Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-24

[Chz]

Sounds simple, but b) is almost impossible to do in this case. It's not something that difficult to pull off, and that makes it hard to rule out even Poland or Estonia doing it. The only one I outright didn't believe was the Americans using the Norwegians to do it. Ludicrous that they'd do something they need to keep quiet and involve another country in it.

 

[Pickman's model]

Even if everything Pirani says is correct its not ludicrous that the US did it. The link you posted boils down to one conclusion: "ive no idea who did it". The US remains the most likely. Thats not a certainty, it goes on a long list of things we will likely never know, but US is the most likely, not least because they said they would do it and Poland said thank you

I said before and will repeat it as anything else is daft. Russia did not destroy Nordstream 2. This stupid theory really deserves the term “ludicrous “.

If you read about eg macv sog the notion of the Americans doing this as a covert op isn't imo so far-fetched even if hersh hasn't proven his case

 

[LDC]

I said before and will repeat it as anything else is daft. Russia did not destroy Nordstream 2. This stupid theory really deserves the term “ludicrous “.

Yeah the ultra-nationalist authoritarian country that annexed Crimea using deniable 'little green men' in 2014, has since invaded another country after denying it was going to do that for months, and has forcibly deported thousands of children from Ukraine to Russia, has executed and tortured civilians out of hand, bombed medical facilities and civilian infrastructure, plus a bunch of other things would never do that.

Do you have any evidence for stating it wasn't Russia as a fact? Maybe you're letting your dogma get in the way of reality, and you need to try and think beyond that 'debt' you think we all owe to Russia for WW2?

 

[TopCat]

Yeah the ultra-nationalist authoritarian country that annexed Crimea using deniable 'little green men' in 2014, has since invaded another country after denying it was going to do that for months, and has forcibly deported thousands of children from Ukraine to Russia, has executed and tortured civilians out of hand, bombed medical facilities and civilian infrastructure, plus a bunch of other things would never do that.

Do you have any evidence for stating it wasn't Russia as a fact? Maybe you're letting your dogma get in the way of reality, and you need to try and think beyond that 'debt' you think we all owe to Russia for WW2?

You don’t believe the Russians done it. You are just fully committed to your war and won’t undermine your side’s propaganda however daft this makes you look.

 

[Yossarian]

Didn't Putin come to power by orchestrating the bombing of Russian apartment buildings and blaming it on Chechens?

 

[strung out]

Didn't Putin come to power by orchestrating the bombing of Russian apartment buildings and blaming it on Chechens?

Why would he bomb his own people though? Doesn't make sense - must have been the Americans, I am very clever.

 

[LDC]

You don’t believe the Russians done it. You are just fully committed to your war and won’t undermine your side’s propaganda however daft this makes you look.

Funnily enough I don't know who or what State did it. Unlike you who knows for a fact it wasn't Russia. And that is obviously entirely unrelated to your other positions on the war and Russia.

Lol at fully committed to your war, you loon.

 

[TopCat]

Funnily enough I don't know who or what State did it. Unlike you who knows for a fact it wasn't Russia. And that is obviously entirely unrelated to your other positions on the war and Russia.

Lol at fully committed to your war, you loon.

When they call for foreign fighters I expect you up the front.

 

[LDC]

Still not actually answering the question about how you can state for a fact it wasn't Russia then? Or have you got mixed up between opinions and facts?

 

[TopCat]

Still not actually answering the question about how you can state for a fact it wasn't Russia then? Or have you got mixed up between opinions and facts?

I haven’t stated it as a fact. I said that no honest person believes the Russians did it. I have cast doubt on your honesty. Or you are dead thick but I think it’s the former.

 

[strung out]

I haven’t stated it as a fact. I said that no honest person believes the Russians did it. I have cast doubt on your honesty. Or you are dead thick but I think it’s the former.

I believe the same as I did back in October, that there's a strong possibility that the Russians did it (while not discounting that other possibilities also exist).

It's possible it was aimed at internal Russian politics. By taking out Nordstream permanently, Putin reduces the risk that any internal opponents might decide to overthrow him and be able to do a deal with the west in return for turning the gas back on.

I think Putin was already resigned to losing Europe as a major customer of gas, so the sabotage firms up his own position at home.

 

[LDC]

I haven’t stated it as a fact. I said that no honest person believes the Russians did it. I have cast doubt on your honesty. Or you are dead thick but I think it’s the former.

My mistake or misreading then. When you said this a few posts ago I took it to mean that you meant that Russia did not destroy Nord Stream, when you must have meant something else when you said "Russia did not destroy Nord Stream."

Russia did not destroy Nordstream 2. This stupid theory really deserves the term “ludicrous “.

Nice to be cast as dishonest rather than thick, thanks. Obviously I'm a pro-war pro-NATO lackey trying to sow our propaganda among the important U75 demographic.

 

[The39thStep]

I believe the same as I did back in October, that there's a strong possibility that the Russians did it (while not discounting that other possibilities also exist).

Which internal opposition that would want to do a deal with 'the West' did you have in mind at the time you wrote that?

 

[editor]

I said before and will repeat it as anything else is daft. Russia did not destroy Nordstream 2. This stupid theory really deserves the term “ludicrous “.

You can repeat it as much as you like but without any credible evidence to back up your pro-Russian beliefs, your opinion is as valid as some random stoned bloke sat in a bin down the street.

 

[editor]

I haven’t stated it as a fact. I said that no honest person believes the Russians did it. I have cast doubt on your honesty. Or you are dead thick but I think it’s the former.

Oh right! So only dishonest people believe it was the Russians!

 

[Raheem]

Oh right! So only dishonest people believe it was the Russians!

Only dishonest people say it was the Russians.

They must be dishonest, or else why would they be sent to prison?

Honest people keep their mouths shut.

 

[strung out]

Which internal opposition that would want to do a deal with 'the West' did you have in mind at the time you wrote that?

Off the top of my head, a grouping of oligarchs with significant business interests in the west are one set of people who would be keen to have a deal done to lift sanctions.

If Putin had already written off switching the gas back on, its feasible that extinguishing any possibility of the gas being switched back on under different leadership could be another way of maintaining the control he's had over oligarchs.

Other theories exist, obviously.

 

[redsquirrel]

Didn't Putin come to power by orchestrating the bombing of Russian apartment buildings and blaming it on Chechens?

Has it ever been traced back that far?

From what I've seen the evidence for dodginess is strong but is there any evidence that he was involved in the actual bombings, as opposed to using them to help him politically.

 

[TopCat]

Has it ever been traced back that far?

From what I've seen the evidence for dodginess is strong but is there any evidence that he was involved in the actual bombings, as opposed to using them to help him politically.

There was no evidence of Putin involvement. It could have been. Or not.

 

[emanymton]

You can repeat it as much as you like but without any credible evidence to back up your pro-Russian beliefs, your opinion is as valid as some random stoned bloke sat in a bin down the street.

I think you are giving him a bit too much credit there.

 

[Yossarian]

Has it ever been traced back that far?

From what I've seen the evidence for dodginess is strong but is there any evidence that he was involved in the actual bombings, as opposed to using them to help him politically.

I don't think any solid evidence linking Putin to the bombings has uncovered - though that may be because a lot of people who tried looking for it ended up dead.

 

[The39thStep]

Off the top of my head, a grouping of oligarchs with significant business interests in the west are one set of people who would be keen to have a deal done to lift sanctions.

If Putin had already written off switching the gas back on, its feasible that extinguishing any possibility of the gas being switched back on under different leadership could be another way of maintaining the control he's had over oligarchs.

Other theories exist, obviously.

There are some from the grouping you describe who have come out against the war or at least said something critical . In theory, I could certainly see some sort of a motive there from such people however can't see the means and I'm far from convinced they are seen as a threat.

 

[TopCat]

You can repeat it as much as you like but without any credible evidence to back up your pro-Russian beliefs, your opinion is as valid as some random stoned bloke sat in a bin down the street.

Possibly more than a balding old fool in a stupid hat.

 

[editor]

Possibly more than a balding old fool in a stupid hat.

Sorry, who are you referring to here? Be good to make things clear.

 

[ska invita]

Bizarre the way people are using this as a which side are you on football. If it was the US it was presumably part of the war effort (hence Poland saying thank you) and so a good thing....

 

[Rob Ray]

Jfc various players could have done it, no-one knows who did do it, anything else is speculation, so there's no point in having an argument about it. Also Topcat's not "pro Russian," people blaming the Russians when they don't actually know who did it aren't "dishonest" (just speculative with a bias) and no-one's "fully committed to war" there's just disagreement on what's happening/why/the best way to prevent more of it.

 

[Pickman's model]

Yeah the ultra-nationalist authoritarian country that annexed Crimea using deniable 'little green men' in 2014, has since invaded another country after denying it was going to do that for months, and has forcibly deported thousands of children from Ukraine to Russia, has executed and tortured civilians out of hand, bombed medical facilities and civilian infrastructure, plus a bunch of other things would never do that.

Do you have any evidence for stating it wasn't Russia as a fact? Maybe you're letting your dogma get in the way of reality, and you need to try and think beyond that 'debt' you think we all owe to Russia for WW2?

so much of what hersh points to in his article exists - the diving school in panama city, the naval exercises, biden on film saying he'd deal with nordstream if russia invaded ukraine. the americans certainly have the means, the motive and the opportunity to act as hersh claims. the russians? we've seen their vaunted armed forces humiliated in ukraine, both army and navy, whether elite or conventional. in the absence of any evidence being shared suggesting that russia might have done it - ships in the area or whatnot - perhaps claims of amerrican culpability are not so outlandish

 

[Pickman's model]

Jfc various players could have done it, no-one knows who did do it, anything else is speculation, so there's no point in having an argument about it.

there's no point to so much of what we do here

 

[strung out]

so much of what hersh points to in his article exists - the diving school in panama city, the naval exercises, biden on film saying he'd deal with nordstream if russia invaded ukraine. the americans certainly have the means, the motive and the opportunity to act as hersh claims. the russians? we've seen their vaunted armed forces humiliated in ukraine, both army and navy, whether elite or conventional. in the absence of any evidence being shared suggesting that russia might have done it - ships in the area or whatnot - perhaps claims of amerrican culpability are not so outlandish

Yeah, if you take out all the bits Hersh either made up or got wrong, it's pretty convincing. As it is though, it's essentially worthless.

 

[Pickman's model]

Yeah, if you take out all the bits Hersh either made up or got wrong, it's pretty convincing. As it is though, it's essentially worthless.

it's an astonishingly poorly written article, a hack off the mail might have done a better job