Posted on 09/29/2022 11:34:42 AM PDT by Timber Rattler
Shutting off the fuel can destroy the pipe if off too long
I served in the Navy and yes they can be spotted if close enough to the surface
It will be very difficult, if not impossible, to prove conclusively who sabotaged the pipeline.
“Even if we didn’t anyone who might have motive could bet on America being accused because Biden said we would”.
True. But Biden didn’t get something like that that out of thin air. He was told or heard that could be a possibility.
“And Russia seems in no position to do anything about it either”
The Russians are taking their case to the UN that this needs to be investigated as a case of international terrorism. Only the most stupid don’t think the US is behind this. And now Russia will probably go ahead and take out the rest of Ukraine’s infrastructure, that means no more gas, electricity, or water for the people. That means tens of millions fleeing to the West to survive, and an expensive and disruptive humanitarian crisis for the West to deal with.
The US doesn’t care, it’s still trying to do everything it can to justify bringing in NATO troops and WW3. Will the EU countries allow themselves to be suckered into this? Outside of Germany and the UK, I wouldn’t count on it like the idiot neocons seem to be doing. They may be surprised to see how many EU countries refuse to go along with it.
Causes price spike in gas which was previously falling. Pipe can be fixed.
He estimated that repairs could take between three and six months, as the damaged sections would need to be replaced. Similar damage to a different pipeline in the past took nine months.
>>Evidence is mounting against the Russians.
but why would they need to blow it up? They could just stop pumping into it....I don’t get it, what is there motive?
“The Russians are taking their case to the UN that this needs to be investigated as a case of international terrorism.”
Cool, I’m sure the UN will get right on that.
“And now Russia will probably go ahead and take out the rest of Ukraine’s infrastructure, that means no more gas, electricity, or water for the people.”
Yes, sure, I guess Russia has just been holding back all this time and voluntarily losing the war out of their well known sense of fairplay and goodwill towards other countries. They are famous for it!
“The US doesn’t care, it’s still trying to do everything it can to justify bringing in NATO troops and WW3.”
It seems like there would be much easier ways to start WW3 if that is our goal. Like you know, we could invade a country that borders Russia and then say “Russia made us do it!” and threaten to drop nukes if anyone intervened. Something like that.
Will the Russians pound their shoe this time?
“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.”
Its simply not possible to come to the conclusion you are coming to. You cannot protect every pipeline, transmission line, undersea (or overland) fiber optic cable that is on your territory, much less running between borders.
What you have to do is consider an attack on your assets as an act of war and deal with that situation however you deem necessary.
What is crazy about us blowing up the Russian pipelines is that they can easily do the same thing to us, and most likely will do so, probably indirectly.
Some may think it’s an appropriate escalation like you do. I don’t agree. I also don’t agree that an attack on your (at least partly) indefensible infrastructure is something that is preventable, given a suitably insane adversary that has goals that are not compatible with the world we are used to.
I find Ukraine and Russia equally despicable countries based on their behavior, but Ukraine gets support from us and the rest of the West because of corruption and bribery that feeds money into the pockets of Western leaders. I’m not for Ukraine because they are clearly corrupt if you look at Bidens son, Pelosi’s son, and Romneys son who all had illegitimate business dealings there - leveraging US political influence to line their pockets.
But I worry about giving defacto control over our nuclear arsenal to a dirtbag like Zelensky.
Its a dirty business, and it’s going to get out of control.
Another democrat jumps off the screen. That.Is.Awesome.
And Biden has a proven history of bragging on camera about stuff he shouldn’t brag about before a camera: like using the office of Vice President to bully another country (Ukraine) to cease investigating Hunter and fire the AG or bragging about the then pending campaign fraud.
Domestically the progressives do not give a flying flip about it, or they really support it, and like Hillary’s “vast right wing conspiracy” quip they have no issue being managed through talking points and outright denials of truth provided the wrongdoing is in their favor or by their fellow travelers.
Simply there are the “not-we” that any charge by them, against the “not-we” is considered serious, even if the accusation is ludicrous, and then there is a “we” that they will circle the wagons around to defend, almost without question.
When someone like Biden gets used to this state of affairs domestically, they can forget that internationally people may still not trust bastards or they may be willing to manipulate events in light of someone like him spouting off.
Ukraine, for example, contains an alternate route by which product may be shipped to the West and so a Ukrainian may have a motive to destroy NS2 but they would likely be considered a natural suspect by any and all ... if Biden hadn’t shot off his mouth.
I’m not saying they did this, or even that, having a prior relationship with the Big Guy when it comes to corruption they got Biden to do it for them, but they are an example of the sort that now had the opportunity to act because their motives have this potential cover.
“You cannot protect every pipeline, transmission line, undersea (or overland) fiber optic cable that is on your territory, much less running between borders.”
Then if you plan to invade other countries, I guess you had better accommodate yourself to the fact that such infrastructure which you admittedly cannot protect may suffer some unfortunate incidents. Cost of doing business.
“What you have to do is consider an attack on your assets as an act of war and deal with that situation however you deem necessary.”
The problem with that stance is that nobody is likely to send you a formal notice that they blew up your pipeline. So you’d just be saying “I think country XXX did this, so we are now at war with country XXX”. That’s probably just going to drive every country anywhere near you into a defensive alliance against you, which is probably not the result you were hoping for.
“Some may think it’s an appropriate escalation like you do.”
I never said that I thought that. I do think it’s a pretty inevitable possibility that you should take into account before waging aggressive wars though.
Maybe if they pound their shoe hard enough, the UN investigation of the “terrorist attack” on the Russian pipeline will be moved up ahead of the UN investigation of the illegal Russian invasion of Ukraine :)
You win the thread!
Look at a map, Skippy.
L
Germans said it may be permanently unusable
the simplest answer
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.