Europe at War

[LKB]

Anything from Seymour Hersh should be taken with several gains of salt. He's published material based on hearsay which he obtained decades after the event ( and which proved to be inaccurate ), made assertions without presenting evidence, and in interviews has maintained the right to use a different standard for accuracy when speaking, as opposed to what he writes.

Wikipedia is useful here, with the usual caveats:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seymour_Hersh

Some of his early work was important and illuminating. But that was fifty years ago, and some people change significantly as they age.

[Todd]

Wikipedia is useful here, with the usual caveats:

Starting with the fact that co-founder Larry Sanger says it cannot be trusted.

The rest of your post is a variant of ad hominem and therefore irrelevant.

Whichever country or combination of countries did it committed an act of war and state act of terrorism.

[BasilValentine]

Starting with the fact that co-founder Larry Sanger says it cannot be trusted.

The rest of your post is a variant of ad hominem and therefore irrelevant.

Whichever country or combination of countries did it committed an act of war and state act of terrorism.

The U.S. and Norway seem by far the most plausible culprits here. If it's not an accurate account of what happened to the pipelines, then it's some of the cleverest and most meticulously crafted fiction I've read recently. In either case, kudos to Hersh.  My money's on it being true.

[Madiel]

Hersh gives a lot of details and goes step by step. I assume he has sources and he does have credibility as a journalist. On the other hand, we should always be skeptical and look for other reporting. Plus, the official word is that this is pure fiction, so there's that.

People give a lot of details about how the moon landing was faked and how 9/11 was an inside job. The number of details merely indicates that a lot of time was spent, not that it was spent well.

[Karl Henning]

I assume he has sources

You know what they say about assume.

[Todd]

I should like to see what country or countries that people who insist the US was not involved think did it.  I know at least one GMGer seriously believes Russia sabotaged Nord Stream 1 & 2, and I suspect many (or most) others do as well.  The number of countries that could have pulled off such an operation is small.

One thing is certain, if/when US involvement is proven to the nebulous and ever-changing "standards" pro-war folks rely on, the US will face no consequences.  Russia will not risk direct military confrontation, and the US is above international law. 

[BasilValentine]

I should like to see what country or countries that people who insist the US was not involved think did it.  I know at least one GMGer seriously believes Russia sabotaged Nord Stream 1 & 2, and I suspect many (or most) others do as well.  The number of countries that could have pulled off such an operation is small.

One thing is certain, if/when US involvement is proven to the nebulous and ever-changing "standards" pro-war folks rely on, the US will face no consequences.  Russia will not risk direct military confrontation, and the US is above international law. 

I'd say this assessment is correct. I'm just amazed that Biden et alia managed to be so ruthlessly efficient and purposeful in flouting it. If I were Germany I'd be really pissed about now. 

[Todd]

A repurposed Joan Cornellà cartoon making the rounds.

[Daverz]

Sy Hersch used to be a reputable journalist, but that was a long time ago.  He seems to be one of those folks who couldn't get past the habit of seeing the West as always the worst actor in their cosmology no matter how much the world has changed around them.

https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2023/02/quite-a-story-from-a-single-anonymous-source

[milk]

People give a lot of details about how the moon landing was faked and how 9/11 was an inside job. The number of details merely indicates that a lot of time was spent, not that it was spent well.

Yes that's true. And his credibility has taken hits over the years. It'd be better to get the story confirmed from somewhere else.

[Madiel]

To be frank the whole pipeline thing doesn't make a huge amount of sense no matter who did it. It was not actually being used and there was no short term prospect of it being used.

[Todd]

Yes that's true. And his credibility has taken hits over the years. It'd be better to get the story confirmed from somewhere else.

Absolutely.  Better yet, maybe an independent, multi-national investigation under the auspices of, say, the UN could get to the bottom of it.  Maybe send the people who looked for WMD.

[SimonNZ]

If somebody gets this could they explain it to me?

[Madiel]

If somebody gets this could they explain it to me?

Germany hostage to Russian gas supplies, etc etc.

Of course it's the Germans who actually had already said no to using the pipeline. As I've pointed out. So the narrative doesn't work.

[Karl Henning]

Of course it's the Germans who actually had already said no to using the pipeline.

Well, darn those vassals, anyhow!

[milk]

Absolutely.  Better yet, maybe an independent, multi-national investigation under the auspices of, say, the UN could get to the bottom of it.  Maybe send the people who looked for WMD.

[Madiel]

I honestly can't tell if this means Todd believes there really were weapons of mass destruction, and people were stupid not to find them.

Or whether he agrees that there weren't weapons of mass destruction and is commenting on how the wild accusations that they existed were wrong, and that throwing reckless accusations around at countries is a really bad idea.

Or whether he didn't actually think the comparison through before making it.

[Todd]

From Reuters: Russia strikes Ukrainian power grid and advances in the east

The article mentions how the artillery battles are called "meat grinders".  No prob for the brave Ukrainians.  Don't even think about pushing for a negotiated settlement.  Grind away.

[Spotted Horses]

To be frank the whole pipeline thing doesn't make a huge amount of sense no matter who did it. It was not actually being used and there was no short term prospect of it being used.

As I've posted before, it makes sense. There is not motive for Russia. They turned off the gas in order to blackmail the E.U., "we won't turn on that sweet gas until you stop supporting Ukraine." Destroying the pipeline takes away the blackmail leverage, since now they can't turn it on.

But it would make sense for Ukraine. "Our allies will abandon us to get their gas back, let's destroy the pipeline so they can't get their gas back no matter what, taking away that temptation." It would also make some sense for some actor who doesn't want to give in to Russian expansion. I doubt the U.S. did it, getting caught would be too embarrassing and risk fracturing the coalition supporting Ukraine.

I wouldn't put it past Ukraine's capabilities. A commercial undersea drone could reach the pipeline, and they'd just have to attach a big bomb to it.

[Todd]

A commercial undersea drone could reach the pipeline, and they'd just have to attach a big bomb to it.

How do you know this?