[Plantagenet]

Did you see the story where immediately after leaving Putin Xi called a meeting with the ex-Soviet -stans, and excluded Russia?

This war is great for China, they get low cost gas and are able to expand their influence over the USSR carcass. Xi is eating Russias lunch. He has opened an influence front on Russia East flank and there is jack all Putin can do about it.

No clue how this will play out, but I have to believe Putin’s days are numbered.

I don’t think Xi will have him “removed”, Putin is doing too good a job for Xi, Xi wll want him to stay and weaken Russia even more.

Yup. ---Exactly right.

I can't imagine why ordinary Russians would want to turn their back on being trading partners with Europe and instead agree to become basically a colony of China. Russia is now so locked into trading only with China that they don't even get fair market prices from the Chinese.


Putin is so stupid he's got Russia locked into selling their oil to China at a big discount, and then the Chinese turn around and resell the Russian oil on the open market and make a big profit.

SHEESH!!!

[evilgenius]

Carinke,

I did listen to that Hill video. I was not impressed by the arguments or their background knowledge.

Hersh was unable to get ANY reputable outlet to carry his story because it was totally unsubstantiated, based on a single unnamed source. So he released it on substack, self published.

We're this the first time one could perhaps give him some credence. However he has now cultivated a long history of outrageous unsubstantiated claims.

https://www.19fortyfive.com/2023/02/did ... -problems/

The theory that it was Russia operating out of Kaliningrad has far more credibility because they have a proximate naval base, have developed submersible with the capability, and have a painfully long history of destroying civil infrastructure to threaten populations. Putin also has demonstrated he is willing to sacrifice Russian assets to further his personal ego, dramatically in the form of human sacrifice. If he does not care about human life why should he care about a pipeline? Pipeline can not protest their loss like wives and mothers.

People keep trying to sustain out Putin's logic by applying their personal ruel set, asking "What would I do?" While that is grequently a good method it does not work with exceptional people, and Putin is an exception.

In his case it is best to ask "How has he performed before, what are his tactics, what are his goals."

According to David Satter, Yuri Felshtinsky, Alexander Litvinenko, Vladimir Pribylovsky and Boris Kagarlitsky, the bombings were a successful false flag operation coordinated by the Russian state security services to win public support for a new full-scale war in Chechnya and to bring Putin to power.[206][17][18][19][68][207][20][208][209] Some of them described the bombings as typical "active measures" practised by the KGB in the past. The war in Chechnya boosted Prime Minister and former FSB Director Vladimir Putin's popularity, and brought the pro-war Unity Party to the State Duma and Putin to the presidency within a few months.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_a ... t_bombings

It makes far more sense to me, consistent with past and current practice, that Lutin would sacrifice a key asset to impress upon the West how far he was willing to go.

Neilsons most recent video is on Russias hybrid warfare and the Wests response. His opinion is that these events (cyber attacks, derailments, sabatoge, etc.) are taking place and that the West is ignoring them so that we do not have to respond.
https://youtu.be/EeP_ZZbBIl4

My Personal "Best Guess" is that if the investigators (Norway??) have info they are sitting on it so as to not inflame the situation. GUESS being the operative word there.

..............................
I am reading more and more analyst who seem to be converging on the idea that Putin desires an open conflict with NATO and that he is trying to provoke the same. For some reason it seems it is a game, neither side wants to be seen as being the initiator. Reminds me of Fort Sumpter at the opening of the US Civil war. We now have, on average, more than one Russian incursion flight per day which is met by US or NATO aircraft.

Try this, assume that Putin is living an insurance life, he has no more that 4 to 5 advisors, who were all selected for their loyalty not their ability, that Putin was trained in using fear and intimidation as weapons, that is afraid for his life. With that assumption set then ask yourself "If I were this person, what would I do?"

Since we are trading videos, here is an interesting one.

Trumps security advisor.

https://youtu.be/xLDgPV9NiGg

And obfuscating who did it makes it clear why a Russian plane would attack a US drone over the Black Sea, all the while making it look like Russian fighter pilots can't fly very well! Because he hit the drone when he certainly didn't have to. Spraying fuel may have only been to get our attention. "Hey, there, you are about to see a Russian pilot fly very poorly." It fits the narrative that Russia is too incompetent to pull something like destroying the pipelines off.

What's the alternative to losing in Ukraine? Is it really winning in Ukraine? Why would Russia deliberately engage in tactics that lead to failure? The realities of what is happening on the ground don't always line up with the seeming end game to all of the propaganda.

My hunch is that they do not want a reformed military that can fight more efficiently because it can think at the level that it faces the threats on the ground. That type of military might more easily figure out the difference between fighting for old Soviet style influences that kept up the corruption of the old Politburo, extending it into the rule of the oligarchs, and something done more in the national interest.

Winning in Ukraine as the war has been prosecuted probably requires the sort of military that can think on its feet, so we will likely watch more Russian soldiers die in horrible ways for a while. I think the propaganda line is that Putin is looking for a general Grant type figure, as Lincoln was. He might not really be doing that at all. It actually looks to me like Putin may be intentionally drawing this conflict out. Perhaps that's why they didn't win in the first few days, when the only real reason why they didn't was something like the will to do it?

If I was at the Pentagon, and the US did not destroy Nordstream, I would be paying serious attention to this. I would take it as a feint. I would figure the most logical reason would be to align the timeline of Ukraine up with the timeline of Taiwan. It would mean to expect Russia to be a whole lot more competent than they appear on the surface. It would mean to expect them to overrun Ukraine, if Taiwan is invaded, and probably pierce a certain distance into Europe. But that's only how I would feel if I was privy, if I knew who did it, and it was Russia. There are all kinds of reasons why it could have been the US too.

[Newfie]

I have considered the Lincoln/Grant analogy as well. Maybe some merit.

I’m also thin Putin is trying to draw the war out. He really has no choice. Pulling out would signal what a dumb idea it was, he would likely not survive that. Same end if he is pushed out. He can not outright win. So he keeps on struggling as a war time leader hoping for a negotiated peace that won’t bee too bad.

But honestly, in the broader spectrum, it has already been an unmitigated disaster.

[Newfie]

For snyone still following the Seymor Hersh line of thinking here is a decent current round up, so you don't need to go through the pay wall.

https://brian-whit.medium.com/all-at-se ... 67e17a1728

[Newfie]

A little more from Brian Whitiaker.

Danish ships photographed Russian ships over the pipeline but will not release images.

https://brian-whit.medium.com/photos-sh ... a4524be1a7

[Plantagenet]

For snyone still following the Seymor Hersh line of thinking here is a decent current round up, so you don't need to go through the pay wall.

https://brian-whit.medium.com/all-at-se ... 67e17a1728

Thanks for posting this. It's a well-written and fairly objective summary.

HOWEVER....I think I found a flaw with Mr. Whitaker's approach to this issue. Mr. Whitaker is quick to pursue every single possible problem with Mr. Seymour Hersh's claim that the US blew up the pipeline. However, Mr. Whitaker spends no time at all looking at serious problems with the alternative sailboat hypothesis.

You know a lot more about sailboats than I do, Newfie.....tell me how this works in real life.

As I understand it, Sailboats have a limited capacity to carry weight, and there are standard equations to calculate how much weight a sailboat can safely carry. Using the equations at the website below, I calculate that a 49 foot sailboat, for instance, can carry about 5000 lbs.

Calculating-Your-Boat-s-Capacity

OK....it's estimated that the explosives used to blow up nordsea pipeline weighed about 2000 lbs. There were 6 people on the yacht....thats another 1000 pounds. No doubt the yacht had a significant amount of fuel and water and food and beer on board. Add in, say, another 1000 lbs. Now add in the gear for the two divers going down 80 feet...cold water wetsuits, gloves, finns, weights, tanks, masks, etc. Thats another 200 lbs easy. Add in a spare air tank and some spare diving gear for another 100 pounds. Now add in the compressor needed to recharge the tanks for multiple dives...another 150 pounds. Add in some equipment to move the heavy explosives around the boat and gear to winch it over the side and gear and cables to get the explosives down to the bottom. Add in...say....another 100-300 pounds? Add in some lights with batteries to illuminate the work site down at the pipeline....say 50 pounds? Add in some kind of electronic triggering mechanisms and radio communication equipment to be installed at each batch of explosive set on the pipeline so it can be remotely detonated....say 60 pounds? Add in the detonator mechanism and explosive ....say 40 pounds? Add in some kind of decompression bag for the doctor to use if there was a problem and one of the divers got the bends....30 pounds? Add in everybody's personal clothes, cell phones, cameras, the doctor's medical bag and kit, etc. and get another 100 pounds easy.....and VOILA!!!!! We are either uncomfortably very close to the limit or we have actually exceeded the carrying capacity of the yacht.



And if it is questionable if the 49 foot long yacht in question can safely carry all the explosives and gear and people required for a big underwater demolition job like this, then it seems reasonable to me there might have been a bigger ship involved in this sabotage.

Cheers!

[Newfie]

Plant,

The sailboat story is hokum. Those points you make are valid, there are more reasons to disbelieve it. It MAY have been a communications or support vessel, perhaps as a surface rescue boat but it was NOT the prime mover in this event.

Ever do any diving? Ever try to get into a dive boat in 3’ seas? That sailboat would have been a wack-a-mole hammer to divers. Decompression? Their heads would have been compressed into there hinder parts.

Where the evidence is leading is to a submarine operation. The hounds are on the trail of the Russian sub support vessel with a rather large rescue sub and appropriate apparatus to place explosives, attended by 2 sea going tugs with cranes.

My theory, not gaining traction, is it could have been a larger sub towing a detachable explosive package for placement.

The Danes, Swedes, and US were all over this operation as it occurred. They may not have known exactly what was going on but they obviously were aware of the activity. The Danes have no admitted one of the vessels took 112 photos of the Russian vessels, but will jot release the photos citing security reasons.

Some Danish news agency is, right now, airing a 3 hour expose on Russian activities. Hopefully that will expose some further info. I don’t have access so I need to await others to sit through it and report. What I heard from hour 1 was 34km of some cable has gone missing and the Russian “research” vessel has an armed contingent to shoo away small boats.

[Plantagenet]

Thanks, NEWFIE.

That makes a lot of sense.



cheers!

[Newfie]

A roughly similar incident.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Ru ... rgy_crisis

More detail here.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4638566.stm

[Newfie]

Some new info on the Nord Stream incident.

https://oalexanderdk.substack.com/p/dan ... ms-russian

[AdamB]

Some new info on the Nord Stream incident.

https://oalexanderdk.substack.com/p/dan ... ms-russian

Seems unreasonable, providing information that contradicts the very title of the thread.

I'm surprised that the few remaining looney tunes leaning conspirators we have around haven't accused you of American favoritism or something.

[Newfie]

One thing fascinating is to watch how new is dispersed by geographic region. It is pretty clear when looking at the new story (linked above) about the Russian submarine support ship with a rescue sub being at the blast site 4 days prior to the blast. The Danes took pictures if it.

The news is slowly being distributed by European sources, mostly British, if my Google search is any guide. But then perhaps my internet connection is influencing the results. I am physically in Guadeloupe, which identifies as France, but am using a VPN server in the USA.

But secondly, shortly after the blast CNN noted that Russian submarine support vessel (or sub?) was seen at the blast site in the previous week, but then repudiated the source as unreliable.

To my ear the news is being highly manipulated, but by whom and for what purpose is not clear.

I do believe that this new news is credible and based on open source evidence and will hold up.

[jato0072]

Nuland threatens Nordstream 2 - Facebook video - 20 seconds

Biden says he will end Nordstream - youtube - 30 seconds



Really people!?! So the Biden administration threatens to end Nordstream. Then, after it is destroyed, the Biden Administration approves of the so called "Russian" attack on Nordstream?

Nuland (& the Biden Administration) is "very gratified" that Nord Stream 2 is "a hunk of metal at the bottom of the sea" - youtube, 8 seconds

[Newfie]

Jato

You and I interpret those statements very differently. I was hoping you had some more concrete evidence of the attack.

What I was pointing to was evidence of a Russian submarine rescue boat with a smaller sub and 2 maneuvering tugs on the explosion site 4 days before the explosions.

[evilgenius]

I was thinking about what I said above, about how if I was in charge of keeping watch at the Pentagon I would suspect the Russians were up to something. Well, along those lines, I was just reading a story about how Russian jets are giving US jets more grief over Syria.

Then, it occurred to me, the US doesn't have enough F-22's. The F-22 is the best dog fighter in the world. Dog fighting is what you will get, if you have to obey rules of engagement up until the very point where your enemy reveals their antagonistic intentions. The encounters in Syria all ended with the US planes strictly obeying their rules of engagement. That would mean that the Russians would get the first shot, up close. That almost guarantees the sort of proximity that negates the advantage gained by advanced radar and long range missiles. It might mean needing maneuverability.

If the Russian move into Ukraine aligns with a Chinese move upon Taiwan, the Russians only need to place their advanced fighters into a particular region that they have tested with encounters. They test various places like this all of the time. We know from the news that the US does have F-22's based in Alaska, for instance.

The Russians are always flying Bearcat bombers over the region, to provoke a US response. If those F-22's were to stop coming out to meet them because they were stationed in Europe in preparation for what the Russians might do when the Chinese go, then that corridor might be where the Russians decide to use their more advanced fighters. There is so much to watch out for.

This is why the Air Force wanted the number of fighters they asked for. Deliberate ignorance of this is why politicians canceled the program when they did. The F-16 is probably pretty good at acting fast too, but not against fighters that can do things it can't, I suppose?

You gotta wonder. This is a weird time. Something like the timing of Ukraine and Taiwan aligning could just be a coincidence. The Chinese could just be making noise, in order to bring out the patriot in their own population.

The thing is, if there is a legitimate opportunity would the Russians simply use it? There probably are enough F-22's, in other words, but the logistics of getting them around, and divvying out how many are here or there, mean that it could go wrong somewhere if nobody is paying particular attention.

The Russians could use the possible defeat of an under staffed region to force the US to quit in other places. Or to take reserves that are needed elsewhere. The idea being that they wouldn't be trying to conquer Europe, but to gain concessions before retreating back into Russia. They'd be looking to see if they can force an unequal confrontation somewhere that can get that for them. The concessions might include something like a monopolization of natural gas sales to Europe for the foreseeable future, keeping Ukraine, whose deposits the Russians wanted, out of the picture. You know, let them have Crimea, it looks like the Russians may be preparing for a battle over the place, as long as there has been a political agreement instituted that gives them the same result as if they had kept it.

[jato0072]

You and I interpret those statements very differently.

How do you interpret them?

When people threaten to carry out a crime, then said crime happens, then the people who threatened the crime say they are "very gratified" at the result, I pay attention. That is power.

[AdamB]

You and I interpret those statements very differently.

How do you interpret them?

When people threaten to carry out a crime, then said crime happens, then the people who threatened the crime say they are "very gratified" at the result, I pay attention. That is power.

But not necessarily how the pipeline was destroyed. No one apparently has been watching Prince of Siberia throughput, changes in China NG consumption, imports and exports, or the type of cold weather compressors necessary to make moving more NG possible and spikes in their sales, and to who, in particular environments. Like, say, if someone required a commitment from a partner to cut a particular type of deal, similar to the deals made for discount priced Russian oil. Actions taken by certain actors is not equivacating language, it is action meant to benefit a party.

Not that the US couldn't have taken out the pipeline, but the US can do all sorts of things, threatens all sorts of things, and rarely carries through. The language equivacates...on purpose.

[Newfie]

You and I interpret those statements very differently.

How do you interpret them?

When people threaten to carry out a crime, then said crime happens, then the people who threatened the crime say they are "very gratified" at the result, I pay attention. That is power.

I interpret them as junivile statements.

I see no evidence Biden did anything.

Now however we are told the Danes have pics of just the sort of vessle you would expect to place these charges, at the scene of the crime shortly before.

That is tangible evidence of practical amity to do the deed and also being at the scene.

[careinke]

You and I interpret those statements very differently.

How do you interpret them?

When people threaten to carry out a crime, then said crime happens, then the people who threatened the crime say they are "very gratified" at the result, I pay attention. That is power.

I interpret them as junivile statements.

I see no evidence Biden did anything.

Now however we are told the Danes have pics of just the sort of vessle you would expect to place these charges, at the scene of the crime shortly before.

That is tangible evidence of practical amity to do the deed and also being at the scene.

We've been told lots of stuff, most of it false. Everything you link to says "may have" in their conclusions. They claim to have the evidence but won't produce it. Just trust them....yeah right.

Who benefited from the pipeline explosions? The Russians or the Americans?

Peace

[AdamB]

Who benefited from the pipeline explosions? The Russians or the Americans?
Peace

The Chinese. Do try and get just a LITTLE outside the obvious box.