6 ms·

The US was always opposed to Nord Stream and for good reasons. I'm in fact glad it's gone. Many people already speculated it was the US, because Biden himself

The US was always opposed to Nord Stream and for good reasons. I'm in fact glad it's gone. Many people already speculated it was the US, because Biden himself literally says "we will bring an end to it": https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OS4O8rGRLf8 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OS4O8rGRLf8 With a smirk. Even when pressed how he is going to do it. For me, Hersh' story is the secondary corroboration.

rexxxmi 4y ago
A general criminal law principle known as the corpus delicti rule provides that a confession, standing alone, isn't enough for a conviction. I am not taking a position. I'm saying no one has presented hard evidence. And until they do, if ever, both sides will play hot potato and nothing will happen. When someone presents hard evidence for either position I'll listen to them happily.
- marcusverus 4y ago
  It may not be sufficient for a conviction in criminal court, but it goes a long way in the court of public opinion. As well it should.
aredox 4y ago
Yes, it overtly said he would do it. Even though it was a very secret operation that had to be hidden from Congress'gang of eight. Totally how Biden rolls. Oh, and they forgot to blow one of the pipes. Whoopsy!
smcl 4y ago
Seems to me equally likely he's saying they'd pressure Germany to not use it or introduce sanctions (to bring an end to Nordstream 2, as a source of foreign currency for Russia and as leverage over the EU). Additionally wasn't Nordstream 2 not yet operational, and mostly Nordstream 1 that was sabotaged?
- kcplate 4y ago
  “Put an end to it” seems to carry a bit more finality then “we are going to encourage to not use it, or introduce sanctions to not use it”. Especially in light of the damn thing actually being destroyed…and an end being put to it. The action that was taken, even though it’s not acknowledged, has brought weight to the statement.
  - smcl 4y ago
    I think if they were planning to do this they wouldn't have sent Joe Biden out and said "alright, drop a little hint that you're going to bomb Nordstream in the event of a Ukraine invasion". And if they were planning to do so and Biden blurted it out (because ... he's Joe Biden) I imagine any plans to bomb the pipeline would surely have been scrapped as he'd have just given the game away. More realistic is the old man who has famously delivered gaffe after gaffe, who has repeatedly stumbled on his speeches and said dumb shit, said something a bit inelegant that everyone's now seizing on like a bunch of qanoners baking the latest q-drop on 8chan
    - kcplate 4y ago
      Even a gaffe doesn’t change the core strategic value, it only adds another variable to consider as part of the possible blowback of the operation. Regardless, it’s apparent that even with a Biden gaffe in the mix, if the US was responsible it was done in a way that preserved enough mystery to minimize the blowback.
      - smcl 4y ago
        Right, this is what I'm saying. The situation is anything but clear and I don't think Biden's comments that day tell us anything concrete about this one way or another, and I think it's a mistake that some people think it does. If the USA didn't commit this, then through their various covert actions over the last half-century they only have themselves to blame for the suspicion that it was down to them.

rexxxmi 4y ago

A general criminal law principle known as the corpus delicti rule provides that a confession, standing alone, isn't enough for a conviction. I am not taking a position. I'm saying no one has presented hard evidence. And until they do, if ever, both sides will play hot potato and nothing will happen. When someone presents hard evidence for either position I'll listen to them happily.

marcusverus 4y ago
It may not be sufficient for a conviction in criminal court, but it goes a long way in the court of public opinion. As well it should.

aredox 4y ago

Yes, it overtly said he would do it. Even though it was a very secret operation that had to be hidden from Congress'gang of eight. Totally how Biden rolls. Oh, and they forgot to blow one of the pipes. Whoopsy!

smcl 4y ago

Seems to me equally likely he's saying they'd pressure Germany to not use it or introduce sanctions (to bring an end to Nordstream 2, as a source of foreign currency for Russia and as leverage over the EU). Additionally wasn't Nordstream 2 not yet operational, and mostly Nordstream 1 that was sabotaged?

kcplate 4y ago
“Put an end to it” seems to carry a bit more finality then “we are going to encourage to not use it, or introduce sanctions to not use it”. Especially in light of the damn thing actually being destroyed…and an end being put to it. The action that was taken, even though it’s not acknowledged, has brought weight to the statement.
- smcl 4y ago
  I think if they were planning to do this they wouldn't have sent Joe Biden out and said "alright, drop a little hint that you're going to bomb Nordstream in the event of a Ukraine invasion". And if they were planning to do so and Biden blurted it out (because ... he's Joe Biden) I imagine any plans to bomb the pipeline would surely have been scrapped as he'd have just given the game away. More realistic is the old man who has famously delivered gaffe after gaffe, who has repeatedly stumbled on his speeches and said dumb shit, said something a bit inelegant that everyone's now seizing on like a bunch of qanoners baking the latest q-drop on 8chan
  - kcplate 4y ago
    Even a gaffe doesn’t change the core strategic value, it only adds another variable to consider as part of the possible blowback of the operation. Regardless, it’s apparent that even with a Biden gaffe in the mix, if the US was responsible it was done in a way that preserved enough mystery to minimize the blowback.
    - smcl 4y ago
      Right, this is what I'm saying. The situation is anything but clear and I don't think Biden's comments that day tell us anything concrete about this one way or another, and I think it's a mistake that some people think it does. If the USA didn't commit this, then through their various covert actions over the last half-century they only have themselves to blame for the suspicion that it was down to them.