- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Moneywerx data assessment of the U.S. sabotaging Nord Stream 2 Pipeline
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:04 pm to GumboPot
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:04 pm to GumboPot
quote:
The last paragraph in the OP say the West does gain from sabotaging the NS2. And we do.
quote:
the EU has secured a deal with Israel going forward so they will no longer rely on Russia for the gas and oil.
The last paragraph says the EU already didn't have to rely on Russia for the gas/oil.
If the EU has alternatives and they had no future reliance on NS2, then how do they gain by blowing up a (useless) pipeline?
The logic in that paragraph is flawed to the point of absurdity. It doesn't destroy the argument, but the source exposes itself as unreliable.
1
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:04 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:Now, it is entirely taken out of the equation, especially if the expected winter energy problems arise.
Nothing was flowing through it at the time and nothing was expected to flow to it for a long time due to sanctions.
IMO, it would have been a very strong bargaining chip for Russia come winter.
Not any longer.
Seems like a better deal for the west to cut ALL ties with Russia.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:05 pm to GumboPot
quote:
Biden is pushing the standard doublespeak
The guy can't even "single speak". Joe ain't doin' crap except trying to say what his controllers want him to say. That guy has brain damage.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:05 pm to Scruffy
quote:
Now, it is entirely taken out of the equation, especially if the expected winter energy problems arise.
IMO, it would have been a very strong bargaining chip for Russia come winter.
Not any longer.
Seems like a better deal for the west to cut ALL ties with Russia.
Exactly. This removes the ability of Germany to capitulate while freezing to death.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:05 pm to GumboPot
Sweden sent a research ship to investigate the area but Russia started releasing gas again, making underwater operations impossible. I'm sure it was just coincidental though.
This post was edited on 10/4/22 at 2:10 pm
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:07 pm to Scruffy
quote:
The bigger question is why would Russia do it?
SFP says Putin did in an attempt to not "the bad guy".
It doesn't make logical sense for Russia to have done it. That doesn't mean they didn't do it. It could be related to a longer term military goal.
It does make sense for an enemy of Russia to have done it.
You would think that European nations wouldn't want to do it because of the pain it causes their citizens. But, again, perhaps this is an acceptable pain for a longer term strategic goal.
Certainly, it makes sense that the U.S. may do it. That doesn't mean it happened. But, those pretending the U.S. doesn't have strategic motive are in denial.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:07 pm to Scruffy
quote:
The west, which is in a proxy war with Russia, gains significantly with the destruction of NS2 in the long term.
how?? NS2 was never going to start selling gas, atleast for 8-10 years due to the sanctions and maybe not for 15 years.
NS1 was already off line and not deliverying to germany anymore so why would the west do it?
yall are some conspicary nuts. it was russia that did it and to drum up support to say hey...loook we were attacked.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:09 pm to Scruffy
quote:
IMO, it would have been a very strong bargaining chip for Russia come winter.
Not any longer.
Seems like a better deal for the west to cut ALL ties with Russia.
I think the population that isn't supporting Ukraine doesn't understand how hard the EU has dug in and how much they (along with the US) will pay to subsidize Europe over that winter.
Also, if the US bombed that pipeline, we directly threaten our alliance (Economic, military, etc.) with our strongest ally (EU). If the EU suspected that the US fricked them over like this, it will destroy "globalism" as a certain population likes to say.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:10 pm to lsu777
quote:I disagree.
how?? NS2 was never going to start selling gas, atleast for 8-10 years due to the sanctions and maybe not for 15 years.
It was a massive bargaining chip in Russia’s back pocket.
If winter in Europe becomes as terrible as many predict, negotiations would easily become a factor and Russia would have the upper hand.
I think it was a brilliant move for the west if they actually did destroy it.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:11 pm to moneyg
quote:
SFP says Putin did in an attempt to not "the bad guy".
This board is constantly flooded with similar talking points.
So it's effective for Russia, clearly.
quote:
But, those pretending the U.S. doesn't have strategic motive are in denial.
I'm not, but the costs-risks make it absurd, especially compared to the benefits.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:12 pm to Scruffy
quote:
If winter in Europe becomes as terrible as many predict, negotiations would easily become a factor and Russia would have the upper hand.
In a world where this is possible, and the US would risk it's alliance with NATO and the EU, the US would just continue the Ukraine endeavor alone (like Iraq)
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:12 pm to upgrayedd
quote:quote:
You haven't heard that Putin invaded Ukraine because of NATO expansion (into possibly Ukraine)?
How about we stick to the OP. There are a million other Russia threads you can derail.
SFP is fully invested in "discourse analysis". This is when one party tells you the reason they do things and it's not the reason that fits your narrative so you have to analyze their words and manipulate them to fit your preferred narrative.
The West doesn't not like the narrative the Putin invaded Ukraine because of an encroaching NATO. NATO is supposed to be a defensive alliance but has been acting pretty offensive toward Russia since the fall of the USSR.
There are a cabal of Vitoria Nuland types in the Pentagon and State Department that want the pre-Putin era back where western oligarchs would team up with ethnic Russian oligarchs and economically rape Russia dry. Those were the good ole days for them. Then Putin kicked them out and they moved a lot of their corrupt operations to Ukraine.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:13 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:We will see.
I think the population that isn't supporting Ukraine doesn't understand how hard the EU has dug in and how much they (along with the US) will pay to subsidize Europe over that winter.
The Europeans have rioted over way less.
quote:Why assume this was done unilaterally?
Also, if the US bombed that pipeline, we directly threaten our alliance (Economic, military, etc.) with our strongest ally (EU). If the EU suspected that the US fricked them over like this, it will destroy "globalism" as a certain population likes to say.
Especially if the EU is that devoted to the cause, as you just posted.
This post was edited on 10/4/22 at 2:14 pm
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:13 pm to GumboPot
quote:
but has been acting pretty offensive toward Russia since the fall of the USSR.
Your argument falls apart here. NATO has never been offensive without UN approval. Your argument is based on a straw man.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:14 pm to lsu777
quote:
how?? NS2 was never going to start selling gas, atleast for 8-10 years due to the sanctions and maybe not for 15 years.
NS1 was already off line and not deliverying to germany anymore so why would the west do it?
You do know that all this can be changed very quickly, right?
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:14 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
If the EU has alternatives and they had no future reliance on NS2, then how do they gain by blowing up a (useless) pipeline?
The capitalists in the EU want the cheapest energy. There were protest in Germany over this and politicians were getting pressure to start receiving gas from the cheaper alternative, NS2.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:14 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:Again, I don’t think it was a unilateral action.
In a world where this is possible, and the US would risk it's alliance with NATO and the EU, the US would just continue the Ukraine endeavor alone (like Iraq)
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:14 pm to Scruffy
quote:
Why assume this was done unilaterally?
So Europe cut its own dick off?
quote:
Especially if the EU us that devoted to the cause, as you just posted.
Either the EU was at risk of capitulating to Russia or it wasn't.
You can't logically argue that the EU blew up the pipeline (with the US) to avoid the EU capitulating to Russia.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:15 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
You do know that all this can be changed very quickly, right?
Even if Russia evacuates Ukraine and apologizes, I don't think the sanctions are going away.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:16 pm to GumboPot
quote:
Moneywerx data assessment of the U.S. sabotaging Nord Stream 2 Pipeline
quote:
MonkeyWerx focuses on handcrafted artisan style products made from wood, acrylics and all natural ingredients. I take pride in hand-crafting unique, high quality products you won't find anywhere else.
quote:
If you want the latest SITREPS on flights to GTMO or XPL, general overwatch of helo activity as well as my biblical news and studies - this will be the place to stay up-to-date.
This post was edited on 10/4/22 at 2:18 pm
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News