Nord Stream 1 and 2 Attacked

[Bacle]

So old news that got a new update, and I figured I'd take a small victory lap along with everyone here who had the common sense to know it wasn't Russia: America blew up the Nordstream Pipeline (apparently with Norway's help).

How America Took Out The Nord Stream Pipeline

The New York Times called it a “mystery,” but the United States executed a covert sea operation that was kept secret—until now

seymourhersh.substack.com

There was only one source, but then, it'd be hard to get corroboration for this.

Last June, the Navy divers, operating under the cover of a widely publicized mid-summer NATO exercise known as BALTOPS 22, planted the remotely triggered explosives that, three months later, destroyed three of the four Nord Stream pipelines, according to a source with direct knowledge of the operational planning.

Yeah, this sounds like a lot of hot air and bullshit stirring.

Hersh may have cred from the Mai Lai and Abu Ghrab, but I need a lot more than his word for this, particulalry when the entire article is basically has a 'bro, trust me'-tier citation to it, with the 'according to a source' bit.

Would want much broader confirmation of this before I take it seriously.

 

[The Whispering Monk]

Frankly, his article reads like fan-fiction.

Puts everything down as gospel according to unnamed single source WITH ALL THE KNOWLWDGE!

 

[AmosTrask]

straight up WS/WN type

I'll probably regret asking. This acronym is used to indicate switchboxes in blueprints or in technical conversations between us engineers. What is it in this statement?

 

[Bacle]

I'll probably regret asking. This acronym is used to indicate switchboxes in blueprints or in technical conversations between us engineers. What is it in this statement?

'White Nationalist/White Supremacist'

 

[Cherico]

You can delude yourself all you like, but It took 8 years to build up the defenses in donbass, and due to the nature of donbass, its a highly defensible place. The lines they are building elsewhere will not be so dense, so heavy, so concentrated and so highly developed.

Ive been saying for months the russians main target in this point of the war is maximising their advantage in artillery to grind down the Ukrainian army. While you were all jubilant about very costly meme offensives into lightly occupied or evacuated regions like Kherson or Kharkov and fantasizing that this will lead to some grand advance in Crimea, Russia has been grinding the Ukrainians down in the real center of the fight..donbass.

Even the Ukrainians are starting to admit the lopsided nature of the casualties there.

Bakhmut will soon fall. The Ukrainians will be forced back to the fourth line, and there are 200,000+ fresh Russian reserves waiting for whatever conditions the russians have set to enter the fight.

Ukrainian defeat comes gradually, then suddenly. And it wouldnt have happened if the Americans and their British vassals had allowed their Ukrainian colony to negotiate peace last march.

We wont really know who will win this for awhile this war is not going to be a short one.

 

[Abhorsen]

Yeah, this sounds like a lot of hot air and bullshit stirring.

Hersh may have cred from the Mai Lai and Abu Ghrab, but I need a lot more than his word for this, particulalry when the entire article is basically has a 'bro, trust me'-tier citation to it, with the 'according to a source' bit.

Would want much broader confirmation of this before I take it seriously.

When the source violated the law to tell something this big, this is the best one can get.

There is no other method available that could give better information. The question is on two parts, do we trust Hersh? Yes, given his other work. Then the question is do we trust the source? Given that it makes complete and total sense for America to do this as it is highly beneficial for America, and everything lines up nicely, with Biden calling his shot, and the convenient Military exercise beforehand, the only thing that could be verified by an outside source that hasn't been is the air dropping of the buoy and local sonar recordings. And maybe those wouldn't be possible to verify either?

Frankly, his article reads like fan-fiction.

Puts everything down as gospel according to unnamed single source WITH ALL THE KNOWLWDGE!

Given he claims the source was one of the people involved in planning it, then yeah, they'd have all of the knowledge. That completely checks out with what is expected. A person involved in planning would know each step. You could not believe the guy for another reason, but this does not check out. It's simply safer on things like this to have a few people know everything vs a lot of people knowing enough, because any knowledge getting released would have a similar impact, the number of people who admit to it is the most damning part.

Basically, if the author had less info but from two sources, that would be a lot more damning. The US knows this and aren't stupid, and so traded off having more people in the know for each individual having more info.

 

[Abhorsen]

Yeah there is no way they would put a bomb and wait three months

There is 100% a way they would do that. First, this is reportedly Biden's demand, so it being stupid isn't inconceivable. But I don't even think it's stupid. You have an apparently hard to infiltrate place (Russia closely watches the Baltic, and has satellites). You have about a week where you have an excuse to be there. The original plan of blowing it up 2 days later? Kinda obvious.

But Russian watching does not equate to Russian searching. Once you've planted something, it's pretty hard to notice it. It's a needle in a haystack the opponent doesn't think is there. So why not wait 3 months?

Basically, this new info fits with the facts we already had.

 

[Zachowon]

There is 100% a way they would do that. First, this is reportedly Biden's demand, so it being stupid isn't inconceivable. But I don't even think it's stupid. You have an apparently hard to infiltrate place (Russia closely watches the Baltic, and has satellites). You have about a week where you have an excuse to be there. The original plan of blowing it up 2 days later? Kinda obvious.

But Russian watching does not equate to Russian searching. Once you've planted something, it's pretty hard to notice it. It's a needle in a haystack the opponent doesn't think is there. So why not wait 3 months?

Basically, this new info fits with the facts we already had.

Except it is underwater, and you can not take into account all the various things that could happen

 

[Abhorsen]

Except it is underwater, and you can not take into account all the various things that could happen

You can't. I can't. But people who are specialized in this? They can. Given they can put a submarine underwater for a long time, I've no doubt they can put a stationary bomb with a listening device underwater for that long also. Calling this impossible is just dumb.

We've stuck mines underwater before also, and they last a long time. Seriously, why wouldn't this work?

 

[Bacle]

There is 100% a way they would do that. First, this is Biden's demand, so it being stupid isn't inconceivable. But I don't even think it's stupid. You have an apparently hard to infiltrate place (Russia closely watches the Baltic, and has satellites). You have about a week where you have an excuse to be there. The original plan of blowing it up 2 days later? Kinda obvious.

But Russian watching does not equate to Russian searching. Once you've planted something, it's pretty hard to notice it. It's a needle in a haystack the opponent doesn't think is there. So why not wait 3 months?

You can't. I can't. But people who are specialized in this? They can. Given they can put a submarine underwater for a long time, I've no doubt they can put a stationary bomb with a listening device underwater for that long also. Calling this impossible is just dumb.

We've stuck mines underwater before also, and they last a long time. Seriously, why wouldn't this work?

Because nature has a say too; sharks in particular.

Sharks wage war on undersea internet cables

There are many, many things that can go wrong as you lay thousands of miles of fibre optic cable along the ocean's floor

www.wired.co.uk

Sharks have been found chewing on underwater cables enough to cause damage/service loss/degradation, or on other subsea infrastructure, and is is something found happpening all over the world.

Leaving an explosive in the water for 3 months, in a heavily trafficked and monitored area (half the job of subs is keeping watch over subsea infrastructure) is just asking for issues with either nature or man unintentionally screwing with the device and leaving evidence behind when it malfunctions or simply fails.

I don't trust the Biden admin, but there is too little reward for too much risk, trying to do what the substack article is claiming they did with the pipeline. If he had said they covertly planted it via diver and sub that was supposed to be somewhere else, a few days before the explosion, it would have been more believable.

Leaving it there for 3 months also risks random accidents with a ship's anchor hitting the device as well, and you can never fully account for random idiots on boats making a mistake or malfunction on where they drop their anchor.

 

[Zachowon]

You can't. I can't. But people who are specialized in this? They can. Given they can put a submarine underwater for a long time, I've no doubt they can put a stationary bomb with a listening device underwater for that long also. Calling this impossible is just dumb.

We've stuck mines underwater before also, and they last a long time. Seriously, why wouldn't this work?

Explosives are diffrent from mines.
Mines are enclosed explosives that are triggered via a certain means.
Explosives planetd underwater would literally take a miracle to make sure everything is the same.
People spealizes in this would tell you the same damn thing

 

[Abhorsen]

Because nature has a say too; sharks in particular.

Sharks wage war on undersea internet cables

There are many, many things that can go wrong as you lay thousands of miles of fibre optic cable along the ocean's floor

www.wired.co.uk

Sharks have been found chewing on underwater cables enough to cause damage/service loss/degradation, or on other subsea infrastructure, and is is something found happpening all over the world.

Leaving an explosive in the water for 3 months, in a heavily trafficked and monitored area (half the job of subs is keeping watch over subsea infrastructure) is just asking for issues with either nature or man unintentionally screwing with the device and leaving evidence behind when it malfunctions or simply fails.

I don't trust the Biden admin, but there is too little reward for too much risk, trying to do what the substack article is claiming they did with the pipeline. If he had said they covertly planted it via diver and sub that was supposed to be somewhere else, a few days before the explosion, it would have been more believable.

Leaving it there for 3 months also risks a random accidents with a ship's anchor hitting the device as well, and you can never fully account for random idiots on boats making a mistake or malfunction on where they drop their anchor.

... You do know that's because of electromagnetic field right? A field that wouldn't exist in a bomb. Oh, and people still lay cable, because it works despite the vaunted power of nature. And we put underwater pipes in, despite nature. And we put trackers on sharks, that work despite nature. That this is where you arbitrarily decide to draw the line means that you aren't thinking objectively, but letting your biases rule you.

Explosives are diffrent from mines.
Mines are enclosed explosives that are triggered via a certain means.
Explosives planetd underwater would literally take a miracle to make sure everything is the same.
People spealizes in this would tell you the same damn thing

Or, here me out here, they made a specially enclosed explosive for just this thing? No one is saying they just left c4 in a condom with a detonator attached. They spent a lot of time and effort engineering this thing, and they apparently succeeded.

 

[Bacle]

... You do know that's because of electromagnetic field right? A field that wouldn't exist in a bomb. Oh, and people still lay cable, because it works despite the vaunted power of nature. And we put underwater pipes in, despite nature. And we put trackers on sharks, that work despite nature. That this is where you arbitrarily decide to draw the line means that you aren't thinking objectively, but letting your biases rule you.

Or maybe, just maybe, I want more than a single source with a lot of theorizing and little actual evidence.

Now, should further evidence come up, I am willing to adjust my views; something like what I found below helps a little.

Independent Evidence Video Confirms Key Part of Sy Hersh’s Report on the Attack on Nord Stream 2 | The Gateway Pundit | by Larry Johnson

P8 Poseidon Ever heard of Monkey Werx?

www.thegatewaypundit.com

This is somewhat independent confirmation that part of the story could have taken place and this plane may have been part of it.

However, there needs to be more than this to make the claim seem legit.

 

[Abhorsen]

Or maybe, just maybe, I want more than a single source with a lot of theorizing and little actual evidence.

And you think I didn't?

As for the rest:

Now, should further evidence come up, I am willing to adjust my views; something like what I found below helps a little.

Independent Evidence Video Confirms Key Part of Sy Hersh’s Report on the Attack on Nord Stream 2 | The Gateway Pundit | by Larry Johnson

P8 Poseidon Ever heard of Monkey Werx?

www.thegatewaypundit.com

This is somewhat independent confirmation that part of the story could have taken place and this plane may have been part of it.

However, there needs to be more than this to make the claim seem legit.

This is the confirmation to hunches I already had. Everyone with a brain knew it was in America's best interest for the Nordstream Pipeline to go away, and against Russian interests. The only open question for me was if the German Government cooperated in screwing its own people, and who actually pulled the trigger.

The other null hypotheses basically go: this dude, despite everything checking out, lied to Hersh, and... (various options, all of which have America or an American ally as the actor), with a 1% prior chance of it being Russia (that's lower now). With that 1% representing selfless stupidity on their part. Stupid, because it harms their interests, selfless because it costs the oligarchs who make money off selling oil. I highly doubt they'll be both selfless and stupid, as people get smarter when it's their own stuff on the line.

 

[Atarlost]

Everyone with a brain knew it was in America's best interest for the Nordstream Pipeline to go away, and against Russian interests.

It was only against Russian interests if they thought they could successfully use it to extort Germany. If they didn't think it was going to work it was in their interest to expend it to harm America diplomatically.

Every nation supporting Ukraine also has the same possible motives as America but the added benefit of the blame predictably falling on America rather than their own heads.

Even the German government had a possible motive if Russia was demanding more than they were prepared to do in terms of keeping EU members from supporting Ukraine and they wanted to put the blame for high gas prices on other heads.

 

[Abhorsen]

It was only against Russian interests if they thought they could successfully use it to extort Germany. If they didn't think it was going to work it was in their interest to expend it to harm America diplomatically.

Every nation supporting Ukraine also has the same possible motives as America but the added benefit of the blame predictably falling on America rather than their own heads.

Even the German government had a possible motive if Russia was demanding more than they were prepared to do in terms of keeping EU members from supporting Ukraine and they wanted to put the blame for high gas prices on other heads.

In order:
The diplomatic win if Russia did it hoping to harm America would be incredibly minor unless they did a better frame job. The cost in income to russia, however, is not minor. The diplomatic cost of Russia not being able to subvert the EU countries economically is major.

Yes, every nation supporting Ukraine has a similar motive, but few have the capabilities (basically people involved in the Baltic exercise and those with access to the Baltic). Every such nation's military is basically a Washington Puppet when thinking about attacking Russia though.

I said the Germans had a motive.

Overall, this info is what shifted me from "American ally did this with American approval" to "America did this with Norway's help".

 

[ShieldWife]

At this point, I wouldn’t believe any numbers about casualties. Ukraine and their allies are all liars, Russia and their allies are all liars, leaks are by their nature questionable. We’re probably not going to know the truth about deaths (civilian or military) for a long time.

Regarding Nordstream, of course the USA blew it up. Everybody with a modicum of common sense and honesty suspected that from the start. As more evidence comes in, now the Hersh story in particular, it only confirms what any reasonable person already knew - that it was the USA and/or our allies.

 

[LordsFire]

Regarding Nordstream, of course the USA blew it up. Everybody with a modicum of common sense and honesty suspected that from the start. As more evidence comes in, now the Hersh story in particular, it only confirms what any reasonable person already knew - that it was the USA and/or our allies.

This is an incredibly arrogant thing for you to say. I don't agree with a lot of your takes, but usually you aren't this condescending towards others.

It's particularly ironic given that the earlier part of your post just said you believe everyone around the situation are liars, but then you're suddenly trusting sources about this.

Why the intense skepticism about casualty counts, but not about who destroyed Nord Stream?

 

[ShieldWife]

True,and i wish you would be right about NS.Problem is - USA proved unable to destroy anything since al least Obama times,so i must suspect it.
When Putin succesfully blow 4 houses in Moscov killing more then 300 people to have pretext for war in Czeczenya
And destroyed Kursk submarine using his own stupidity.

So,when i want belive in powerpuff USA,it probably were soviets again.

I think that the USA, despite some incompetence in both our government and military, is more than capable of blowing things up. In fact, it’s more likely that a nation with military resources like the USA were the ones responsible.

As for Russia blowing it up, we’ve been through this all before. I’m open minded about the possibility of Putin arranging a false flag operation to justify some Russian activity. But in this case, that doesn’t make any sense. He could have done any number of false flag actions that would justify some Russian escalation more than this without destroying one of his own most important assets. In fact, what Russian actions has this even justified? Putin would have known that his enemies wouldn’t care about this and would oppose him regardless. He would have known that the Western media would have sad he did it, which they’re saying even now when the USA clearly did it.

When it comes to false flags, I believe that it’s the USA that are the masters of that.

 

[Bacle]

On the issue of the pipeline story, I want to point out a couple of things that make it seem unlikely and smell like bullshit.

1) Methane Hydrate build up in the pipes can cause them to burst in an explosive fashion, and anyone want to bet on how well Russia had maintained those pipes? Anyone got the Russian maintenance records to show when the portions of the pipes that blew had been inspected or serviced? Or the pumping logs to so the PSI in the pipe over say the last year?

We all know 'Russian maintiance' is almost an oxymoron, so why must hostile action have blown the pipes?

2) If the US had done it, or an ally had, the French/Macron would be using it for his own political ends to try to sell more French guns than American guns.