Comments (13)
sorted by:
ailurus 13 points ago +13 / -0

First, that the damage to the pipelines — an action for which Russia is certainly a more-than-viable suspect, if not the preeminent one —

I'll follow that up by going 64 words previous in your own article

There’s no evidence of this, of course.

current_horror 13 points ago +14 / -1

As far as I’m concerned, a person’s willingness to believe Russia might have bombed their own pipelines is a proxy for an IQ test.

TentElephant 5 points ago +6 / -1

Devil's advocate: Russia could safely assume that many westerners would blame the US for obvious reasons. Enthusiasm for the war has deflated in NATO countries as a result of the attack because they assume the US did it, such as the German bundestag voting against sending more weapons to the Ukraine. There has been a notable shift in the coverage of the war, as if the west is now resigned to letting Russia win. There was no reason for regime media to show Putin's speech nor write headlines declaring that Russia had annexed parts of the Ukraine, unless the media is pivoting and prepared to let Russia have it. The destruction of NS also shores up the Russian alliance with China as Beijing knows they will be able to rely on Russia for cheap gas.

ernsithe 7 points ago +7 / -0

How about China? Keeps NATO and Russia at each other's necks, ensures that the gas goes to China instead with more pricing power.

I wouldn't rule out Germany either. This way as the people shout for the gas to be turned back on they have an excuse other than valuing Ukraine more than their own people.

IMO almost every nation BUT Russia has more motive. Unless it's a sort of false flag like you think, they're just kneecapping their own leverage over Europe. It would be quite a gamble.

TentElephant 3 points ago +3 / -0

The Baltic is too far away from China and Germany doesn't have the capability. The only powers that could hit a pipeline 70m underwater in the Baltic without getting caught is the US, Russia and maybe—emphasis on the maybe—the UK.

ernsithe 4 points ago +4 / -0

You're probably right but I do wonder if it would have been possible for Germany to hit it from inside.

Sweden has the capability (Gotland class is a sneaky little fuck) but can't imagine they'd have a reason to.

cartoonericroberts 3 points ago +3 / -0

Russia doesn't really have the capabilities. 70m isn't that deep and the Danes have advanced SONAR that they bought off the US that would detect Russian submarines operating in the area. Anyone operating in the area would need to have a reason to be there, which the US has had.

TheImpossible1 0 points ago +2 / -2

The UK...now that's an interesting idea.

Steampunk_Moustache 9 points ago +9 / -0

Not transliterating the name is propagandistic as fuck.

bamboozler1 6 points ago +6 / -0

I mean, it is owned by Bezos…

It just took him somewhat longer than many people might have expected to run the damn thing into the ground…

The guy doesn’t strike me as particularly… “Normal”, so it’s perhaps not surprising that his media empire is starting to reflect that…

But also: dying medium; needs the clicks; etc…

ThatsAlright [S] 5 points ago +5 / -0
cartoonericroberts 4 points ago +4 / -0

Oh, yeah, as if no one on Russian TV would be like, "oh yeah, it's definitely the US that blew up the pipeline" if Tucker Carlson didn't say it first.

List of who knows it was the USA:

List of those who don't know it was the USA:
Idiot American journalists who've actually swallowed the regime flavor-aid.
Idiots who take idiot American journalists seriously.

I mean come on; I haven't seen our resident pro-Ukraine posters try to deny it was the US.

acp_k2win 4 points ago +4 / -0

always has been