The pipelines are coated with concrete, not to re-inforce them but to add weight so that they sink. It's called 'weight coating', other wise, when they are filled with gas, they have bouyancy.
yes - and it offers some protection towards normal marine activity and environmental issues - but is not meant to be or built as an armor against sabotage
It was a cunning plan to prevent the Germans from accumulating enough gas reserve for Winter but mattered little in the end. The Germans completed the building of their LNG terminals in record time and managed to fill up their reserve tanks anyway. Now the Europeans need to watch out if someone would want to damage other pipelines like the ones from Norway.
@@Mr.Monta77 That the part of the comment above that seems to suggest germany finished it's LNG terminals (plural) is wrong. 🤷♂️ Most of the gas we used to fill up our reserves came through pipelines from Russia. The new LNG terminals played a minor role, and most good was achieved through less consumption and a mild winter. And I highly doubt that there is enough information around to make up ones mind who did it. In the end it is often the wisest and least popular thing to accept that you don't know. And only fools act as if they know as a result of wild fetched speculation on too little information. And it doesn't really matter either. If you take a stance with Ukraine this will not change if Ukraine or a NATO country did it. If you are with Russia and Russia did it you would consider it a fair move.
@@Chiungalla79 By this time next year, I'm sure that there will be no to little problems providing the EU with Natural Gas or LNG! Russia soon will be an irrelevent nation when it comes to Natural Gas and Oil for the EU and will only have much business with their Asian "friends"!
@@khiemone I hope you are right and think that you will be nearly right in your accessment. LNG ist natural gas btw. that's what the NG stand for in LNG. But I wonder why you wrote this as reply to my post, since it is neither confirming nor in conflict with my theory.
@@noahway13 Yep! According to a real military analyst, a hybrid attack by russia makes sense. Go watch Anders Puck Nielsen's video "Nord Stream sabotage and hybrid war on Europe".
Biden is America's Osama Bin Laden, but how to bring him to justice as he is surrounded with American military? Starting war against the terrorist state as it was before with ISIS is not feasible. On the other hand Senate and other legislations are not going to do anything to remove that criminal from power. Only American military can remove this shame from the country if they remove by force the guy who has brought that shame on the country
This leaves out a key point. At the time of the explosions Europe was not using Nordstream and had just established the infrastructure for shipping LNG from alternate sources. Russia would know that Nordstream was probably never going to be restarted and never going to generate any further revenue. This leaves Russia with 2 problems and 1 useless pipeline. Problem 1. By contract Russia owed Germany for loss of supply. While the pipeline was functioning Russia was in debt to Germany. The solution is to blow up the pipe and claim the contract void. Problem 2. Europe was no longer reliant on Russia for natural gas so Russia could not intimidate them with starting and stopping Nordstream. The solution is to blow up Nordstream and threaten the rest of European undersea energy infrastructure. Remember the Shetland's undersea cables were cut on 20th October when the Russian sub-sea naval ship Akademik Boris Petrov was nearby.
Exactly, I see it the same way. Not sure where the "expert" collects his knowledge from ... the whole operation made only sense for the Russians. As a side-effect they wanted to force Germany into accepting to use the still working one pipe of NS2, in my opinion.
Don't expect the sock puppets, conspiracy morons, and tankies to consider those factors. Russia has a long history of interfering with undersea and land infrastructure in Eastern Europe and the Baltics, it just doesn't make the news in English-speaking world very often. The GRU blew up arms dumps in the Czech Republic, a NATO member, in 2016,FFS. Russia is also suspected of several other physical and cyberattacks on energy infrastructure on it's neighbours, and numerous instances of undersea cables being damaged, GPS jamming along the Finnish border, etc.
@P McD I'm just politely pointing out missing facts. If you've got 23 minutes for Times Radio, you probably have 1 minute to read and consider additional information.
You failed to point out that Germany was considering to sue Russia for breach of contract when they cut off the gas flow. Also whoever did it they left one gas line intact, so they could continue pumping the gas but at a reduced flow. It was such an obvious ploy that Germany refused to turn back on the flow citing blackmail. Interesting enough this cut out the possibility of a lawsuit.
Also worth pointing out that the sabotage happened shortly after it was becoming evident that Europe would not be buying much russian energy for the next few decades. This changed the pipelines value for russia to essentially zero just weeks before they blew up.
lol ... both sidism in a polite voice. US LNG companies have been pushing for this for a long long time. Condoleezza Rice has been saying this for almost a decade.Remember the Polish official tweet-'Thank You, US' with the picture of bubbling water?
It's worth remembering that in 2006 when Georgia started to seek NATO membership, and thereby displeased Russia, the gas pipelines to Tiblisi were destroyed by explosions causing an energy crisis. Plus Russian Navy ships and a submarine were in the area on September 26th-27th.
More noteworthy and memorable is this: the US President announces clear intent and targets beforehand, and assures journalists that they will definitely carry it out.
It’s simple. Take leverage away from Russia. If the winter was bad as Russia predicted then Europe won’t be tempted to negotiate. It’s so obvious why are we even having this conversation.
Everyone should read Seymour Hersh's article directly. He's a Pulitzer prize winning journalist with strong contacts in Washington. According to him, we do know who did it and how - the US. This would be an act of war... Against Germany
Biden is America's Osama Bin Laden, but how to bring him to justice as he is surrounded with American military? Starting war against the terrorist state as it was before with Fascist Germany is not feasible. On the other hand Senate and other legislations are not going to do anything to remove that criminal from power. Only American military can remove this shame from the country if they remove by force the guy who has brought that shame on the country.
I have read it, and it really have some flaws. As Norwegian, the role, attitude and motives he puts on Norway in his story - simply don't fit. Norway would never risk a war with Russia to earn some more on gas sales. Also- it would ruin the relations to Europe. Besides - it really manage wery well without extra gas sales. Based on this, it is so unrealistic and shows a basic lack of understanding of Norwegian think, positition and policy. I dont say this to defend Norway - but the story really doesn't hold credibility on that part. And that makes the rest look dubious as well. It is all based on one anonimus source, who should know so much of affairs in several countries in a highly secret case - doesn't spund right at all. There is a real possibility that he is used to tell this story - not knowingly.
The state committed this act of terrorism shall be declared a terrorist state. And we all know what state it is. And those assisted or aware of that shall be declared the terrorist accomplices.
@@Mr.Monta77 Claudio's comment is part of the context my friend. Why did they only choose to cover this in depth AFTER the reporting came out that it was the US that had the means and motivation (not to mention the extremely sketchy comments from Biden a year ago about nord stream) to pull this off.
Poland makes the most sense... everything to gain, nothing to lose because they're very insulated from any fallout: -Poland views a Ukrainian defeat as an existential threat (see increase in military spending and extensive military support for Ukraine). No Nord Stream, no leverage. Allowing German/European politicians to focus on helping Ukraine and finding alternative energy sources. -If discovered, Germany could hardly complain to Poland about infrastructure damage given the damage done to Poland's in the past. Particularly whilst considering the circumstances Poland could find itself in if Ukraine lost. -Poland has LNG terminals. -Poland has the Norway-Poland pipeline -Poland is already in NATO
Delay reaction to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact? The Poles have one diesel submarine, so i guess you could rule them out if the sub has an alabai, unless the charges were just lowered from surface?
What about Germany's past? The current government and architecture of Germany was created with the support of the United States after the Second World War, all questions on the Second World War were closed
@@theichione1827 there are institutions in the European Union for this, let him look for it, he has the right, but if the story with the gas pipeline is true, then it is unlikely that Poland will receive at least one euro
No, It was the USA, They planted the explosives 3 months prior to detination If you dont believe me check out "Joe Bloggs" report he made a couple days ago. on the subject.
To strap explosives to a “pig” ( pipe robot inspection) would of been the easiest way and impossible to detect..even after..only if bits of the Pig were found in the sea bead….there is 4 pipelines in north stream 1 & 2…2 each..one didn’t explode…there may be an unexploded pig still in the pipeline…
Doesn't really matter who did it. What matters is the Germans were prevented from breaking the sanctions regime in the winter. They are the weakest link in NATO.
The Times should be embarrassed to call this journalism. No reference was made to the actual sequence of events during the Aug/Sept timeframe 1. Nordstream 1 was not operational 2. Russians had been flaring off gas since June 3. Germany was establishing LNG import terminals 4. The Baltic Pipeline was opening on 27th Sept 5. Sweden was seeking to join NATO and the biggest of the explosions were just outside of their waters The open questions are 1. Nordstream 1 pumping station at Portovaya was effectively out of action - why did this occur? 2. Why was Nordstream 1 taken out while one of the 2 Nordstream 2 pipelines was still intact? Not a 100% successful operation Western operations could have closed down Portovaya but the sabotage was an act to provoke a response bey either Poland (Baltic Pipeline) and/ or Sweden
where did the reaction go? And why did the joint investigation fall apart as soon as the first results were processed? And why haven't investigators found evidence of Russian involvement? And why did Russia start repairs? Why these unnecessary questions, let's just forget this story. And Ohio, too, at the same time, now the main trend is balloons and UFOs
Does the damage point to an internal or external explosion? It would not be hard to ascertain. Given that I have not seen any information regarding that question, it begs the question as to why. Who benefits by keeping this cloud of doubt over this incident?
External, it was blown up... but being a direct act of war against Russia, is understandable them investigations with their results, are just suddenly not talked about anymore. Making results public, could well trigger a huge global war. Cloud of doubt benefits us all, world leaders have a true possibility of WW3 on their hands. It will propably not happen atleast before US has closed up their NATO-border against Russia, by adding Finland and Sweden in their pocket... but after that, anything can happen. US is the one who gains from this, while Russia loses a lot... not to mention Ukraine. Even other European countries suffer from this... but not US. And this is what it's all about, US upping it's position in the ongoing long race between them few superpowers, that started decades ago. Gas that was running to Europe from Russia through Nord Stream before it was was blown up, gave Russia 9-digit amounts of income every single day, losing it was a huge impact on their economics. It's now replaced with LNG that is shipped from US, also much of military equipment used in this war, are sold by US... a single anti-air missile or artillery rocket costs well over 100k, even one anti-tank missile shot from shoulder costs like 40-70k each... not to mention energy market. Is not that much Russia vs Ukraine this war, as it is US vs Russia, this whole situation has been going on for many years already. Was well known US was involved in Ukraine getting a new president, such that leaned much towards west... and Russia many time during those elections, warned by starting military actions, if US wouldn't stop... on which US then threathened to blow up the pipe, if Russia does so. Ukraine got their new president, NATO discussions of Ukraine started, Russia's attack started, pipe blew up... investigations start, and after results, no-one wants to talk about it. Just in case u have missed them: ruclips.net/user/shortsFVbEoZXhCrM ruclips.net/video/Tz9RbdgyW0w/видео.html
There is only one relevant question to be asked, because all the rest ist just endless talking with little relevant content, is: "Why were no results of the investigation published yet?" It can't be exactly a rocket science to at least identify the explosives used in these relatively shallow waters. Surely satellite imagery has been mulled over to death already. Honestly, the only reason I can imagine NOT to share the results is, that the evidence may be pointing towards one of NATO allies or members.
@@javierfrancia1938 Agree on the second point - I think that we can be pretty much 100% sure, that it was not New Zealand, because they would have first performed haka on the island of Bornholm. But beyond that, I am not so sure.
Hi, I think that you have overlooked some aspects. The sequence and locations of the explosions were attempts by Russia to provoke reactions. The first explosion at 2am was near where Nordstream 2 pipeline crosses the new Baltic Pipeline. The Baltic Pipeline was due to open on 27th Sept and provides gas from Norway to Poland. The second set of Explosions at 7pm on 26th Sept that took out Nordstream 1 was just outside Swedish waters. The objective of NATO has been to keep a lid on Russian provocative actions from escalating the war to countries outside Ukraine. The other fact was that Nordstream 1 was having issues (real or created) with it's pumping station at Portovaya near St Petersburg and had been flaring gas off at its Vyborg site since June. If you remember this was the issue with the turbine being returned from Canada for repair. There have been reported issues with the other turbine at Portovaya which resulted in the gas flaring
@@philjameson292 I appreciate your reply. Yes, there definitely is a merit to those arguments. I do remember the issues the Nordstream 1 was having a the time (looked legit as Russia does not have in-house technology for many of its oil/gas related machinery).
I doubt the lot on here would read that piece without their blinders on. The US President, his Secretary of State and deputy have all alluded to what might have happened to the pipeline. And we still have people who still blame Russia for this. Talk of bias on an astronomical scale.
Biden is America's Osama Bin Laden, but how to bring him to justice as he is surrounded with American military? Starting war against the terrorist state as it was before with Fascist Germany is not feasible. On the other hand Senate and other legislations are not going to do anything to remove that criminal from power. Only American military can remove this shame from the country if they remove by force the guy who has brought that shame on the country.
Undersea oil and gas pipelines are occasionally damaged and subsequently repaired, expensive repair but not an endgame. The Russians or other actors would not necessarily, be permanently closing the pipeline as I’m sure they know. I’m surprised that there hasn’t been reporting as to whether the explosive was detonated inside or outside the pipeline, as it would probably be fairly easy to attach explosives to an inspection sled (pig) at the supply or receiving terminal.
Explosives were placed outside the first report from Norway said. There wasn't a "scattering" around. The lines were pushed down, pressured into the ground, by mines on top of them.
That charges were places on the outside of the pipeline and the fact was not widely reported, leads to suspect there is not much interest on the allied side in locating the perpetrator. The US and Britain have much more to gain in removing the leverage of Russian Gas from Europe. It weakens Russia, keeps the allies together and ends European dependence on Russian gas.
I’m quite sure, regardless of the outcome of these attacks on Nord stream pipelines, I’m in favor of Ukraine and the people favoring Ukraine. Russia hasn’t lost anything on their sovereign grounds.
I'm sorry, his reason for why Russia would blow it from NATO perspective is absolute waste of breath nonsense. At least we can all agree that the pipes are exploded? 🤔🔥 That's a start.
@@dchappy6985 And if Biden is stopped, the Democrats will blame Putin (as in 2016), and not the reality that it was the weakness of their candidates (Hilary and Biden 2024) that cost them the election.
Biden is America's Osama Bin Laden, but how to bring him to justice as he is surrounded with American military? Starting war against the terrorist state as it was before with ISIS is not feasible. On the other hand Senate and other legislations are not going to do anything to remove that criminal from power. Only American military can remove this shame from the country if they remove by force the guy who has brought that shame on the country
The pipeline was attacked just after methane prices were at their highest, and started flagging. Russia needed the prices to be this high, and this would either further raise the price or continue the price high for longer.
I do wish it was the CIA or USN or some such arm of the US government. It would be good use of my tax dollars. This is war, not chess or cricket, and thousands upon thousands of Ukrainian civilians are dying in hideous fashion (so much for all those decades of saying “Never again”).
Not even a word on Gazprom's liability hypothesis? I feel like this was a waste of time. I could have a more elaborate and insightful conversation on the topic of the Nord Stream explosion with random folks on the bus. In fact, the comment section of this video contains more intelligent insight than the video itself. This interview was a low-IQ, low information effort, but at least the journalist asked good questions and sounded well-informed on Russian false flag tradition.
Unipro are suing Gazprom for $4bn per month for breaching contract. Repairs would only cost $2bn and take 2-6 months. Russia recommended that Germany open NS2 when NS1 malfunctioned earlier in the year. Why would the US leave one pipeline functional instead of destroying all of them?
@@exiledhebrew1994 There are 4 pipelines total. Each NS has 2 each. Both of NS1's pipes were hit but only one of NS2's. Russia wanted Germany to open NS2. The Times says repairs are estimated at $500m and take 3 months. Cheap compared to paying $4bn per month in compensation.
@@igorstrelkov1862 500 million is not cheap. Russia does not have the world reserve currency. Which means they don’t have money to be wasting like Americans do. Russia actually has to balance their budgets. So why would they waste money blowing up their own infrastructure
The argument for the US to hit the pipelines, I.e. that it would give Russia too much leverage over European countries gives European countries as much reason to do it as the US. Putin said, 6 days before the blasts that Europe would freeze this winter.
Biden is America's Osama Bin Laden, but how to bring him to justice as he is surrounded with American military? Starting war against the terrorist state as it was before with Fascist Germany is not feasible. On the other hand Senate and other legislations are not going to do anything to remove that criminal from power. Only American military can remove this shame from the country if they remove by force the guy who has brought that shame on the country.
russia was already self sabotaging the line with intentional maintenance accidents before hand. It sure makes ya wonder. Some lawyer somewhere knows the truth.
To deliver a bomb to blow up the pipeline could be done from the inside. Some years ago the petroleum pipeline in my back yard was tested from inside with a device called a pig. It is moved through the pipeline testing for pipe issues. They found one and dug down 20 feet to fix a welded joint. If the pig were replaced with a high explosive bomb using a pig type mechanism an explosive would be easier to place than an external placement. The NORD 2 pipeline was still undergoing testing when it was blown up.
Your scenario is correct. The evidence lies in the nature of the damage. The explosion rolled back the edges of the steel pipe. The missing portion would have provided more evidence but its absence is evidence enough in that significant effort was required. All carefully done with the right resources.
Yeah, the Russians blew it up. We've all done it, you turn the kitchen tap on to fill the kettle then can't be bothered to turn it off so you end up just smashing up the plumbing 🤣
Rather: we must be more comfortable with not knowing and not succumb to the urge to fill the vacuum with gradually solidifying assumptions and feelings.
I suspect the last comment is the correct one - we won't know for years if not decades. Those explosives could have been put there well in advance so finding who did it would be nigh on impossible unless they were dumb enough to use something traceable.
The Russians are almost certainly inept enough to have left traces, but even if they were found, the tankies and conspiracy theorists will claim any evidence was planted by the West. Unless of course the Russians themselves planted evidence to make it look like a Western operation, in which case the conspiracy theorists will uncritically accept the evidence because it supports their narrative. You can't win with these people 🤷🏻♂️
dumb like when the FSB poisoned Nawalny with a nerve agent that was specific to the Soviet Arsenal? 😂 Yea, I feel like will we know in years not decades
It's obviously Sweden. Gotland-class subs are silent, AND let's not forget it was inside Swedish economic zone. No way we don't keep an eye out, especially during these times. There was no pressure inside the gas pipes, therefore you can't use a PIG inside.
The only real truth is that you can see if the explosion was from the inside or the outside, this will tighten the story. Blowing up any Russian kit gets my pat on the back but as it was a defunct pipeline owned by the enemy, like any gangsters sending a threatening message is normal practise and lets be honest a few weeks worth of work can repair it. This was Russia saying many things, 1. We can blow up your infrastructure, 2. We will make sacrifices to win this war, 3. Don't come back to us for your gas as we won't sell it to you 4. If you do come back to buy our gas we will stall you for aeons. 5. Blowing up our gas pipes and blaming you is good propaganda. 6. Blowing up or gas pipes will win us friends across the world as we push our story of being the victim. 7. We are nutters, watch out... look we will even blow up our own stuff.... it goes on and on... in Putins eyes, this was a big, big win for him... blowing up a few feet of pipe that had already made him billions was nothing
Do you understand that if Russia did this covertly, Russia should be ten times ahead of NATO? And I point it - there's no evidence from NATO or even rhetoric that it was Russia. Your accusations are invalid and can't stand even one bit to these facts.
@@BeGentle_ And RasPutin the mad is not able to provide proof that he didn't do it, or even proof that someone else did, and you know what they say about madmen....
I like how this video, which is contrary to reality, is being pushed by the RUclips algorithm gods when there are more accurate videos with more views out there.
I was disappointed that this didn’t address the potential use of pipe maintenance robots inside the pipeline producing characteristic explosion pattern in the pipe wall. Also no mention of how at that very time Russia was trying to. It off has supplies to those who would not pay rubles but has no contractual basis for doing so.
"didn’t address the potential use of pipe maintenance robots". According to a former German Army explosive expert, 1 t of explovies as been applied per line, You can't transport a ton with a maintenance robot.
The US did. I love my country. But we are the only country that had the interest and capability to do this. We had to sever the Russian-German gas based economic link. No one else has an interest in doing this.
@@Waterdiver3900 you clearly don’t have a good grasp on the English language. If you work at a Russian or Chinese troll farm, I hope that they fire you for incompetence
As an ex-special unit operator, this could only be done covertly from a Sub! Planes (fixed and or rotary), boats etc. are all traced, subs less and you need very special equipment and knowledge to be able to pull that off.
@@traianowellcome2617Thats just partially true. Most PIGs use the transported medium as a source of power for locomotion, but there are self-powered versions.
If it wasn't Russia, they would have retaliated against a Western pipeline, as we would them. Not to mention as others have pointed out, the contractual reasons for Russia doing it. Was this guy supposed to be an expert of some kind?
Moscow could have done it to cause suspicion and devision in the West. They would do this knowing that the likelyhood of Germany buying gas in the future was minimal
The problem we have in the UK is an unwillingness/inability to 'connect the dots' even though it's obvious what the big picture is without connecting them at all. As Jack Nicholson once said: "The truth?...You can't handle the truth".
You sound precisely like an FSB troll trying to create confusion about this incident. I find it very interesting that so many FSB trolls are so keen to troll this video? Why is this so important for FSB and Putin?
Somewhere under the way it was suggested, that if the explosions came from inside the pipelines and blew the pipe walls outwards, it must have been the Russians who sent the explosives away inside the pipes all the way down to Bornholm. That is done with instruments to survey the insides, for maintenance purposes. If the explosions damaged the pipelines from the outside, it could have been done by a number of nations. It doesn't seem like there has been any following up of that theory.
@@upstream1942 A couple of weeks ago in a Senate hearing in Washington, Victoria Nuland was almost jumping up and down with joy that the NS pipelines were now wreckage at the bottom of the sea. She was practically straining at the leash to claim 'I did it, and I'm glad'. Yes, any nation with a half decent navy could do it, but you really have to look at the ones who benefit from this. The biggest winner is USA. The biggest loser is Europe. Russia is somewhere in between. Now Europe has to pay 4x for its gas - not good. And to be fair, America doesn't even produce enough for significant export - that is something people don't know, yet. Russia will take a temporary hit, but natural gas is an essential commodity and if Europe don't buy it, plenty other nations and regions out there who will. So if US was the biggest winner and had the most to gain, then it don't take genius to work out who the chief no.1 suspect is.
Sure, acting like you don't know shows how censored is everithing nowadays. You talk in details only for 2 players USA (big motives) Rus (anti motives), and the conclusion is "it is a mystery" Anyhow, why this time not blaming Rus like before is not the fact that you somehow starting to see but Mr. Hersh`s brave work! At his age doing this we can only appreciate and thanking him
There was no flow in any of the pipelines, but they were full of gas. The valves at either end of the pipelines WERE shut. Explosions break the pipe and the gas flows out and seawater flows in. I hope that this helps.
To add to Ivancho's reply, not only were they full of gas, but full of gas at 100bar (or more) pressure. So effectively 100 times the volumetric capacity of the pipeline in gas - plenty of gas to leak out!
@@juskahusk2247 the impact on the climate of the methane release was covered by media at the time. It's a lot of methane but in global terms the impact was expected to be very small relative to all the other methane leaks going on.
There is no mystery. The driver was under the influence of alcohol and diazepam and drove stupidly in an attempt to get away from the photographers. There was a crash. That's it. No mystery.
There are some other possible motivations for Russia. They may have hoped that Ukraine would immediately come under suspicion and that this would weaken Western support, or that it would deepen the divide between Germany especially and the Eastern European countries that are more robustly supporting Ukraine.
The report should've been on the lack of transparency in the investigation. Pictures of the pipe would immediately show whether the explosion originated from the inside or the outside of the pipe.
Any large pipeline can and is routinely accessed from the inside the pipeline for inspection purposes , therefore a similar sled loaded with explosives could probably be inserted and sent down the pipeline and exploded.
A logical Kremlin motive this interview does not discuss, but which others have proposed: Avoid a $100B(?) breach of contract lawsuit liability for damaging Western Europe's economy if Russia admitted it was willingly cutting NG supplies to Germany (to extort NATO not to support Ukraine). Such a civil court judgement (taken from currently merely frozen Russian assets in the West) could be avoided if there was doubt as to who caused the shutdown of NordStream pipeline NG supplies. If so, Russia's dictatorship could punish NATO economies for supporting Ukraine by cutting their NG off, but w/o facing a subsequent successful civil lawsuit for the huge money damages their willful breach of contract had caused. This is an unproven, but logical Kremlin motive to destroy their own NordStream pipelines.
Europe has LNG that can replace gas from pipelines, plus there is Norway. So you're saying that Russia wanted to essentially get out of the market, and then pay a fine when the investigation almost immediately finds out that she did it? Very logical, I'm delighted
@@ГалинаЮдачева Why do Russian trolls always have names like "user- letters and numbers"? Did your mothers hate you so much that they didn't even bother to give you a name?
When you have 2 non-military pundits discussing the Nord Stream Pipeline attack, and citing a elderly 3RD pundit who is off the rails for years, this is the type of discussion you get. Russia’s main interest in this war on Ukraine is dividing NATO and EU members. This attack came long after harsh sanctions were already imposed on Russia. It came as Russian headliners sought retaliatory Russian actions against NATO and the EU. Finally, it came as Germany was racing to store up enough gas energy reserves to last through the Winter. If presented in this context, a Russian attack on its own pipeline make rational military sense. Russia attacked its own pipeline to try an pull specifically Germany, out of the NATO and EU camps. If Germany did not have sufficient gas reserves for the Winter and LNG facilities would take months to build, a harsh Winter cold could force German politicians to be “neutral” on the war on Ukraine. Even without the attack, even with good gas reserves, German politicians in Social Democrats (SDP) have tried and stall all aid packages to Ukraine. This attack backfired on Russia in the long run because most NATO and EU average citizens think Putin and his Russia are diabolically inclined to extremes. What modern European country uses human wave attacks? What modern European country would allow 500-1000 casualties per day to be suffered? Finally, what rational European country would allow kleptocracy to become an institutional government policy? Europeans cannot understand what advantages Russians thought war could deliver better than having more democracy, joining the EU and NATO, and negotiating from the inside. Most Europeans think Putin drove Russia off a cliff.
@@stephensipe5405 I'm not ready to rule Germany out completely, though the likelihood of it being Germany working independently is low. There will be Germans who are against the East Germans who still love their former Russian masters. My money is still on Russia being the culprit however. WE don't know for sure currently (but I would bet that the likes of MI6 do know), but I'm ok with not knowing.
Gasprom is mainly Putin ‘s exclusive property . If his entourage was ready to and willing to carry on exporting gas to Europe , Putin probably decided to close all options and carry on with his energy siege on Europe.
EU has no gas due to EU leaders doing as there told by usa it was the wests decision to stop the gas not Russia, the western sanctions backfired and on those who put the sanctions on Russia ,EU prospered for decades on Russian cheep gas but usa didn't like it and the EU got there orders ,west has made a grave mistake poking Russia, the west is not fighting people in flip-flops now.
Russia does not care how much destruction to the infrastructure they do in their claimed annexed regions of Ukraine, or to their army personnel, or to the rest of Ukraine that they claim is part of Russia that they are fighting to reclaim. Rather than admit to having been attacked and destroyed, prestigious items such as the Moskva flagship sinking and aircraft blown up at Saky were described as accidents, so that other so-called accidents to Russian infrastructure, were thereafter jokingly attributed to "the smoker in the ammunition dump"! There are so many interested state organizations in Russia that they act without cooperation with the other agencies, often in open opposition to each other. Russians don't have the western attribute of "guilt", but only the eastern attribute of "shame", so rather than show weakness, they would rather admit the fault as their own doing instead of admitting that they have been beaten by an opponent. Internally, those responsible, or ones who know those who are responsible (or scapegoats), fall out of windows, commit suicide, or otherwise come to untimely ends, or are imprisoned on made-up charges. The Russian Federation will rather remain a world pariah for the next century than admit to any criminality in their actions over Ukraine, or that any of their actions in the world since the end of Soviet times have been unfair in any way. They blew up the pipeline to make things hard for the Europeans to support the Ukrainians against them by permanently breaking the tie between them, and Russia will continue to press westward and over central Asia on its own, keeping the rest of the world blackmailed by the threat of their nuclear strength, if that exists any more, or not. Unless the west breaks and squashes Russian autocracy, or the people in the federation rebel and remove their despots themselves, this situation will come about time and time again.
All the assessments about RU in your writeup track. They are completely unscrupulous to do such a thing and the most likely culprit, but it's still not a definitive proof.
The fact that the Russians accused the British Navy implies that it was the Russians who did it -- or someone acting on the behalf of the Russians. Why? Because the Russians in fact know that the British Navy didn't do it, indeed that that the British aren't the type who'd ever do something like that. Imagine for a moment that Russia didn't damage the pipeline and didn't know who did -- but that they still know the truth about Britain, that is, that Britain would not have done something like that. Under these facts, Russia would actually be a victim, genuinely indignant, more upset than it showed itself to be when the pipeline was damaged, and it would be investigating vigorously.
Such infrastructure-damaging operations have already been carried out against Russia (from the declassified CIA), they immediately knew who was behind this, but did not disclose it I don’t want to reveal the most delicious, I’ll just watch what while eating popcorn
That's what they want you to think. Hersch broke the story of My Lai and Abu Ghraib. His version of the Bin Laden assassination made more sense than the official version. The Americans threatened to cut off aid to Pakistan and also paid $25 million to a Pakistan general to get Bin Laden's whereabouts. Bin Laden was living in Abbotobad in a 20,000 square foot house next to Pakistan's West Point. Pakistan's radar was switched off. One of the American helicopters crashed in the city. Hersch is always being discredited by useful idiots. The Western press is becoming a joke.
@@gaoxiaen1 the US is the only country with the motive to blow it up. It doesn't make sense for Russian to blow up their own pipeline. They can just turn off the gas if they don't want to supply Europe but not totally close off all options to sell their gas.
The three countries have said they know who did it but have refused to comment, citing security concerns and saying 'it is not in the public interest' to reveal which country is guilty.
Not necessarily a false flag, but to sow discord amongst the coalition which is now assisting Ukraine in defending itself against Russia's war of aggression. This theory, in my opinion, has gained weight with the recent poorly thought out and incompletely sourced news article by Seymour Hirsch. His article gets a number of things wrong that indicate to me that his source in unfamiliar with how underwater demolitions are conducted, but it does accomplish the goal of putting more pressure on both NATO and the 50 nation coalition now assisting Ukraine in self defense.
Yep for me this has always been the biggest reason why Russia did it. Forget about all the economic arguments, Russia just wants to sow distrust among the allies. If people take the simple economic argument then they will say "who has most to gain?" and point to america, and I think Russia has been counting on this all along. In fact I think the pipelines were near useless to Russia already due to the mounting sanctions.
@@PhilAndOr But it doesn't make any sense. At the beginning, everyone immediately accused Russia without any investigation, and therefore they will also blame Russia for creating this fake, and therefore why is it needed?
If the United States President wanted to sabotage the pipelines, it seems like he would want it permanently destroyed. The damage to the pipeline seems repairable. It makes most sense for someone who wants the pipeline to keep existing in the long term or someone who lacked the resources to permanently put it out of service. If the United States Armed Forces did carry this out, they should be ashamed of not finishing the job.
no state needed--any professional 6 man underwater demolition team with oil rig experience could have carried out this operation. cheap too 40 ft boat/3 hours/done. the expensive part is the million per man payoff to keep quiet.
Someone mentioned that Seymore Hersh's article was terrific reporting. It was all made up as reported by Oliver Alexander's article "Blowing Holes in Seymore Hersh's Pipe Dream". Another article on who had the motive is Jonithan MS Pierce's article "Analysis: Who Blew Up the Nord Stream Pipeline" in Only Sky.
The Hersh article is an awful piece of BS ( I read the original ). Sad to see an old man trying to achieve attention he had earlier - which for sure was justified back then.
@@ciaranryan5265 He destroyed that a long time ago. He's been one of those Chomsky/Aron Mate/Abbie Martin-like "anti-imperialist" US haters for a while.
Even the theory that it was the US claims the US was doing it in co-operation or agreement with Germany and the Nordic countries, so then why on earth should that lead to NATO breaking up?
![[#2024MAMA] BIGBANG (빅뱅) - 뱅뱅뱅 (BANG BANG BANG) + FANTASTIC BABY | Mnet 241123 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EQsYfiPR9uM/mqdefault.jpg)
The pipelines are coated with concrete, not to re-inforce them but to add weight so that they sink. It's called 'weight coating', other wise, when they are filled with gas, they have bouyancy.
Ackshually...
@@noahway13 Good point
yes - and it offers some protection towards normal marine activity and environmental issues - but is not meant to be or built as an armor against sabotage
Imagine how all infrastructure around the globe is such soft targets. Scary. These pipelines were actually difficult, how it was done.
@@noahway13 Solution: Decentral renewables and storage.
It was a cunning plan to prevent the Germans from accumulating enough gas reserve for Winter but mattered little in the end. The Germans completed the building of their LNG terminals in record time and managed to fill up their reserve tanks anyway. Now the Europeans need to watch out if someone would want to damage other pipelines like the ones from Norway.
Germany did not finish "it's LNG terminals". It finished one that isn't sufficient to replace either of the north streams.
@@Chiungalla79 So what do you mean by that? What is your theory?
@@Mr.Monta77
That the part of the comment above that seems to suggest germany finished it's LNG terminals (plural) is wrong. 🤷♂️
Most of the gas we used to fill up our reserves came through pipelines from Russia. The new LNG terminals played a minor role, and most good was achieved through less consumption and a mild winter.
And I highly doubt that there is enough information around to make up ones mind who did it. In the end it is often the wisest and least popular thing to accept that you don't know. And only fools act as if they know as a result of wild fetched speculation on too little information.
And it doesn't really matter either. If you take a stance with Ukraine this will not change if Ukraine or a NATO country did it. If you are with Russia and Russia did it you would consider it a fair move.
@@Chiungalla79 By this time next year, I'm sure that there will be no to little problems providing the EU with Natural Gas or LNG! Russia soon will be an irrelevent nation when it comes to Natural Gas and Oil for the EU and will only have much business with their Asian "friends"!
@@khiemone
I hope you are right and think that you will be nearly right in your accessment.
LNG ist natural gas btw. that's what the NG stand for in LNG.
But I wonder why you wrote this as reply to my post, since it is neither confirming nor in conflict with my theory.
Getting info out of this guy is like getting blood out of a stone.
He doesn't know anything. He doesn't just point a finger like most do, with no clear evidence.
Mi6 propaganda channel is always f 😂😂😂
@@noahway13 Yep! According to a real military analyst, a hybrid attack by russia makes sense. Go watch Anders Puck Nielsen's video "Nord Stream sabotage and hybrid war on Europe".
@@unoriginalname4321 even the West is now saying it was probably pro UKR group that attacked
@@unoriginalname4321 let’s just ignore biden saying he’d do it then 🤣🤣🤣cuckoooo
It was obviously America..
Biden is America's Osama Bin Laden, but how to bring him to justice as he is surrounded with American military? Starting war against the terrorist state as it was before with ISIS is not feasible. On the other hand Senate and other legislations are not going to do anything to remove that criminal from power. Only American military can remove this shame from the country if they remove by force the guy who has brought that shame on the country
This leaves out a key point.
At the time of the explosions Europe was not using Nordstream and had just established the infrastructure for shipping LNG from alternate sources.
Russia would know that Nordstream was probably never going to be restarted and never going to generate any further revenue.
This leaves Russia with 2 problems and 1 useless pipeline.
Problem 1. By contract Russia owed Germany for loss of supply. While the pipeline was functioning Russia was in debt to Germany. The solution is to blow up the pipe and claim the contract void.
Problem 2. Europe was no longer reliant on Russia for natural gas so Russia could not intimidate them with starting and stopping Nordstream. The solution is to blow up Nordstream and threaten the rest of European undersea energy infrastructure. Remember the Shetland's undersea cables were cut on 20th October when the Russian sub-sea naval ship Akademik Boris Petrov was nearby.
Lol was that rant for anyone in particular?
Exactly, I see it the same way. Not sure where the "expert" collects his knowledge from ... the whole operation made only sense for the Russians. As a side-effect they wanted to force Germany into accepting to use the still working one pipe of NS2, in my opinion.
Don't expect the sock puppets, conspiracy morons, and tankies to consider those factors.
Russia has a long history of interfering with undersea and land infrastructure in Eastern Europe and the Baltics, it just doesn't make the news in English-speaking world very often.
The GRU blew up arms dumps in the Czech Republic, a NATO member, in 2016,FFS.
Russia is also suspected of several other physical and cyberattacks on energy infrastructure on it's neighbours, and numerous instances of undersea cables being damaged, GPS jamming along the Finnish border, etc.
we might never know who did, ...but definitely we now know who did not
@P McD I'm just politely pointing out missing facts. If you've got 23 minutes for Times Radio, you probably have 1 minute to read and consider additional information.
You failed to point out that Germany was considering to sue Russia for breach of contract when they cut off the gas flow. Also whoever did it they left one gas line intact, so they could continue pumping the gas but at a reduced flow. It was such an obvious ploy that Germany refused to turn back on the flow citing blackmail. Interesting enough this cut out the possibility of a lawsuit.
Also worth pointing out that the sabotage happened shortly after it was becoming evident that Europe would not be buying much russian energy for the next few decades.
This changed the pipelines value for russia to essentially zero just weeks before they blew up.
It would appear that Russia did indeed confirm that one pipeline is conveniently still operable. A pretty important point to miss out.
I’m not convinced Russia is particularly concerned about the rule of law.
@@stpancraschapel2136 It would have been if it was still intending to supply gas to Germany. Which it can still do, obviously.
@@proselytizingorthodoxpente8304 how?
lol ... both sidism in a polite voice. US LNG companies have been pushing for this for a long long time. Condoleezza Rice has been saying this for almost a decade.Remember the Polish official tweet-'Thank You, US' with the picture of bubbling water?
It’s was blown up by USA with the help of Norway
It's worth remembering that in 2006 when Georgia started to seek NATO membership, and thereby displeased Russia, the gas pipelines to Tiblisi were destroyed by explosions causing an energy crisis. Plus Russian Navy ships and a submarine were in the area on September 26th-27th.
More noteworthy and memorable is this: the US President announces clear intent and targets beforehand, and assures journalists that they will definitely carry it out.
It was USA who did it
@@sexynelson100 You have proof?
It’s simple. Take leverage away from Russia. If the winter was bad as Russia predicted then Europe won’t be tempted to negotiate. It’s so obvious why are we even having this conversation.
@@sexynelson100 so what?
Everyone should read Seymour Hersh's article directly. He's a Pulitzer prize winning journalist with strong contacts in Washington. According to him, we do know who did it and how - the US.
This would be an act of war... Against Germany
The pipes were owned by gazprom
@James Balmforth I doubt he would. He conveniently left out Germany's 49% stake in the project.
Biden is America's Osama Bin Laden, but how to bring him to justice as he is surrounded with American military? Starting war against the terrorist state as it was before with Fascist Germany is not feasible. On the other hand Senate and other legislations are not going to do anything to remove that criminal from power. Only American military can remove this shame from the country if they remove by force the guy who has brought that shame on the country.
I have read it, and it really have some flaws. As Norwegian, the role, attitude and motives he puts on Norway in his story - simply don't fit. Norway would never risk a war with Russia to earn some more on gas sales. Also- it would ruin the relations to Europe. Besides - it really manage wery well without extra gas sales. Based on this, it is so unrealistic and shows a basic lack of understanding of Norwegian think, positition and policy. I dont say this to defend Norway - but the story really doesn't hold credibility on that part. And that makes the rest look dubious as well. It is all based on one anonimus source, who should know so much of affairs in several countries in a highly secret case - doesn't spund right at all. There is a real possibility that he is used to tell this story - not knowingly.
@@hansmonsen1359 I can totally understand how those lacking in basic common sense might struggle to see the glaringly obvious.
Seymour Hersh: How the US Took Out the Nord Stream Pipeline......
Seymour Hersh is right.
The state committed this act of terrorism shall be declared a terrorist state. And we all know what state it is. And those assisted or aware of that shall be declared the terrorist accomplices.
Joe Biden told us he would do it.
yeah of course ...
@ You want proof? ruclips.net/video/d4BuMaGlKp0/видео.html
The (reason for why The Times made this) video (right now, but not earlier) starts @ 17:55. There, you saved almost 18 minutes. You’re welcome!
Claudio: Context is very important. Don’t encourage laziness!
Spot om my friend. You can just skip 20 min.
There are more reliable independent sources. This is like for EU propaganda.
@@Mr.Monta77 Claudio's comment is part of the context my friend. Why did they only choose to cover this in depth AFTER the reporting came out that it was the US that had the means and motivation (not to mention the extremely sketchy comments from Biden a year ago about nord stream) to pull this off.
@@victorpaalvast9491 This is a typical FSB comment. The aim is to create confusion and deflect responsibility. ‘My friend’ 🤮
Why? I mean ask yourself why, and research your answer carefully
Poland makes the most sense... everything to gain, nothing to lose because they're very insulated from any fallout:
-Poland views a Ukrainian defeat as an existential threat (see increase in military spending and extensive military support for Ukraine). No Nord Stream, no leverage. Allowing German/European politicians to focus on helping Ukraine and finding alternative energy sources.
-If discovered, Germany could hardly complain to Poland about infrastructure damage given the damage done to Poland's in the past. Particularly whilst considering the circumstances Poland could find itself in if Ukraine lost.
-Poland has LNG terminals.
-Poland has the Norway-Poland pipeline
-Poland is already in NATO
we might never know who did, ...but definitely we now know who did not
Delay reaction to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact? The Poles have one diesel submarine, so i guess you could rule them out if the sub has an alabai, unless the charges were just lowered from surface?
What about Germany's past? The current government and architecture of Germany was created with the support of the United States after the Second World War, all questions on the Second World War were closed
@@struvrim7637 Poland is currently seeking compensation from Germany.
@@theichione1827 there are institutions in the European Union for this, let him look for it, he has the right, but if the story with the gas pipeline is true, then it is unlikely that Poland will receive at least one euro
The fact that we are wondering confirms that Russia did it. They wanted to sow distrust in each other
No, It was the USA, They planted the explosives 3 months prior to detination If you dont believe me check out "Joe Bloggs" report he made a couple days ago. on the subject.
To strap explosives to a “pig” ( pipe robot inspection) would of been the easiest way and impossible to detect..even after..only if bits of the Pig were found in the sea bead….there is 4 pipelines in north stream 1 & 2…2 each..one didn’t explode…there may be an unexploded pig still in the pipeline…
Exactly.
we might never know who did, ...but definitely we now know who did not
Doesn't really matter who did it. What matters is the Germans were prevented from breaking the sanctions regime in the winter. They are the weakest link in NATO.
The Times should be embarrassed to call this journalism. No reference was made to the actual sequence of events during the Aug/Sept timeframe
1. Nordstream 1 was not operational
2. Russians had been flaring off gas since June
3. Germany was establishing LNG import terminals
4. The Baltic Pipeline was opening on 27th Sept
5. Sweden was seeking to join NATO and the biggest of the explosions were just outside of their waters
The open questions are
1. Nordstream 1 pumping station at Portovaya was effectively out of action - why did this occur?
2. Why was Nordstream 1 taken out while one of the 2 Nordstream 2 pipelines was still intact? Not a 100% successful operation
Western operations could have closed down Portovaya but the sabotage was an act to provoke a response bey either Poland (Baltic Pipeline) and/ or Sweden
ruclips.net/video/d4BuMaGlKp0/видео.html
Times radio is a joke. Must be aimed at a reading age of 6-8. Pure mi6 spew 🤣
where did the reaction go? And why did the joint investigation fall apart as soon as the first results were processed? And why haven't investigators found evidence of Russian involvement? And why did Russia start repairs? Why these unnecessary questions, let's just forget this story. And Ohio, too, at the same time, now the main trend is balloons and UFOs
Does the damage point to an internal or external explosion? It would not be hard to ascertain. Given that I have not seen any information regarding that question, it begs the question as to why. Who benefits by keeping this cloud of doubt over this incident?
External, it was blown up... but being a direct act of war against Russia, is understandable them investigations with their results, are just suddenly not talked about anymore. Making results public, could well trigger a huge global war. Cloud of doubt benefits us all, world leaders have a true possibility of WW3 on their hands. It will propably not happen atleast before US has closed up their NATO-border against Russia, by adding Finland and Sweden in their pocket... but after that, anything can happen. US is the one who gains from this, while Russia loses a lot... not to mention Ukraine. Even other European countries suffer from this... but not US. And this is what it's all about, US upping it's position in the ongoing long race between them few superpowers, that started decades ago.
Gas that was running to Europe from Russia through Nord Stream before it was was blown up, gave Russia 9-digit amounts of income every single day, losing it was a huge impact on their economics. It's now replaced with LNG that is shipped from US, also much of military equipment used in this war, are sold by US... a single anti-air missile or artillery rocket costs well over 100k, even one anti-tank missile shot from shoulder costs like 40-70k each... not to mention energy market.
Is not that much Russia vs Ukraine this war, as it is US vs Russia, this whole situation has been going on for many years already. Was well known US was involved in Ukraine getting a new president, such that leaned much towards west... and Russia many time during those elections, warned by starting military actions, if US wouldn't stop... on which US then threathened to blow up the pipe, if Russia does so. Ukraine got their new president, NATO discussions of Ukraine started, Russia's attack started, pipe blew up... investigations start, and after results, no-one wants to talk about it.
Just in case u have missed them:
ruclips.net/user/shortsFVbEoZXhCrM
ruclips.net/video/Tz9RbdgyW0w/видео.html
There is only one relevant question to be asked, because all the rest ist just endless talking with little relevant content, is: "Why were no results of the investigation published yet?" It can't be exactly a rocket science to at least identify the explosives used in these relatively shallow waters. Surely satellite imagery has been mulled over to death already. Honestly, the only reason I can imagine NOT to share the results is, that the evidence may be pointing towards one of NATO allies or members.
we might never know who did, ...but definitely we now know who did not
@@javierfrancia1938 Agree on the second point - I think that we can be pretty much 100% sure, that it was not New Zealand, because they would have first performed haka on the island of Bornholm. But beyond that, I am not so sure.
Hi, I think that you have overlooked some aspects. The sequence and locations of the explosions were attempts by Russia to provoke reactions. The first explosion at 2am was near where Nordstream 2 pipeline crosses the new Baltic Pipeline. The Baltic Pipeline was due to open on 27th Sept and provides gas from Norway to Poland. The second set of Explosions at 7pm on 26th Sept that took out Nordstream 1 was just outside Swedish waters.
The objective of NATO has been to keep a lid on Russian provocative actions from escalating the war to countries outside Ukraine.
The other fact was that Nordstream 1 was having issues (real or created) with it's pumping station at Portovaya near St Petersburg and had been flaring gas off at its Vyborg site since June. If you remember this was the issue with the turbine being returned from Canada for repair. There have been reported issues with the other turbine at Portovaya which resulted in the gas flaring
@@philjameson292 I appreciate your reply. Yes, there definitely is a merit to those arguments. I do remember the issues the Nordstream 1 was having a the time (looked legit as Russia does not have in-house technology for many of its oil/gas related machinery).
@@matusknives Russia, elementary Mr Watson
Seymour Hersh - How America Took Out The Nord Stream Pipeline
I doubt the lot on here would read that piece without their blinders on.
The US President, his Secretary of State and deputy have all alluded to what might have happened to the pipeline. And we still have people who still blame Russia for this. Talk of bias on an astronomical scale.
Biden is America's Osama Bin Laden, but how to bring him to justice as he is surrounded with American military? Starting war against the terrorist state as it was before with Fascist Germany is not feasible. On the other hand Senate and other legislations are not going to do anything to remove that criminal from power. Only American military can remove this shame from the country if they remove by force the guy who has brought that shame on the country.
Undersea oil and gas pipelines are occasionally damaged and subsequently repaired, expensive repair but not an endgame. The Russians or other actors would not necessarily, be permanently closing the pipeline as I’m sure they know. I’m surprised that there hasn’t been reporting as to whether the explosive was detonated inside or outside the pipeline, as it would probably be fairly easy to attach explosives to an inspection sled (pig) at the supply or receiving terminal.
Explosives were placed outside the first report from Norway said. There wasn't a "scattering" around. The lines were pushed down, pressured into the ground, by mines on top of them.
That charges were places on the outside of the pipeline and the fact was not widely reported, leads to suspect there is not much interest on the allied side in locating the perpetrator. The US and Britain have much more to gain in removing the leverage of Russian Gas from Europe. It weakens Russia, keeps the allies together and ends European dependence on Russian gas.
@@williewonka6694 Except that the pipeline is relatively easy to repair. This isn't as catastrophic as everyone seems to think.
@@williewonka6694 Except that the pipeline is relatively easy to repair. This isn't as catastrophic as everyone seems to think.
I’m quite sure, regardless of the outcome of these attacks on Nord stream pipelines, I’m in favor of Ukraine and the people favoring Ukraine. Russia hasn’t lost anything on their sovereign grounds.
I'm sorry, his reason for why Russia would blow it from NATO perspective is absolute waste of breath nonsense.
At least we can all agree that the pipes are exploded? 🤔🔥
That's a start.
Remember nether Nordstream I and Nordstream 2 were operational at the time. Although I must say it is one of Nordstream 2 pipes that were undamaged
Undamaged yet. I understand Ol Joe will be running for a second term, unless he's stopped.
@@dchappy6985 And if Biden is stopped, the Democrats will blame Putin (as in 2016), and not the reality that it was the weakness of their candidates (Hilary and Biden 2024) that cost them the election.
Nord Stream 2 is 100% Russian owned.
US did it.
Biden is America's Osama Bin Laden, but how to bring him to justice as he is surrounded with American military? Starting war against the terrorist state as it was before with ISIS is not feasible. On the other hand Senate and other legislations are not going to do anything to remove that criminal from power. Only American military can remove this shame from the country if they remove by force the guy who has brought that shame on the country
The pipeline was attacked just after methane prices were at their highest, and started flagging. Russia needed the prices to be this high, and this would either further raise the price or continue the price high for longer.
Why they did. Not destroy the pipeline in Ukraine. Then ?
@@angeyannick9550 Good question that the low information propagandists that populate this site can't answer.
Blow up the pipeline to keep gas prices high is cutting off your nose to spite the face Makes no sense.
I do wish it was the CIA or USN or some such arm of the US government. It would be good use of my tax dollars. This is war, not chess or cricket, and thousands upon thousands of Ukrainian civilians are dying in hideous fashion (so much for all those decades of saying “Never again”).
Give those Canadian military beavers there credit.
Damn Canadians, wreaking havoc around the world 😂
Not sure they’re that clever, though.
I’m Canadian, by the way!
Tactical beavers 🦫 I knew it !
@@ianfraser6161 Point proven!
Not even a word on Gazprom's liability hypothesis? I feel like this was a waste of time. I could have a more elaborate and insightful conversation on the topic of the Nord Stream explosion with random folks on the bus. In fact, the comment section of this video contains more intelligent insight than the video itself. This interview was a low-IQ, low information effort, but at least the journalist asked good questions and sounded well-informed on Russian false flag tradition.
Russia: Those little green man in Crimea ar not the Russian army.
Russia: We will never invade Ukraine
Russia: We didn't blew up that pipe.
Unipro are suing Gazprom for $4bn per month for breaching contract. Repairs would only cost $2bn and take 2-6 months.
Russia recommended that Germany open NS2 when NS1 malfunctioned earlier in the year. Why would the US leave one pipeline functional instead of destroying all of them?
Exactly. This was a well planned sabotage operation so why fail to blow all 4 pipelines in NS1 and NS2?
Because of delay they appointed the explosives decayed in sea water.
Both pipelines were hit; idk were this fake information is coming from
@@exiledhebrew1994 There are 4 pipelines total. Each NS has 2 each. Both of NS1's pipes were hit but only one of NS2's. Russia wanted Germany to open NS2. The Times says repairs are estimated at $500m and take 3 months. Cheap compared to paying $4bn per month in compensation.
@@igorstrelkov1862 500 million is not cheap. Russia does not have the world reserve currency. Which means they don’t have money to be wasting like Americans do. Russia actually has to balance their budgets. So why would they waste money blowing up their own infrastructure
Thumbnail is the most comical picture I’ve ever seen 😂😂😂
Why
@@Jensth the guy in the picture is wearing a gasmask, not an aqualung.
This journalism should be banned for misleading its audience.
The argument for the US to hit the pipelines, I.e. that it would give Russia too much leverage over European countries gives European countries as much reason to do it as the US. Putin said, 6 days before the blasts that Europe would freeze this winter.
Biden is America's Osama Bin Laden, but how to bring him to justice as he is surrounded with American military? Starting war against the terrorist state as it was before with Fascist Germany is not feasible. On the other hand Senate and other legislations are not going to do anything to remove that criminal from power. Only American military can remove this shame from the country if they remove by force the guy who has brought that shame on the country.
russia was already self sabotaging the line with intentional maintenance accidents before hand. It sure makes ya wonder. Some lawyer somewhere knows the truth.
Yeah; now Europe can’t buy Russian gas, I’m sure that’s what they wanted…
Now we buy are gas from America at 5x the price, who does that benefit?
@@r2hildur How do you know where I live ? 😊
To deliver a bomb to blow up the pipeline could be done from the inside. Some years ago the petroleum pipeline in my back yard was tested from inside with a device called a pig. It is moved through the pipeline testing for pipe issues. They found one and dug down 20 feet to fix a welded joint. If the pig were replaced with a high explosive bomb using a pig type mechanism an explosive would be easier to place than an external placement. The NORD 2 pipeline was still undergoing testing when it was blown up.
Your scenario is correct. The evidence lies in the nature of the damage. The explosion rolled back the edges of the steel pipe. The missing portion would have provided more evidence but its absence is evidence enough in that significant effort was required. All carefully done with the right resources.
The use of a maintenance "pig" to blow it up from the inside has been the explanation I've been going on the whole time.
Yeah, the Russians blew it up. We've all done it, you turn the kitchen tap on to fill the kettle then can't be bothered to turn it off so you end up just smashing up the plumbing 🤣
Exactly!
it's not ambiguous people. it was usa!
Let there be no more unsolved mysteries like this one.
Rather: we must be more comfortable with not knowing and not succumb to the urge to fill the vacuum with gradually solidifying assumptions and feelings.
Well, we don't know who did it 🤔 But we do know it was the Americans.
I suspect the last comment is the correct one - we won't know for years if not decades. Those explosives could have been put there well in advance so finding who did it would be nigh on impossible unless they were dumb enough to use something traceable.
The Russians are almost certainly inept enough to have left traces, but even if they were found, the tankies and conspiracy theorists will claim any evidence was planted by the West.
Unless of course the Russians themselves planted evidence to make it look like a Western operation, in which case the conspiracy theorists will uncritically accept the evidence because it supports their narrative.
You can't win with these people 🤷🏻♂️
we might never know who did, ...but definitely we now know who did not
@@javierfrancia1938 exactly, we know it wasn't the UK. you are spot on
dumb like when the FSB poisoned Nawalny with a nerve agent that was specific to the Soviet Arsenal? 😂 Yea, I feel like will we know in years not decades
@@PharisaerWatch Polonium was what sprang to mind, but yes - there is a history there!
It's obviously Sweden. Gotland-class subs are silent, AND let's not forget it was inside Swedish economic zone. No way we don't keep an eye out, especially during these times. There was no pressure inside the gas pipes, therefore you can't use a PIG inside.
The only real truth is that you can see if the explosion was from the inside or the outside, this will tighten the story. Blowing up any Russian kit gets my pat on the back but as it was a defunct pipeline owned by the enemy, like any gangsters sending a threatening message is normal practise and lets be honest a few weeks worth of work can repair it. This was Russia saying many things, 1. We can blow up your infrastructure, 2. We will make sacrifices to win this war, 3. Don't come back to us for your gas as we won't sell it to you 4. If you do come back to buy our gas we will stall you for aeons. 5. Blowing up our gas pipes and blaming you is good propaganda. 6. Blowing up or gas pipes will win us friends across the world as we push our story of being the victim. 7. We are nutters, watch out... look we will even blow up our own stuff.... it goes on and on... in Putins eyes, this was a big, big win for him... blowing up a few feet of pipe that had already made him billions was nothing
we might never know who did, ...but definitely we now know who did not
Do you understand that if Russia did this covertly, Russia should be ten times ahead of NATO? And I point it - there's no evidence from NATO or even rhetoric that it was Russia. Your accusations are invalid and can't stand even one bit to these facts.
good points
@@BeGentle_ untrue-get head out of sand......russia good at only breaking things-obvious putin op
@@BeGentle_ And RasPutin the mad is not able to provide proof that he didn't do it, or even proof that someone else did, and you know what they say about madmen....
Not Russia. Considering they control the lever to turn gas on/off.
Sound design by David Crackles, that's funny!
Us did it Even a poor lady in africa Knows who did it
I like how this video, which is contrary to reality, is being pushed by the RUclips algorithm gods when there are more accurate videos with more views out there.
CIA pushing the mi6 produced propaganda vid 🤣🤣🤣
Really. Just stop the non-sense. I live in Sweden and have friends in the US... everyone thinks that US did it.
I was disappointed that this didn’t address the potential use of pipe maintenance robots inside the pipeline producing characteristic explosion pattern in the pipe wall. Also no mention of how at that very time Russia was trying to. It off has supplies to those who would not pay rubles but has no contractual basis for doing so.
"didn’t address the potential use of pipe maintenance robots". According to a former German Army explosive expert, 1 t of explovies as been applied per line, You can't transport a ton with a maintenance robot.
@@m.walther6434 not at once, but how do you eat an elephant? One spoon at a time
Russia couldn’t accept other currencies due to sanctions.pathetic excuse duhhhhh
@@m.walther6434 yes you can its the size of a small car
The US did. I love my country. But we are the only country that had the interest and capability to do this. We had to sever the Russian-German gas based economic link. No one else has an interest in doing this.
@@Waterdiver3900 you clearly don’t have a good grasp on the English language. If you work at a Russian or Chinese troll farm, I hope that they fire you for incompetence
You are an honest man.
As an ex-special unit operator, this could only be done covertly from a Sub! Planes (fixed and or rotary), boats etc. are all traced, subs less and you need very special equipment and knowledge to be able to pull that off.
It could also have been done by sending a "PIG" (remote-controlled maintenance vehicle designed to travel inside pipelines) loaded wth explosives.
Was described as too shallow though ?
@@coderider3022 I don't know, but I've not heard anybody rule out torpedoes.
@@traianowellcome2617Thats just partially true.
Most PIGs use the transported medium as a source of power for locomotion, but there are self-powered versions.
@@AntonGudenus Exactly. It definitely is possible. But also fairly easy to conclude whether the explosion occurred outside the pipe, or inside.
If it wasn't Russia, they would have retaliated against a Western pipeline, as we would them. Not to mention as others have pointed out, the contractual reasons for Russia doing it. Was this guy supposed to be an expert of some kind?
Moscow could have done it to cause suspicion and devision in the West. They would do this knowing that the likelyhood of Germany buying gas in the future was minimal
It was the US who did it. No doubt about it.
we might never know who did, ...but definitely we now know who did not
@@javierfrancia1938 The US did it. The Truth is known.
@@PTdreaming i dont know who did it, I only believe taht is obvoius who did not
@@PTdreaming That's not true nobody really knows for sure that's what the planners who carried this out intended...
09:54 they invaded a COUNTRY. That's signal enough. They did not have to support it with a relatively tiny, cazy-expensive signal.
The problem we have in the UK is an unwillingness/inability to 'connect the dots' even though it's obvious what the big picture is without connecting them at all.
As Jack Nicholson once said:
"The truth?...You can't handle the truth".
You sound precisely like an FSB troll trying to create confusion about this incident. I find it very interesting that so many FSB trolls are so keen to troll this video? Why is this so important for FSB and Putin?
Clearly, just look at Brexit.
@@nerinamak3298 The only thing clear here, is that you joined RUclips like days ago. Smells bad.
@@Mr.Monta77 Go away. I wasn't talking to you.
@@nerinamak3298 I’m not going anywhere, troll.
Somewhere under the way it was suggested, that if the explosions came from inside the pipelines and blew the pipe walls outwards, it must have been the Russians who sent the explosives away inside the pipes all the way down to Bornholm. That is done with instruments to survey the insides, for maintenance purposes.
If the explosions damaged the pipelines from the outside, it could have been done by a number of nations. It doesn't seem like there has been any following up of that theory.
Because it's not a good theory
Out of curiosity, couldn't the Germans do this too from their end of the pipeline?
@@limedickandrew6016 I don't know, but it sure seems plausible.
@@upstream1942 A couple of weeks ago in a Senate hearing in Washington, Victoria Nuland was almost jumping up and down with joy that the NS pipelines were now wreckage at the bottom of the sea. She was practically straining at the leash to claim 'I did it, and I'm glad'. Yes, any nation with a half decent navy could do it, but you really have to look at the ones who benefit from this. The biggest winner is USA. The biggest loser is Europe. Russia is somewhere in between. Now Europe has to pay 4x for its gas - not good. And to be fair, America doesn't even produce enough for significant export - that is something people don't know, yet. Russia will take a temporary hit, but natural gas is an essential commodity and if Europe don't buy it, plenty other nations and regions out there who will. So if US was the biggest winner and had the most to gain, then it don't take genius to work out who the chief no.1 suspect is.
@@limedickandrew6016 I am naive enough to hope that this situation will speed up the transition to renewable energy...
Sure, acting like you don't know shows how censored is everithing nowadays. You talk in details only for 2 players USA (big motives) Rus (anti motives), and the conclusion is "it is a mystery" Anyhow, why this time not blaming Rus like before is not the fact that you somehow starting to see but Mr. Hersh`s brave work! At his age doing this we can only appreciate and thanking him
The pipelines blew gas for days after the explosions. Why did the automatic shutoff valves fail to close on ALL THREE lines that were hit.
There was no flow in any of the pipelines, but they were full of gas. The valves at either end of the pipelines WERE shut. Explosions break the pipe and the gas flows out and seawater flows in. I hope that this helps.
To add to Ivancho's reply, not only were they full of gas, but full of gas at 100bar (or more) pressure. So effectively 100 times the volumetric capacity of the pipeline in gas - plenty of gas to leak out!
What is the climate impact of all this gas being released?
It would be funny if the leaked methane was responsible for the warm winter.
@@juskahusk2247 the impact on the climate of the methane release was covered by media at the time. It's a lot of methane but in global terms the impact was expected to be very small relative to all the other methane leaks going on.
Reminds me of the mystery involved in the death of Princess Diana.When will we find out what went down?
There is no mystery. The driver was under the influence of alcohol and diazepam and drove stupidly in an attempt to get away from the photographers. There was a crash. That's it. No mystery.
This case is equally mysterious in that there is NO mystery, lol... spend ten seconds learning about KGB, Pootin ffs.
There are some other possible motivations for Russia. They may have hoped that Ukraine would immediately come under suspicion and that this would weaken Western support, or that it would deepen the divide between Germany especially and the Eastern European countries that are more robustly supporting Ukraine.
15:27, interesting quote
The U.S. blew up Nordstream.
The report should've been on the lack of transparency in the investigation. Pictures of the pipe would immediately show whether the explosion originated from the inside or the outside of the pipe.
Video records already show the peeled back edges caused by internal explosions. The bombs were pigs inserted at the onland terminal.
Any large pipeline can and is routinely accessed from the inside the pipeline for inspection purposes , therefore a similar sled loaded with explosives could probably be inserted and sent down the pipeline and exploded.
And the pipe was brought to an end. Exactly as promised. 🇺🇦🇺🇸🇸🇯👍
I advise you to read the war powers act from the United States.
as said in the video - the statements is taken out of context. It weights just as little as the russian promise that europe shall freeze.
A logical Kremlin motive this interview does not discuss, but which others have proposed: Avoid a $100B(?) breach of contract lawsuit liability for damaging Western Europe's economy if Russia admitted it was willingly cutting NG supplies to Germany (to extort NATO not to support Ukraine). Such a civil court judgement (taken from currently merely frozen Russian assets in the West) could be avoided if there was doubt as to who caused the shutdown of NordStream pipeline NG supplies. If so, Russia's dictatorship could punish NATO economies for supporting Ukraine by cutting their NG off, but w/o facing a subsequent successful civil lawsuit for the huge money damages their willful breach of contract had caused. This is an unproven, but logical Kremlin motive to destroy their own NordStream pipelines.
That plus collect the insurance. 🤔
How exactly would collect insurance from the West?The same West that are freezing Russian bank accounts 🤔
What lawsuit can be there where as the war has been waged between Russia and the US?
Europe has LNG that can replace gas from pipelines, plus there is Norway. So you're saying that Russia wanted to essentially get out of the market, and then pay a fine when the investigation almost immediately finds out that she did it? Very logical, I'm delighted
@@ГалинаЮдачева Why do Russian trolls always have names like "user- letters and numbers"? Did your mothers hate you so much that they didn't even bother to give you a name?
NO BRAINER. THEY BRAGGED ABOUT IT.
When you have 2 non-military pundits discussing the Nord Stream Pipeline attack, and citing a elderly 3RD pundit who is off the rails for years, this is the type of discussion you get.
Russia’s main interest in this war on Ukraine is dividing NATO and EU members. This attack came long after harsh sanctions were already imposed on Russia. It came as Russian headliners sought retaliatory Russian actions against NATO and the EU. Finally, it came as Germany was racing to store up enough gas energy reserves to last through the Winter. If presented in this context, a Russian attack on its own pipeline make rational military sense.
Russia attacked its own pipeline to try an pull specifically Germany, out of the NATO and EU camps. If Germany did not have sufficient gas reserves for the Winter and LNG facilities would take months to build, a harsh Winter cold could force German politicians to be “neutral” on the war on Ukraine. Even without the attack, even with good gas reserves, German politicians in Social Democrats (SDP) have tried and stall all aid packages to Ukraine.
This attack backfired on Russia in the long run because most NATO and EU average citizens think Putin and his Russia are diabolically inclined to extremes. What modern European country uses human wave attacks? What modern European country would allow 500-1000 casualties per day to be suffered? Finally, what rational European country would allow kleptocracy to become an institutional government policy? Europeans cannot understand what advantages Russians thought war could deliver better than having more democracy, joining the EU and NATO, and negotiating from the inside. Most Europeans think Putin drove Russia off a cliff.
we might never know who did, ...but definitely we now know who did not
@@javierfrancia1938 Who is definitely a NOT??? Germany?
@@stephensipe5405 He spams the same comment throughout the whole discussion, don't bother. Frankly should be reported.
@@stephensipe5405 I'm not ready to rule Germany out completely, though the likelihood of it being Germany working independently is low. There will be Germans who are against the East Germans who still love their former Russian masters.
My money is still on Russia being the culprit however. WE don't know for sure currently (but I would bet that the likes of MI6 do know), but I'm ok with not knowing.
@@ivancho5854 You must like paying Gas bills.
Who blew up the Nord Stream pipeline? - USA did!
Gasprom is mainly Putin ‘s exclusive property . If his entourage was ready to and willing to carry on exporting gas to Europe , Putin probably decided to close all options and carry on with his energy siege on Europe.
😂😂😂total nonesense
those who write such hypotheses simply do not understand anything about how things are done in Russia
EU has no gas due to EU leaders doing as there told by usa it was the wests decision to stop the gas not Russia, the western sanctions backfired and on those who put the sanctions on Russia ,EU prospered for decades on Russian cheep gas but usa didn't like it and the EU got there orders ,west has made a grave mistake poking Russia, the west is not fighting people in flip-flops now.
The difference between Trump and Biden is Trump would be bragging that he blew it up
He's saying the Russians didn't do it, which means of course lol.
jackanory presents this weeks storytime with ‘Western Terrorism on the high seas’
Seymour Hersh's piece on SubStack clarifies all of this.
This is some James Bond stuff...crazy
Russia does not care how much destruction to the infrastructure they do in their claimed annexed regions of Ukraine, or to their army personnel, or to the rest of Ukraine that they claim is part of Russia that they are fighting to reclaim. Rather than admit to having been attacked and destroyed, prestigious items such as the Moskva flagship sinking and aircraft blown up at Saky were described as accidents, so that other so-called accidents to Russian infrastructure, were thereafter jokingly attributed to "the smoker in the ammunition dump"! There are so many interested state organizations in Russia that they act without cooperation with the other agencies, often in open opposition to each other. Russians don't have the western attribute of "guilt", but only the eastern attribute of "shame", so rather than show weakness, they would rather admit the fault as their own doing instead of admitting that they have been beaten by an opponent. Internally, those responsible, or ones who know those who are responsible (or scapegoats), fall out of windows, commit suicide, or otherwise come to untimely ends, or are imprisoned on made-up charges. The Russian Federation will rather remain a world pariah for the next century than admit to any criminality in their actions over Ukraine, or that any of their actions in the world since the end of Soviet times have been unfair in any way. They blew up the pipeline to make things hard for the Europeans to support the Ukrainians against them by permanently breaking the tie between them, and Russia will continue to press westward and over central Asia on its own, keeping the rest of the world blackmailed by the threat of their nuclear strength, if that exists any more, or not. Unless the west breaks and squashes Russian autocracy, or the people in the federation rebel and remove their despots themselves, this situation will come about time and time again.
we might never know who did, ...but definitely we now know who did not
All the assessments about RU in your writeup track. They are completely unscrupulous to do such a thing and the most likely culprit, but it's still not a definitive proof.
good points
Anyone believing Russia brew up their own pipeline isn't the sharpest tool in the box
@@JamesBalmforth 🤡🤡🤡 CLOWNS % COMEDIANS
Seymour is going senile, sadly.
Or you are being ignorant
@@Wvk5zc OK boomer
The fact that the Russians accused the British Navy implies that it was the Russians who did it -- or someone acting on the behalf of the Russians. Why? Because the Russians in fact know that the British Navy didn't do it, indeed that that the British aren't the type who'd ever do something like that. Imagine for a moment that Russia didn't damage the pipeline and didn't know who did -- but that they still know the truth about Britain, that is, that Britain would not have done something like that. Under these facts, Russia would actually be a victim, genuinely indignant, more upset than it showed itself to be when the pipeline was damaged, and it would be investigating vigorously.
we might never know who did, ...but definitely we now know who did not
Such infrastructure-damaging operations have already been carried out against Russia (from the declassified CIA), they immediately knew who was behind this, but did not disclose it
I don’t want to reveal the most delicious, I’ll just watch what while eating popcorn
@@struvrim7637 ME TOO!
People who were watching looked the other way. What do you think made them do that ?
Seymour Hersh has completely discreditted himself. Fantastic debunking done by Oliver Alexander.
we might never know who did, ...but definitely we now know who did not
That's what they want you to think. Hersch broke the story of My Lai and Abu Ghraib. His version of the Bin Laden assassination made more sense than the official version. The Americans threatened to cut off aid to Pakistan and also paid $25 million to a Pakistan general to get Bin Laden's whereabouts. Bin Laden was living in Abbotobad in a 20,000 square foot house next to Pakistan's West Point. Pakistan's radar was switched off. One of the American helicopters crashed in the city. Hersch is always being discredited by useful idiots. The Western press is becoming a joke.
@@javierfrancia1938 We might never know who blew up Nordstream, but I think we know what you are going to say next.
I dont agree. USA did it, everyone knows it.
@@nerdyali4154 i see you are smart! then help spread the truth and stop thiswar for profit that only kills our white christian slavic brothers
USA DID IT BUY U GUYS PRETEND NOT
Lol - EVERYONE knows who blew up the Nord Stream pipeline: including you guys at Times Radioactive.
Enlighten us, please.
@@gaoxiaen1 the US is the only country with the motive to blow it up. It doesn't make sense for Russian to blow up their own pipeline. They can just turn off the gas if they don't want to supply Europe but not totally close off all options to sell their gas.
@@gaoxiaen1 USA and Norway.
anything with "times" is a U.S-U.K proxy of their globalist propaganda.
@@johnisaacfelipe6357 Like the Moscow Times?
The three countries have said they know who did it but have refused to comment, citing security concerns and saying 'it is not in the public interest' to reveal which country is guilty.
Perhaps the red herring did it? I mean it happened in the ocean 🤔
anybody remembers Red October ... ;-)
Lame
Worst.
Allies.
Ever.
Not necessarily a false flag, but to sow discord amongst the coalition which is now assisting Ukraine in defending itself against Russia's war of aggression. This theory, in my opinion, has gained weight with the recent poorly thought out and incompletely sourced news article by Seymour Hirsch. His article gets a number of things wrong that indicate to me that his source in unfamiliar with how underwater demolitions are conducted, but it does accomplish the goal of putting more pressure on both NATO and the 50 nation coalition now assisting Ukraine in self defense.
Yep for me this has always been the biggest reason why Russia did it. Forget about all the economic arguments, Russia just wants to sow distrust among the allies. If people take the simple economic argument then they will say "who has most to gain?" and point to america, and I think Russia has been counting on this all along. In fact I think the pipelines were near useless to Russia already due to the mounting sanctions.
@@PhilAndOr But it doesn't make any sense. At the beginning, everyone immediately accused Russia without any investigation, and therefore they will also blame Russia for creating this fake, and therefore why is it needed?
@@PhilAndOr yeah and so are the UFO sightings it was Russia to create panic....same logic
If the United States President wanted to sabotage the pipelines, it seems like he would want it permanently destroyed. The damage to the pipeline seems repairable. It makes most sense for someone who wants the pipeline to keep existing in the long term or someone who lacked the resources to permanently put it out of service. If the United States Armed Forces did carry this out, they should be ashamed of not finishing the job.
Is that taking into account the corrosion factor? It seems that Mother Nature may have finished the job for them.
Keep believing the lie! And don't forget to support the current thing!
@@Zodroo_Tint Is that even meant to be serious? You might be the laziest conspiracy theorist to heckle me.
we might never know who did, ...but definitely we now know who did not
@@javierfrancia1938 Give it a break, Javier. You don't need to spam every comment with this same response.
no state needed--any professional 6 man underwater demolition team with oil rig experience could have carried out this operation. cheap too 40 ft boat/3 hours/done. the expensive part is the million per man payoff to keep quiet.
If the Russians did it the personnel cost would be limited to the price of the bullets uned to silence them.
Wow thats lucky says the US now you will have to buy our gas (quick double the price)
haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒, haha 🇷🇺💩🐒,
we might never know who did, ...but definitely we now know who did not
@@javierfrancia1938 show me evidence of Russian oligarchs selling shares before it happened and that would be proof, like before 9-11
@@arcenside1772 wow, it is an interesting observation!, i dont know who did it, I only believe that it is obvoius who did not
@@javierfrancia1938 Pound sand, troll.
The USA
I said from day one it was the yanks
If Ukraine did it then wow. These guys need to be on our side.
Someone mentioned that Seymore Hersh's article was terrific reporting. It was all made up as reported by Oliver Alexander's article "Blowing Holes in Seymore Hersh's Pipe Dream". Another article on who had the motive is Jonithan MS Pierce's article "Analysis: Who Blew Up the Nord Stream Pipeline" in Only Sky.
Looks like British regime troll farms are leaving deranged comments like this all over the video 😂
The Hersh article is an awful piece of BS ( I read the original ). Sad to see an old man trying to achieve attention he had earlier - which for sure was justified back then.
we might never know who did, ...but definitely we now know who did not
@@spxram4793 On the contrary why would he destroy his legacy/reputation as the best investigative Journalist ever.
@@ciaranryan5265 He destroyed that a long time ago. He's been one of those Chomsky/Aron Mate/Abbie Martin-like "anti-imperialist" US haters for a while.
To narrow the field I've ruled out Haiti, Panama and Antigua
The only player who had the means, opportunity, the motive and could keep it secret was Russia. All the others lack at lest one element of that.
Strange america left Afghanistan a bit sharpish within a month of ns2’s completion 🤔
It was Terrorussia obviously.
It was the yanks. NATO should break up.
Even the theory that it was the US claims the US was doing it in co-operation or agreement with Germany and the Nordic countries, so then why on earth should that lead to NATO breaking up?
Where would your mom work at night?
Times radio for primary school aged readers 😂😂😂more propagandised nonesense
Seymour Hersh, Jeffrey Sachs…
Gas is not as environmentally damaging as oil?