Russia attacks Ukraine! WW3 imminent?

[jkor]

That "reporter" has zero proof and is a Kremlin operative.
The investigation is still ongoing.
The likeliest party is Russia, sending bomb laden maintenance "pigs" from land based, russian controlled access points.

Why? Does that make sense?

 

[jkor]

When everything is a lie one has to use their own judgement. Does that make sense?

 

[monkeybutler]

That "reporter" has zero proof and is a Kremlin operative.

It's pretty odd how many of us recognize things like this readily, yet... others don't...

 

[Howard1955]

That "reporter" has zero proof and is a Kremlin operative.
The investigation is still ongoing.
The likeliest party is Russia, sending bomb laden maintenance "pigs" from land based, russian controlled access points.

 

[jkor]

Victoria newland also said the same thing.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Why? Does that make sense?

Firecracker down the terlit? Well..

 

[Provincial]

Why? Does that make sense?

NATO countries, especially Germany, were in the process of drastically reducing their consumption of Nord Stream-delivered gas. The greatest leverage Russia had at that point was European dependence on Russian natural gas energy. If the European countries were not going to continue to buy the gas, what were Russia's options?

1. Sell the gas elsewhere, in which case Nord Stream was a pipeline to nowhere. Meanwhile, Putin felt he had "Sanction-proofed" the Russian economy.
2. Get Europe to reverse course and go back to buying gas imported by Nord Stream. This was unlikely, and Europe was actively changing its energy usage to other sources and reducing consumption of energy overall.
3. Try to turn the strategic reverse into a propaganda victory by sabotaging the pipeline and blaming the US. The idea being to drive a wedge between the US and Germany by awakening Germans to a bleak Winter without enough energy to heat their homes and fuel their industry. The advantage would be to whip up anti-American feeling and intimidate the German government into backing off on supporting Ukraine.

Think about it. What benefit does the US get for sabotaging the pipeline? Germany was already committed to major reductions in using that source, and the chance of getting caught was not worth the risk. The original accusation included tying the US Navy to the incident because of training maneuvers in that part of the Baltic the previous Summer, when there was no real expectation of an invasion. Moreover, any fleet maneuver in that area would have been shadowed by Russian spy ships that would have noticed and documented those activities. Since no evidence has been advanced, it is unlikely that the accusations have any merit.

In short, the risks were too great, and the rewards essentially non-existent for the US to blow up the pipelines. Remember, the US was expecting Russia to take Kiev in days, or a few weeks. They were intending to live with a fait accompli. Why would they set up a sabotage of the pipelines a year in advance, when it likely would do no good, and risk looking very bad?

The Russians did indeed try to whip up anti-American feelings in Germany, but were unsuccessful. I know someone currently living in Germany and he says that the invasion of Ukraine was a wake-up call that felt like a slap to the head of most Germans. They had felt that Russia was no longer a threat after the Cold War, and the use of energy supplies to pressure Germany caused the average German to re-evaluate their relationship with Russia even before the pipeline explosions. He says that Germany no longer trusts Russia, and will never again rely on them as a major supplier of energy.

 

[The Heretic]

The Russians did indeed try to whip up anti-American feelings in Germany, but were unsuccessful. I know someone currently living in Germany and he says that the invasion of Ukraine was a wake-up call that felt like a slap to the head of most Germans. They had felt that Russia was no longer a threat after the Cold War, and the use of energy supplies to pressure Germany caused the average German to re-evaluate their relationship with Russia even before the pipeline explosions. He says that Germany no longer trusts Russia, and will never again rely on them as a major supplier of energy.

Putin/et. al. reminds me of the fable of the scorpion and the frog. Which interestingly, is said to originate from Russia.

 

[arakboss]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/13/europe/russia-ukraine-vuhledar-donetsk-fiasco-intl/index.html

Ukraine’s New Anti-Tank Tactic: Lay A Minefield, Then Scatter More Mines From the Air

There are indications the Ukrainians have adopted a clever new method of laying mines. Ukrainian gunners wait until Russian troops clear a path through an old minefield—then toss fresh mines onto that same path right as the Russians are crossing.

www.forbes.com

 

[jkor]

NATO countries, especially Germany, were in the process of drastically reducing their consumption of Nord Stream-delivered gas. The greatest leverage Russia had at that point was European dependence on Russian natural gas energy. If the European countries were not going to continue to buy the gas, what were Russia's options?

1. Sell the gas elsewhere, in which case Nord Stream was a pipeline to nowhere. Meanwhile, Putin felt he had "Sanction-proofed" the Russian economy.
2. Get Europe to reverse course and go back to buying gas imported by Nord Stream. This was unlikely, and Europe was actively changing its energy usage to other sources and reducing consumption of energy overall.
3. Try to turn the strategic reverse into a propaganda victory by sabotaging the pipeline and blaming the US. The idea being to drive a wedge between the US and Germany by awakening Germans to a bleak Winter without enough energy to heat their homes and fuel their industry. The advantage would be to whip up anti-American feeling and intimidate the German government into backing off on supporting Ukraine.

Think about it. What benefit does the US get for sabotaging the pipeline? Germany was already committed to major reductions in using that source, and the chance of getting caught was not worth the risk. The original accusation included tying the US Navy to the incident because of training maneuvers in that part of the Baltic the previous Summer, when there was no real expectation of an invasion. Moreover, any fleet maneuver in that area would have been shadowed by Russian spy ships that would have noticed and documented those activities. Since no evidence has been advanced, it is unlikely that the accusations have any merit.

In short, the risks were too great, and the rewards essentially non-existent for the US to blow up the pipelines. Remember, the US was expecting Russia to take Kiev in days, or a few weeks. They were intending to live with a fait accompli. Why would they set up a sabotage of the pipelines a year in advance, when it likely would do no good, and risk looking very bad?

The Russians did indeed try to whip up anti-American feelings in Germany, but were unsuccessful. I know someone currently living in Germany and he says that the invasion of Ukraine was a wake-up call that felt like a slap to the head of most Germans. They had felt that Russia was no longer a threat after the Cold War, and the use of energy supplies to pressure Germany caused the average German to re-evaluate their relationship with Russia even before the pipeline explosions. He says that Germany no longer trusts Russia, and will never again rely on them as a major supplier of energy.

yes, that is world for world the western propaganda explanation. A good mind fcking.
The pipes were not just empty sewer pipes. they were kept pressurized even with no flow. so, they opened up their end without letting any pressure out, sent a self propelled explosive down many miles?
Russia has not really had a direct response to the pipe explosion. If they had a 9-11 (nothing like killing thousands of your own people to convince them to start a decades long war) type of response right after the incident it might have been more suspect. Russia has been very cool headed really.

 

[Provincial]

yes, that is world for world the western propaganda explanation. A good mind fcking.
The pipes were not just empty sewer pipes. they were kept pressurized even with no flow. so, they opened up their end without letting any pressure out, sent a self propelled explosive down many miles?
Russia has not really had a direct response to the pipe explosion. If they had a 9-11 (nothing like killing thousands of your own people to convince them to start a decades long war) type of response right after the incident it might have been more suspect. Russia has been very cool headed really.

"The pipes were not just empty sewer pipes. they were kept pressurized even with no flow. so, they opened up their end without letting any pressure out, sent a self propelled explosive down many miles?"

There are "air locks" that allow the devices to enter and exit the pipes. They are at the Russian end. The devices travel within the pressurized pipes, normally to inspect them. This is common in pipeline operations. I've known about this for decades, so it isn't just propaganda since the incident.

 

[jkor]

"The pipes were not just empty sewer pipes. they were kept pressurized even with no flow. so, they opened up their end without letting any pressure out, sent a self propelled explosive down many miles?"

There are "air locks" that allow the devices to enter and exit the pipes. They are at the Russian end. The devices travel within the pressurized pipes, normally to inspect them. This is common in pipeline operations. I've known about this for decades, so it isn't just propaganda since the incident.

and there is no evidence pointing in that direction.

 

[jkor]

and there is no evidence pointing in that direction.

Just like there was no evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq or, a plane hitting the Pentagon

 

[Provincial]

and there is no evidence pointing in that direction.

And what evidence is there proving that the US blew up the pipelines?

 

[jkor]

And what evidence is there proving that the US blew up the pipelines?

there is nothing concrete in ether direction. Though, Joe Biden and Victoria newland both quite openly stated that the pipeline would be shut down in one way or the other.
Those saying Russia did it offer up a possibility, those who believe the USA did it offer up a possibility.
If history proves anything, if the US government and media tell us one thing, it is the opposite of true. All we are told are lies.

 

[jkor]

Like someone saying, ohhh that person will pay in one way or another hahahahaha. The next day the person is shot dead... Ummm that's pretty suspect.. that person would at very least be questioned.

 

[monkeybutler]

And what evidence is there proving that the US blew up the pipelines?

There's a bunch of carp about that in the typical edgelord conspiracy sites. There is no real evidence, as usual.

 

[Cavedweller]

That "reporter" has zero proof and is a Kremlin operative.

Anyone who doesn't parrot the Ukraine MoD/NATO propaganda machine is a Kremlin operative.

 

[Cavedweller]

As it is, Russia is getting ground down without the US or NATO sending troops into Ukraine.

Ground down at the cost of the lives of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians. They are running out of old men. Soon they'll be sending their children into the meat grinder. All for the sake of NATO expansion.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Ground down at the cost of the lives of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians. They are running out of old men. Soon they'll be sending their children into the meat grinder. All for the sake of NATO expansion.

I think you're confusing "NATO expansion" with genocide.