NTMBK
Lifer
- Nov 14, 2011
- 10,269
- 5,134
- 136
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.
Ukraine blowing up a gas pipe that no gas was being delivered through at the risk of alienating their most important allies and essentially losing the war makes no sense.
Regardless, there will be an investigation and I suspect we will find out relatively shortly who did it. (Russia)
Q up in this Polish house! And Forbes too, apparently.Well the other theory today from ZorPrime is the US did it. I feel like the Qvasion is coming to this thread.
But it would make sense for America to do so.
What exactly does a war like this look like to you? Capturing village by village is exactly how things go.
Yeah I really don’t understand what the message could be. They can simply turn off the gas if that is what they want, and if it was supposed to be a threat towards NATO members energy supplies then it is full scale war threat, which is nothing new or something they would risk.I am inclined to believe the Russians did it, but it still seems murky as to what the purpose of doing so was. It's been reported the explosion occured just barely outside of Danish territorial waters - implying someone was being careful not to be seen as directly attacking a NATO country?
"Sending a message" is a possible explanation, but it seems a slightly obscure message. Seems more plausible to me that it's just an alternative to constantly halting deliveries on the pretext of 'maintenance work'. Or could it actually have been accidental after all?
The pro Ukraine narratives/propaganda is... pro Ukraine. Why are you sabotaging Ukraine psyops campaign?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.
Some people just see the glass half empty.The pro Ukraine narratives/propaganda is... pro Ukraine. Why are you sabotaging Ukraine psyops campaign?
The pro Ukraine narratives/propaganda is... pro Ukraine. Why are you sabotaging Ukraine psyops campaign?
To be fair, we should seek the truth. Not sides.
However, the posts we are responding to have repeatedly and adamantly downplayed Ukraine at every turn. And is now acting in defiance of the truth, exactly as we would expect from Russian News itself. Likely not breaking until after Russian News does. Which begs the question... to whom do they listen?
The development of Lyman's encirclement is clear. I was surprised they still denied it. Only the higher ups at Russia deny it, their people on Telegram are panicked and upset.
Theoretically yes - would be trivial if the gas was flowing to use a standard maintenance pig with some extra C4 and a detonator attached - although that would almost certainly leave significant (presumably undesirable to the bad actor) evidence behind upon inspection. As gas wasn't flowing would need to be a custom delivery device, but nothing overly complicated. In any case, damage inspection should be able to determine if explosion was internal or external.Could Russia just slip a few bombs into the pipeline, wait until they reach the optimal destination, and then remote detonate?
You could theoretically do this with a pig, but the gas would have to be flowing to move the pig.Could Russia just slip a few bombs into the pipeline, wait until they reach the optimal destination, and then remote detonate?
One leak could certainly have been an accident. Two separate explosions, 75km apart, is almost certainly enemy action. Preliminary Swedish estimates from seismology readings is >100kg TNT explosive equivalent blastsI am inclined to believe the Russians did it, but it still seems murky as to what the purpose of doing so was. It's been reported the explosion occured just barely outside of Danish territorial waters - implying someone was being careful not to be seen as directly attacking a NATO country?
"Sending a message" is a possible explanation, but it seems a slightly obscure message. Seems more plausible to me that it's just an alternative to constantly halting deliveries on the pretext of 'maintenance work'. Or could it actually have been accidental after all?
You could theoretically do this with a pig, but the gas would have to be flowing to move the pig.
Meduza says Russia is going to hold off on annexation for now.
The message is probably like: we have this capability to cut off undersea gas pipelines and other undersea infrastructure. By doing it only to Nordstreams, they don't risk escalation with other countries, but they get to send the message and also play dumb blame other people games like someone in this thread is pushing.I am inclined to believe the Russians did it, but it still seems murky as to what the purpose of doing so was. It's been reported the explosion occured just barely outside of Danish territorial waters - implying someone was being careful not to be seen as directly attacking a NATO country?
"Sending a message" is a possible explanation, but it seems a slightly obscure message. Seems more plausible to me that it's just an alternative to constantly halting deliveries on the pretext of 'maintenance work'. Or could it actually have been accidental after all?
Mkay, then whats the play? Nothing?
This was literally the plot to a James Bond movie.Could Russia just slip a few bombs into the pipeline, wait until they reach the optimal destination, and then remote detonate?
Someone else mentioned that Russia’s reaction is also very telling. The guys who threaten nuclear war every time their lunch order is late are just like ‘I guess we will just have to wait and see’ on this one.The message is probably like: we have this capability to cut off undersea gas pipelines and other undersea infrastructure. By doing it only to Nordstreams, they don't risk escalation with other countries, but they get to send the message and also play dumb blame other people games like someone in this thread is pushing.
They also have created a feasible event to protect Gazprom from legal action for failure to fulfill gas contracts in Europe. "Sorry, pipeline had an unforeseeable accident."