[RFEngineer]

“I don’t much care who took the pipeline out, but I do think, if Russia can’t defend its assets in the Baltic Sea, then it probably shouldn’t be invading European countries.”

So, if someone sabotages one of our pipelines in the US, say, Dominion pipeline, which was left undefended last year from a cyberattack, then can we thus conclude that the United States cannot defend it’s assets and should cease all overseas actions, and redeploy our worldwide assets to guard critical infrastructure at home? Maybe even our border?

I think this line of reasoning needs a little work, especially the conclusion part.

[kiryandil]

freeper Travis McGee [Matt Bracken] posted an article from last year [April 2021] talking about UUVs and interference with the completion of Nordstream 2 from NATO countries:

https://freerepublic.com/focus/news/4096918/posts?page=18#18

[Boogieman]

“So, if someone sabotages one of our pipelines in the US, say, Dominion pipeline, which was left undefended last year from a cyberattack, then can we thus conclude that the United States cannot defend it’s assets and should cease all overseas actions, and redeploy our worldwide assets to guard critical infrastructure at home? Maybe even our border?”

I think if we have a pipeline running through a foreign region, then we should probably take care to guard that pipeline before deciding to invade countries in that region. That is, if we would like to keep our pipeline.

Seems pretty common sense to me, but common sense is in short supply around here lately.