Russian propaganda has been full of shit since this war began all the way back in 2014.

Cringe.

I think both the US and NATO had the plausible ability to pull this off with divers using delayed fuses that would go undetected. With a far greater likelihood of a Russian attempt being detected, and with a more direct motive and evidence of intent for the US.
We're still speculating blindly in absence of real evidence but what little we know probably puts the balance in favor of the US being the culprit, but its hardly damning.

Nah, you're being far too kind.

There's no reason Russia would pop these things that even remotely outweighs the loss of leverage that these bombs have resulted in.

I mean black xistenz just listed various motivations. The US, EU, Ukraine and Russia all have motivations for and against the impacts of sabotaging NS. Some impacts will benefit them, some risks jeopardize them, even if they don't get caught. As I explained earlier on, the least likely culprit also is the only one with a pure win:win motive, that being China. Russia has plenty of reasons to sever NS by force once it became clear it wasn't going to resume operations in the near future, but while making its position against the EU more aggressive it also cuts off one deescalation and mutually beneficial financial off-ramp from the current hostilities. Which is why no matter how clean their hands look and how remote the capabilities are, I can't help but look suspiciously at the Chinese.

I'm not convinced by this supposedly direct and clear motive for the US. Like I've explained some days ago, we're months away from the hypothetical risk of public upheaval forcing European governments to break rank from the sanctions regime and seeking to mend fences with Russia at the expense of Ukraine and the US geopolitical goals. If the US were behind this, why blow the pipelines up now and give your (allegedly) unreliable allies time to repair them? Also, why risk everything you've worked for in this conflict just to take out two pipelines when there are other, land-based pipelines left that the dastardly Europeans could also use once they resume trade with Russia?

And last but not least: the United States are militarily allied with Europe and they are heavily invested in Europe. American hedge funds and companies hold trillions of investment in Europe which are being crushed as we speak due to the energy-price-induced recession looming over the European economy. It makes no sense to operate under the assumption that the US has an interest in tanking the European economy, both based on financial grounds and because they need their allies to be strong when the inevitable showdown with China happens further down the line. You know who unambiguously benefits from new panic/instability/uncertainty on the energy markets? Russia.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Sep 29 2022 11:59pm

The words of an insane person who thinks the Chinese, who haven't invaded another country since his dad was coyly sharing a smooch with mama, would send a sub across the ocean to plant bombs on a pipeline in a conflict that they barely support to begin with.

The Chinese are not as peaceful as they like to portray themselves, but yeah, I gotta agree here. China being behind this is just a far too outlandish theory if you ask me.

I don't think there's a 'direct and clear motive' for anyone but China, that's what I've been saying. Everyone else has something to gain, something to lose. This war started with the leverage that Russia held by circumventing Ukraine as a pipeline transit country by building NS2, and the US opposing it. Land based pipelines gave Ukraine leverage over Russia and literally going around them meant they were now defenseless. But similarly, if the EU is voluntarily embargoing Russian gas, Ukraine's chip is off the table just the same.
Russia clearly preferred having geopolitical leverage over the EU that was benefiting themselves more than the EU. If they didn't want Nord Stream, they wouldn't have built in the first place. If we thought it was a good thing, we wouldn't have opposed it.
Trump was adamant about stopping NS, and Biden while initially more dovish on Russia with all the hypocrisy that required, has now become a firebrand and made a less-than-veiled threat to blow up NS, which is why the weight of evidence is still against the US



The Chinese are the only people fully benefiting from the continued US-Russian hostilities. Everyone else has something to lose, the Chinese are laughing as all their geopoltiical rivals degrade themselves.
What's against it is the remoteness of the action for China to carry out surreptitiously, their risk adverse nature and the extreme backfire if it were discovered. I don't think China are the likely culprits, but when all we're going on is motive, they're the only party with a pure motive.

This post was edited by Goomshill on Sep 30 2022 12:27am

That's actually not accurate. Russia intentionally did not refill the German gas storages that they controlled (thanks again to our fucking braindead government) throughout 2021 in a move which was clearly in preparation of the war that was about to come during the 21/22 winter. They did this at a time when it was not clear whether Nord Stream 2 would really be completed. So arguing that Russia's invasion hinged on the completion of NS2 is just not true. Also note that NS2 only has less than half the capacity of the land-based pipelines going through Ukraine, so it would not have been able to fully compensate these other pipelines' blockade.

The only scenario in which this would have worked out like that is if Russia stops its gas supplies to Ukraine and Eastern Europe, barely keeps up its supplies to Western Europe through the two Nord Stream pipelines, and Western Europe just sits idly by while Russia slaughters Ukraine (and potentially the Baltics), being glad that they still get their gas. If that's really what Putin envisioned (which I doubt), then he assumed Western Europe to be assholes and cowards of truly historic proportions.



No, he did not. He equivocated and made a very generic, ambiguous statement when a reporter pondered on an obvious disagreement between him and Scholz. It's far more likely that Biden wanted to downplay the dissent and alluded to applying the screws in backroom talks if necessary, rather than sending marine divers to literally blow up his ally's infrastructure project.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Sep 30 2022 12:43am