You claimed that German prosecutors claim Sergey K. acted "on behalf of the Ukrainian government". A phrase which is nowhere to be found in the entire article you just linked.
The dw-article explicitly uses the phrasing "on the orders of state authorities". Which is exactly what I just described in my lengthy, initial post:

The working theory of the prosecution is no direct government involvement, and also no official orders, but presumably inofficial orders coming from authorities somewhere below the government level. For example (and most likely) the military or the intelligence community.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Jul 3 2026 11:35am

Are you actually arguing semantics now ? I do not understand your argument. No matter how you want to frame it, Ukraine is implicated. Your argument is : No Ferdia, Ukraine is not implicated - it could be like what the Wall Street Journal said - Valerii Zaluzhnyi, then commander-in-chief of Ukraine's armed forces ordered it, or it could have been Roman Chervinsky, or Viktor Hanushchak. These are individuals in Ukraine, they are not the Ukrainian Government.

I mean come on. Do you mean to tell me Generals in Ukraine will carry out an act of terrorism on an ally of Germany without permission? thats not credible. Finally, Whether they did so with or without Zelensky's knowledge does not change the fact that it was a state-level operation.

This post was edited by ferdia on Jul 3 2026 11:42am

Semantics really, we all know it was western backed and likely orchestrated by MI-6/CIA types. Germany can pretend it's some rando-commando Ukrainian but you really have to suspend your intellect to believe that.

And lets not forget the Poland Tweet, Oh Poland, always stirring the pot when it comes to Russia - The now-deleted tweet from former Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski on September 27, 2022, was a pointed message accompanied by a photo of the pipeline leak: "Thank you, USA."

And ofc Seymour Hersh who you spent a good bit of time discrediting as a hack. But no, it was a few men in a little dingy and some explosives and Ukraine is not implicated. Yes, ofc, how silly of me. Silly Ferdia.

TLDR: Either:

The U.S. was involved (Nuland's glee, Sikorski's thanks, Hersh's reporting)
Or Ukraine was involved (German prosecution, WSJ reporting)
Or both

What is not plausible is that none of this matters and it was just "a few men in a little dingy" acting without state backing.

This post was edited by ferdia on Jul 3 2026 11:50am

"German prosecutors blame Ukrainian government" vs "German prosecutors try to establish connection between the commando and mid-level figures in Ukrainian military" is a huge, meaningful difference and not just 'semantics'.





Why would the MI6 or the CIA take such a huge risk, though? At the time NS was blown up, it had already been inoperative for months (because Russia itself had shut it down). All that blowing it up accomplished was taking a scenario off the table in which Russia promises Germany to resume gas supplies via NS, the German side trusts them in spite of Russia just having proven its untrustworthiness, and then Germany being willing to completely turn on all its European and NATO allies. A very far-fetched scenario.

The risks, on the other hand, were dramatic. If anything during the operation goes wrong and the "true" instigators are found out quickly after the fact, you have a veritable diplomatic crisis and just drove a far bigger wedge between the allies than Russia ever could have. For Western state actors, the calculus just made no sense at that point in time. Such a gungho move only made sense from the perspective of true hardliners in Ukraine or perhaps Poland.

there is a complete logic failure here on your side. If RUSSIA DID IT Denmark and Sweden would have stated this. Ditto if it was a rogue actor. How do you reconcile with this ? I mean if it was a rogue actor in Ukraine, its no big deal ok. put hm in jail and jobs done. Poland EXPLICITLY DENIED an extradition request. I mean come on...as part of the refusal they said "the attack was legitimate self-defence." now I am not a detective but that sounds like a state is involved.

This post was edited by ferdia on Jul 3 2026 11:57am

And this (lol)



This post was edited by Djunior on Jul 3 2026 11:52am

Djunior I dont know what your trying to say sorry. Unless by Sabotage you are implying that she knew it was not Russia, noting if she said act of aggression or terrorism it would stick to Russia but the word sabotage means its closer to home. ANYWAY, please rephrase your response so I know what you want to say.

This post was edited by ferdia on Jul 3 2026 11:53am

How did you not get this

Strongest possible response? Nothing came out of this.

EU countries dropped investigations, Poland refused to hand over suspect etc

sometimes you have to spell it out ok. we dont always get your framing sorry!