K1052
Elite Member
- Aug 21, 2003
- 46,880
- 34,832
- 136
Nordstream is 50.002% held by Gazprom subsidiary, the balance is owned by 4 European firms.So what's up with the Nordstream pipelines leaking?
Sounds very much as though it was a deliberate attack. But what would be the rationale for doing so, when they aren't currently being used and are, as I understand it, legally owned by Russians anyway?
Listen, if I had that capability, I might had done it.It's "piss poor" to call out Ukraine or the US. It's not exactly "piss poor" to call out Russia, another "specific country." They have the capability, and it would be just like Putin to display this capability as a warning shot, since there are other undersea pipelines he could disrupt.
If Ukraine had the capability to secretly plant sub-sea explosives, some 800km away from Ukraine ~ they would instead have blown the Kerch bridge supportsIt was obviously the Ukranians, the fact that people don't even consider this seems pretty blinkered. I mean, logically it's not complex. It's your enemy, they get paid $10's of billions a month for gas by Europe, that is then used to buy bombs to kill Ukranians. If you could cut that financial supply with a small boat, a remote controlled sub and some charges why would you not? Kick them where it hurts, hard in the wallet. Obviously Russia still has other pipelines .... that go through Ukraine ... so gives Ukraine greater control of Russian gas.
Finally you can blame it on the Russians because no one believes a word they say.
If Ukraine had the capability to secretly plant sub-sea explosives, some 800km away from Ukraine ~ they would instead have blown the Kerch bridge supports
TBH, those look pretty cool. Seaview in real life.Make what you will of it...
Russia is the only country with a fleet of special mission subs for seabed warfare and espionage and is expanding the capability. Other countries, like the U.S., also work well in this arena and have specialist capabilities, but these capabilities reside on multi-mission platforms.
Russia’s fleet includes two massive submarine motherships that each carry one or two deep-diving submersibles. These can be employed for covert seabed missions, including wreck plundering...
Russia's Growing Secret Submarine Fleet Key to Moscow's Undersea Future - USNI News
Tensions between Washington and Moscow are rising with a marked increase in competition in the undersea domain, as Russia continues to invest in a fleet of specialized submarines. Russia is the only country with a fleet of special mission subs for seabed warfare and espionage and is expanding...news.usni.org
How about a summary of this video.Only saw just now that Bea did a video on it
And this is how I read Zor's post : Who has motive? Not a "US DID IT!!!"
Basically he makes the case for no-one knows yet, so personally he blames the little mermaid and some other cartoon character, as he put it, there is the same amount of supporting evidence for his theory as there is for anyone elses.How about a summary of this video.
No, Ukraine is the one country we can rule out:It was obviously the Ukranians, the fact that people don't even consider this seems pretty blinkered. I mean, logically it's not complex. It's your enemy, they get paid $10's of billions a month for gas by Europe, that is then used to buy bombs to kill Ukranians. If you could cut that financial supply with a small boat, a remote controlled sub and some charges why would you not? Kick them where it hurts, hard in the wallet. Obviously Russia still has other pipelines .... that go through Ukraine ... so gives Ukraine greater control of Russian gas.
Finally you can blame it on the Russians because no one believes a word they say.
Like I said above, Ukraine has to much to lose, lacks capability, and lacks the secrecy to do this.No they are attacking Russia, they are quite happy for Europe to get it's power from somewhere that isn't Russia. Ukraine have pointed out on a number of occasions very strongly the stupidity of on one hand claiming to support them while on the other paying their enemy billions a month. I think Ukraine considers the life of it's people dying to the bombs paid for by those billions as the most important thing, and it's hard to argue with that.
I mean the US was happy to go around the world invading nations when it felt threatened after 9-11 when a few thousand died. What would they do if their cities were under permanent bombardment, are you saying they wouldn't blow up a gas money pipe because it might upset someone?
Could you elaborate?Another angle, it could be Russia but not Putin.
He claims it could have been anyone, which is silly.How about a summary of this video.
The Kerch bridge is well defended, much harder to blow up (would need much much larger charges to take down a bridge support), and probably less important to Russia then the billions they get from gas.If Ukraine had the capability to secretly plant sub-sea explosives, some 800km away from Ukraine ~ they would instead have blown the Kerch bridge supports
The Kerch bridge is well defended, much harder to blow up (would need much much larger charges to take down a bridge support), and probably less important to Russia then the billions they get from gas.
As to 800km comment, you didn't really give this any thought. All Ukraine needs is a underwater drone (lots of commercial rc subs designed for checking underwater piping exist), hire/buy a little boat (e.g. an old fishing boat) somewhere not too far away, sail over the pipe, drop the drone over the side and remote control it down, stick a simple timed charge on. Sort of thing that would take some organisation, but you could probably do it with 3 people. Being as Ukraine are pretty tech savy and innovative with their aerial drones I don't think it's much of a stretch to think using an undersea one is beyond them, or you could even use a diver (it's only 80m down).
All the under sea drones I have seen on TV are a bit more complicated then that.The Kerch bridge is well defended, much harder to blow up (would need much much larger charges to take down a bridge support), and probably less important to Russia then the billions they get from gas.
As to 800km comment, you didn't really give this any thought. All Ukraine needs is a underwater drone, hire/buy a little boat somewhere not too far away, sail over the pipe, drop the drone over the side and remote control it down, stick a simple timed charge on. Sort of thing that would take some organisation, but you could probably do it with 3 people and easily available tech. Being as Ukraine are pretty tech savy and innovative with their aerial drones I don't think it's much of a stretch to think a undersea one is beyond them, or you could even use a diver (it's only 80m down).
Saying Putin (who controls one end of the pipe) needs to blow it up is much more outlandish. If he doesn't want the gas to flow he can just turn it off at source.As outlandish as this scenario is there is also no attempt to explain why Ukraine would risk alienating their most important military and financial supporters when Russia could deliver gas via the Yamal pipeline or through Turkey instead.
It's a petty swipe from Putin at the Germans, nothing more.
Could you elaborate?
Saying Putin (who controls one end of the pipe) needs to blow it up is much more outlandish. If he doesn't want the gas to flow he can just turn it off at source.
The other pipes don't go to Germany and western Europe, if that pipe is down then he loses tens of billions a month, pretty important when you are trying to fund a very expensive war and the rest of your economy is crashing due to sanctions.
If you think about this logically the Russians blowing it up is by far the most likely answer. They have the access to do so and the motive.Saying Putin (who controls one end of the pipe) needs to blow it up is much more outlandish. If he doesn't want the gas to flow he can just turn it off at source.
The other pipes don't go to Germany and western Europe, if that pipe is down then he loses tens of billions a month, pretty important when you are trying to fund a very expensive war and the rest of your economy is crashing due to sanctions.
What exactly does a war like this look like to you? Capturing village by village is exactly how things go.The same type of posts have been made daily. Some new map, some new village.
Twitter posts are not the best source of information as no real quality control but still not the fall of Lyman that has been predicted every day for a week or more already.
Putin's motives have been detailed by multiple people in this thread.Saying Putin (who controls one end of the pipe) needs to blow it up is much more outlandish. If he doesn't want the gas to flow he can just turn it off at source.
The other pipes don't go to Germany and western Europe, if that pipe is down then he loses tens of billions a month, pretty important when you are trying to fund a very expensive war and the rest of your economy is crashing due to sanctions.
The difference being that Nordstream is owned by a Russian company, so it is not an attack on a NATO member, an attack on this pipeline very much is and would inflict article 5.