|
Potrzebie posted:The best part is that some mod felt the need to probe two posters for not being DnD enough, but this VERY SERIOUS DERAIL can apparently go on forever. I think it's swell. The only thing it's a derail from is the boring churn of each respective country's posters vagueposting/commenting on national news without providing context for international viewers. It's relevant discussion and a welcome break from people whose entire posting purpose seems to be regurgitating one-liners about living in hellworld and generally being Mad Online, year in year out.
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2023 17:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 11:08 |
|
|
Beeswax posted:I think it's swell. The only thing it's a derail from is the boring churn of each respective country's posters vagueposting/commenting on national news without providing context for international viewers. It's relevant discussion and a welcome break from people whose entire posting purpose seems to be regurgitating one-liners about living in hellworld and generally being Mad Online, year in year out. true.spoon posted:A single anonymous source with no apparent effort to verify the claims made by that source. I have to say though that I'm making more of a theoretical point.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2023 18:09
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Yeah. It's kind of weird really to call it a derail. IF Norway had a hand in attacking Russo-German infrastructure inside the Danish and Swedish EEZ then it's about as Scandinavian politics as it's possible to be. Let's be realistic for a moment. That story is obviously complete bullshit. We knew it from the beginning. Why should we treat every "jet fuel can't melt steel beams" idiot as if they had an important point to make?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2023 19:56
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Let's be realistic for a moment. That story is obviously complete bullshit. We knew it from the beginning. Why should we treat every "jet fuel can't melt steel beams" idiot as if they had an important point to make?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2023 20:34
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:That doesn't make it a derail. If you say so. But I just feel that when someone starts quoting the Protocols of the Elders of Zion anywhere, it is our duty to point out that it was a hoax fabricated by Russian intelligence.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2023 20:42
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:If you say so. But I just feel that when someone starts quoting the Protocols of the Elders of Zion anywhere, it is our duty to point out that it was a hoax fabricated by Russian intelligence.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2023 21:14
|
|
|
Tbh I don't see how "maybe the us of a tried stirring up poo poo in international politics" is a hot take.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2023 21:27
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:If you say so. But I just feel that when someone starts quoting the Protocols of the Elders of Zion anywhere, it is our duty to point out that it was a hoax fabricated by Russian intelligence. lol
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2023 21:30
|
|
|
Just to restate the positions: Everyone agrees that we should have an investigation on what happened, which should not be made by any of the suspects, including every government in the world except maybe Fiji. Everyone more or less agrees that it would be in character, but not expected, if USA turned out to be the ones who did the bombing. The thing everyone is disagreeing with Lenin about is whether the investigation should be based on the theory that the USA/Norway tag team did it. You can make pretty good accusations against a good number of governments that have an interest in blowing up the pipeline, and somewhat reasonable scenarios where they took over a cargo ship to deploy the charges. Saudi Arabia benefits from being able to sell more oil to Europe, China likes division in Europe, Iran also produces oil and want to be left alone, I'm sure you can make arguments for Israel and North Korea, and at least a dozen others. That doesn't mean we should investigate based on those theories, we should investigate based on actual evidence and see who is the most likely suspect. Also there's a huge difference between having an anonymous source and an editor (who knows that your source is legit and who it is) and having an anonymous source and a blog. The editor has to consider the reputation of the publication, so he's a lot less willing to run with an unconfirmed story (obviously it has to be a reputable publication for this to work, daily mail will not cut it).
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2023 21:33
|
|
|
The last 3 pages remind me of that sealion comic
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2023 22:18
|
|
|
McCloud posted:The last 3 pages remind me of that sealion comic This is incredibly unswedish of you, and I must applaud 
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2023 22:24
|
|
|
It's done in the spirit of brotherly teasing 
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2023 22:26
|
|
|
McCloud posted:It's done in the spirit of brotherly teasing Oh, we know all about brotherly teasing  
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2023 22:32
|
|
|
McCloud posted:The last 3 pages remind me of that sealion comic if people had wanted to just stop the discussion we could've just stopped the discussion. i don't particularly enjoy restating a position in fifty different ways while people insult me when people start ranting about conspiracy theories etc, however, i tend to want to clarify my position. that has to be done in a really tedious D&D way because this is D&D. Randarkman posted:Why? People place themselves in awkward spots all the loving time. He (and let's be clear this is one guy, a top official, but one guy), hasn't ruled out anything and the statement in the original is just that they basically can't say anything yet, including anything as regards Russia, probably because that was the specific questions he was being asked at the time. You are making a whole lot of assumptions on this thing. the standard response from officials talking about ongoing investigations is along the format of "we do not comment on ongoing investigations". one can find this in tutorials for basic press management, e.g.: https://obsidianpr.com/the-no-no-comment-rule/ an example of this kind of thing can be seen here: https://kyivindependent.com/news-feed/eu-on-government-reshuffle-we-welcome-ukrainian-authorities-taking-corruption-allegations-seriously where the rhetorical device is specifically "we don't normally comment on ongoing investigations BUT we welcome that ukraine is taking this seriously" - i.e., the norm is that we do not comment this sort of thing, but we're making an exception to this well-known rule in this case. this official is making an exception in this case. since this is a well-known basic rule of press management and this guy is very senior - and since it has not been retracted - it is most reasonable to assume, in my view, that this was deliberate. it's also congruent with the chatter surrounding the investigation, e.g. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/12/21/russia-nord-stream-explosions/ which is came out prior to frank's statement. if you prefer to interpret it as a slip or something, that's OK, but i think that the interpretation that he's saying that they don't think russia did it is the most parsimonious, given the assumption that senior officials are very disciplined about their messaging on highly sensitive issues of national security. true.spoon posted:That The Media would engage less and less substantively after each consecutive nonsense story - until reaching virtually no engagement - is in my opinion not particularly objectionable nor particularly dangerous. I cannot entirely disagree with your point on demanding substantive engagement though. sure, i don't necessarily disagree with this principle generally. there's a case which i think is roughly analogous in some important respects, except that the issue is much less fraught at the moment and so might make a decent comparison, which is this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincenzo_Vinciguerra vinciguerra is an italian right-wing extremist who got arrested for killing some cops during the years of lead. his deep involvement in neofascist militant groups is unquestioned, and he's made some controversial claims about the years of lead, strategy of tension, etc. which have naturally been seized upon by conspiracy theorists. some of his more specific allegations have been investigated and disproven. however, critically, some of his other allegations have been corroborated by very senior people in the italian state, notably with andreotti's revelations about the italian stay-behind network in the nineties. how should vinciguerra then be treated? he's clearly a self-aggrandising rear end in a top hat with plenty of reason to lie, but on the other hand some of the things he's said have been true, and true with very serious ramifications. in my view, this kind of source is important to take seriously, and to the extent that vinciguerra's allegations can be practically investigated they should be. now i obviously don't think that hersh is a neofascist murderer, but he's clearly a fallible source who has nonetheless has had some genuine scoops which required genuine, highly-placed contacts; it is theoretically quite possible that he could get a story like this, were it real, and that it might look somewhat like what he published. the impact of these revelations if even partially true is enormous, and the risk of a dismissal being wrong - even if one reckons that there's a ~99% chance of him being purely full of poo poo - warrant substantive, critical engagement. this applies especially because of how seriously secretive the institutions in question are - since part of their job is to avoid negative press coverage, they will wield part of their not inconsiderable power to try to mess up any reporting about their activities. that makes them difficult to investigate in a proper way; especially, it becomes very difficult to get non-anonymous sources for anything critical (even Deep Throat was anonymous). this secrecy is no less pronounced in norway, where even a relatively minor cock-up by the norwegian foreign intelligence agency had its scrutiny severely curtailed (e.g. https://www.nrk.no/urix/frode-berg-saken_-omkamp-om-offentliggjoring-av-eos-rapporten-1.15762406 , but the entire thing was deeply weird - i still haven't heard anything about getting the report declassified, but i expect that the russian invasion of ukraine hosed up that process as well - another small middle finger from putin to the rest of us, i guess). such a desire for, and power to obtain, secrecy means that one needs to be extra generous with claims critical of these institutions. the press has its own ideology which usually tends fairly institutionalist (they want to keep their access, they don't want to get raided or stuck in endless litigation against a powerful adversary, etc., in addition to editors and prominent journalists typically being on working terms with the people they cover - georg johannesen and chomsky+herman both have imo good critiques of how this works). popular ideology must therefore demand a critical attitude to such services. that demand is missing when the instinct is to simply dismiss allegations like this. basically, i prefer to err on the side of entertaining the idea that our security services may have done something illegal and/or immoral, and i think that this is important enough to argue about it. i agree that there does need to be some filter for which allegations one should entertain, but i think that my "significant amount of reasonable people" metric works as a rough guideline for that. e: i should make it clear that i'm making three separate points in the bulk of this post. first, relating to the interpretation of Frank's statement - i didn't think this would be controversial, but i can accept that it is in fact so second, relating to the strict necessity of substantive engagement with regards to this case, generalised as something which will be accepted by a significant number of reasonable people. this, i don't see as controversial because it's integral to the basic function of the fourth estate third, my personal investment in scrutiny of the secret services. this is fairly controversial, but i feel pretty strongly about it and it's why i felt the need to actually argue the second point with regard to this specific case despite it being pedantic and kind of tedious V. Illych L. fucked around with this message at 02:07 on Feb 12, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2023 23:15
|
|
|
Strictly speaking Seymour Hersh has been working for proganda machines that are anti-American, anti-Western liberal democracy ever since he wrote about the My Lai massacre by virtue of such reporting being picked up by North Vietnam, USSR, etc. In that sense dismissing reporting that harms our side as being the same as helping the enemy and therefore should be ignored as false is wrong. It's more than enough criticism for Hersh's article in my opinion that he relies on one anonymous source in this and whenever an article relying on an anonymous source in some Western intelligence agency etc might say something about our enemies being up to no good it will be, and hopefully has been in the past, similarly dismissed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 01:39
|
|
|
It's incredible that the claim "The U.S. did something they've done a million times before, even inside Russia itself" is now equivalent to justifying the Holocaust.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 01:42
|
|
|
Grimnarsson posted:Strictly speaking Seymour Hersh has been working for proganda machines that are anti-American, anti-Western liberal democracy ever since he wrote about the My Lai massacre by virtue of such reporting being picked up by North Vietnam, USSR, etc. In that sense dismissing reporting that harms our side as being the same as helping the enemy and therefore should be ignored as false is wrong. My Lai is irrelevant to what he has been up to in the past decade. He defended Assad's chemical warfare against Syrian people. Bashar al Assad of course is one of Putin's closest allies, but it's probably not related to him now spreading Russian propaganda.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 02:05
|
|
|
SplitSoul posted:It's incredible that the claim "The U.S. did something they've done a million times before, even inside Russia itself" is now equivalent to justifying the Holocaust. The US has blown up the critical infrastructure of NATO allies during an international crisis that everyone is afraid could escalate into nuclear war a million times before? Can you narrow down a bit what you're thinking of?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 02:05
|
|
|
SplitSoul posted:It's incredible that the claim "The U.S. did something they've done a million times before, even inside Russia itself" is now equivalent to justifying the Holocaust. [image of a stalinist cat playing harmonica and singing a stalinist song]
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 02:07
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:My Lai is irrelevant to what he has been up to in the past decade. He defended Assad's chemical warfare against Syrian people. Bashar al Assad of course is one of Putin's closest allies, but it's probably not related to him now spreading Russian propaganda. He said Assad did it and the victims deserved it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 02:24
|
|
|
The US blowing up the pipeline is definitely within the realm of possibility, and so is Hersh having access to a source that could reveal something like that, but that doesn't really mean anything when the article in question is quite obviously conspiracy theory nonsense, and attempting to debunk a conspiracy theory with facts does not actually work on the believers. Saying that the incident deserves a thorough investigation is a banal statement; of course it does, but it's not because Hersh has published nonsense. It's perhaps even more of a platitude because if it was actually a military intelligence operation, such an investigation would not lead anywhere at all unless the responsible government decided to just outright admit its involvement and declassify it (or if by some astonishing chance something substantial leaks). You can go and look at a similar incident from history - take the Glomar Explorer (project Azorian) for example, which Hersh apparently was close to breaking the story on back in 1975. In that case the basic facts were revealed because of a more or less random burglary, but the CIA kept all the documentation classified until 2010, 45 years later. You might also want to compare the sourcing situation in that case to what's going on here.
TheFluff fucked around with this message at 02:32 on Feb 12, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 02:27
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:If you say so. But I just feel that when someone starts quoting the Protocols of the Elders of Zion anywhere, it is our duty to point out that it was a hoax fabricated by Russian intelligence. seymour hersh is jewish
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 06:09
|
|
|
TheFluff posted:The US blowing up the pipeline is definitely within the realm of possibility It was within a realm of possibility before this because everyone was weirdly quiet about the 10billion project getting blown up (ignoring that Russia cut off supplies through it in August and it was unused by september, instead of pumping as much as possible to appear as a reliable supplier that does not use energy as a weapon), however pulling out the washed up "Syrians gassed themselves to make Assad look bad" and "Magnitsky died in prison to make the russian state look bad" guy months after with the sourcing of 'one guy who knows things told me' that then was spread by russian state channels is sort of indicative. The lowest common denominator that it's aimed at that believes it here is also a sign
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 07:04
|
|
|
Somaen posted:It was within a realm of possibility before this because everyone was weirdly quiet about the 10billion project getting blown up (ignoring that Russia cut off supplies through it in August and it was unused by september, instead of pumping as much as possible to appear as a reliable supplier that does not use energy as a weapon), however pulling out the washed up "Syrians gassed themselves to make Assad look bad" and "Magnitsky died in prison to make the russian state look bad" guy months after with the sourcing of 'one guy who knows things told me' that then was spread by russian state channels is sort of indicative. The lowest common denominator that it's aimed at that believes it here is also a sign
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 07:37
|
|
|
Definitely that alone is not, the goal of a critical analysis is taking in every possible aspect of the situation and pattern recognition to come to a likeliest conclusion, so including the behavior of the involved parties and their risk assessment (US - high risk to ruin relations with NATO allies, benefit - cutting off gas that wasn't flowing half a year into the war?), correlation with previous behavior (russia loves using proxies to post articles in a similar vein, when Browder was pushing for the Magnitsky act, some new york post or similar rag articles appeared with the Magnitsky Killed Himself Actually narrative that was obviously ordered), the source of the information (anonymous sources shared by a dictator defender) and so on. The thing is that this is a pretty straight forward op, if critical faculties fail at an assessment of something as hamfisted as this, how well do you think people spreading this garbage are capable of recognizing and resisting something done capably?
Somaen fucked around with this message at 07:56 on Feb 12, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 07:47
|
|
|
I still question whether this would ruin relations with NATO allies for the US. Might not make that many friends in Germany, but a lot of NATO would support the US in this. It also signals to Germany that the US is done with it playing footsies with Russia, which might be (seen to be) worth it even if it pissed Germany off. Like, what is Germany gonna do? Leave NATO? At worst it's gonna continue doing what it has been doing, that is, not being very supportive of US foreign adventures.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 07:54
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:I still question whether this would ruin relations with NATO allies for the US. Might not make that many friends in Germany, but a lot of NATO would support the US in this. It also signals to Germany that the US is done with it playing footsies with Russia, which might be (seen to be) worth it even if it pissed Germany off. I imagine the literal multiple billions sent in weapons to actually kill Russian soldiers are a more effective signal than doing a secret pipeline blow up operation and than uh, never admitting it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 08:00
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:I imagine the literal multiple billions sent in weapons to actually kill Russian soldiers are a more effective signal than doing a secret pipeline blow up operation and than uh, never admitting it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 08:53
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:It'd be a signal to not try to restart the relationship when the war ends. Yeah I think we're not lacking for signals for that from that relationship over here lmao What, America is worried that Germany will start buying Russian gas and set itself up for another crippling economic downturn should the next guy decide to invade Kazakhstan or something? So it needs to engineer a secret Tom Clancy operation with Norwegian frogmen that it will publically deny to send...a signal that maybe buying Russian gas is a bad idea? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 09:55
|
|
|
Beeswax posted:I think it's swell. The only thing it's a derail from is the boring churn of each respective country's posters vagueposting/commenting on national news without providing context for international viewers. It's relevant discussion and a welcome break from people whose entire posting purpose seems to be regurgitating one-liners about living in hellworld and generally being Mad Online, year in year out. I'll stop posting about living in a hellworld once we stop living in a hellworld, tyvm.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 10:49
|
|
|
tristeham posted:seymour hersh is jewish And?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 11:03
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:It'd be a signal to not try to restart the relationship when the war ends. You really haven't been paying attention how the German-Russian energy relationship has been developing to think anyone was worried about that. It would take an AFD-Linke coalition to change German policy in that regard. If you need a refresher on the energy war leading up to the Nord Stream sabotage, this article will get you up to speed. https://novayagazeta.eu/articles/2022/10/05/in-comparison-with-all-the-other-senseless-actions-the-gas-siege-of-the-eu-barely-registers
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 11:03
|
|
|
Hannibal Rex posted:You really haven't been paying attention how the German-Russian energy relationship has been developing to think anyone was worried about that. It would take an AFD-Linke coalition to change German policy in that regard. (Also, it was kinda hard to take the article seriously when they mix up Danish and Dutch, but I guess that still makes it top of the line journalism in today's market.) DarkCrawler posted:Yeah I think we're not lacking for signals for that from that relationship over here lmao Also, don't imply I believe in the Norwegian frogmen story just because I think it would be rational from the American perspective to gently caress that pipeline up. Nenonen posted:And? *by essentially equating the Norwegian frogman story to a hugely damaging effort to foment antisemitism
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 12:27
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:And? And so maybe don't imply that he's antisemitic by drawing comparisons between his article and the Protocols. Somaen posted:The lowest common denominator that it's aimed at that believes it here It would be nice if you and Nenonen would stop peppering your posts with little barbs implying people who disagree with you are 9/11 truthers, antisemitic, or "the lowest common denominator". It's lovely, and I'm sure you're sufficiently confident in your arguments that you can get by without them. Somaen posted:Definitely that alone is not, the goal of a critical analysis is taking in every possible aspect of the situation and pattern recognition to come to a likeliest conclusion, so including the behavior of the involved parties and their risk assessment (US - high risk to ruin relations with NATO allies, benefit - cutting off gas that wasn't flowing half a year into the war?), correlation with previous behavior (russia loves using proxies to post articles in a similar vein, when Browder was pushing for the Magnitsky act, some new york post or similar rag articles appeared with the Magnitsky Killed Himself Actually narrative that was obviously ordered), the source of the information (anonymous sources shared by a dictator defender) and so on. The thing is that this is a pretty straight forward op, if critical faculties fail at an assessment of something as hamfisted as this, how well do you think people spreading this garbage are capable of recognizing and resisting something done capably? I don't think Hersh's story is all that interesting unless someone can corroborate it, but this doesn't point to Russia blowing up the pipelines, nor does it indicate that the US wasn't involved. There were clear incentives for the US to destroy the pipelines. The pipelines being destroyed removes any temptation for Germany to waffle on the war in case energy shortages start, it helps ensure the EU will be using US gas and not Russian gas in the future, and it cuts off a source of funding for Russia. That's all beneficial to the US. You might say that it would be completely unrealistic for Germany to want to restart the gas flow anyway, but keep in mind that the gas was throttled by Russia, not Germany, and Germany was pretty angry about it. If it is so blindingly obvious that Russia did it for reasons, and if you believe otherwise you're just gullible, you wouldn't expect to have EU officials, who would presumably know more about the investigations than randos on the internet, telling the press that people probably jumped to conclusions and they now doubt Russia did it. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/12/21/russia-nord-stream-explosions/ posted:“No one on the European side of the ocean is thinking this is anything other than Russian sabotage,” a senior European environmental official told The Washington Post in September. Esran fucked around with this message at 13:06 on Feb 12, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 13:00
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Counter question: What is the point of bringing in the protocols in the first place? Because to me, it seems like it does nothing but minimize antisemitism* to own your posting enemies. Do I have to spell everything out? I mentioned it as an example of fabricated story produced by Russia, which was then very effectively spread by others. Russia knows which strings to pull to make tankies dance for them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 13:10
|
|
|
Esran posted:I don't think Hersh's story is all that interesting unless someone can corroborate it, but this doesn't point to Russia blowing up the pipelines, nor does it indicate that the US wasn't involved. There were clear incentives for the US to destroy the pipelines. The pipelines being destroyed removes any temptation for Germany to waffle on the war in case energy shortages start, it helps ensure the EU will be using US gas and not Russian gas in the future, and it cuts off a source of funding for Russia. That's all beneficial to the US. You might say that it would be completely unrealistic for Germany to want to restart the gas flow anyway, but keep in mind that the gas was throttled by Russia, not Germany, and Germany was pretty angry about it. This doesn't pass a simple risk assessment smell test. US risks: global reputational and relationship damage with allies, Russia flips its poo poo and starts threatening nuclear war or retaliating by damaging critical infrastructure. Reward: status quo, Germany potentially doesn't buy gas in case it wants to? Same can be achieved with sanctioning nord stream with less risk and more negotiation room. (Germany can still keep buying russian gas because stupid americans failed to blow up nord stream 2) Russian risks: reputational damage minimal because who gives a poo poo, potential rewards: gas crisis in Germany forcing them to buy gas over nord stream 2 or all the other pipelines, potential to blame US/Norway/Algeria And yes, the officials conducting the investigation need precise and hard evidence before making accusations compared to an internet rando that can evaluate the geopolitical logic and make educated guesses
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 14:07
|
|
|
I have an anonymous source that tells me Hersh is an FSB asset and since i'm accusing a security service, you have to fully investigate and completely disprove my claim before you dismiss it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 14:13
|
|
|
Somaen posted:This doesn't pass a simple risk assessment smell test. US risks: global reputational and relationship damage with allies, Russia flips its poo poo and starts threatening nuclear war or retaliating by damaging critical infrastructure. Reward: status quo, Germany potentially doesn't buy gas in case it wants to? Same can be achieved with sanctioning nord stream with less risk and more negotiation room. (Germany can still keep buying russian gas because stupid americans failed to blow up nord stream 2) I don't think your analysis holds water. The benefits to the US of the pipelines being destroyed are not "status quo". How would the US sanction Nord Stream in a way that prevents Germany from buying Russian gas, without also pissing off Germany? Remember, the goal in this hypothetical would be to drive a wedge between Germany and Russia. You claim the risk to Russia is minimal. Do you feel that there is no risk to Russia in attacking infrastructure which could be easily interpreted as belonging to a NATO member? You seem to be saying that in order to force Germany to buy gas from Russia, Russia is blowing up its own pipelines that were not delivering gas, in order to create a gas crisis in Germany that will force Germany to buy gas via Russia's other pipelines. That's nonsense. If the destruction of the NS pipelines creates a gas crisis in Germany, it will be because Germany needed Russian gas via NS. Blowing up the pipelines doesn't force Germany to buy more gas from Russia than they would have otherwise, it just moves the delivery from NS to other pipelines. The officials conducting the investigation do need evidence before making accusations. But when you have no evidence, you say "We're not sure yet". What's the motivation for them to say "We now doubt Russia was responsible, also the rationale that it was Russia never made sense to me"?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 15:02
|
|
|
Somaen posted:This doesn't pass a simple risk assessment smell test. US risks: global reputational and relationship damage with allies, [...] Were you around during the trump and bush eras? This is nothing compared to that. Hell we got functional relationships with countries like Israel and they conduct political assassinations on allied territory all the time. The USA blowing up a russian pipeline that is the object of alot of public distaste is not that much of a diplomatic facepalm.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 15:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 11:08 |
|
|
Nenonen posted:Do I have to spell everything out? I mentioned it as an example of fabricated story produced by Russia, which was then very effectively spread by others. Russia knows which strings to pull to make tankies dance for them. You believe the Russian state operatus are conducting info ops aimed at... terminally online communists? Because they're effective agents for Russia, no less?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 15:12
|
|