8 ms·

Well, you never know 100%. There is a small (really small) chance it was an accident. Just like there is a small chance that Al Capone was innocent man. (But r

Well, you never know 100%. There is a small (really small) chance it was an accident. Just like there is a small chance that Al Capone was innocent man. (But really, it clearly has “Russia” written all over it)

pelasaco 2y ago
just to be honest, the Pipelines explosion, had "Russia" written all over it, except after investigation, and a possible culprit, i.e not Russia, then nobody wanted to discuss about it anymore. I think the hysteria is too high, people are thirsty for War, looks like..
- mciancia 2y ago
  > people are thirsty for War, looks like Russians, yes
  - vasco 2y ago
    I wish I lived in a world where it's so easy to know who is good and who is evil and to pinpoint them so well.
    - peutetre 2y ago
      You do. Russia's invasion of Ukraine is not an ambiguous war. Russia is plainly in the wrong.
      - FrustratedMonky 2y ago
        Yeah. Lot of Russian Apologist. Russia invades Ukraine -> It is Biden's fault, he ordered it. Russia actually invading and killing -> It was NATO's fault for discussing admission. Like, Russia is actually 'doing the bad things'.
        pelasaco 2y ago
        > Like, Russia is actually 'doing the bad things'. Yes, Russia is doing bad things.. But do we really need or want a third World War because of it? It’s not Ukraine’s fault that Russia invaded, but Ukraine bears responsibility for having been so corrupt over the past 20 years and for being irresponsible given its proximity to Russia. We still don’t know how much of the aid sent to Ukraine is being lost to corruption... So I am not willing to fight this War.
        amanaplanacanal 2y ago
        You should definitely stay home then. Other people are doing the fighting for you.
        pelasaco 2y ago
        For me? Definitely not for me. But my country investing my pension, health infrastructure, education system to support their civilians. Even you and all other Ukraine that spend the day online here, are being paid by us. Still, no reason to Europe to go to war for Ukraine, but instead invest our military budget in our NATO partners and preparing to defend them.
        mopsi 2y ago
        If you ask European military leaders where we should invest and how we should prepare, they'll tell you that strong support of Ukraine is one of the best investments into European defense that you could make at the moment. They calculate that it's better to stop Russia in Ukraine than to face Russia (with additional resources from fully occupied Ukraine) in Poland or elsewhere. Military leaders are pragmatic people and this is a pragmatic approach. We have a problem. We see that the problem has grown in time and will grow further if ignored. So it's better to deal with the problem now rather than waste valuable time and face an even larger problem in 5 to 8 years.
        pelasaco 2y ago
      - vasco 2y ago
        I don't know what goes on to comment. I'm not there and I don't fool myself into thinking that I know geopolitics just because I read some articles. My comment was replying to someone who said the Russians are the war thirsty people of the world. It's a bit rich because, there's a bunch of other ongoing wars in the world and people aren't just "bad" or "good"
        Cthulhu_ 2y ago
        Objective facts though: Russia invaded Ukraine, in 2014 and 2022. There was no formal declaration of war. There were widespread and indiscriminate attacks on civilians. Which parts of those are "good" in your opinion? Do you believe Russia's "denazification" claim? There are no international laws that legitimized Russia's invasion of Ukraine. If Ukraine was in violation of something, there's procedures in place to declare war legitimately - but before that there's the nonviolent approach, which Russia skipped.
        vasco 2y ago
        No parts of the war are good - I didn't make any claims about the Russian war, I don't know what caused it or why it's going on, and I don't like wars. I don't believe most claims by either side, I doubt there's advantage in revealing the real reasons by either side - the articles we read are to craft an opinion either to support one side or the other and I don't think it's that simple - that's my whole point. I don't need to think a war is legitimate to have a reaction to someone saying there's one country with warmonger people and one country without. In general I think it's normal to side with the invaded party and I'm personally inclined to support that side - but it doesn't mean I tell myself I'm making some informed decision.
        kjkjadksj 2y ago
        With this rigid logic you might as well not trust anything you can’t observe first hand yourself.
        vasco 2y ago
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - oneshtein 2y ago
      This planet voted in UN that Russian Federation is aggressor. Which world you represent?
      - limit499karma 2y ago
        Maybe he is an Israeli.
    - esarbe 2y ago
      It is easy; nations that attack other nations unprovoked are "evil" (at fault). Ukraine has never infringed on Russia's sovereignty or territorial integrity before it was attacked. Therefor this war is entirely Russia's fault. The world is mostly shades of gray. But this case it black and white.
      - dotancohen 2y ago
        [flagged]
        esarbe 2y ago
        Russia's "concerns" are not valid. It's not even that there was absolutely no active process of joining NATO when Russia attacked Ukraine in February 2014 and started all this. No; if Ukraine wants to join NATO, that's entirely Ukraine's decision. Russia has no say in it. Ukraine is sovereign and can join any military alliance it wants. Just as Russia is free to do so. No nation has extra-territorial security interests that it needs to defend by attacking a neutral, peaceful and friendly neighbor. You have been fooled into defending imperialism. Or worse; you're consciously defending imperialism.
        dotancohen 2y ago
        > Russia's "concerns" are not valid. Dismissing Russia's concerns is exactly what led to this war. > It's not even that there was absolutely no active process of joining NATO when Russia attacked Ukraine in February 2014 and started all this. No; if Ukraine wants to join NATO, that's entirely Ukraine's decision. Russia has no say in it. Ukraine is sovereign and can join any military alliance it wants. Just as Russia is free to do so. NATO stated in the 2008 Bucharest Summit that "Ukraine will become a member of the Alliance" and reiterated that statement in the 2021 Brussels Summit. I didn't even remember those details, it was easy to find with google and a vague idea that NATO had shown interest in Ukraine. > No nation has extra-territorial security interests that it needs to defend by attacking a neutral, peaceful and friendly neighbor. Then you know nothing of US doctrine. The Central Americans will tell you how the US will even invade just to lower the price of bananas - no joke. > You have been fooled into defending imperialism. Or worse; you're consciously defending imperialism. No, I really don't have a side in this. I'm simply presenting Russia's viewpoint as I understand it. I also understand the Western viewpoint as well, but there's no need to defend it in present company, we all agree about NATO, European, and US positions on the matter.
    - wbl 2y ago
      They murdered an entire town. Well several. Raped and tortured those they didn't kill. Kidnap children to Russianize them. Torture and kill POWs. The only difference between them and the Germans is that they haven't carried out industrial slaughter of Jews.
      - pelasaco 2y ago
        And now Germans are paying Ukraine bills. History is much more complicated than we think..
    - stoperaticless 2y ago
      > I wish I lived in a world where it's so easy to know who is good and who is evil War and killings turn up the contrast, converting shades of gray to black and white, people to friends and enemies. I rather would live in peacetime, where it’s less obvious who is good and who is bad.
- benterix 2y ago
  > people are thirsty for War, looks like.. Nobody in the West wants any war. The usual tactics of Putin is to do what he wants whether on his or foreign soil, using poisoning etc. in a way that everybody knows it's him but he will politely deny. It's a kind of a silly game, the GRU could just have put a bullet in Lytvynenko's head but they choose a slow death to show off.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - pelasaco 2y ago
    I’m not sure that no one wants a war. I can see some groups profiting from it.. I see some politicians being quite blunt about it—some in Germany, for instance, who are well-known lobbyists for the defense industry. Biden’s decision to allow the use of long-range weapons seems like a tactical political move designed to make Trump’s life significantly harder from day one. It feels irresponsible, as it appears that war is being used both to weaken the opposition and to enrich the defense industry.
    - kjkjadksj 2y ago
      A war in europe is not going to be profitable squared against the damage it will do to the global economy. Thats why the middle eastern wars were attractive for American coalition members. Defense contractors profit. You can demo new tech and tactics. And whatever damage you do in that corner of the world won’t really impact anything at home.
    - aftbit 2y ago
      >Biden’s decision to allow the use of long-range weapons seems like a tactical political move designed to make Trump’s life significantly harder from day one. I have a different take on this, basically parroting Perun on YouTube. The lame duck period is the perfect time for escalatory steps, as the Russians always have the option of waiting until the new administration comes into office rather than responding aggressively. Trump will be free to re-impose whichever restrictions he wants, but he'll be starting from a stronger position. He'll have the "stop UA use of long-range weapons" bargaining chip, _and_ he'll be able to relatively costlessly blame Biden for the "bad decision" of allowing them.
- oneshtein 2y ago
  Delivery of Russian gas was stopped by Russia in violation of contract. European gas companies demands $20 billion in compensation. Nobody had incentive to blow up empty pipes except Russia. Of course, Russians used false flag as usual, to blame Ukraine, but Ukraine doesn't hide successful attacks on Russian infrastructure, because Ukraine has legal right to defend itself.
  - FrustratedMonky 2y ago
    Wait. Wasn't it Ukraine that blew up the pipeline? I'm all for them defending themselves. Are you saying it was actually Russia that did it? They blew up own pipeline?
    - esarbe 2y ago
      There's no actual evidence that Ukraine did it, lest alone solid proof. Russia is a probable candidate.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - calmoo 2y ago
        There is some pretty compelling evidence that it was Ukraine. The CIA even tipped Germany off about the potential saboteurs https://archive.is/dPdoX https://archive.is/dPdoX
        esarbe 2y ago
        What exactly is the evidence there? I read the article and all I see is hearsay. German investigations found that the Andromeda trail leads to Russia[0]. [0] https://www.tagesspiegel.de/internationales/nord-stream-spur-nach-russland-andromeda-yacht-offenbar-von-scheinfirma-angemietet-10126528.html https://www.tagesspiegel.de/internationales/nord-stream-spur...
        deleted 2y ago
- matt-p 2y ago
  I think most reasonable people realise that was either the US or the UK.
DiggyJohnson 2y ago
This is not nearly as obvious as this entire thread is making it out to be, unfortunately. I think it has to due with commercial shipping operations and procedures not aligning with our intuitions.

pelasaco 2y ago

just to be honest, the Pipelines explosion, had "Russia" written all over it, except after investigation, and a possible culprit, i.e not Russia, then nobody wanted to discuss about it anymore. I think the hysteria is too high, people are thirsty for War, looks like..

mciancia 2y ago
> people are thirsty for War, looks like Russians, yes
- vasco 2y ago
  I wish I lived in a world where it's so easy to know who is good and who is evil and to pinpoint them so well.
  - peutetre 2y ago
    You do. Russia's invasion of Ukraine is not an ambiguous war. Russia is plainly in the wrong.
    - FrustratedMonky 2y ago
      Yeah. Lot of Russian Apologist. Russia invades Ukraine -> It is Biden's fault, he ordered it. Russia actually invading and killing -> It was NATO's fault for discussing admission. Like, Russia is actually 'doing the bad things'.
      - pelasaco 2y ago
        > Like, Russia is actually 'doing the bad things'. Yes, Russia is doing bad things.. But do we really need or want a third World War because of it? It’s not Ukraine’s fault that Russia invaded, but Ukraine bears responsibility for having been so corrupt over the past 20 years and for being irresponsible given its proximity to Russia. We still don’t know how much of the aid sent to Ukraine is being lost to corruption... So I am not willing to fight this War.
        amanaplanacanal 2y ago
        You should definitely stay home then. Other people are doing the fighting for you.
        pelasaco 2y ago
        For me? Definitely not for me. But my country investing my pension, health infrastructure, education system to support their civilians. Even you and all other Ukraine that spend the day online here, are being paid by us. Still, no reason to Europe to go to war for Ukraine, but instead invest our military budget in our NATO partners and preparing to defend them.
        mopsi 2y ago
        If you ask European military leaders where we should invest and how we should prepare, they'll tell you that strong support of Ukraine is one of the best investments into European defense that you could make at the moment. They calculate that it's better to stop Russia in Ukraine than to face Russia (with additional resources from fully occupied Ukraine) in Poland or elsewhere. Military leaders are pragmatic people and this is a pragmatic approach. We have a problem. We see that the problem has grown in time and will grow further if ignored. So it's better to deal with the problem now rather than waste valuable time and face an even larger problem in 5 to 8 years.
        pelasaco 2y ago
    - vasco 2y ago
      I don't know what goes on to comment. I'm not there and I don't fool myself into thinking that I know geopolitics just because I read some articles. My comment was replying to someone who said the Russians are the war thirsty people of the world. It's a bit rich because, there's a bunch of other ongoing wars in the world and people aren't just "bad" or "good"
      - Cthulhu_ 2y ago
        Objective facts though: Russia invaded Ukraine, in 2014 and 2022. There was no formal declaration of war. There were widespread and indiscriminate attacks on civilians. Which parts of those are "good" in your opinion? Do you believe Russia's "denazification" claim? There are no international laws that legitimized Russia's invasion of Ukraine. If Ukraine was in violation of something, there's procedures in place to declare war legitimately - but before that there's the nonviolent approach, which Russia skipped.
        vasco 2y ago
        No parts of the war are good - I didn't make any claims about the Russian war, I don't know what caused it or why it's going on, and I don't like wars. I don't believe most claims by either side, I doubt there's advantage in revealing the real reasons by either side - the articles we read are to craft an opinion either to support one side or the other and I don't think it's that simple - that's my whole point. I don't need to think a war is legitimate to have a reaction to someone saying there's one country with warmonger people and one country without. In general I think it's normal to side with the invaded party and I'm personally inclined to support that side - but it doesn't mean I tell myself I'm making some informed decision.
        kjkjadksj 2y ago
        With this rigid logic you might as well not trust anything you can’t observe first hand yourself.
        vasco 2y ago
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - oneshtein 2y ago
    This planet voted in UN that Russian Federation is aggressor. Which world you represent?
    - limit499karma 2y ago
      Maybe he is an Israeli.
  - esarbe 2y ago
    It is easy; nations that attack other nations unprovoked are "evil" (at fault). Ukraine has never infringed on Russia's sovereignty or territorial integrity before it was attacked. Therefor this war is entirely Russia's fault. The world is mostly shades of gray. But this case it black and white.
    - dotancohen 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - esarbe 2y ago
        Russia's "concerns" are not valid. It's not even that there was absolutely no active process of joining NATO when Russia attacked Ukraine in February 2014 and started all this. No; if Ukraine wants to join NATO, that's entirely Ukraine's decision. Russia has no say in it. Ukraine is sovereign and can join any military alliance it wants. Just as Russia is free to do so. No nation has extra-territorial security interests that it needs to defend by attacking a neutral, peaceful and friendly neighbor. You have been fooled into defending imperialism. Or worse; you're consciously defending imperialism.
        dotancohen 2y ago
        > Russia's "concerns" are not valid. Dismissing Russia's concerns is exactly what led to this war. > It's not even that there was absolutely no active process of joining NATO when Russia attacked Ukraine in February 2014 and started all this. No; if Ukraine wants to join NATO, that's entirely Ukraine's decision. Russia has no say in it. Ukraine is sovereign and can join any military alliance it wants. Just as Russia is free to do so. NATO stated in the 2008 Bucharest Summit that "Ukraine will become a member of the Alliance" and reiterated that statement in the 2021 Brussels Summit. I didn't even remember those details, it was easy to find with google and a vague idea that NATO had shown interest in Ukraine. > No nation has extra-territorial security interests that it needs to defend by attacking a neutral, peaceful and friendly neighbor. Then you know nothing of US doctrine. The Central Americans will tell you how the US will even invade just to lower the price of bananas - no joke. > You have been fooled into defending imperialism. Or worse; you're consciously defending imperialism. No, I really don't have a side in this. I'm simply presenting Russia's viewpoint as I understand it. I also understand the Western viewpoint as well, but there's no need to defend it in present company, we all agree about NATO, European, and US positions on the matter.
  - wbl 2y ago
    They murdered an entire town. Well several. Raped and tortured those they didn't kill. Kidnap children to Russianize them. Torture and kill POWs. The only difference between them and the Germans is that they haven't carried out industrial slaughter of Jews.
    - pelasaco 2y ago
      And now Germans are paying Ukraine bills. History is much more complicated than we think..
  - stoperaticless 2y ago
    > I wish I lived in a world where it's so easy to know who is good and who is evil War and killings turn up the contrast, converting shades of gray to black and white, people to friends and enemies. I rather would live in peacetime, where it’s less obvious who is good and who is bad.
benterix 2y ago
> people are thirsty for War, looks like.. Nobody in the West wants any war. The usual tactics of Putin is to do what he wants whether on his or foreign soil, using poisoning etc. in a way that everybody knows it's him but he will politely deny. It's a kind of a silly game, the GRU could just have put a bullet in Lytvynenko's head but they choose a slow death to show off.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- pelasaco 2y ago
  I’m not sure that no one wants a war. I can see some groups profiting from it.. I see some politicians being quite blunt about it—some in Germany, for instance, who are well-known lobbyists for the defense industry. Biden’s decision to allow the use of long-range weapons seems like a tactical political move designed to make Trump’s life significantly harder from day one. It feels irresponsible, as it appears that war is being used both to weaken the opposition and to enrich the defense industry.
  - kjkjadksj 2y ago
    A war in europe is not going to be profitable squared against the damage it will do to the global economy. Thats why the middle eastern wars were attractive for American coalition members. Defense contractors profit. You can demo new tech and tactics. And whatever damage you do in that corner of the world won’t really impact anything at home.
  - aftbit 2y ago
    >Biden’s decision to allow the use of long-range weapons seems like a tactical political move designed to make Trump’s life significantly harder from day one. I have a different take on this, basically parroting Perun on YouTube. The lame duck period is the perfect time for escalatory steps, as the Russians always have the option of waiting until the new administration comes into office rather than responding aggressively. Trump will be free to re-impose whichever restrictions he wants, but he'll be starting from a stronger position. He'll have the "stop UA use of long-range weapons" bargaining chip, _and_ he'll be able to relatively costlessly blame Biden for the "bad decision" of allowing them.
oneshtein 2y ago
Delivery of Russian gas was stopped by Russia in violation of contract. European gas companies demands $20 billion in compensation. Nobody had incentive to blow up empty pipes except Russia. Of course, Russians used false flag as usual, to blame Ukraine, but Ukraine doesn't hide successful attacks on Russian infrastructure, because Ukraine has legal right to defend itself.
- FrustratedMonky 2y ago
  Wait. Wasn't it Ukraine that blew up the pipeline? I'm all for them defending themselves. Are you saying it was actually Russia that did it? They blew up own pipeline?
  - esarbe 2y ago
    There's no actual evidence that Ukraine did it, lest alone solid proof. Russia is a probable candidate.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - calmoo 2y ago
      There is some pretty compelling evidence that it was Ukraine. The CIA even tipped Germany off about the potential saboteurs https://archive.is/dPdoX https://archive.is/dPdoX
      - esarbe 2y ago
        What exactly is the evidence there? I read the article and all I see is hearsay. German investigations found that the Andromeda trail leads to Russia[0]. [0] https://www.tagesspiegel.de/internationales/nord-stream-spur-nach-russland-andromeda-yacht-offenbar-von-scheinfirma-angemietet-10126528.html https://www.tagesspiegel.de/internationales/nord-stream-spur...
        deleted 2y ago
matt-p 2y ago
I think most reasonable people realise that was either the US or the UK.

DiggyJohnson 2y ago

This is not nearly as obvious as this entire thread is making it out to be, unfortunately. I think it has to due with commercial shipping operations and procedures not aligning with our intuitions.