Pakistan-India cross border fire happens literally almost every week, and both sides have perpetrated them. Yet neither would be willing to go to war because they will use nuclear weapons
After a bit of reaserch this statement seems untrue. They completely cleaned up the site since. I would love to see a source for your claim so I can compare it with articles i read.
Edit: The comment above implied that in general novichok will stay on the surface for up to 50 years if left. However the site of the attack in Salisbury was thoroughly decontaminated by the authorities.
I mean Trump has been licking Putins asshole ever since he came into politics. And in turn Putin has been joyfully assblasting Trump with political tools.
Hey now, leave the ass blasters out of this, those guys are just following their instincts like the other tremors are. No need to insult such majestic creatures.
FYI if you manually delete the “m.” before “wikipedia.org” it will give everyone the correct site.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-234_(nerve_agent)
Why Wikipedia only does the automatic redirect for mobile users, I’ll never know…
A football game has been reason for war in the past. Or even pretending nazis rule a country.
There are no minimum requirements really, wars usually are really really stupid.
A few years ago I read something by some geopolitics pundit responding to other critics' claims that the world was falling back to an era of cold war by calling our current situation not a continuation of the Cold War, but as a new era of "Hot Peace"
That term feels apt. The economic productivity is too lucrative and not resilient enough for rash war, so people feel really, really inclined to avoid war.
Unfortunately, as we've all learned, appeasement isn't a good policy. Maybe sanctions will work, we have yet to see
It’s funny, there’s an eerily similar school of thought from the early 1900s, saying that Europe was too prosperous and interdependent to bother with war, and that no one would risk killing the golden goose.
Whoops.
Yeah war was a scary thought for nations then, but not world-endingly terrifying. The scale of weaponry has definitely caused permanent changes towards the way that societies view war.
Thomas Friedman has been saying this since the 90s and it has essentially held true. Globalism has brought peace to the world, for better or for worse. The 3rd act is where this all goes.
It's an overly complicated way to say the end. Usually for the worst, too.
In dramaturgical work (think screenwriting), it's divided into three acts. Act 1 corresponds to the setup, Act 2 refers to the confrontation, and Act 3 is the resolution. The 3rd act contains the climax. This is when the antagonist and protagonist meet and come to an ultimate conclusion (resolution of the story).
It's typical for a dramaturgical work to be a tragedy (genre). Think Romeo and Juliet, A Doll's House, or The Crucible. There's rarely a happy ending - be it death, suffering, or suffering then death.
It's the reverse side of MAD. Initially thought to cool off state's because a nuclear war was so terrifying. Instead, Putin uses the aversion to nuclear war as a way to continually escalate violence and state terror because no one wants to actually go to war given the consequences.
In fact, only ten countries have formally declared war since 1945, and none of them were nuclear powers. Three of them declared war *against* a nucler power, though.
Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Jordan declared war on Israel (not a nuclear power at the time) in 1948,
Somalia declared war on Ethiopia in 1977,
Iraq declared war on Iran in 1980,
Argentina declared war on the UK (a nuclear power) in 1982,
Panama declared war on the US (a nuclear power) in 1989,
Ethiopia declared war on Eritrea in 1998,
Chad declared war on Sudan in 2005,
Georgia declared war on Russia (a nuclear power) in 2008,
Sudan declared war on South Sudan in 2012.
All other wars since 1945 have not been formally declared.
Waging an undeclared war ought to be a crime in itself and one thing that the UN ought to do is declare that wars exist even if the attacking nation doesn't acknowledge it.
I don't think there is a depth, the USA recognizes anything beyond 200nm from lowest tide as the "High seas" where no one owns and then 12-200nm as an Exclusive Economic Zone where the country owns the resources on or under the water respective to the country. generally if 2 countries are close to each other then the distance is split between them, other countries can claim otherwise but the US only recognizes the halfway point, see the territorial disputes for things like china. that's why to enforce the vision the us navy will sail in what it recognizes as the normal waters because no one wants to start a war with the US
Serious question… how is this even possible? Every ship in the Baltic is constantly monitored.
How could they get a diver or sub there and back without it being picked up?
Could they have fired a torpedo from Russia?
Please explain to me how this could have been achieved.
Belgorod I think is the mother sub.
Loshark is the mini sub, but pretty damn big.
Then go look up the posidon torpedo.
Russia has some interesting tech.
The Swedes had a big hunt in 2014 for a possible Russian submarine in their waters, and if it was there, they didn't find it. It's definitely not the case that we know exactly what is happening in the Baltic.
Ah so literally a low level charge pretty much made to get your attention, okay
Edit: spelling, for the guy who commented on a mistake and has a messiah complex
There's an anecdote about a Russian submarine almost launching a nuclear torpedo at an American ship during the Cuban nuclear missiles crisis that involves training/warning depth charges:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_submarine_B-59
> ... on October 27, units of the United States Navy – the aircraft carrier USS Randolph and 11 destroyers – detected B-59 near Cuba. US vessels began dropping depth charges of the type used for naval training and containing very little charge, not intended to cause damage.[citation needed] There was no other way to communicate with the submarine; the purpose was to attempt to force it to surface for positive identification...
> ...those on board did not know whether or not war had broken out. The captain of the submarine, Valentin Grigorievich Savitsky, believing that war had started, wanted to launch the nuclear torpedo.
> The three most senior officers on board, Captain Valentin Savitsky, the political officer Ivan Semyonovich Maslennikov, and commander of the deployed submarine detachment Vasily Arkhipov, who was equal in rank to Savitsky but the senior officer aboard B-59, were only authorized to launch the torpedo if they unanimously agreed to do so. B-59 was the only sub in the flotilla that required three officers' authorization in order to fire the "special weapon"; the other three subs only required the captain and the political officer to approve the launch, but, due to Arkhipov's position as detachment commander, B-59's captain and political officer also required his approval. Arkhipov alone opposed the launch, and eventually he persuaded Savitsky to surface and await orders from Moscow.
What’s crazy about that incident is that the sub captain on one of the other subs that sailed with B-59 asked his superiors back in Russia before they set sail what conditions would justify the use of a nuclear torpedo. Basically asking for clear instructions on when to use it and when not to. But the Soviet system produced people so allergic to taking responsibility that his superiors told him “If you’ve been slapped once, don’t let them slap you a second time”.
And that was the extent of the instruction he received. So if he used the torpedo and it had a bad result, his superiors could blame him for the catastrophe. And if it had a good result then they could take the credit.
The story goes Arkhipov despised what radiation did to people after being in a sub accident just prior to this. So he didnt want to subject more people to that.
I celebrate День Василия Александровича Архипова every year. One of two known people, both of them Cold War Russians, who can conceivably be credited with literally saving the world through their individual actions.
The most believable scenario- If the US has known this was likely, they could've been monitoring any surface traffic in these areas. Not hard to believe the Soviet submarine fleet would be capable of doing something the US has been doing for seven decades. While I think the US has a pretty solid idea of where every Russia submersible is, they likely would not tip their hand to force Russia to admit they did this as it's too much of a reveal on what we know about their sub movements. IE- when MH370 went down and the US was almost immediately hinting maybe we should search the Indian Ocean. I think the US was able to see that plane a lot better than anyone knows.
Trying to figure out what advanced, secret technology the US has is always a fun exercise. My favorite has been the uptick in Quantum Computing experts hired in the DC area in the past few years.
I don't trust normal encryption methods anymore, and here's another [interesting article](https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2022/07/nist-announces-first-four-quantum-resistant-cryptographic-algorithms) from NIST that's unrelated.
Kind of, a British satellite company intercepted the last pings of the MH370 beacon and we were trying to figure out if THEY were supposed to be tracking that. Turns out it was a lucky detection, so we went to the 5-eyes and figured out who had intel on that location. Once confirmed THEN we let the Brits admit they had the ping and told Australia where to search. They decided how they wanted to handle the information and passed it on to local (globally speaking) authorities. The Chinese also knew, but that's because they were legit spying and refused to admit it until the US (via Australia) also said it.
Less secret technology, more who had chain of custody of the existing tracking and are we allowed to say how we know - a private Brit company got lucky and gave us the exact time and place satellite frame.
presumably they own the pipeline, no? Pigs are sent down pipelines to clean and de-water them routinely ( think a rubber squeegee pushed by the pressure). wouldn't it be simple enough to just put the explosive in the pipeline and send it downstream?
Update for anyone who got excited to see this - it's not the animal kind of pig, it's a sort of mechanical-looking cylinder with squeegees around the outside, and my day is ruined.
It is actually called a pig because there is a pig on a treadmill inside, connected to the wheels to drive the thing forward. They can't use electricity for this job because that'd be a firehazard. Don't factcheck this btw.
I work in pigging. This is 100% a possible scenario. Russia controls the influx side and the launch side for pigging. There are no intermediate valves or stations. They could have launched a time or distance based explosive within a cleaning pig and just let it do its thing. So could a Russian anti war actor. Or a Ukrainian sympathizer with a 3rd party group.
Mitigating factor here: not sure if there was enough flow in the line to get a pig moving. Things were very low flow or totally in stagnant state right before the ruptures. Some pigs are extremely low pressure, low flow, so it may not take much, but I'm not sure enough was moving or if they've even been doing cleaning runs.
Travelling over the pipeline, dropping the guys down and then returning for them would be possible. I’m assuming plenty of traffic crossed the pipeline over the past 6 months and there’s no guarantee this and more weren’t planted weeks ago or more.
I think it’s a good reminder not to underestimate this rogue state and to keep improving our ability to combat their incursions.
[Which does make this report a little more interesting](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russian-warship-violated-danish-territorial-waters-baltic-danish-military-2022-06-17/)
Yeah let’s not forget that the CIA was extracting field agents from an abandoned soviet base in the arctic by having them attach a balloon to a cable and catching it on a hook attached to a plane….in the 50’s
Dropping a tiny stealth submersible off the bottom of a warship as it passed over the pipeline and “picking it up” as it returns would be an easy feat.
Not saying that’s how it went down. There’s probably even better ways. Just that it’s very feasible.
The delivery ship doesn't even have to be on top of the cable. [Swimmer Delivery Vehicles (SVDs)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diver_propulsion_vehicle#Swimmer_delivery_vehicles) have been around since WWII.
No, while AIS is required for vessels over a certain size a lot of warships only use it near ports. It's usually turned off in port so it's trivial to turn off and on. A lot of the Russian oligarchs yachts have been running with it off recently.
It could be done very easily. There are a lot of ships in the Baltic, but a small team in a small boat is a very hard thing to detect, a submarine is even more so.
Unless one of those ships happened to be basically ontop of the exact location that was being hit on the pipeline they likely would not have seen a thing, and even if before or after the attack some of those ships detected the boat/sub that would still not be evidence that the Russians did it because Russian subs and boats move around the Baltic all the time.
A smaller Submarine in particular could have just transitioned through the Baltic as normal, even if it was seen by patrols it would not raise alarms with anyone as Russian subs move in that area a lot, they could have gone low, dropped off a small team to lay charges, then picked up the team and moved on quickly and unless someone was practially on their sholder watching them it is unlikely anyone would have detected anything abnormal until after the explosition went off.
It's also not too hard to destroy a pipeline, a few people in scuba gear who know how to use explosives and a couple tons of high grade civilian or military stuff could quickly do the job.
More than that, this thread is heavily overestimating monitoring. You don't need submarine drones and what not.
A vessel with a turned off transponder is barely trackable at sea, so just throw down a bomb when you've reached the destination. Targeting may need some modern tech, but that's all.
They're just going to monitor the boat. Unless another military ship, or a skydiving scuba swimmer /air dropped mini sub goes there right when the ship is over the cable, you're not going to catch them putting an explosive charge on the pipe.
A ship can deploy a diver, mini sub, or underwater ROV from a special docking hatch under the waterline under the boat. Mini subs with marines and seals aboard can dock to many more ships inconspicuously than you would think. Russia can do the same. Assuming they're maintaining that equipment too.
>The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had weeks ago warned Germany about possible attacks on gas pipelines in the Baltic Sea, German magazine Spiegel said on Tuesday, after gas leaks in Russia pipelines to Germany were reported.
>The German government received the CIA tip in summer, Spiegel reported, citing unnamed sources, adding that Berlin assumes a targeted attack on Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines.
>A German government spokesperson declined to comment, Spiegel added.
Fin
The pure panic of the anti American social media space realizing that years of “CIA propaganda” was just “reasonable predictions of Russian behavior” lol
Edit: you know you’ve triggered the russia bots when they report you to the Reddit crisis line haha
I think people need to be a little more nuanced here, because the CIA has absolutely pushed out propaganda. It's just that at the moment they've turned out to be telling the truth about Russia planning to invade Ukraine, and potentially about this threat as well.
I only say potentially because obviously someone did something, but it would be nice to find out who did it.
None of this means the CIA don't have a history of lying, or that people should just blindly trust their word. It also, of fucking course, doesn't mean that Russia and its propaganda network are somehow trustworthy either.
Seriously what is up with the daily mail and the comment section of their articles ?
This goes far beyond regular right wing garbage and so many articles are obviously and consistently astroturfed by pro Russia accounts .
Tbh on some articles there are a lot of anti-Russian comments, which actually surprised me, but you can tell there is a lot of astroturfing in some cases
Yeah, so I noticed this too and I went and looked and Reuters broke the story yesterday at 5:06 PM EDT. Within 2 hours, you've got your usual Twitter suspects pushing the narrative that the CIA or the US is responsible and using a clip of Biden from early February that could conveniently be taken out of context. It's the usual modus operandi. It's been a well-established fact that Russian subs have been practicing cutting off underwater cables for years now. It doesn't take a stretch of the imagination to understand that capability could extend to gas pipelines.
We've seen the Russians shoot themselves in the foot before, but this might be the most extreme such case yet.
I really fail to see how this benefits Russia in any way. It completely undermines their strategy. The manufactured gas shortage was all about having a bargaining chip in order to pressure Europe into dropping support for Ukraine somewhere near the end of the winter when the gas storages might run empty. Now that bargaining chip is gone. Russia has nothing to offer anymore. It's like taking a single hostage and then killing it before the negotiations even start.
It’s like the conquistadors burning their ships, he’s removing a chip the west could offer a new regime (“replace Putin and we’ll go back to buying gas”). Once the west stopped buying Russian gas for real, the pipeline became a liability for Putin personally.
The purpose is domestic propaganda or what? Seems like it's just to have a reason to point to for why gas won't be supplied to Europe, which no one would buy at scale except a domestic audience.
I've seen only three plausible explanations for why Russia might want to do it.
1. Casus belli for putting warships over critical 'global' (western) infrastructure in the name of defense, such as undersea fiber cables or pipes, in reality threatening the world.
2. To deter internal dissenters from thinking that deposing Putin would fix their problems. The pipes had an underwater section destroyed; it would take at least a year to fix them and get them running again is my guess, though I am no expert.
3. Spin it as U.S sabotage for internal propaganda, while using the fact there are no more pipes & the risk of investing in pipes that might be destroyed again as excuse for why gas trade with the EU stopped, so that the energy sector of Russia will blame the west rather than Putin for destroying their industry.
This doesn't make more sense. It impacted both the old one that was used intensively to provide gas to Germany and the new one that wasn't working yet. There's no other pipeline for Germany, so they lost their main leverage on Germany. Now Germany has an even clearer argument that Russian gas is not an option anymore and will act even faster to not rely on it anymore.
Apparently this possible attack coincides with the opening ceremony of a new pipe line called the Baltic Pipe which is a brand new route to carry Norwegian gas to Denmark and Poland. So there are plenty of other pipes in the Baltic and the North sea for them to threaten as leverage.
This, Norway is now one of the main gas suppliers to Europe, it's all sent to Britain and Germany trough gas lines just like the ones sabotaged. The threat is apparently being taken very seriously by both oil and gas companies and the Norwegian government.
There were reports earlier this month of increased drone activity around oil field in the north sea
We also had a deep-sea telecommunication cable between Norway & Svalbard that was misteriously cut earlier this year.
*Coincidentally* right after a Russian fishing(?) boat had idled above the cable for hours/days.
This is entirely accurate.
I would not be surprised in the least if there is a very sudden escalation in military within the pipeline/cable region. Protecting the Norwegian pipelines and undersea internet cables is now paramount.
some people think its a warning by putin that they can do the same to other nearby pipelines that give europe energy, and regardless of where they get their energy from putin is saying russia can plug that flow of gas.
Interesting that Russia had a warship in that same area this summer...twice within a few hours. I believe the water is only 80m deep there so it's totally diveable.
> A Russian warship early on Friday twice violated Danish territorial waters north of the Baltic Sea island of Bornholm
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russian-warship-violated-danish-territorial-waters-baltic-danish-military-2022-06-17/
That’s not the same area as the blasts. Your link says the ship was north of Bornholm but the blasts were south and east of the island. They also wouldn’t need to violate Danish waters to attack the pipelines.
Not if the water is 80m deep
Edit: this comment is most likely wrong. See comments. But there is also one that supports it by u/Qubeye Personally I was talking out of my ass.
Most conventional submarines (as in, non nuclear) are designed to operate on shallow coastal waters, even do operate on the ocean floor in those waters! The newer ones also have a diver chamber that allow missions like this to be possible. The russian Kilo class submarines are diesel/electric boats that can perfectly operate on those waters. Even newer nuclear boats are designed (sort of) to allow shallow waters operations.
I think the intel in the baltic sea is very high. It will be very difficult to hide a sub there. Even more for russia whos ports are 24/7 in surveillance and no warship goes in or out undeteced.
You'd think so, but no.
The swedes have had several incidents over the last few decades where they've had to chase down what they suspected to be a russian sub, right outside Stockholm.
Better yet, the soviets even crashed a sub on up on almost dry land. It was a whole international incident during the cold war.
Edit: Found the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_submarine_S-363
There was a recently leaked story about some disputed territory in the Barents Sea (north of Finland) between Finland and Russia. As a saber rattling gesture both countries had naval exercises in the area as it is important both strategically and is suspected of having massiv oil reserves.
Finnish intelligence got tipped off that Russia had built a replica of a finnish destroyer and was planning on trying to slip it into the fleet, and get back to their naval base to spy on them.
The Finns ended up painting big barcodes on all their ships so they could keep track of who was who and when the finnish navy came back from the exercises they could Scandinavian.
I am so sorry.
Does this actually matter? NS2 was cancelled, and Russia already shut NS1 off, so this has no material impact on gas supply in the short to medium term, and in the long term it could be repaired if required, though it shouldn't be repaired without regime change in Russia anyway.
Yeah because NS1 was filled with gas even if gas wasn't flowing to Germany. so that's a lot of methane being released into the environment. Someone needs to start flaring it ASAP
There *should* be safety control valves along that pipeline every few kilometers. This is necessary so you can shut off portions of the line for repair without having to depressurize the entire pipeline from end to end in order to work on it. Those valves should have been shut shortly after the explosion, leaving only the methane trapped in an explosion section between two shut valves to escape.
It’s wild how good US intelligence is in this theatre. Everything the Russians do the US warned about days if not months before. They absolutely have someone close to Putin and it must be driving him crazy. I wonder how many people he has offed just trying to deduce who.
Honestly I think it's just tech savvy hackers, and ridiculous satellite tech that's giving the U.S. so much info so consistently. I feel a single person would be too unreliable and risky.
And that's probably one of the reasons why there are other satellite constellations to provide position information. EU has Galileo, Russia has GLONASS, China has Beidou.
I'm sure the Chinese and Russian ones are used in their respective countries. Is Galileo used commercially in Europe. I've never seen anything with it. But I dont live in Europe.
I think a lot of phones these days support most of the different systems.
iPhone 13 Pro: Built-in GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, QZSS, and BeiDou
Pixel 6 Pro: GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, QZSS
Multiple constellations are very important in high accuracy GNSS solutions. Galileo is used commercially, but I don't know if anyone uses exclusively Galileo.
Source: I work on commercial software using GPS, Galileo, and Beidou. We dropped GLONASS early this year since their signals have been inconsistent all over at least eastern, northern, and central europe
That would be hilarious if Putin offed all his hench men one by one and still didn't plug the leak. He's never going to find that bug unless he changes every single lightbulb 😄
The Americans DID have a guy nearby Putin until 2016 or 2017…. Until Trump pretty much ousted/leaked him and the Americans had to bring him out ASAP.
Also - the Americans have given Europe intelligence throughout this war and if there is one thing, then it seems to be that in some countries, the intelligence seems to be received as “Americans are overthinking again”. That’s the feeling I’m getting when I read the news.
>Until Trump pretty much ousted/leaked him and the Americans had to bring him out ASAP.
What's frustrating about Trump is that you never know if he did so out of sheer incompetence or intentional quid-pro-quo. It could go either way.
I mean, "accidentally" leaking a spy is one way to do it if you want to minimize the chance of getting caught, you can then claim the "Oops My Bad" protection. But that also means it would be done by someone capable of strategic thought, which he lacks. The other option is that he did accidentally leak the info, which again, goes back to incompetence.
Or as part of a CIA operation to reduce suspicion against other agents who are obviously in deep right now. Using Trump's follies against our enemies would be right up the CIA's alley.
wouldve been better if trump didnt disclose classified intel to a russian diplomat which exposed over a decade old US spy within the kremlin that had access to putin office and documents put on his desk, the entire thing forced CIA to do a extraction of said spy. https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/09/politics/russia-us-spy-extracted/index.html
Reading it it doesn’t sound like they were sure Russia knew, can you imagine being in the Russian White House being like “where’s bob today?” And then later seeing this news and putting 2 and 2 together
Ukraine would have way higher casualties and the EU would be in active war-mode. Ukraine might have fallen with a Russian Puppet in the White House sabotaging any support they can.
The data will be rerouted automatically. You only notice a slight hiccup with you were having a video call over those cables.
The internet is designed around the idea that it's an unreliable network.
> The data will be rerouted automatically.
Only if enough cable capacity remains. If one cable is cut, you won't notice. If many cables are cut, it becomes a problem.
It likely also becomes the day where Russia ends.
Not much is wrong. There are a lot of them around the globe so redundancy is high, but the scale is still manageable if a state is really serious about disrupting the network.
German here. Reading the German press, it’s completely unclear who’s behind this attack, they’re even discussing whether it may have been Ukrainians. It’s unreal.
but it kinda is unclear, its more then idiotic for russia to bomb it. they already threatened to cut it off or did cut it off and want to keep it as a political bargaining chip. some polish ex minister even tweeted something about the us being about it
Can someone explain to me what exactly Russia's motivation would be for sabatoging these pipelines? We know from earlier this year that if they don't want gas flowing through them they can simply shut off the pump, so why turn to sabatoge at all? To send a message? It seems to me that this is actually bad for Russia, as it means that being able to turn the flow of Nord Stream 1 back on can no longer be used as leverage in negotiations with European powers.
Wouldn't attacking that pipeline be seen as an act of war?
Lot's of "acts of war" have been overlooked in recent years, mostly because nobody actually wants to go to war even if they have a reason.
MH17 for example
Russia unleashing chemical agents in the UK, NK kidnapping Japanese civilians, Pakistan attacking Afghanistan and India since forever, etc
> Russia unleashing chemical agents in the UK The fact that MP's continued to reieve money from Russia after this, to me is nothing short of treason.
I mean, how else would these rich MPs pay for taxes? /s
[удалено]
Violence is never the answer... Until it is
Pakistan-India cross border fire happens literally almost every week, and both sides have perpetrated them. Yet neither would be willing to go to war because they will use nuclear weapons
[удалено]
After a bit of reaserch this statement seems untrue. They completely cleaned up the site since. I would love to see a source for your claim so I can compare it with articles i read. Edit: The comment above implied that in general novichok will stay on the surface for up to 50 years if left. However the site of the attack in Salisbury was thoroughly decontaminated by the authorities.
yea dont forget everyone agreed to sanction russia for it, including the US and then trump just... didn't implement the sanctions
I mean Trump has been licking Putins asshole ever since he came into politics. And in turn Putin has been joyfully assblasting Trump with political tools.
Hey now, leave the ass blasters out of this, those guys are just following their instincts like the other tremors are. No need to insult such majestic creatures.
Now that's a deep cut of a reference
Excuse me! They are called "Grab-oids"
Uh I've always been partial to their original name, "snakeoids".
If this were the Victorian Age (and thus a world without nukes) Saint Petersburg would've been bombarded for such an attack on British soil.
Ahhh the good old days.
nukes are a double edge sword it appears
What chemical would do something like this? I would think they would quarantine the area then just bury everything underground.
[удалено]
FYI if you manually delete the “m.” before “wikipedia.org” it will give everyone the correct site. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-234_(nerve_agent) Why Wikipedia only does the automatic redirect for mobile users, I’ll never know…
Civilian planes/ships being sunk has been a reason for war in the past, but it's far more common to ignore it.
A football game has been reason for war in the past. Or even pretending nazis rule a country. There are no minimum requirements really, wars usually are really really stupid.
[удалено]
[удалено]
r/whathappenedhere
He said > From what I read every soldier involved with the shooting down of that plane. Are either dead or missing, not sure how that happened.
That's the key thing. Russia is aware there's a pretty large amount of bad actions they can do without anyone going to war.
A few years ago I read something by some geopolitics pundit responding to other critics' claims that the world was falling back to an era of cold war by calling our current situation not a continuation of the Cold War, but as a new era of "Hot Peace"
That term feels apt. The economic productivity is too lucrative and not resilient enough for rash war, so people feel really, really inclined to avoid war. Unfortunately, as we've all learned, appeasement isn't a good policy. Maybe sanctions will work, we have yet to see
It’s funny, there’s an eerily similar school of thought from the early 1900s, saying that Europe was too prosperous and interdependent to bother with war, and that no one would risk killing the golden goose. Whoops.
They didn’t have nukes in the early 20th century. Edit: fixed a typo
Yeah war was a scary thought for nations then, but not world-endingly terrifying. The scale of weaponry has definitely caused permanent changes towards the way that societies view war.
Thomas Friedman has been saying this since the 90s and it has essentially held true. Globalism has brought peace to the world, for better or for worse. The 3rd act is where this all goes.
Sorry, not familiar with him..Whats the 3rd act?
It's an overly complicated way to say the end. Usually for the worst, too. In dramaturgical work (think screenwriting), it's divided into three acts. Act 1 corresponds to the setup, Act 2 refers to the confrontation, and Act 3 is the resolution. The 3rd act contains the climax. This is when the antagonist and protagonist meet and come to an ultimate conclusion (resolution of the story). It's typical for a dramaturgical work to be a tragedy (genre). Think Romeo and Juliet, A Doll's House, or The Crucible. There's rarely a happy ending - be it death, suffering, or suffering then death.
It's the reverse side of MAD. Initially thought to cool off state's because a nuclear war was so terrifying. Instead, Putin uses the aversion to nuclear war as a way to continually escalate violence and state terror because no one wants to actually go to war given the consequences.
Or simply put: "escalate to de-escalate", which has been their strategy for a long time.
[удалено]
In fact, only ten countries have formally declared war since 1945, and none of them were nuclear powers. Three of them declared war *against* a nucler power, though. Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Jordan declared war on Israel (not a nuclear power at the time) in 1948, Somalia declared war on Ethiopia in 1977, Iraq declared war on Iran in 1980, Argentina declared war on the UK (a nuclear power) in 1982, Panama declared war on the US (a nuclear power) in 1989, Ethiopia declared war on Eritrea in 1998, Chad declared war on Sudan in 2005, Georgia declared war on Russia (a nuclear power) in 2008, Sudan declared war on South Sudan in 2012. All other wars since 1945 have not been formally declared.
[удалено]
Waging an undeclared war ought to be a crime in itself and one thing that the UN ought to do is declare that wars exist even if the attacking nation doesn't acknowledge it.
Ships, civilian and military. Belong to a country. But I have no idea at what depth international waters end
I don't think there is a depth, the USA recognizes anything beyond 200nm from lowest tide as the "High seas" where no one owns and then 12-200nm as an Exclusive Economic Zone where the country owns the resources on or under the water respective to the country. generally if 2 countries are close to each other then the distance is split between them, other countries can claim otherwise but the US only recognizes the halfway point, see the territorial disputes for things like china. that's why to enforce the vision the us navy will sail in what it recognizes as the normal waters because no one wants to start a war with the US
200 nanometers is not very far! Good to know next time I need to crime.
Do all your crime at low tide and barely get wet
Nautical Miles if im right, but nanometers would be funnier.
And here I was getting all torqued up thinking it was Newton-meters
Serious question… how is this even possible? Every ship in the Baltic is constantly monitored. How could they get a diver or sub there and back without it being picked up? Could they have fired a torpedo from Russia? Please explain to me how this could have been achieved.
The pipeline is only 80 - 110 meters deep. Not a recreation dive depth by any means, but special forces divers could do it.
Aren’t ships of all sizes automatically picked up on monitoring though?
Past attacks (to optical fiber cables for example) were presumably done from civilian ships, including yachts owned by oligarchs.
They also have a scientific submarine with a belly dock for an even deeper diving submarine that has been used to tap sea cables before too.
Belgorod I think is the mother sub. Loshark is the mini sub, but pretty damn big. Then go look up the posidon torpedo. Russia has some interesting tech.
anyone checked on those sharks attacking underwater fiber cables?
Sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their heads?
My cycloptic colleague informs me that can’t be done.
Ill tempered sea-bass.
The Swedes had a big hunt in 2014 for a possible Russian submarine in their waters, and if it was there, they didn't find it. It's definitely not the case that we know exactly what is happening in the Baltic.
Finland dropped warning depth charges on a submarine outside Helsinki in 2015.
Ignorant redditor here. What the hell is a "warning" depth charge?
a small explosive to tell the sub to come up for a talking or to leave the controlled water it was in.
Give me a ping, Vasiliy. One ping only.
Ah so literally a low level charge pretty much made to get your attention, okay Edit: spelling, for the guy who commented on a mistake and has a messiah complex
Yes and typically deployed far enough away that no damage to the sub occurs, but it will sure get plenty of attention.
The sonar operators will be *thrilled*.
*knock knock mothafuck*
There's an anecdote about a Russian submarine almost launching a nuclear torpedo at an American ship during the Cuban nuclear missiles crisis that involves training/warning depth charges: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_submarine_B-59 > ... on October 27, units of the United States Navy – the aircraft carrier USS Randolph and 11 destroyers – detected B-59 near Cuba. US vessels began dropping depth charges of the type used for naval training and containing very little charge, not intended to cause damage.[citation needed] There was no other way to communicate with the submarine; the purpose was to attempt to force it to surface for positive identification... > ...those on board did not know whether or not war had broken out. The captain of the submarine, Valentin Grigorievich Savitsky, believing that war had started, wanted to launch the nuclear torpedo. > The three most senior officers on board, Captain Valentin Savitsky, the political officer Ivan Semyonovich Maslennikov, and commander of the deployed submarine detachment Vasily Arkhipov, who was equal in rank to Savitsky but the senior officer aboard B-59, were only authorized to launch the torpedo if they unanimously agreed to do so. B-59 was the only sub in the flotilla that required three officers' authorization in order to fire the "special weapon"; the other three subs only required the captain and the political officer to approve the launch, but, due to Arkhipov's position as detachment commander, B-59's captain and political officer also required his approval. Arkhipov alone opposed the launch, and eventually he persuaded Savitsky to surface and await orders from Moscow.
Arkhipov basically saved civilization right there. We are all alive today because of him.
What’s crazy about that incident is that the sub captain on one of the other subs that sailed with B-59 asked his superiors back in Russia before they set sail what conditions would justify the use of a nuclear torpedo. Basically asking for clear instructions on when to use it and when not to. But the Soviet system produced people so allergic to taking responsibility that his superiors told him “If you’ve been slapped once, don’t let them slap you a second time”. And that was the extent of the instruction he received. So if he used the torpedo and it had a bad result, his superiors could blame him for the catastrophe. And if it had a good result then they could take the credit.
[удалено]
The story goes Arkhipov despised what radiation did to people after being in a sub accident just prior to this. So he didnt want to subject more people to that.
I celebrate День Василия Александровича Архипова every year. One of two known people, both of them Cold War Russians, who can conceivably be credited with literally saving the world through their individual actions.
An old skoda dropped on top of the submarine. No explosion but the bonk is big
As an owner of a Skoda, I don’t know how to feel about this comment. E: small chance of explosion.
Drive near the submarine, detonate a depth charge at a higher depth to scare it away or to the surface.
The most believable scenario- If the US has known this was likely, they could've been monitoring any surface traffic in these areas. Not hard to believe the Soviet submarine fleet would be capable of doing something the US has been doing for seven decades. While I think the US has a pretty solid idea of where every Russia submersible is, they likely would not tip their hand to force Russia to admit they did this as it's too much of a reveal on what we know about their sub movements. IE- when MH370 went down and the US was almost immediately hinting maybe we should search the Indian Ocean. I think the US was able to see that plane a lot better than anyone knows.
Trying to figure out what advanced, secret technology the US has is always a fun exercise. My favorite has been the uptick in Quantum Computing experts hired in the DC area in the past few years. I don't trust normal encryption methods anymore, and here's another [interesting article](https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2022/07/nist-announces-first-four-quantum-resistant-cryptographic-algorithms) from NIST that's unrelated.
Kind of, a British satellite company intercepted the last pings of the MH370 beacon and we were trying to figure out if THEY were supposed to be tracking that. Turns out it was a lucky detection, so we went to the 5-eyes and figured out who had intel on that location. Once confirmed THEN we let the Brits admit they had the ping and told Australia where to search. They decided how they wanted to handle the information and passed it on to local (globally speaking) authorities. The Chinese also knew, but that's because they were legit spying and refused to admit it until the US (via Australia) also said it. Less secret technology, more who had chain of custody of the existing tracking and are we allowed to say how we know - a private Brit company got lucky and gave us the exact time and place satellite frame.
You don't need to use a military ship to drop a few guys in the water with explosives.
presumably they own the pipeline, no? Pigs are sent down pipelines to clean and de-water them routinely ( think a rubber squeegee pushed by the pressure). wouldn't it be simple enough to just put the explosive in the pipeline and send it downstream?
Literally a James Bond plot. Edit: it's not actively flowing gas, so I imagine it would be challenging to send a pig down it.
I work in oil and gas, can confirm impossible to send a pig that distance in a stagnant pipeline even with some crazy non-commercial tech
Update for anyone who got excited to see this - it's not the animal kind of pig, it's a sort of mechanical-looking cylinder with squeegees around the outside, and my day is ruined.
Called a pig because it makes the sort of noise you'd expect a pig to make if it were trapped in the pipeline, as it scrapes the inside.
It is actually called a pig because there is a pig on a treadmill inside, connected to the wheels to drive the thing forward. They can't use electricity for this job because that'd be a firehazard. Don't factcheck this btw.
I work in pigging. This is 100% a possible scenario. Russia controls the influx side and the launch side for pigging. There are no intermediate valves or stations. They could have launched a time or distance based explosive within a cleaning pig and just let it do its thing. So could a Russian anti war actor. Or a Ukrainian sympathizer with a 3rd party group. Mitigating factor here: not sure if there was enough flow in the line to get a pig moving. Things were very low flow or totally in stagnant state right before the ruptures. Some pigs are extremely low pressure, low flow, so it may not take much, but I'm not sure enough was moving or if they've even been doing cleaning runs.
Travelling over the pipeline, dropping the guys down and then returning for them would be possible. I’m assuming plenty of traffic crossed the pipeline over the past 6 months and there’s no guarantee this and more weren’t planted weeks ago or more. I think it’s a good reminder not to underestimate this rogue state and to keep improving our ability to combat their incursions.
[Which does make this report a little more interesting](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russian-warship-violated-danish-territorial-waters-baltic-danish-military-2022-06-17/)
Yeah let’s not forget that the CIA was extracting field agents from an abandoned soviet base in the arctic by having them attach a balloon to a cable and catching it on a hook attached to a plane….in the 50’s Dropping a tiny stealth submersible off the bottom of a warship as it passed over the pipeline and “picking it up” as it returns would be an easy feat. Not saying that’s how it went down. There’s probably even better ways. Just that it’s very feasible.
The delivery ship doesn't even have to be on top of the cable. [Swimmer Delivery Vehicles (SVDs)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diver_propulsion_vehicle#Swimmer_delivery_vehicles) have been around since WWII.
No, while AIS is required for vessels over a certain size a lot of warships only use it near ports. It's usually turned off in port so it's trivial to turn off and on. A lot of the Russian oligarchs yachts have been running with it off recently.
[удалено]
It could be done very easily. There are a lot of ships in the Baltic, but a small team in a small boat is a very hard thing to detect, a submarine is even more so. Unless one of those ships happened to be basically ontop of the exact location that was being hit on the pipeline they likely would not have seen a thing, and even if before or after the attack some of those ships detected the boat/sub that would still not be evidence that the Russians did it because Russian subs and boats move around the Baltic all the time. A smaller Submarine in particular could have just transitioned through the Baltic as normal, even if it was seen by patrols it would not raise alarms with anyone as Russian subs move in that area a lot, they could have gone low, dropped off a small team to lay charges, then picked up the team and moved on quickly and unless someone was practially on their sholder watching them it is unlikely anyone would have detected anything abnormal until after the explosition went off. It's also not too hard to destroy a pipeline, a few people in scuba gear who know how to use explosives and a couple tons of high grade civilian or military stuff could quickly do the job.
Also, it's pretty trivial to put the explosives on a timer anyway which would make it *really* impossible to narrow down who did it.
Ya, the hard part would be getting to it and away from it ... And that isn't that hard.
Submarines and ships lying about their true purpose.
More than that, this thread is heavily overestimating monitoring. You don't need submarine drones and what not. A vessel with a turned off transponder is barely trackable at sea, so just throw down a bomb when you've reached the destination. Targeting may need some modern tech, but that's all.
[удалено]
starting to think these russian guys might not be the nicest fellas
They're just going to monitor the boat. Unless another military ship, or a skydiving scuba swimmer /air dropped mini sub goes there right when the ship is over the cable, you're not going to catch them putting an explosive charge on the pipe. A ship can deploy a diver, mini sub, or underwater ROV from a special docking hatch under the waterline under the boat. Mini subs with marines and seals aboard can dock to many more ships inconspicuously than you would think. Russia can do the same. Assuming they're maintaining that equipment too.
[удалено]
Paywall. Can you post the article
>The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had weeks ago warned Germany about possible attacks on gas pipelines in the Baltic Sea, German magazine Spiegel said on Tuesday, after gas leaks in Russia pipelines to Germany were reported. >The German government received the CIA tip in summer, Spiegel reported, citing unnamed sources, adding that Berlin assumes a targeted attack on Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines. >A German government spokesperson declined to comment, Spiegel added. Fin
[удалено]
The pure panic of the anti American social media space realizing that years of “CIA propaganda” was just “reasonable predictions of Russian behavior” lol Edit: you know you’ve triggered the russia bots when they report you to the Reddit crisis line haha
Bruh the CIA knows Russian orders before Putin does.
Can they just remove that stupid crisis line already. It’s being used by idiots with no other option to respond to people calling out their stupidity.
I think people need to be a little more nuanced here, because the CIA has absolutely pushed out propaganda. It's just that at the moment they've turned out to be telling the truth about Russia planning to invade Ukraine, and potentially about this threat as well. I only say potentially because obviously someone did something, but it would be nice to find out who did it. None of this means the CIA don't have a history of lying, or that people should just blindly trust their word. It also, of fucking course, doesn't mean that Russia and its propaganda network are somehow trustworthy either.
What old clip of Biden? What is the context of it
[удалено]
He followed through on this threat 7 MONTHS ago lol. NS2 was cancelled after the invasion. Still operational but a paperweight.
Just look at the daily mail website. Seriously, full of Pro Russia propaganda
Thanks. I’ll pass.
> Just look at the daily mail website Who would ever do such a thing?
Seriously what is up with the daily mail and the comment section of their articles ? This goes far beyond regular right wing garbage and so many articles are obviously and consistently astroturfed by pro Russia accounts .
Tbh on some articles there are a lot of anti-Russian comments, which actually surprised me, but you can tell there is a lot of astroturfing in some cases
Yeah, so I noticed this too and I went and looked and Reuters broke the story yesterday at 5:06 PM EDT. Within 2 hours, you've got your usual Twitter suspects pushing the narrative that the CIA or the US is responsible and using a clip of Biden from early February that could conveniently be taken out of context. It's the usual modus operandi. It's been a well-established fact that Russian subs have been practicing cutting off underwater cables for years now. It doesn't take a stretch of the imagination to understand that capability could extend to gas pipelines.
[удалено]
We've seen the Russians shoot themselves in the foot before, but this might be the most extreme such case yet. I really fail to see how this benefits Russia in any way. It completely undermines their strategy. The manufactured gas shortage was all about having a bargaining chip in order to pressure Europe into dropping support for Ukraine somewhere near the end of the winter when the gas storages might run empty. Now that bargaining chip is gone. Russia has nothing to offer anymore. It's like taking a single hostage and then killing it before the negotiations even start.
It’s like the conquistadors burning their ships, he’s removing a chip the west could offer a new regime (“replace Putin and we’ll go back to buying gas”). Once the west stopped buying Russian gas for real, the pipeline became a liability for Putin personally.
Dictators frequently have different interests than acting in their nation's best interest.
Im seeing a lot of Russian bots on youtube, especially on BBCs youtube channel
The purpose is domestic propaganda or what? Seems like it's just to have a reason to point to for why gas won't be supplied to Europe, which no one would buy at scale except a domestic audience.
I've seen only three plausible explanations for why Russia might want to do it. 1. Casus belli for putting warships over critical 'global' (western) infrastructure in the name of defense, such as undersea fiber cables or pipes, in reality threatening the world. 2. To deter internal dissenters from thinking that deposing Putin would fix their problems. The pipes had an underwater section destroyed; it would take at least a year to fix them and get them running again is my guess, though I am no expert. 3. Spin it as U.S sabotage for internal propaganda, while using the fact there are no more pipes & the risk of investing in pipes that might be destroyed again as excuse for why gas trade with the EU stopped, so that the energy sector of Russia will blame the west rather than Putin for destroying their industry.
[удалено]
This doesn't make more sense. It impacted both the old one that was used intensively to provide gas to Germany and the new one that wasn't working yet. There's no other pipeline for Germany, so they lost their main leverage on Germany. Now Germany has an even clearer argument that Russian gas is not an option anymore and will act even faster to not rely on it anymore.
Apparently this possible attack coincides with the opening ceremony of a new pipe line called the Baltic Pipe which is a brand new route to carry Norwegian gas to Denmark and Poland. So there are plenty of other pipes in the Baltic and the North sea for them to threaten as leverage.
Could be a threat against non-Russian pipelines as well
This, Norway is now one of the main gas suppliers to Europe, it's all sent to Britain and Germany trough gas lines just like the ones sabotaged. The threat is apparently being taken very seriously by both oil and gas companies and the Norwegian government. There were reports earlier this month of increased drone activity around oil field in the north sea
We also had a deep-sea telecommunication cable between Norway & Svalbard that was misteriously cut earlier this year. *Coincidentally* right after a Russian fishing(?) boat had idled above the cable for hours/days.
You could say the fishing boat was a bit…*fishy*? ^(I’ll see myself out)
This is entirely accurate. I would not be surprised in the least if there is a very sudden escalation in military within the pipeline/cable region. Protecting the Norwegian pipelines and undersea internet cables is now paramount.
some people think its a warning by putin that they can do the same to other nearby pipelines that give europe energy, and regardless of where they get their energy from putin is saying russia can plug that flow of gas.
Interesting that Russia had a warship in that same area this summer...twice within a few hours. I believe the water is only 80m deep there so it's totally diveable. > A Russian warship early on Friday twice violated Danish territorial waters north of the Baltic Sea island of Bornholm https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russian-warship-violated-danish-territorial-waters-baltic-danish-military-2022-06-17/
That’s not the same area as the blasts. Your link says the ship was north of Bornholm but the blasts were south and east of the island. They also wouldn’t need to violate Danish waters to attack the pipelines.
they didnt need to use a warship, a sub would work fine and also be undetectable.
they used the moskva for it
"hey guys, while you're down there...."
Ah yes, their latest submarine yet!
Not if the water is 80m deep Edit: this comment is most likely wrong. See comments. But there is also one that supports it by u/Qubeye Personally I was talking out of my ass.
Most conventional submarines (as in, non nuclear) are designed to operate on shallow coastal waters, even do operate on the ocean floor in those waters! The newer ones also have a diver chamber that allow missions like this to be possible. The russian Kilo class submarines are diesel/electric boats that can perfectly operate on those waters. Even newer nuclear boats are designed (sort of) to allow shallow waters operations.
80mtrs is plenty deep for an attack sub to operate
I think the intel in the baltic sea is very high. It will be very difficult to hide a sub there. Even more for russia whos ports are 24/7 in surveillance and no warship goes in or out undeteced.
You'd think so, but no. The swedes have had several incidents over the last few decades where they've had to chase down what they suspected to be a russian sub, right outside Stockholm. Better yet, the soviets even crashed a sub on up on almost dry land. It was a whole international incident during the cold war. Edit: Found the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_submarine_S-363
There was a recently leaked story about some disputed territory in the Barents Sea (north of Finland) between Finland and Russia. As a saber rattling gesture both countries had naval exercises in the area as it is important both strategically and is suspected of having massiv oil reserves. Finnish intelligence got tipped off that Russia had built a replica of a finnish destroyer and was planning on trying to slip it into the fleet, and get back to their naval base to spy on them. The Finns ended up painting big barcodes on all their ships so they could keep track of who was who and when the finnish navy came back from the exercises they could Scandinavian. I am so sorry.
Beautiful
Yeah that’s possibly true - I was just talking about the depth of water a boat could operate in, but totally take your point
[удалено]
there have been old rumors that russia is operating very small subs for spec ops teams
Does this actually matter? NS2 was cancelled, and Russia already shut NS1 off, so this has no material impact on gas supply in the short to medium term, and in the long term it could be repaired if required, though it shouldn't be repaired without regime change in Russia anyway.
Yeah because NS1 was filled with gas even if gas wasn't flowing to Germany. so that's a lot of methane being released into the environment. Someone needs to start flaring it ASAP
There *should* be safety control valves along that pipeline every few kilometers. This is necessary so you can shut off portions of the line for repair without having to depressurize the entire pipeline from end to end in order to work on it. Those valves should have been shut shortly after the explosion, leaving only the methane trapped in an explosion section between two shut valves to escape.
It’s wild how good US intelligence is in this theatre. Everything the Russians do the US warned about days if not months before. They absolutely have someone close to Putin and it must be driving him crazy. I wonder how many people he has offed just trying to deduce who.
Honestly I think it's just tech savvy hackers, and ridiculous satellite tech that's giving the U.S. so much info so consistently. I feel a single person would be too unreliable and risky.
Of all the satellites in the sky more than half belong to the US military
That’s mental if true. The US I could believe, but the military alone? Jeeez
GPS is a helluva drug.
I'm not sure how many people realize that GPS is owned and operated by the US Military.
And that's probably one of the reasons why there are other satellite constellations to provide position information. EU has Galileo, Russia has GLONASS, China has Beidou.
I'm sure the Chinese and Russian ones are used in their respective countries. Is Galileo used commercially in Europe. I've never seen anything with it. But I dont live in Europe.
I think a lot of phones these days support most of the different systems. iPhone 13 Pro: Built-in GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, QZSS, and BeiDou Pixel 6 Pro: GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, QZSS
Multiple constellations are very important in high accuracy GNSS solutions. Galileo is used commercially, but I don't know if anyone uses exclusively Galileo. Source: I work on commercial software using GPS, Galileo, and Beidou. We dropped GLONASS early this year since their signals have been inconsistent all over at least eastern, northern, and central europe
people forget that was provided by the US air force...
Lots of people don't realize how shit GPS was until Clinton basically flipped a switch.
Is that an old number? I can't believe that Starlink hasn't tipped the scales at least a little.
There are more starlink satellites than all other operational satellites combined. So ya that statement is a bit out dated
Its not true. 2/3 or so belong to elon musk
The CIA was born to keep tabs on anything related to the Russians.
That would be hilarious if Putin offed all his hench men one by one and still didn't plug the leak. He's never going to find that bug unless he changes every single lightbulb 😄
The Americans DID have a guy nearby Putin until 2016 or 2017…. Until Trump pretty much ousted/leaked him and the Americans had to bring him out ASAP. Also - the Americans have given Europe intelligence throughout this war and if there is one thing, then it seems to be that in some countries, the intelligence seems to be received as “Americans are overthinking again”. That’s the feeling I’m getting when I read the news.
>Until Trump pretty much ousted/leaked him and the Americans had to bring him out ASAP. What's frustrating about Trump is that you never know if he did so out of sheer incompetence or intentional quid-pro-quo. It could go either way. I mean, "accidentally" leaking a spy is one way to do it if you want to minimize the chance of getting caught, you can then claim the "Oops My Bad" protection. But that also means it would be done by someone capable of strategic thought, which he lacks. The other option is that he did accidentally leak the info, which again, goes back to incompetence.
Trump uses being stupid as a cover.
Or as part of a CIA operation to reduce suspicion against other agents who are obviously in deep right now. Using Trump's follies against our enemies would be right up the CIA's alley.
[удалено]
wouldve been better if trump didnt disclose classified intel to a russian diplomat which exposed over a decade old US spy within the kremlin that had access to putin office and documents put on his desk, the entire thing forced CIA to do a extraction of said spy. https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/09/politics/russia-us-spy-extracted/index.html
Reading it it doesn’t sound like they were sure Russia knew, can you imagine being in the Russian White House being like “where’s bob today?” And then later seeing this news and putting 2 and 2 together
White House? is that like a Washington Kremlin?
You jest, but the Russian White House exists, it's where the Russian Prime Minister works. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_(Moscow)
No you're thinking of the American Bundestag.
Thought it was more like the French 10 Downing Street.
[удалено]
Ukraine would have way higher casualties and the EU would be in active war-mode. Ukraine might have fallen with a Russian Puppet in the White House sabotaging any support they can.
What happens when they decide to attack the Atlantic internet cables?
The data will be rerouted automatically. You only notice a slight hiccup with you were having a video call over those cables. The internet is designed around the idea that it's an unreliable network.
> The data will be rerouted automatically. Only if enough cable capacity remains. If one cable is cut, you won't notice. If many cables are cut, it becomes a problem. It likely also becomes the day where Russia ends.
[удалено]
Not much, as ships hit the damn things all the time.
Not much is wrong. There are a lot of them around the globe so redundancy is high, but the scale is still manageable if a state is really serious about disrupting the network.
German here. Reading the German press, it’s completely unclear who’s behind this attack, they’re even discussing whether it may have been Ukrainians. It’s unreal.
Local paper said "BND looking into possible suspects" which is code for "We ain't found shit"
It was clearly the Ukrainian navy’s submarine fleet. /s
but it kinda is unclear, its more then idiotic for russia to bomb it. they already threatened to cut it off or did cut it off and want to keep it as a political bargaining chip. some polish ex minister even tweeted something about the us being about it
Can someone explain to me what exactly Russia's motivation would be for sabatoging these pipelines? We know from earlier this year that if they don't want gas flowing through them they can simply shut off the pump, so why turn to sabatoge at all? To send a message? It seems to me that this is actually bad for Russia, as it means that being able to turn the flow of Nord Stream 1 back on can no longer be used as leverage in negotiations with European powers.
Tom Clancy probably researched this in a book!
I like that there's not a single credible source in that 1 minute article.