By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Posted with some trepidation as I know Clive doesn’t like multis. Understandably overlooked by the national media, but it seems like the Russians are completely caving in, rope-a-doped as effectively as von Paulus in 1942. Who knows what this might lead to?
While not questioning their ability to do it, or their belligerency overall, why would the Russians destroy a pipeline they can turn off from the tap anyway?
While not questioning their ability to do it, or their belligerency overall, why would the Russians destroy a pipeline they can turn off from the tap anyway?
While not questioning their ability to do it, or their belligerency overall, why would the Russians destroy a pipeline they can turn off from the tap anyway?
[Post edited 30 Sep 2022 12:33]
Could be any number of reasons. E.g. the same reason Russia continue to come up with excuses to stop supply such as works taking place, new parts required etc. It provides justification to stop supply long term as opposed to simply switching off at their end (why haven’t they done this so far instead of making excuses?).
It also gives Russia an opportunity to point the finger at the US and try to create factions in the west. Smoke and mirrors, fog of war etc.
One thing I've read, which of course could be garbage, is if the Russians blew up the pipeline themselves it could be a sign of an internal power struggle within Russia.
Ie GazProm, the owners, gradually seeing their business go up in smoke with sanctions etc are putting pressure on Putin to be concluding the war, and then Putin's side blowing up the pipe to kibosh the GazProm circle.
While not questioning their ability to do it, or their belligerency overall, why would the Russians destroy a pipeline they can turn off from the tap anyway?
[Post edited 30 Sep 2022 12:33]
Why would you believe the Russians about anything....they just lie and deceive. I fully believe they are behind this.
AND WHEN I DREAM , I DREAM ABOUT YOU AND WHEN I SCREAM I SCREAM ABOUT YOU!!!!!
They (the Russian government) are liars and deceivers but blowing up your own pipeline where $12b of gas flow through in the good times.
It would have been cheaper staging the destruction of the Kremlin!
Not much gas flowing through it at the moment though. Could be so many different reasons why Putin wants the pipeline out of service. As someone pointed out above, a potential conflict between Putin and Gazprom.
Taking the pipeline out of service further commits Russia to the war Putin has started as it’s a lot more difficult to remove Putin and restart gas supply to western countries. It also gives him an opportunity to portray the west as villains and an excuse if the Russian economy tanks and Russians ask why the supply of gas to the west ceased, Putin can blame the west.
I wouldn’t completely discount the US from being involved but I can see plenty of reasons why the damaged pipeline could be advantageous to Putin. I doubt we’ll ever know the truth.
Not much gas flowing through it at the moment though. Could be so many different reasons why Putin wants the pipeline out of service. As someone pointed out above, a potential conflict between Putin and Gazprom.
Taking the pipeline out of service further commits Russia to the war Putin has started as it’s a lot more difficult to remove Putin and restart gas supply to western countries. It also gives him an opportunity to portray the west as villains and an excuse if the Russian economy tanks and Russians ask why the supply of gas to the west ceased, Putin can blame the west.
I wouldn’t completely discount the US from being involved but I can see plenty of reasons why the damaged pipeline could be advantageous to Putin. I doubt we’ll ever know the truth.
Your last paragraph is precisely how any sane person should approach this (i.e. someone who wants a world not destroyed by nuclear Armageddon). Especially the last sentence.
While not questioning their ability to do it, or their belligerency overall, why would the Russians destroy a pipeline they can turn off from the tap anyway?
[Post edited 30 Sep 2022 12:33]
If they turn the taps off they get sued by Germany, etc for not providing the product they're contractually obliged to provide. Making the pipeline inoperable means they can claim it's out of their hands and can't be blamed.
If they turn the taps off they get sued by Germany, etc for not providing the product they're contractually obliged to provide. Making the pipeline inoperable means they can claim it's out of their hands and can't be blamed.
Aren’t we all sanctioning them anyway?
I’m really confused, some are saying there is no gas flowing through and others are saying there is.
Thing is this Natural gas is short term resource now, as impacted countries in Europe will increase investment into renewable energy to remove external energy dependencies. Any dependence on the US for Natural Gas will be relatively short lived (years as opposed to decades)
However I can well believe the US (or proxy) blowing up Nord Stream pipeline for numerous reasons.
@swisscottage: "However I can well believe the US (or proxy) blowing up Nord Stream pipeline for numerous reasons."
NS2 has never opened, while Russia have effectively closed down NS1 themselves. And Russia will eventually have eg Asian markets buying all its oil and gas, at the same time as the West secures alternative suppliers (apparently we're cosying up to Venezuela once more).
So what possible benefit would it serve for USA/NATO etc to sabotage them? (We're not the aggressor, remember)
Whereas Putin will do it (a ) because he can, and (b ) to send a message to the West to demonstrate that he can, on a "where next?" basis.
This is especially important to him seeing as he can't do much in Ukraine itself.
@swisscottage: "However I can well believe the US (or proxy) blowing up Nord Stream pipeline for numerous reasons."
NS2 has never opened, while Russia have effectively closed down NS1 themselves. And Russia will eventually have eg Asian markets buying all its oil and gas, at the same time as the West secures alternative suppliers (apparently we're cosying up to Venezuela once more).
So what possible benefit would it serve for USA/NATO etc to sabotage them? (We're not the aggressor, remember)
Whereas Putin will do it (a ) because he can, and (b ) to send a message to the West to demonstrate that he can, on a "where next?" basis.
This is especially important to him seeing as he can't do much in Ukraine itself.
Are we not putting any stock in the fact that Biden literally said he’d end NS2?
[Post edited 30 Sep 2022 17:00]
Proof please. When did Biden ‘literally’ say he would blow up the pipeline?
The reality is that Biden said that he could bring an end to Nord Stream 2. There are many ways he could do this without blowing it up. Applying diplomatic pressure to Germany to kill the project for a start. Which incidentally is actually what happened after the war started earlier this year.
Let’s try to avoid blindly following Kremlin misinformation points, assuming that you’re approaching this discussion in good faith.
Re this latest Annexation, as we all know, Putin is liable to use any Ukrainian army incursions into "the new Russia" as an excuse to threaten, or even use, tactical nuclear weapons on Ukraine.
And as we know equally well, Ukraine cannot/will not be cowed, because if they (unofficially) decided to keep out of the four new territories, they know that come next year, or the year after, Putin will just annex some more Ukrainian territory, and so on until he controls the whole country. And from there to the Baltics etc.
Therefore I believe that NATO should call his bluff and declare that if one speck of nuclear radiation falls on one square centimetre of NATO territory (carried on the wind, basically), then we reserve the right to respond in kind.
Tbh, I'm not sure even that would deter Putin (though he's no fool), but I believe that if he ever gave the order to go nuclear in those circumstances, the Kremiln apparatchics and/or the gemerals would refuse, since they know how much everyone would have to lose.
Proof please. When did Biden ‘literally’ say he would blow up the pipeline?
The reality is that Biden said that he could bring an end to Nord Stream 2. There are many ways he could do this without blowing it up. Applying diplomatic pressure to Germany to kill the project for a start. Which incidentally is actually what happened after the war started earlier this year.
Let’s try to avoid blindly following Kremlin misinformation points, assuming that you’re approaching this discussion in good faith.
[Post edited 30 Sep 2022 16:57]
Amended but the point is still the same.
Absolutely coming at this in good faith. I just resent the presentation of the West as the good guys here, as if there isn’t centuries of filthy behaviour all over the planet. There are no good guys here, even ours.
Are we not putting any stock in the fact that Biden literally said he’d end NS2?
[Post edited 30 Sep 2022 17:00]
Biden didn't have to do anything to "end NS2" - the Germans have effectively already done that by refusing to import Russia gas through it.
Like those Russian submarines that keep appearing off Sweden and Norway etc - (even off the Irish Republic!), this is Putin just sabre-rattling in the Baltic, where he's now surrounded by NATO following the accession of Sweden and Finland.
The most obvious conclusions are almost always the rightr ones
Biden didn't have to do anything to "end NS2" - the Germans have effectively already done that by refusing to import Russia gas through it.
Like those Russian submarines that keep appearing off Sweden and Norway etc - (even off the Irish Republic!), this is Putin just sabre-rattling in the Baltic, where he's now surrounded by NATO following the accession of Sweden and Finland.
The most obvious conclusions are almost always the rightr ones
Absolutely coming at this in good faith. I just resent the presentation of the West as the good guys here, as if there isn’t centuries of filthy behaviour all over the planet. There are no good guys here, even ours.
Saying that you will put an end to something doesn’t mean that you will blow it up!
Biden has major leverage over Germany and the EU as a major trading partner. As soon as Russia invaded Ukraine it was clear that Nord stream 2 wouldn’t go ahead and Germany made that decision immediately.
You sound like Putin earlier today talking about western colonialism while annexing a sovereign nation. Irrespective of the West’s history, Putin is the aggressor here and it’s inexcusable whatever you might think of how the West has behaved in the past.
Saying that you will put an end to something doesn’t mean that you will blow it up!
Biden has major leverage over Germany and the EU as a major trading partner. As soon as Russia invaded Ukraine it was clear that Nord stream 2 wouldn’t go ahead and Germany made that decision immediately.
You sound like Putin earlier today talking about western colonialism while annexing a sovereign nation. Irrespective of the West’s history, Putin is the aggressor here and it’s inexcusable whatever you might think of how the West has behaved in the past.
Harsh on Bazza. I think we're all agreed Russia is the aggressor, albeit I would argue that so much more, and less in NATO's case, could have been done before we got to this stage.
But I won't believe everything I'm told by the media.
Saying that you will put an end to something doesn’t mean that you will blow it up!
Biden has major leverage over Germany and the EU as a major trading partner. As soon as Russia invaded Ukraine it was clear that Nord stream 2 wouldn’t go ahead and Germany made that decision immediately.
You sound like Putin earlier today talking about western colonialism while annexing a sovereign nation. Irrespective of the West’s history, Putin is the aggressor here and it’s inexcusable whatever you might think of how the West has behaved in the past.
We’re all being quite civil.
Why do you need to say I sound like Putin? Was that necessary?
I’ve made my view on Putin and Russia very clear. Sometimes even the worst people are right.
Lets not lose sight of the fact that since WW2 the good old USA has been the most militarily aggressive nation in the world by a long,long way.I see their hand in this pipeline explosion.The CIA is more of a threat to the world than Mr Putin in fact they have caused this War and are trying to escalate it every chance they get.
Well you’re parroting the same talking points that Putin used in his speech earlier today re western colonialism.
Sorry if my response caused offence but it was uncanny that you adopted the same rationale as Putin.
I’ll leave it here as I sense we’re not going to agree on much and not looking to p1ss anyone off.
I’m not pissed off, nor offended.
Before you go you should know I haven’t seen anything Putin has said since before the start of the war, both as a deliberate choice, and because Russian media is embargoed.
Anti colonialism / anti imperialism is a well established ideology held by 80% of the planet. That Putin would use it as a weapon makes it no less valid.
The President of Ireland also made a similar statement last week. I hope he is not accused of parrotting Putin too.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
