Links and explanation of 24 above:
Just do a video search for: Airborne Mine Neutralization System.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kegFJgpNNmg&ab_channel=DefenseFlashNews
The US Navy can drop UUVs from Sea Hawk helicopters to find and “neutralize” undersea mines by “detonation.”
Please watch this 47-second video, and look at the many other more in-depth videos.
The US Navy in the form of the Kearsarge Amphib. Ready Group [ARG] was practicing this in the Western Baltic around Bornholm all summer:
BALTOPS 50 Site For Experimental Mine Hunting Equipment
12 June 2021
https://www.navy.mil/Press-Office/News-Stories/Article/2656237/baltops-50-site-for-experimental-mine-hunting-equipment/
PUTLOS, Germany - Exercise Baltic Operations (BALTOPS), the premier maritime-focused exercise in the Baltic region, has been underway since June 6, 2021.
For the first time this annual exercise, explosive ordnance and mine countermeasure units from the Navy and the Marine Corps integrated into a NATO multi-national exercise using cutting- edge technology and experimental equipment to increase the effectiveness of mine countermeasure.
[I can’t wait to see the results of the “investigation” of the NS1 & 2 pipeline sabotage operations. IMHO, the same folks who were tasked to perform the sabotage will be tasked with the investigation.
Read the info at the link and watch the embedded video. The new term for an untethered ROV is UUV, Underwater Unmanned Vehicle. Instead of finding war mines, they can find a well-charted pipeline a lot easier, and be modified to blow it up. Just spitballing, but I believe these are the tracks to investigate.
The presence of U.S.S. Kearsarge evidences opportunity.
The possession of Airborne Mine Neutralization System evidences means.
Statements of the president and Victoria Nuland evidence motive.
The three combined suggest American guilt.
But opportunity, means and motive, even combined, are simply not sufficient proof of guilt. More is needed: forensic physical evidence, whistleblower, admission of guilt confession etc., documentary evidence, etc.
The stakes are too high , the evidence insufficient for sweeping conclusions that we have read on this thread: "There’s no question that the US was behind the destruction of these pipelines, you’d have to be a fool to believe otherwise."
