Russia is the obvious choice..but why would they blow up a pipeline that makes them their money when they can simply just shut it off themselves?

Could the US have done it? Ukraine? Britain? Who has something to gain by doing it? It does look sus that the new Baltic/Poland pipeline just came online.

AunBear89 said:

---

---

Racist cops with no moral compass for $1000, Alex.

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Russia is the obvious choice..but why would they blow up a pipeline that makes them their money when they can simply just shut it off themselves?

Could the US have done it? Ukraine? Britain? Who has something to gain by doing it? It does look sus that the new Baltic/Poland pipeline just came online.

---

Makes them money?

How do these pipelines make the Russians money when Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 are shuttered and not delivering gas to Europe? Even before the shuttering, Nord Stream 1 was only at 20% capacity.

You dont seem to be very current when it comes to these pipelines, which have been well covered in the financial news.

It's not really clear.

It could be Russia trying to send some sort of message, but blowing up their own pipeline seems stupid and I am not sure what the message might be.

To me it seems like something someone would do in order to ensure that Russia will not be able to sell gas to Europe and/or so that Europe and Russia aren't able to find some common ground to negotiate re: energy production when/if the shortages start this winter.

If I had to guess I would say this is something the US did, because it doesn't impact us directly and it was done close to Denmark's territorial waters (versus, say, Russia's). It cripples Russia's ability to export gas and takes away a bargaining chip they could use with Europe.

Some other less likely scenarios:

1. Internal Russian (non-state) actors trying to send a warning to executives at Gazprom

2. Competing oil and gas interests eliminating competition

For Russia, Nordstream was both a tool to generate a lot of revenues, and a huge source of political leverage over Germany and western Europe, circumventing the pipeline through Ukraine and Poland, two countries that are fundamentally hostile to Russia. It's completely ret@rded to believe that Russia would have destroyed its main political and economic trump card on its European deck, clown world level of geopolitics, they fully control that pipeline, can shut it down or turn it on at their will.

As well, they couldn't have pulled it off operationally speaking as this was right in front of one of the NATO strongholds in the Baltic Sea, almost in Danish waters. An area that was actually the site of NATO submersive drone operations not to long ago.

This was done to help preempt any settlement between Germany and Russia, that was going to be inevitable once the damage from their energy crisis starts to really take a bite out of the German economy. The pressure from both the business community and German workers and consumers to open up Nordstream !! was going to be immense. Olaf Scholz in anticipation of this has so far refrained from writing an open check to Ukraine and sending German tanks. Blowing up NS1&2 effectively burns that bridge, Germany is completely screwed this winter.

The Polish husband of neocon Biden admin/Hillary Clinton confidant @anneapplebaum celebrates the attack on Nord Stream as an act of US state terror that will doom millions of Europeans to a freezing winter https://t.co/K7asZUUYWS

— Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) September 27, 2022

I have no idea who sabotaged that pipeline, but if Max Blumenthal says it wasn't Russia, then I'm more inclined to believe that it was. That dude has been on Putin's payroll for years.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/meet-the-sneakiest-defenders-of-vladimir-putins-ukraine-invasion-and-chinas-xinjiang-repression

https://prospect.org/politics/my-adventures-with-rt-putin-russia/

It was global warming.

From Forbes:

President Joe Biden promised on February 7 to prevent Nord Stream 2 from becoming operational if Russia invaded Ukraine. "If Russia invades," said Biden, "then there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it."

Reporter: "But how will you do that, exactly, since...the project is in Germany's control?"

Biden: "I promise you, we will be able to do that."

dimitrig said:

---

From Forbes:

President Joe Biden promised on February 7 to prevent Nord Stream 2 from becoming operational if Russia invaded Ukraine. "If Russia invades," said Biden, "then there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it."

Reporter: "But how will you do that, exactly, since...the project is in Germany's control?"

Biden: "I promise you, we will be able to do that."

---

Don't worry, the US just investigated itself..says it didn't do it.

Russian navy was spotted on the day of the explosion in the area and there are no US ships there, but sure let's pretend like the US did this. Also, I'm sure it was a total accident that this happened just far enough from the cost to be in international waters so that it couldn't be seen as an attack on a NATO country that could trigger article 5.

The most troubling aspect about this is the environmental impact. Even though neither pipeline was pushing any product to Europe, they weren't empty and now we've released a lot of methane into the atmosphere.

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Could the US have done it? Ukraine? Britain? Who has something to gain by doing it? It does look sus that the new Baltic/Poland pipeline just came online.

---

You watch too much Tucker Carlson.

Tucker Carlson suggests US blew up Nord Stream pipeline and lists possible Russian 'retaliations' (yahoo.com)

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Russian navy was spotted on the day of the explosion in the area and there are no US ships there, but sure let's pretend like the US did this. Also, I'm sure it was a total accident that this happened just far enough from the cost to be in international waters so that it couldn't be seen as an attack on a NATO country that could trigger article 5.

The most troubling aspect about this is the environmental impact. Even though neither pipeline was pushing any product to Europe, they weren't empty and now we've released a lot of methane into the atmosphere.

---

The US Navy was conducting operations in the area all summer long ostensibly drilling on mine counter measures using underwater drones and helicopters as well as vessels.

Russian ships operate in the Baltic all the time, but the US Navy just happened to conduct operations near Bornholm this summer and we are supposed to believe it is suspicious that a Russian ship was in the Baltic.

DiabloWags said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

It's not really clear.

If I had to guess I would say this is something the US did, because it doesn't impact us directly and it was done close to Denmark's territorial waters (versus, say, Russia's). It cripples Russia's ability to export gas and takes away a bargaining chip they could use with Europe.

---

Yes.
Because the United States loves stabbing its NATO partners in the back after doing everything they can to support them.
Makes perfect sense.

---

I don't think Russia has anything to gain by doing this and the US definitely does.

It may have even been done with EU knowledge and cooperation.

Of course, I don't know but I am just looking at which country benefits most from this and coincidentally whose President has already voiced opposition to the project.

Russia could have done it, but it would have been incredibly stupid for them to do so. Was it an attempt to rally their citizenry against the evil West? If Russia really did it then they made a big mistake.

DiabloWags said:

---

Yes, it must have been the United States that sabotaged the Pipeline.
We want the EU economies to shrink by as much as 5% next year and watch Germany suffer the 3rd largest economic contraction since WW-2.

Makes perfect sense.

---

EU wasn't using the pipelines anyway.

dimitrig said:

---

Russia could have done it, but it would have been incredibly stupid for them to do so. Was it an attempt to rally their citizenry against the evil West? If Russia really did it then they made a big mistake.

---

At this point, are we ruling out Russia doing an incredibly stupid thing?

sycasey said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

Russia could have done it, but it would have been incredibly stupid for them to do so. Was it an attempt to rally their citizenry against the evil West? If Russia really did it then they made a big mistake.

---

At this point, are we ruling out Russia doing an incredibly stupid thing?

---

No, but USucks is insinuating that anyone is a conspiracy theorist and traitor if they post that the US might have done it. USucks knows all.

DiabloWags said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

Yes, it must have been the United States that sabotaged the Pipeline.
We want the EU economies to shrink by as much as 5% next year and watch Germany suffer the 3rd largest economic contraction since WW-2.

Makes perfect sense.

---

EU wasn't using the pipelines anyway.

---

Huh?

Nord Stream 1 had delivered gas to Germany until earlier this month when Russian energy giant Gazprom turned off the supply (which had been operating at 20% of capacity since roughly mid-June), alleging that urgent maintenance work was required to replace vital components.

Last time I checked, Germany was a member of the EU.

---

At the time of the explosions, the EU wasn't using the pipelines anyway.

Now they can't.

Who benefits most from that? If Russia wanted to cut off the gas supply well… they already had without this stunt.

dimitrig said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

Yes, it must have been the United States that sabotaged the Pipeline.
We want the EU economies to shrink by as much as 5% next year and watch Germany suffer the 3rd largest economic contraction since WW-2.

Makes perfect sense.

---

EU wasn't using the pipelines anyway.

---

Huh?

Nord Stream 1 had delivered gas to Germany until earlier this month when Russian energy giant Gazprom turned off the supply (which had been operating at 20% of capacity since roughly mid-June), alleging that urgent maintenance work was required to replace vital components.

Last time I checked, Germany was a member of the EU.

---

At the time of the explosions, the EU wasn't using the pipelines anyway.

Now they can't.

Who benefits most from that? If Russia wanted to cut off the gas supply well… they already had without this stunt.

---

Right, and this removes a huge asset for the Russians in terms of their economic and political leverage over Germany, the key EU country. Why would they do that? And why would they blow it off in a most destructive manner, which will insure it won't be repaired this season?

Bear in mind, even if Russia was never going to resume its energy relationship with Europe after the war, it doesn't have a motive to remove this possibility from its own table. It would only be sabotaging options it already controls.

— Baron of the Taiga (@baronitaigas) September 27, 2022

In addition, why would Russia sabotage the pipeline in the given location, quite far from its own shore, when NATO is monitoring maritime activity at what are likely unprecedented levels? It makes no sense.

— Baron of the Taiga (@baronitaigas) September 27, 2022

Who Dunnit?
GERMANY - Economy crashes & people freeze with no hope of correction
RUSSIA - Loses billions of invested funds.
US - Sells more LNG to the EU and realizes its dream of separating Germany from Russian energy

— Garland Nixon (@GarlandNixon) September 29, 2022

And finally, a short capsule of 20th/21st century European geopolitics as viewed from Washington DC:

Just sayin’ … pic.twitter.com/Hu2AxHmOkP

— Margarita K. (@MargarittaaK) September 27, 2022

Cal88 said:

---

Right, and this removes a huge asset for the Russians in terms of their economic and political leverage over Germany, the key EU country. Why would they do that? And why would they blow it off in a most destructive manner, which will insure it won't be repaired this season?

---

This pipeline was most likely never going to be re-opened anyway.
Why?

Because Russia is losing this War badly and the EU knows it and has no reason to negotiate with the Russians and remove sanctions. The sanctions will remain. The pipeline would have remained closed .... with or without sabotage.

DiabloWags said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

Who benefits most from that? If Russia wanted to cut off the gas supply well… they already had without this stunt.

---

You're finally showing some common sense.
You are correct.
It was a "stunt".

Ask yourself why.

---

Your intelligence truly knows no bounds.

Big C said:

---

Greenpeace? Antifa? Yogi?

---

DiabloWags said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Your intelligence truly knows no bounds.

---

Says the guy that graduated from Minot State.

Let me guess . . . .you cant comprehend a "stunt" by the Russians that left one of the two Nord Stream 2 pipelines undamaged, leaving Putin the possibility of using it as leverage if the winter turns particularly cold?

---

Uhh both 1 and 2 were damaged genius. Maybe you should go to Minot State.

OK - I came here looking for this thread because I was very curious how the folks here would break it down.

I think there is one obvious party that no one is discussing (both here and in the articles I'm seeing) that had opportunity and motive. Poland.

Here are my thoughts:

Russia/Putinists - I suppose its possible, but I really don't see them taking from Putin the one thing he has that gives him leverage. But maybe he's doing it to cement position? Are the pipelines insured . . . maybe it is a money play for business interruption $$ when he isn't otherwise selling pipeline gas?

Russian Anti-Putinists - could be an effort to destabilize Putin. This seems possible . . .

USA - I don't think Biden and his cronies have the balls to do something like this (but see Poland below). It would be an incredible escalation for the US to be directly tied to this. And, as others have noted, if the US did this and word got out, all of Europe AND Russia would be enraged. I don't think the US would be willing to risk this.

Ukraine - Not sure if they have the capability to do this - maybe? Even if they do, I can't see them directly doing this and alienating European countries.

Private militia/mercenaries - Maybe? Funded by oil interests or anti-Putin oligarchs? Seems unlikely, but can't be discounted.

Poland - Poland is a staunch supporter of Ukraine, they hate the Russian regime and are fearful Russia would try to take Poland if they succeed in Ukraine. Poland must be thrilled to see Putin damaged by the nord stream explosions and his huge loss of leverage (at least in the short run).

Nord Stream was constructed to bypass Ukraine and Poland (economic loss to those countries). The new Norway-Poland pipeline is opening which means: (i) Poland will have independent sources of gas and no longer be reliant on Russia; (ii) Poland stands to make money from the new pipeline - by exporting to other European countries; and (iii) they'd be very happy to see the competition (nord stream) eliminated. And unlike the US and Ukraine, I don't think Poland cares too much if the rest of Europe (particularly Germany) suffers in the short run.

Poland has a VERY competent professional military, particularly special forces. They have had a longstanding close military and intelligence relationship with the USA (CIA black sites). They absolutely would have the ability to blow up those pipelines with the actual explosions being . . . very close to Poland.

So I think it was Poland. Did you notice that they immediately announced their "shock" and puzzlement? Yeah sure.

An interesting question is whether Poland acted with the knowledge and possible clandestine assistance of the USA (i.e., CIA). I absolutely could see that, though I think Poland could and would do it without USA's involvement.

What did I get wrong?

BearGoggles said:

---

OK - I came here looking for this thread because I was very curious how the folks here would break it down.

I think there is one obvious party that no one is discussing (both here and in the articles I'm seeing) that had opportunity and motive. Poland.

Here are my thoughts:

Russia/Putinists - I suppose its possible, but I really don't see them taking from Putin the one thing he has that gives him leverage. But maybe he's doing it to cement position? Are the pipelines insured . . . maybe it is a money play for business interruption $$ when he isn't otherwise selling pipeline gas?

Russian Anti-Putinists - could be an effort to destabilize Putin. This seems possible . . .

USA - I don't think Biden and his cronies have the balls to do something like this (but see Poland below). It would be an incredible escalation for the US to be directly tied to this. And, as others have noted, if the US did this and word got out, all of Europe AND Russia would be enraged. I don't think the US would be willing to risk this.

Ukraine - Not sure if they have the capability to do this - maybe? Even if they do, I can't see them directly doing this and alienating European countries.

Private militia/mercenaries - Maybe? Funded by oil interests or anti-Putin oligarchs? Seems unlikely, but can't be discounted.

Poland - Poland is a staunch supporter of Ukraine, they hate the Russian regime and are fearful Russia would try to take Poland if they succeed in Ukraine. Poland must be thrilled to see Putin damaged by the nord stream explosions and his huge loss of leverage (at least in the short run).

Nord Stream was constructed to bypass Ukraine and Poland (economic loss to those countries). The new Norway-Poland pipeline is opening which means: (i) Poland will have independent sources of gas and no longer be reliant on Russia; (ii) Poland stands to make money from the new pipeline - by exporting to other European countries; and (iii) they'd be very happy to see the competition (nord stream) eliminated. And unlike the US and Ukraine, I don't think Poland cares too much if the rest of Europe (particularly Germany) suffers in the short run.

Poland has a VERY competent professional military, particularly special forces. They have had a longstanding close military and intelligence relationship with the USA (CIA black sites). They absolutely would have the ability to blow up those pipelines with the actual explosions being . . . very close to Poland.

So I think it was Poland. Did you notice that they immediately announced their "shock" and puzzlement? Yeah sure.

An interesting question is whether Poland acted with the knowledge and possible clandestine assistance of the USA (i.e., CIA). I absolutely could see that, though I think Poland could and would do it without USA's involvement.

What did I get wrong?

---

I have seen Poland and even Norway mentioned, but this seems like a pretty bold move for a country that size without tacit NATO approval. I would look to Ukraine before Poland but I am not sure any of those could pull it off under Denmark's nose undetected - especially with the US Navy in the area - without at least some US assistance. Fundamentally that is the same thing as the US doing it but with plausible deniability.