Utopia Talk / Politics / Gas attack

jergul large member	Wed Sep 28 13:11:18 Seb I would have had a heart attack years ago if being correct had me seething. You post ill-considered brain-farts without the courtesy of applying critical thought to your own creations. I called you on that. Anyways. 80% probability of this being an Ukrainian-Polish endevour. So you need not even have asked where the explosives came from if you had just read with a bit more care. Vessel outfitted in Gdynia almost certainly. Poland is big on trawler outfitting. So means, motive and opportunity all checks out.
Seb Member	Wed Sep 28 13:23:33 jergul: So you basically adopted my analysis: It would need to be a state actor local to the baltic - Poland - to be able to carry out. Ukraine probably does not have the capability to launch such an attack undetected by too many countries that it could guarantee not being singled out.
Seb Member	Wed Sep 28 13:24:26 And if the Poles are up for it, I don't think Ukraine needs to be involved at all operationally.
Sam Adams Member	Wed Sep 28 13:38:11 The russians are without honor and without logic. Thus any attack in europe is probably them.
jergul large member	Wed Sep 28 14:11:34 Seb Not really. Ukraine is almost certainly involved. It just makes more sense that they reached out to Poland for practical assistance. This was not a sophisticated attack. Hell, if I checked Polish fishing tradepapers from 6 months to a year ago, I could probably find the vessel used. An old rustbucket on the market forever. Optimize the gear for the task at hand. Rent a fishing quota or get a research one and bob's your uncle. Doable for less than a million bucks easily.
jergul large member	Wed Sep 28 14:15:44 Poland's motive "help Ukraine and hate Russia" is too weak. Its gain "secure Ukrainian winter heating" too indirect. Also, damage control. If it was Ukraine and it gets found out or they slyly admit to it in a few weeks, then what harm really? Look at them fighting back. A unilateral move from Poland however...
Seb Member	Wed Sep 28 14:32:02 But without the Germans finding out? Which is terrible for Ukraine in the medium term. Poland's motive is to re-align German foreign policy, which is achieved whether they are discovered or not. Still most likely is Russia: in your telling they have disengaged from the EU market long term, so they trash two bits of useless metal to send an escalation signal.
Seb Member	Wed Sep 28 14:32:55 Also, you can keep telling us how easy it is to blow up a pipeline. We all agree. The question is "how easy is it to do it without getting caught".
jergul large member	Wed Sep 28 14:38:27 Seb There is also an 80% probability that in less than 10 days you will be saying "Ukraine did not really admit to doing it. The press release can be understood in other ways too" and in less that 30 days you will be saying "Well, ok, Ukraine admitted they did it, but they could be lying and just taking the credit for internet meme reasons".
jergul large member	Wed Sep 28 14:43:00 Very easy to do without getting caught by anyone that matters. You really overestimate the amount of scrutiny fishing vessels are exposed to. *fondly remembers trawling through a protected coral reef in Adventsfjord, Spitzbergen*
Seb Member	Wed Sep 28 15:27:41 jergul: Did you blow up a pipeline while in the coral reef, causing law enforcement and inteligence agencies to trawl through all the records available to work out which vessel was present at the time and place of the explosion, and trace them back to their point of origin? If no, I suggest you are confusing scrutiny with observability.
Seb Member	Wed Sep 28 15:28:43 Like, have you even noticed how much AWACS and SIGINT flights are going on over the baltic and eastern Europe right now?
Seb Member	Wed Sep 28 15:28:52 (by multiple NATO countries)
Seb Member	Wed Sep 28 15:30:19 If this was done by a surface vessel, then multiple NATO countries including *Germany* know who did it. But we will see. On the facts available, I don't think it makes sense for ukraine. I don't think it makes much sense for Russia, but it makes least nonsense for Russia and Russia seems to be doing lots of stupid things.
jergul large member	Wed Sep 28 15:47:54 Seb http://gyazo.com/54c2e5e1b1fe89d757f4a01724ad4e65 How long past the point of Ukraine snidely admitting to do that will your view persist?
jergul large member	Wed Sep 28 15:53:35 I actually have no idea how you would identify a potential vessel without some serious legwork and reverse order at that. Check Polish shipping registars for odd changes in the last 6 months. They try to identify prime suspects within a nautical miles of first one, then perhaps other explosion points during a 2 week window. This is still not confirmation, rather it just narrows suspicions.
jergul large member	Wed Sep 28 15:58:06 Oh, you are limiting your search to vessels at the location at the time of the explosion. So what is your theory. A ship blew up one part, then hurried over to another part and blew up that, then practically flew faster than light to the third part and blew it up there too? Nice theory :D
jergul large member	Wed Sep 28 15:59:19 "but it makes least nonsense for Russia and Russia seems to be doing lots of stupid things." By that logic, the Tusk Government did it.
jergul large member	Wed Sep 28 15:59:43 Truss*
jergul large member	Wed Sep 28 16:00:33 Hmm, ok 70% chance Polish-Ukrainian. 10% chance Truss.
Seb Member	Wed Sep 28 16:04:29 jergul: "without some serious legwork and reverse order at that." You think that law enforcement and intelligence agencies are not doing that right now? " A ship blew up one part" Your theory is someone dumped a crate down a cable six months ago? Unlikely. My thinking this would have been done in the last couple of weeks.
Seb Member	Wed Sep 28 16:05:21 But anyway, you conceded the central point - it is probably not something ukraine could carry off alone.
habebe Member	Wed Sep 28 17:01:48 I'm fine with Kabebe. This isn't that deep for me. I think both sides lack risk, in the sense that muddied waters and distrust, the narrative can be made to fit whatever. Im leaning towards US/NATO/Ukraine had the easiest access and the most to gain. But Russia coukd have done that knowing this ahead of time. And still other options available. We will find out more soon.
swordtail Anarchist Prime	Wed Sep 28 17:18:51 http://www...ord-stream-pipelines.html#more
murder Member	Wed Sep 28 17:20:41 "There is also an 80% probability that in less than 10 days you will be saying "Ukraine did not really admit to doing it. The press release can be understood in other ways too"" There is 0% probability or possibility that Ukraine will fess up to an act of economic terrorism in Europe.
jergul large member	Wed Sep 28 18:37:56 Seb "Your theory is someone dumped a crate down a cable six months ago?" No, my theory is that there is less than a two week window. You really should stop with the ad absurdum fallacy. I find it quite trite frankly. A better theory than your magic flying ship that could be in multiple locations at the same time. Do you see why a magic ship is a bad theory? I am actually pretty sure a lot of countries are very carefully not looking too closely. The answer they might find could be unpleasant. The US for example says it is relying on information from its Danish partner. Not true of course in that case, but it gives plausible deniability.
earthpig GTFO HOer	Wed Sep 28 18:39:33 I hadn't thought of this as a way to force Russia's hand: turn gas off for ALL of europe, or leave it on, including Ukraine.
jergul large member	Wed Sep 28 18:48:20 Murder It is not economic terrorism if Ukraine did it. I personally think it was a legitimate target. First off, it could easily fuel Russia's war machine by itself if active. Secondly, it blocks Russian energy blackmail over Ukraine. Ukraine imports and uses a lot of Russian gas (we can ignore the figleaf of Western traders buying the gas in the pipeline, then selling it to Ukraine. The gas flow goes from East to West).
jergul large member	Wed Sep 28 18:49:59 EP Yepp, energy security is a pretty good motive.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Sep 28 21:15:19 I don’t believe they ever showed the Queen’s body... so how long would it take to swim from England to the pipelines? ...would there be a jergul universe where that happened?
jergul large member	Wed Sep 28 21:29:03 2015-2016 How time flies when we are having fun :D.
murder Member	Thu Sep 29 00:21:08 "It is not economic terrorism if Ukraine did it." I think a lot of European countries would disagree. And it would collapse support for Ukraine overnight.
habebe Member	Thu Sep 29 00:45:23 I don't think that support would drop. What. Woukd the Euros do? IF* the Ukraine Did It, they did it with our blessing if not coordination.
Seb Member	Thu Sep 29 03:46:42 jergul: "You really should stop with the ad absurdum fallacy. I find it quite trite frankly. A better theory than your magic flying ship that could be in multiple locations at the same time." Lol. Look at you, you've turned an off the cuff comment into a fully worked out strawman theory. Point is if it was done from the surface, it will probably be worked back. It is not like there will not be literally hundreds of people across multiple countries investigating. "actually pretty sure a lot of countries are very carefully not looking too closely." Something something ad-hoc speculation ill considered brain-farts. "Secondly, it blocks Russian energy blackmail over Ukraine" Really? Week before last you were pointing out how they can take out the distribution network trivially. So we know the Russians do not need to cut the gas flow through Ukraine to turn off Ukraines energy infrastructure. Habebe: "I don't think that support would drop. What. Would the Euros do?" If it was known publicly, it would make it politically untenable for further cash donations and aid, and reconstruction aid that Ukraine is desperate for. That's the downside for Ukraine - a small opportunity cost in weapons flow as Germany isn't being very forthcoming with guns anyway - a very large immediate and long term opportunity cost in terms of economic aid now and in the medium term. You focus a lot on bullets, but in terms of economic aid keeping the Ukranians going, EU institutions provided the largest chunk of financial aid. When you throw in European govts bilateral aid, of which Germany is the second largest contributor - it is the majority. Doesn't matter if it was known that the US was involved also, the point is no European politician will be able to stand up and explain why we are giving lots of financial and economic aid to a country that just attacked Europe's energy infrastructure while Europeans are getting poorer and getting cold. So there are immediate and fairly severe long term costs to Ukraine for fucking with Europe like this - and no real short term gains. If they didn't strike nordstream, worst case scenario Germany or the EU breaks the sanctions regime and agrees to stop or limit arms (of which they are not terribly important) to Ukraine. Ukraine still gets bilateral aid through Poland from US and UK and others - the ones that are actually providing most arms. Jergul argues that it means Russia has no choice but to keep gas flowing through Ukraine to the West - but we already know it can target power and gas and fuel refinery infrastructure in the broader distribution networks of Ukraine to inflict pain. So does this really work when offset against the risk? Both nord streams are shut down anyway, and russia might just choose to cut gas supplies through Ukraine anyway.
jergul large member	Thu Sep 29 06:39:49 Seb "off-the-cuff comment". Yes, I had asked you to stop with the spitballed brainfarts and apply some degree of critical thought on your own musings before posting. Did not work, so am now teasing you mercilessly when you fail reflecting before posting. I am pretty sure most countries are happy to let Sweden and Denmark investigate. Dont ask questions if you feel you might not like the answer. Unless you are arguing lots of countries are looking for an "out" in this Western solidarity project. Or really, really want to force Denmark to pull the A5 trigger. I am sure Norway is not looking at all and is busy trying to figure out how to at least better monitor its own network. I already showed you a picture of transponder density in the Baltic Sea at a given moment in time. Toss in a two week window, realize that not all ships have transponders turned on, understand that the ship was up to a nautical mile away from the explosion points when it placed the explosives and comprehend that the investigative starting point is checking small trawler sales registries in the country you suspect was used to base the attack. All of Nato and the rest of the world is now spying on Poland you say? I dont think so. Last week, I was arguing Russia needs to use a number of tactical nukes to properely isolate the line of contact. Russia has problems with target density in Ukraine. Too many things to hit. Taking out natural gas distribution faster than Ukraine can repair it nation wide is beyond its capability. Closing a valve and cutting off Ukraine's supply of natural gas is within its capability. It can still do that, but with much higher stakes now. It means cutting Europe off from natural gas. Something Russia has been unwilling to do. Frankly, Ukraine can probably stop paying Russia for natural gas through intermediaries now and just take what it wants. Murder You forget how strong the troll-lol runs. No politician is going to say it hates Ukraine hitting back. Some might deplore the escalation, but nothing serious.
Seb Member	Thu Sep 29 08:38:12 Interesting factoid: The pipes being sabotaged relieves Gazprom of liability in the EU for non delivery of gas through the pipelines. Jergul: "Yes, I had asked you to stop with the spitballed brainfart" So you consider it impossible, nigh on impossible, for any other state actor other than the US to figure out which ships were likely involved using the data available from radar, transponder and national intelligence assets? Or are you just seizing on the example referencing "at the time of the explosion" rather than "window of opportunity" to construct a straw man to pretend the entire principle is "spit balling"? Seems pretty dishonest and stupid to me. Who is this obvious bad-faith argument aimed at?
Seb Member	Thu Sep 29 08:40:24 "Dont ask questions if you feel you might not like the answer." Lol. Yeah. Right. Let's not find out who did it and learn lessons - let's let the vulnerability to critical infrastructure in our backyard persist and not know what happened incase it's politically inconvenient. Said no-one ever. Not a chance.
Seb Member	Thu Sep 29 08:51:03 "I already showed you a picture of transponder density in the Baltic Sea at a given moment in time." Yeah, try the English channel. I've seen what UKBF can do with coastal radar, AIS data, commercial grade satellite data, and for routine shit - I'm taking the stuff they let consultancies publish as case studies. This is not a problem. This is not a problem a *decade* ago. This is not a problem for Denmark or Sweden a decade ago. And when you consider this is going on at a time with an enormous increase in radar,sigint, satellite monitoring of the region. I think it is highly unlikely that you don't leave a trail with high probability of being detected by multiple agencies in multiple nations. But sure, show me the many thousands of transponder signals. I'll show you a desktop computer with the capability to analyse that.
Seb Member	Thu Sep 29 08:52:34 A ship without transponder on, in a few mm radius, but which shows up on radar is exactly the kind of thing you might hone in on.
Seb Member	Thu Sep 29 09:13:43 NATO has just said it is a serious act of sabotage. So not really fitting with your looking away point.
jergul large member	Thu Sep 29 09:58:10 A trawler fishing with its transponder on would almost be more suspicious. I posted a link to a study examining 20 million cases where fishing vessels turned of their transponders. Real-time data is useless for any analysis. It would have to be stored and then accessed by security agencies. Any link to the global intelligence agencies suddenly purchasing 2 weeks of stored data from commercial actors, or are you just speculating out of your ass? But most of all. No one wants to know. If Russia did it, it would be with subsurface vessels. It amazes me that you think Western intelligence agencies are going to pull out every plug to spy on Ukraine and Poland to get an answer they really dont want to hear. Your naivity is almost criminal.
jergul large member	Thu Sep 29 10:05:22 Back tracing is by far the easiest and could almost be done on a desk top computer by a privat citizen. Start with the theory that somebody bought a 50-70 foot trawler some months ago, then refitted the vessel in Poland. I would check Polish, Baltic State and Finnish for sale listings from about a year ago (Finland due to Estonia). Then cross reference named vessel movement and log transponder time off. You would have to pay a few 100d bucks for a subscription to those tracking websites.
jergul large member	Thu Sep 29 10:09:20 Seb What would Nato say if Western intelligence agencies were disinclined to spy on Ukraine and Poland? That it was not a serious act of sabotage? You really have to stop typing out every thought that comes to mind.
jergul large member	Thu Sep 29 10:14:26 However, I have no doubt at all that Western intelligence agencies will theorize this was a subsea attack mode and analyse a lot on how to stop that from happening again while making sure that this is the main hypothesis shared with the public.
swordtail Anarchist Prime	Thu Sep 29 10:32:45 http://pbs...aEAY2G8W?format=jpg&name=small
Habebe Member	Thu Sep 29 12:50:48 "You focus a lot on bullets, but in terms of economic aid keeping the Ukranians going, EU institutions provided the largest chunk of financial aid. When you throw in European govts bilateral aid, of which Germany is the second largest contributor - it is the majority." I don't prioritize one aid of the other.Total aid is my primary focus. EU institutions have provided 12.3 Billion in governmental financial support. The US has sent 8.3 in this sort of support. Technically they have promised that amount. In actual disbursed support In this category the US even sent more. "Doesn't matter if it was known that the US was involved also, the point is no European politician will be able to stand up and explain why we are giving lots of financial and economic aid to a country that just attacked Europe's energy infrastructure while Europeans are getting poorer and getting cold." 1. They are not giving alot. 2. For how much we focus on Europe being reliant on Russia for fuel, the EU is basically a vassal institution of the US. They need US energy and military. 3. The point that doesn't seem to register with you is plausible deniability and muddy waters make this so we will likely never know with certainty, Euros already have relatively high levels nof censorship/propaganda, the truth is irrelevant. You may dismiss this as conspiracy theories but let's look at the facts. In places like Germany media is very controlled. They are already arrestin g journalists for dissent. Sure there is a degree of you can only hide so much, case in point the mass protests currently going on. But most will believe the givernment narrative.
Habebe Member	Thu Sep 29 12:52:09 "Interesting factoid: The pipes being sabotaged relieves Gazprom of liability in the EU for non delivery of gas through the pipelines." What would the punishment for that be?
Seb Member	Fri Sep 30 10:19:16 Habebe: For Russia? It's a foreign state so loud shouty words. But Gazprom is its own legal entity and has assets and subsidiary entities in the EU that can be fined and assets and cash confiscated to meet those fines under the contract.
Habebe Member	Fri Sep 30 14:29:15 Seb, Germany has already seized Gazprom Germania.
Habebe Member	Fri Sep 30 14:29:34 Seb, Germany has already seized Gazprom Germania.
Habebe Member	Fri Sep 30 14:30:42 Seb, Germany has already seized Gazprom Germania.
jergul large member	Fri Sep 30 14:43:53 Cute of Seb to pretend there is rule of law in regards to confiscating Russian assets. Gazprom is keeping its shit only because it has gas supply leverage.
Habebe Member	Mon Oct 03 09:43:21 I'm all but convinced it was the US. That said, Im not against it. This may be the best move Biden has made After he let it get built to begin with, he realized his mistake. Yes, he should have just kept the policy that blocked it's construction. But this method has its advantages too. Mainly plausible deniability.
Seb Member	Mon Oct 03 10:02:18 Habebe: Yes, but you should look into the circumstances of that and understand why it applies specifically for that refinery and not any other asset. Jergul: Yes, all sensible people know it is only Russia that follows rule off law!
jergul large member	Mon Oct 03 10:48:31 Seb Adsurdium fallacy. Why are you ignoring the US clearly stating it would stop NS2 with any means? The only thing that has changed since then is that Ukraine is even more reliant of Russian transit fees and on Russian gas. Something happening to the remaining pipeline through Ukraine and gas going throught NS2 instead would be a huge disaster for Ukraine. That option is now off the table. Everyone gets to freeze together if the pipeline falls.
Habebe Member	Mon Oct 03 10:55:04 "Why are you ignoring the US clearly stating it would stop NS2 with any means?" Did you happen to catch Blinken gushing over what a great "opportunity" this is to secure US LNG sales to Europe?
Habebe Member	Mon Oct 03 10:58:20 http://youtu.be/Q8vF70_H7WM Sorry "Tremendous opportunity"-Blinken
jergul large member	Mon Oct 03 10:58:59 War is a racket.
Hrothgar Member	Mon Oct 03 11:02:14 The pay off vs risk for US destroying it's own allies stuff doesn't line up in this situation. Unless the allies were also in on it/approved it. That all seems far less likely than a pissed off dictator lashing out to ruin whatever he can without getting into a shooting fight.
jergul large member	Mon Oct 03 11:11:13 Yes, yes. Russia obviously bombed its own pipelines instead of say knocking out Norway's. I think it most likely Poland and Ukraine cooperated on knocking the pipelines out. Some portions of the US government would know this and others would be trying very hard not to find out. The pipelines represent and existential threat to Ukraine and are obviously a legitimate target regardless of European gas dependency. But ignoring it does have the downside of signalling that gas pipelines, at least in international waters, are fair game.
jergul large member	Mon Oct 03 11:12:09 Careful with the dictator thing. Ukraine is the only country in the conflict under martial law.
Habebe Member	Mon Oct 03 11:22:02 Hrothgar, Russia has a fair bit of leverage to lose here. The US by the secretary of state's own words sees the sabotage as "A tremendous opportunity" To advance a policy we have wanted since Obama days, to lock in Europe as our gas bitch. Biden accomplished something beneficial, albeit in a shitty and deceptive manner, but regardless, this is a win.
Habebe Member	Mon Oct 03 11:23:06 Manchin is already selling this as a jobs boon on MSNBC.
Seb Member	Mon Oct 03 11:26:54 jergul: Because it has been stopped, the condition was if Germany didn't stop it - so would be an unprecedented attack on an allies CNI. And why would they need to when they have already achieved the objective? Hrothgar: I benefits Russia in three ways: 1. It limits a route for further expropriations from Gazprom 2. It in increases resolve by eliminating the upside for settling with Ukraine. A version of "burning your boats on the shore". 3. It is a cost free (because ultimately it is a Russian owned asset) of demonstrating potential and possible intent to attack European pipelines - giving them a cost free escalation.
Seb Member	Mon Oct 03 11:35:56 jergul: "Yes, yes. Russia obviously bombed its own pipelines instead of say knocking out Norway's." Yes. Russia has been gagging, absolutely gagging, to extend the war in Ukraine into a direct military confrontation with NATO. The point about a threat is that it what you threaten to do if people DONT do what you want. You can't expect to get a concession from someone *after* you have carried out your threat. So it is *entirely* inexplicable why they would demonstrate capability on their own (at this point useless) infrastructure rather than just doing it straight off, triggering Article 50, and losing leverage.
jergul large member	Mon Oct 03 12:14:19 Seb A conditional achievement valid for as long as nothing happens in a warzone to the pipeline in Ukraine. You logic that blowing up a pipeline off bornholm will not trigger article 5, but doing the same in the North Sea will is valid only in so far as there is strong suspicions that allies blew up the first ones. But if Russia did do it and is getting away with it, then of course it can just do it again. Why not? A rhethorical question, so you can spare me the bluster. So yah, 80% chance it was a combined effort by Poland and Ukraine. But sure, you stick with Russia attacking itself. Why not?
Habebe Member	Mon Oct 03 12:25:54 Seb, Your being disingenuous to say it was useless prior to the bombing. Germans were protesting en masse to hit the easy button, Russia wanted them to hit the easy button. Now there is no backpedaling and bending the knee to Russia to get energy.
Seb Member	Mon Oct 03 13:49:45 NATO is likely to look the other way when Russia blows up it's own pipeline that is not in use and a sizeable fraction of NATO countries do not want to see it used. NATO is not likely to look the other way if Russia blows up a pipe owned by other countries that is in use and everyone in NATO wants to see running. This is obvious.
Seb Member	Mon Oct 03 13:51:42 Habebe: There is no sign at all that the German govt was anywhere near changing course. I think you are disingenuous in inflating a protests of a few hundred people into a major political force poised to overturn policy.
jergul large member	Mon Oct 03 13:53:43 Seb So it really is just a guessing game of what assets owned by multinational companies in international waters might trigger article 5 if Russia does it? Ukraine and Poland are behind it almost certainly. Means, motive, opportunity. It is an existential question for Ukraine. But sure, lets pretend Nato carefully not trying to figure out what happened actually means Russia did it. Lets just muddy the waters until truth has no meaning. Why not? Democracy thrives on lies.
Seb Member	Mon Oct 03 14:19:06 jergul: "So it really is just a guessing game of what assets owned by multinational companies in international waters might trigger article 5 if Russia does it?" I know your desire for absolute certainty makes it hard for you to understand how situations where there is not a hard and fast rule amount to a guessing game. Put it this way, a cyber attack by Russia that messes with a few websites. A cyber attack by Russia that takes out air traffic control leading to a bunch of plane crashes. Which might trigger a NATO response? Who can tell iTz jUsT a Gue5s1ng gAmE!
Seb Member	Mon Oct 03 14:20:08 "carefully not trying to figure out what happened actually means Russia did it." Does NATO want to engineer itself into needing to respond overtly to Russia in a way that its public recognises?
jergul large member	Mon Oct 03 14:27:14 Seb I think your hatred of Russia seriously mucks with your rational thinking. It is like you are a gilted lover or something. Russia does something against itself for 5 dimensional chess reasons you freely admit will be futile because the west is so smert. Or Ukraine does something that blocks an existential threat to existence as a viable state. Gee, I wonder who did it?
Habebe Member	Mon Oct 03 15:03:22 "a sizeable fraction of NATO countries do not want to see it used." I wonder if I can find the old Nordstream threads from 3 years ago on here. Its crazy how all the people who argued with me that the US was wrong to block construction are suddenly glad its blown up. "There is no sign at all that the German govt was anywhere near changing course." Perhaps, but it was a popular sentiment amongst the general pppulation. Eventually those things meet. Now with all due respect Seb, you have a way getting a position in your mind and seeing everything regardless of reality making sense to fit that narrative. Back in July Germany was about split in the sanctions support, things have only gotten worse and winter is coming. I'm afraid your hard-on for Putin is drawing the blood from your brain. Germany likely wasn't going to over night break sanctions, but momentum towards that would grow, especially if it is a bad winter. I have no idea if it will be a harsh winter, I think alot of support for the war rested in a hopeful mild winter. Jergul, If Ukraine/Poland were behind it, it was only with US knowledge/blessings.
Seb Member	Mon Oct 03 15:36:28 jergul: 5 dimensional chess is Poland and Ukraine conspiring to blow up a pipeline into Germany. They would be caught out, it would get public, and then goodluck with any further financial aid. Germany is the biggest bilateral aid donor to Ukraine, and the EU the biggest institutional one. Yeah, super smert. By contrast sticking some high explosive on a maintenance pig is something that Gazprom can do on its own. As you say, motive, means.
Seb Member	Mon Oct 03 15:36:45 Hell you even needed me to point out that Poland was a better fit than ukraine.
Seb Member	Mon Oct 03 15:42:13 Habebe: "Perhaps, but it was a popular sentiment amongst the general pppulation. Eventually those things meet." What evidence do you have for this? https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/worries-over-winter-test-support-germany-russia-sanctions-2022-07-28/ 60% support for sanctions https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/70-germans-back-ukraine-despite-high-energy-prices-poll-2022-07-15/ 70% support for sanctions https://kyivindependent.com/uncategorized/poll-53-of-germans-support-sanctions-against-russia-despite-sharp-increase-in-energy-prices 53% support for sanctions This does not suggest to me that there is anything like sufficient popular support that would get Germany to break sanctions agreed through the EU. Trade policy is an EU competence - so they would need to basically break EU and German law to do this. You are talking nonsense.
Habebe Member	Mon Oct 03 16:19:37 "53% support for sanctions" In July. Remember when I said it was about split? Now we start to see German industry shutting down, fears of economic collapse and winter is coming, again, Im not saying it would be over night, but conditions were not getting better. Your seeing what you want to see.
Habebe Member	Mon Oct 03 16:23:05 http://eng...ons-harm-more-than-russia-poll From INSA https://ukranews.com/en/amp/news/879886-more-than-half-of-germans-continue-to-support-introduction-of-sanctions-against-russia-media When Ukrainian news is reporting 53% to 40% , you know the reality is probably worse. And again, it's the trend of conditions. How long do they suffer through if peace is an option?
jergul large member	Mon Oct 03 16:26:53 Habeb Blessing is a strong word. Knowledge? In places for sure. Seb Poland-Ukraine was an independent observation thank you. Hardly 5 dimensional. You could do it off the deck of a trawler. The only question is if it is important enough to do. For Ukraine, most certainly. Would Poland be complicit? Of course. No risk even if it gets out. There is absolutely no way for any Western country to back out of helping Ukraine. Besides, it is an existential issue for Ukraine. It really is totally fucked if the transit pipeline goes down. Maybe you should hate Russia a little less and then see if any analytical skills return? No upside to hate anyway.
Paramount Member	Tue Oct 04 07:15:41 Shocking moment of truth on Bloomberg when Professor Jeffrey Sachs says he believes the US was behind the Nord Stream pipelines destruction. The reporters start to lose it, of course. http://twi...?s=46&t=3nhytujPP-zMPzX-uxRjUw So are we going to see European sanctions on the Biden-regime now? Maybe label the US as a terrorist state?
Seb Member	Tue Oct 04 07:45:42 jergul: You introducing Poland was a direct response to me suggesting Poland made more sense than Ukraine. Up until that point you had been pushing Ukraine alone. "Hardly 5 dimensional." Of course it is - in terms of what you are trying to achieve and the risks it comes with. "You could do it off the deck of a trawler" Again, you keep confusing the ease of dropping some explosives on a pipeline, with the operational complexity of carrying this out without other western countries or indeed the media finding out, and the political blow back it would cause. It is definitely the kind of move that someone who loves overly complicated solutions to non-problems (5 D chess) would come up with. "There is absolutely no way for any Western country to back out of helping Ukraine." Are you kidding? Germany isn't doing anything for Ukraine militarily as it is. Do you think in a years time, after Germany has had a hard winter, and the media full of how Ukraine attacked the pipeline should that come out, will be able to muster any kind of support for further bilateral aid to Ukraine? Do you think they will be lining up to let them in the EU (they are already sceptical on that), in NATO? And all of this because of a fear that somehow, Germany is going to get the EU to row back on sanctions, or is going to break EU law to circumvent sanctions? This is up there with your other crazy reckless ideas about launching a salvo of 30 odd nuclear bombs. You can keep claiming there is no analysis here, but you yourself were arguing on a couple of weeks ago Russia targeting Ukrainian infrastructure could make them freeze this winter. So you propose they incur all this risk for nothing. Crazy. Habebe: The INSA report was also July. And it says they think it will harm Germany more than Russia, not that they do not support the sanctions. The second link: "However, more than half of Germans favour maintaining restrictions against the Russian Federation, even if they have consequences for themselves." It is in fact the same survey the Ukrainian Independent is reporting.
jergul large member	Tue Oct 04 08:10:47 Seb You write many things. I thought through how I would do it, and that involved vessel refitting in Gdynia. 0 risk. Watch Musk getting crucified right now. There is no space at all for being critical of Ukraine in serious Western politics. What part of NS1&2 representing an existential threat to Ukraine don't you understand? What part of NS1&2 being a legitimate target for Ukraine do you not understand? You could say that Poland is being a bit daring, but Poland is crazy. It fits nicely with demanding reparations from Germany and otherwise bullying that country. Ukraine might prefer Leopards being taken off the table. That would lead to increased leverage for Abrams. You are also missing the PR coup hitting "Russian" infrastructure is. Pro Ukr. memes will overfloweth. EU and Nato are an incredibly far way down the road. Ukraine will freeze this winter if the Russian pipeline goes down. I was thinking mainly in regards to the power grid in terms of bombing. Those are not just a question of shutting a valve to turn off. Russia has too many targets to destroy Ukraines gas distribution system faster than Ukraine can repair it. Oh, you have an analysis. How can you invent a Russian motive for blowing up its own shit? If Russia uses nukes, it will do so to shape the battlefield. That needs several dozen tactical nukes. Let go of the hatred Seb. It is unconstructive. You are not actually at war with Russia. Try to remember that, mkay?
Seb Member	Tue Oct 04 08:26:12 Jerul: "There is no space at all for being critical of Ukraine in serious Western politics." Indeed. So why the fuck would Ukraine want to risk that by getting caught launching an attack on Germany's energy supply? It is beyond stupid.
Seb Member	Tue Oct 04 08:34:28 Jergul: "What part of NS1&2 representing an existential threat to Ukraine don't you understand?" The part where you yourself were only two weeks ago explaining to us all how Russian missile attacks meant that they had no need to use the Ukraine pipeline to shut down Ukraine's energy sector. So shutting down NS1 and 2 has no impact whatsoever on mitigating the risk of being cut off by Russia. Instead, they desperately need all the help they can get from the west, particularly Germany - with humanitarian and financial aid. "What part of NS1&2 being a legitimate target for Ukraine do you not understand?" Except it isn't, because it is not in use at the moment; and however you hand waive it, Germany isn't going to say it is legitimate. Indeed NATO itself has come out and said it was a dangerous, unprecedented sabotage. "All currently available information indicates that this is the result of deliberate, reckless, and irresponsible acts of sabotage. These leaks are causing risks to shipping and substantial environmental damage. We support the investigations underway to determine the origin of the damage. We, as Allies, have committed to prepare for, deter and defend against the coercive use of energy and other hybrid tactics by state and non-state actors. Any deliberate attack against Allies’ critical infrastructure would be met with a united and determined response." Lets say Ukraine were publicly disclosed as having done this - do you think it could ever be granted membership under the current leadership? "It fits nicely with demanding reparations from Germany and otherwise bullying that country." It fits nicely with a rule of law sanction from the EC - attacking a neighbours CNI is unprecedented. Remind me, who exactly provides the Polish MBT at the moment? Difficult to justify provision of arms to a country that just attacked you, isn't it? "How can you invent a Russian motive for blowing up its own shit?" Dude, I've posted it several times. Besides, what does it cost them if they are already committed to not using it - and the political and legal structure of the EU makes it near impossible for it to now be used even if Germany changes its mind. Far more useful is the threat implied "ok, you think you can survive without us using LNG and Norwegian gas, but accidents happen".
jergul large member	Tue Oct 04 09:21:41 Seb That seems silly of me. Why would Russia waste munitions trying to do something it could as easily do turning a valve. Perhaps you should provide us with a link? Like I said, there are too many targets in Ukraine for Russia to disrupt Ukrainian natural gas distribution faster than Ukraine can repair it. Now Russia has no option but to leave the pipeline open if it wishes to export 40 million M3/day@16 USD/M3. For reference. Ukraine will earn about 2 billion in transit fees this year. In addition to having a critical need for Russian gas for its domestic consumption. There is zero EC rulings on Germany paying Poland 1.4 trillion USD in reparations for wwii. NS1 and NS2 are mainly Gazprom owned. As you point out, they are not currently critical infrastructure at all. Just redundancy in case something happens with pipeline deliveries running through two countries at war. One thing is Germany not using NS1 and 2 when it does not need to. Something else again if that is the only option. This is never going to be framed as an attack by Ukraine and Poland on Denmark and if evidence points that way, then the West will stop loooking. Lay off the cool-aid, bro. Nobody provides Polish MBTs at the moment. SK and the US will in the future. Are you suggesting a country on record saying it will stop NS2 with any means would not start to back fill Poland's tank force in 2025? Yes, your 5-d theory on whatever that cannot work anyway because the West is so smert. How is that implied threat useful? Are we collectively going to stop supporting Ukraine now? What does Russia gain beside enhanced security on Norwegian pipelines? Face it, bro. Almost certainly a Polish-Ukrainian joint effort. And let go of the hatred. It will set you free.
Habebe Member	Tue Oct 04 09:31:56 Seb, "Are you kidding? Germany isn't doing anything for Ukraine militarily as it is." Well we agree here. As for the numbers, I think we see the same numbers, TBH I do think they are likely skewed favoring the sanctions more than reality. Germany probably has the strictest propaganda/censorship of all the western nations. But our divide lies more with you viewing as half full and Inviewnit. As half empty. Regardless opposition grows.
jergul large member	Tue Oct 04 09:35:39 35% chance of the GOP taking both house and senate (in 1000 universes, the GOP will take both in 350 of them. We just don't know if our universe is one of those yet). If that happens as the US enters a recession, then...
Habebe Member	Tue Oct 04 09:42:26 Jergul, The problem with that is those numbers also have a 61% chance of being wrong. We can't enter a recession anymore than we can enter the month of October, were already in it.
jergul large member	Tue Oct 04 09:46:53 Not how probability works. Hence my 1000 universe analogy :).
Habebe Member	Tue Oct 04 09:50:54 Your using 538 numbers. Few things to keep in mind. 1. There is literally a 61% chance they are wrong by their own admission when talking about parties taking both houses. 2. The house is a lock for the GOP. 3. Factor in Dr. Oz beating Fett now, he can't overcome the speech issue. 4. Gas is like $5/gallon again. The Senate will be tight either way. OZ is fairly moderate, the only thing that really changes is SCOTUS appointees and the such and everything else will remain basically split. The house and governorships/down ballot will see a red wave.
Habebe Member	Tue Oct 04 10:03:47 To clarify, there is a 61% chance either their Senate or their House model is wrong. http://youtu.be/kHnth5bhF8E I thought Dems would keep the Senate. But I favor OZ and maybe* Herschel Walker to win. Walker is too much of a wild card, so therr is always a chance he idk rapes a reporter on camera or something. But in a dead heat and gas prices rising, that favors Republicans. The economy Energy policy Immigration Inflation Are all topics Republicans are favored in like 2 to 1 fashion, so if the economy is shitty/gas is up, Reps can sweep.
Seb Member	Tue Oct 04 10:54:50 jergul: "Why would Russia waste munitions trying to do something it could as easily do turning a valve." Your logic is wrong. Russia might prefer to use a valve - the question is whether by blowing NS1 and 2 Ukraine makes it impossible for Russia to seriously disrupt their energy supply. But Russia has already chosen to shut off NS 1 and NS 2 rather than shut off the Ukraine pipeline - which seems the opposite of what they should have done. The reason for this may be because you are overstating the decisiveness of the Ukraine pipeline. Ukrainian gas production was 20bn cubic feet of 30bn - so only 10bn is from Russian imports (significant yes) - and none of the big fields are currently in territory Russia controls. Further, the gas network through Ukraine does not allow it to support Germany anyway it primarily goes to Austria, Italy and Slovakia. "There is zero EC rulings on Germany paying Poland 1.4 trillion USD in reparations for wwii." Who said there was? I said that Germany has limited scope to void the sanctions regime because of the EC's involvement now. Though quite why you think Poland blowing up Germany's CNI is going to help them get reparations from WWII I am not entire sure. "NS1 and NS2 are mainly Gazprom owned. As you point out, they are not currently critical infrastructure at all." Yes, and the UK Grid is owned by a private company. That is not what determines if something is critical national infrastructure. Yes, it is not in use, but permanently damaging it is another issue - obviously would be even more of an issue if it were in use. So we both agree that it is not in use at the moment (so limited point in Ukraine or Poland blowing it up as there is limited political liklihood of Germany suddenly wanting to break sanctions. It also means that the risks involved in Russia chosing it's own asset to blow up is far lower risk in demonstrating threat, possible intent and capability to attack other European energy infrastructure is more limited. "This is never going to be framed as an attack by Ukraine and Poland on Denmark and if evidence points that way," It's like Snowden, Manning and all the other leaks never happened over there in Jergul-land isn't it. There is very little chance that this would stay secret over the period of time. And what about Russia or China? Not a fucking chance is this going to stay secret if it is Ukraine or Poland doing it - so many people would know it could not be kept secret, and the downsides for both vastly outweigh the upsides. "Nobody provides Polish MBTs at the moment." They use the Leopard LP2 - and the servicing and maintenance contract is heavily dependent on Rheinmetal. I don't think anyone looks at Russia's performance now and goes "yes, skimping on servicing my tanks is a great economy measure". "Are you suggesting a country on record saying it will stop NS2 with any means" I think you are rather over interpreting that statement. "How is that implied threat useful?" Do not escalate further, we have means to escalate against you directly that you would find it hard to respond to. It's Russian asymmetric/hybrid warfare 101. Habebe: "TBH I do think they are likely skewed favoring the sanctions more than reality." Yes, but when you look at it there is no real external basis for you thinking that. It is wishful thinking. Point is in the end there is actually no serious pressure here on Germany that would be sufficient to cause the sanctions regime to collapse. You would need an absolutely enormous positive polling in Germany and for Germans to care more about the gas than maintaining the integrity of the single market and EC. It ain't going to happen - and a few hundred people in a possible rent-a-mob isn't going to swing it.
Habebe Member	Tue Oct 04 11:20:09 "Yes, but when you look at it there is no real external basis for you thinking that. It is wishful thinking." See, here is the problem, you take my position as anti Ukraine and pro Rusdia because I'm not drinking the Ukraine. Would you trust Russian polls entirely showing support for the invasion? Of course not. But you you are naive enough to think the West doesn't push propaganda and censorndissent
Habebe Member	Tue Oct 04 11:22:12 Germany specifically is well known for arresting journalists for reporting against the government narrative. You have this worldview that only the other guy is deceitful.
Seb Member	Tue Oct 04 11:52:40 Habebe: No, I mean it is wishful thinking because it as an opinion you have that has no external basis but helps support the conclusion you have already reached. Normally that is just a psychological bias - it doesn't matter whether you support Ukraine or Russia - it's just you've already formed an opinion on Germany (you think there is a possibility they would break ranks on sanctions) and so you are making up reasons to strengthen that position despite the evidence not supporting it (the polls are skewed). There is no particular reason to think these polls skewed. There are strong reasons to think a Russian poll is skewed. "Germany specifically is well known for arresting journalists for reporting against the government narrative." No it isn't. Russia is known for throwing journalist that report against the govt out of the window.
McKobb Member	Tue Oct 04 12:06:58 I thought russians were just clumsy because vodka. " Sep 1, 2022 — A Russian energy oligarch whose oil company criticized the war in Ukraine has died falling out of a hospital window in Moscow on Thursday, ... "
jergul large member	Tue Oct 04 12:19:09 Seb the logic if fine thank you. Russia can still disrupt Ukrainian gas supplies if it is will to take a 100 million dollar a day hit to do so, or if it is willing to divert finite stand off weaponry to target distribution pipes that Ukraine could repair faster than Russia could destroy in any event. Winter is by far the best time to shut off Ukrainian natural gas supplies. If Russia was going to do it, it would do so in a month or so. March would be way too late. Ukraine needs to import 3.5 billion cubic meters of natural gas for the 22/23 heating season starting in November. Poland actually mods the Leopard itself, but under no circumstances would the German government instruct Reinmetal to break off servicing agreements. So Ukraine is supposed to ignore an existential threat where there would be little downsides if caught and quite a few upsides (look at the little guy fighting back)? Yah, right. Everyone knows Russia willingness to supply natural gas is important to EU. The implicit threat is already there. You are just muttering 5-d chess moves where Russia supposedly wasted asset in the 10s of billions range to send a signal that will not work because the West is so smert and will not be deterred. Yah, definitely Poland-Ukraine behind the pipeline destruction.
Habebe Member	Tue Oct 04 12:24:36 "There is no particular reason to think these polls skewed." The same way that we don't have any specific reason to not bekeive the Russian referendums. We don't trust them for good reasons. The same reasons I wouldn't fully trust polls from Russia or Brazil, or even the US depending on circumstances and varying degrees. You've long struck me as a brilliant fool who could be a professor but also ger robbed by a self proclaimed wallet inspector. "it's just you've already formed an opinion on Germany (you think there is a possibility they would break ranks on sanctions)" Yes and no. I think there would be and has been increasing pressure to do so, would that reach a breaking point? IDK, if We have a particularly harsh winter and an economic crash? Yes. If we have a mild winter and food and energy Prices remain stable, probably not.
murder Member	Tue Oct 04 12:26:12 "I thought Dems would keep the Senate. But I favor OZ ..." Apparently Oz kills puppies.
	show deleted posts