There's don't know and don't know. We've seen in the past with the Kursk that Russia struggles at depth and any operation like this would have needed rehearsals (see eg admiral mcraven's book on special ops where he emphasises this as a preliminary to a successful special op). Given the amount of nato activity in the baltic beforehand both rehearsals and the actual op clearly possible, while all the support necessary was available at the time. So I would tend to support hersh's conclusions tho not all the rationale in support he provides
If only he'd listen to you, and your cogent, reasonable arguments.
i don't imagine he hears many cogent, reasonable arguments
Or stupid.
Which are you? Or perhaps put forward your arguments as to why you really think it was the Russians.
Do you think you have been seriously engaging up to now? Really?
newpol.org
I appreciate your view. Yes the very siting of the severance makes me go "chin rub".
Pirani summarises the article it in his intro:
"I do not know who blew up the pipelines. But here I will show that (i) Hersh’s claims about the effect and purpose of the sabotage are factually incorrect, (ii) his account of the build-up to the explosion misses out huge chunks of the story and is grossly misleading, and (iii) his explanation for U.S. motivation is flawed, and his failure to examine Russian motivation is one-sided."
Pirani summarises partly by saying:
“Left organisations and personalities retail (sp.?) Hersh’s Nord Stream story uncritically, because it is what they want to hear. Dogma beats inquiry. Innuendo and false claims beat solidarity with the victims of Russia’s scorched-earth war on populations, in Syria in 2014 and 2017, and Ukraine in 2022-23."
Given Hersh publised stuff denying Assad's use of chemical weapons with equally spurious 'research' everything he produced is highly politically and factually suspect imo.
The Nord Stream Pipeline Explosions: Challenging False Narratives - New Politics
The claim that the Nord Stream gas pipeline was blown up by U.S. special forces, made by Seymour Hersh, is being used to reinforce false narratives about Russia’s culpability for the war in Ukraine.Read more ›
If you read hersh's article and look at the people he says carried out the operation they don't appear to fall within either the US special operations command or the naval special warfare lot (see United States Naval Special Warfare Command - Wikipedia). And hersh says why he thinks the special forces not used, because use of soc forces has to go to Congress. Using divers from Panama City doesn't have to be so reported. So this rebuttal of hersh has itself at least one apparent error in it, in its claim special forces were employed.Pirani summarises the article it in his intro:
"I do not know who blew up the pipelines. But here I will show that (i) Hersh’s claims about the effect and purpose of the sabotage are factually incorrect, (ii) his account of the build-up to the explosion misses out huge chunks of the story and is grossly misleading, and (iii) his explanation for U.S. motivation is flawed, and his failure to examine Russian motivation is one-sided."
Pirani summarises partly by saying:
“Left organisations and personalities retail (sp.?) Hersh’s Nord Stream story uncritically, because it is what they want to hear. Dogma beats inquiry. Innuendo and false claims beat solidarity with the victims of Russia’s scorched-earth war on populations, in Syria in 2014 and 2017, and Ukraine in 2022-23."
Given Hersh publised stuff denying Assad's use of chemical weapons with equally spurious 'research' everything he produced is highly politically and factually suspect imo.
The Nord Stream Pipeline Explosions: Challenging False Narratives - New Politics
The claim that the Nord Stream gas pipeline was blown up by U.S. special forces, made by Seymour Hersh, is being used to reinforce false narratives about Russia’s culpability for the war in Ukraine.Read more ›
Thanks for that. I never quoted Hersh's article because what I read of it seemed to contain a lot of assertions and theories sort of presented as fact but also smacking of bigging himself as author up. I had no idea of the trajectory Hersh seems to be on. I agree with whoever posted earlier that a lot of big story journoes often go a bit odd.Pirani summarises the article it in his intro:
"I do not know who blew up the pipelines. But here I will show that (i) Hersh’s claims about the effect and purpose of the sabotage are factually incorrect, (ii) his account of the build-up to the explosion misses out huge chunks of the story and is grossly misleading, and (iii) his explanation for U.S. motivation is flawed, and his failure to examine Russian motivation is one-sided."
Pirani summarises partly by saying:
“Left organisations and personalities retail (sp.?) Hersh’s Nord Stream story uncritically, because it is what they want to hear. Dogma beats inquiry. Innuendo and false claims beat solidarity with the victims of Russia’s scorched-earth war on populations, in Syria in 2014 and 2017, and Ukraine in 2022-23."
Given Hersh publised stuff denying Assad's use of chemical weapons with equally spurious 'research' everything he produced is highly politically and factually suspect imo.
The Nord Stream Pipeline Explosions: Challenging False Narratives - New Politics
The claim that the Nord Stream gas pipeline was blown up by U.S. special forces, made by Seymour Hersh, is being used to reinforce false narratives about Russia’s culpability for the war in Ukraine.Read more ›
Frame the conversation.
yeah, that one is an odd one. Capitalism rolls on regardless.
I can say that Russia are the biggest cunts and have lied consistently and thoroughly about everything since the build-up to the invasion and still say that it wouldn't surprise me if the yanks blew up the pipe stream . So question away.
I can echo all of that.
