. With winter coming on, Europe is going to need gas, and could lose there resolve in the face of a cold winter.
- The US can make more gas sales.
- The US for years has opposed and sanctioned these pipelines.
- Biden openly warned that if Russia attacked Ukraine, that the US would keep the pipelines from being used.
- Flip the script, and lets say that the US was piping gas to Germany, and there was sabotage near Russia. And that the Russian President had promised that they would stop the pipeline if the US sent arms to Ukraine. Would we believe Russia did it? Or would we think that it made sense that the US did it?

So what exactly are the logical reasons that would motivate Russia to do this? And are they really, on a level, unbiased playing field, more probable than other possibilities?

If Russia just turns off the tap then Gazprom is potentially liable for billions and billions of dollars in damages and penalties due to contract violations since they have signed contracts for the delivery of gas to various western energy companies (this is mostly Russian companies selling gas to western companies, not country to country transactions). Damages that could be recovered by seizure of Gazprom and Russian assets in the west.

On the other hand, if the pipeline just turns itself off due to sabotage then sorry, nothing can be done.

Blowing up the pipeline not only shuts off the tap without liability for damages, but it makes Germany or whoever spend enormous sums of money to repair the damages.

As for evidence? The Russian Navy does frequently operate in that area. This came out yesterday:

https://www.newsweek.com/russia-ukraine ... on-1747387

Russian navy support ships were reportedly spotted near the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines before they were ruptured by explosions. The claims come as Moscow has again denied involvement in the suspected sabotage, instead blaming the U.S.

Citing Western intelligence officials, CNN said that the alleged presence of Russian vessels was being investigated as a cause of underwater explosions in the Baltic Sea, as Moscow faces accusations that it's trying to manipulate energy flows to hurt Europe.

However, three U.S. officials said to CNN that America had no clear explanation for the explosions on Monday, which caused three separate and simultaneous leaks in the two pipelines that link Russia with Germany. On Thursday, Sweden said it found a fourth leak.

Denmark and Sweden are investigating what caused the explosion, but it could take up to two weeks to approach the site of the explosions due to pressure in the pipes, CNN said.

A Danish military official said that Russian vessels regularly operated in the area and had stepped up their activities there to test Western awareness, but this did not mean in itself that Moscow was responsible for the suspected attacks.

That doesn't mean Russia is responsible. But they do have both motive and means.

[ken_sylvania]

It just doesn't make sense to me that Russia would bother with it. It is so much easier to simply keep the valve off. Additionally, take a look on a map at where the leaks are. They are in a place that is much, much, less convenient for Russia to do it than for the West. I think the motivations given that would point to Russia are pretty weak. Russia loses all leverage that these gas lines offer. Pending further information, I'm not at all convinced that Russia did it. For me, that leaves number 2 or 3 as the likely culprits.

- With Germany seemingly not wanting to fight, the USA could be removing the option of Russian gas from Germany in order to take that off Germanys war calculation. Showing Germany that they will not under any circumstances benefit from Russian gas, so don't even try to stay in Russias good graces. With winter coming on, Europe is going to need gas, and could lose there resolve in the face of a cold winter.
- The US can make more gas sales.
- The US for years has opposed and sanctioned these pipelines.
- Biden openly warned that if Russia attacked Ukraine, that the US would keep the pipelines from being used.
- Flip the script, and lets say that the US was piping gas to Germany, and there was sabotage near Russia. And that the Russian President had promised that they would stop the pipeline if the US sent arms to Ukraine. Would we believe Russia did it? Or would we think that it made sense that the US did it?

So what exactly are the logical reasons that would motivate Russia to do this? And are they really, on a level, unbiased playing field, more probable than other possibilities?

If Russia just turns off the tap then Gazprom is potentially liable for billions and billions of dollars in damages and penalties due to contract violations since they have signed contracts for the delivery of gas to various western energy companies (this is mostly Russian companies selling gas to western companies, not country to country transactions). Damages that could be recovered by seizure of Gazprom and Russian assets in the west.

On the other hand, if the pipeline just turns itself off due to sabotage then sorry, nothing can be done.

Blowing up the pipeline not only shuts off the tap without liability for damages, but it makes Germany or whoever spend enormous sums of money to repair the damages.

As for evidence? The Russian Navy does frequently operate in that area. This came out yesterday:

https://www.newsweek.com/russia-ukraine ... on-1747387

Russian navy support ships were reportedly spotted near the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines before they were ruptured by explosions. The claims come as Moscow has again denied involvement in the suspected sabotage, instead blaming the U.S.

Citing Western intelligence officials, CNN said that the alleged presence of Russian vessels was being investigated as a cause of underwater explosions in the Baltic Sea, as Moscow faces accusations that it's trying to manipulate energy flows to hurt Europe.

However, three U.S. officials said to CNN that America had no clear explanation for the explosions on Monday, which caused three separate and simultaneous leaks in the two pipelines that link Russia with Germany. On Thursday, Sweden said it found a fourth leak.

Denmark and Sweden are investigating what caused the explosion, but it could take up to two weeks to approach the site of the explosions due to pressure in the pipes, CNN said.

A Danish military official said that Russian vessels regularly operated in the area and had stepped up their activities there to test Western awareness, but this did not mean in itself that Moscow was responsible for the suspected attacks.

That doesn't mean Russia is responsible. But they do have both motive and means.

Somehow I thought the benefit to Russia from closing, or threatening to close, the pipeline was in large part their ability to open it or keep it open if Germany stayed "in line." Is there any real benefit to Russia for Germany to run out of gas if the hardship isn't seen as a result of them having angered Russia?

[Ken]

It just doesn't make sense to me that Russia would bother with it. It is so much easier to simply keep the valve off. Additionally, take a look on a map at where the leaks are. They are in a place that is much, much, less convenient for Russia to do it than for the West. I think the motivations given that would point to Russia are pretty weak. Russia loses all leverage that these gas lines offer. Pending further information, I'm not at all convinced that Russia did it. For me, that leaves number 2 or 3 as the likely culprits.

- With Germany seemingly not wanting to fight, the USA could be removing the option of Russian gas from Germany in order to take that off Germanys war calculation. Showing Germany that they will not under any circumstances benefit from Russian gas, so don't even try to stay in Russias good graces. With winter coming on, Europe is going to need gas, and could lose there resolve in the face of a cold winter.
- The US can make more gas sales.
- The US for years has opposed and sanctioned these pipelines.
- Biden openly warned that if Russia attacked Ukraine, that the US would keep the pipelines from being used.
- Flip the script, and lets say that the US was piping gas to Germany, and there was sabotage near Russia. And that the Russian President had promised that they would stop the pipeline if the US sent arms to Ukraine. Would we believe Russia did it? Or would we think that it made sense that the US did it?

So what exactly are the logical reasons that would motivate Russia to do this? And are they really, on a level, unbiased playing field, more probable than other possibilities?

If Russia just turns off the tap then Gazprom is potentially liable for billions and billions of dollars in damages and penalties due to contract violations since they have signed contracts for the delivery of gas to various western energy companies (this is mostly Russian companies selling gas to western companies, not country to country transactions). Damages that could be recovered by seizure of Gazprom and Russian assets in the west.

On the other hand, if the pipeline just turns itself off due to sabotage then sorry, nothing can be done.

Blowing up the pipeline not only shuts off the tap without liability for damages, but it makes Germany or whoever spend enormous sums of money to repair the damages.

As for evidence? The Russian Navy does frequently operate in that area. This came out yesterday:

https://www.newsweek.com/russia-ukraine ... on-1747387

Russian navy support ships were reportedly spotted near the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines before they were ruptured by explosions. The claims come as Moscow has again denied involvement in the suspected sabotage, instead blaming the U.S.

Citing Western intelligence officials, CNN said that the alleged presence of Russian vessels was being investigated as a cause of underwater explosions in the Baltic Sea, as Moscow faces accusations that it's trying to manipulate energy flows to hurt Europe.

However, three U.S. officials said to CNN that America had no clear explanation for the explosions on Monday, which caused three separate and simultaneous leaks in the two pipelines that link Russia with Germany. On Thursday, Sweden said it found a fourth leak.

Denmark and Sweden are investigating what caused the explosion, but it could take up to two weeks to approach the site of the explosions due to pressure in the pipes, CNN said.

A Danish military official said that Russian vessels regularly operated in the area and had stepped up their activities there to test Western awareness, but this did not mean in itself that Moscow was responsible for the suspected attacks.

That doesn't mean Russia is responsible. But they do have both motive and means.

Somehow I thought the benefit to Russia from closing, or threatening to close, the pipeline was in large part their ability to open it or keep it open if Germany stayed "in line." Is there any real benefit to Russia for Germany to run out of gas if the hardship isn't seen as a result of them having angered Russia?

Russia seems to have given up on its previous attempts to persuade and play various factions within the EU and NATO against each other using the leverage of energy. If they were still holding out hope to fracture NATO and the west then they wouldn't have proceeded with their fraudulent referendums and attempt to annex parts of Ukraine. I expect they have more or less given up on any attempt to keep Germany "in line".

The benefit for Russia is to economically strangle a NATO member (or members) who are solidly on the side of Ukraine at this point.