[plushpuffin]

Russia did that. They've damaged/destroyed their own pipelines before in order to avoid penalty clauses in contracts or to get out of a bad deal after the price changed out of their favor, and that's why they did it this time, too.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/arielcohen/2022/09/29/russian-s...

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-turkmenistan-gas-s...

[PKop]

No. The US (or some deputized vassal at the direction of US) did it to destroy German/European industrial power and sever any potential alliance of European industry and cheap Russian commodities/energy flowing through Euro denominated trade outside $ system, along with the massive geopolitical alignment changes this would bring threatening US power/hegemony.

Peeling Europe away from a US alliance through energy partnership and trade, especially trade denominated in Euros which greatly benefited Europeans, was such a powerful lever to play in Russian geopolitical strategy that people claiming Russia blew up their own pipelines and threw this lever away have worms in their brain and simply haven't paid attention to the long term dynamics.

Having Germany/Europe on your side, vs them being on your biggest adversary's side is such an order of magnitude net benefit than saving money on contracts, this is just ridiculous.

Additionally, even if consideration of blowing up the pipelines ever made any sense whatsoever for Russia, blowing them up right now before winter, before further deterioration of Germany/European industrial economy, and before potential financial/energy crisis really bites right around the corner or next year is absurd. If this was a few years from now we could entertain theories of why not having the pipes and trade with Europe is better than having them (it still wouldn't make sense).

But Russia "panic bombing" their own pipelines right before pressure on Europe is about to increase which would potentially get them to capitulate on their sanctions is silly.

This is US propaganda and you bought it. Many different political leaders in congress, the white house, and the administrative state like Victoria Nuland, Ron Johnson, Ted Cruz, Joe Biden, Trump, Marco Rubio, Condoleeza Rice, Lindsey Graham just to name a few have for years attacked the project and promised destruction of Nord Stream.

Anthony Blinken wrote a book in 1988 called "Ally vs Ally" that speculated about blowing up Soviet gas pipelines flowing into Europe, and discussed the Reagan administrations deep opposition to expanding energy trade between Europe and Russia. This is a long term existential threat to US hegemony and dominance of European affairs.

If Russia maybe having to pay a few fees, which I'm sure they could just avoid if they wanted to, was more important than potential energy alliance between Russia and Europe, then multiple US administrations would not have talked and acted to end the project so intensely.

This is another example of the all to common delusional thinking that for some reason, the world hegemon that controls financial system, trade lanes, has massive military power and spending advantage, whose empire is very dependent upon global reserve currency and influence of energy trade, won't actually act like a hegemon and apply their power to suit their interests and thwart rivals building their own power.

What makes you think the US who promised Nord Stream would be stopped, wouldn't stop it with kinetic force and sabotage? This is the Occam's razor, "cui bono" explanation.

Your article claims Russia hasn't called the attacks attacks. They have. Also, it correctly states that destruction of the pipelines "signals a point of no return". Yes, exactly, which is why it makes 0 sense for Russia to do it, and complete sense for US (either directly or through deputized vassals like UK) to do it.

Why would Russia want to reach a point of no return on potential alliance with Germany/Europe against the US?

See Mackinder's heartland theory on potential global power emanating from control of the "world island"/Eurasia:

Who rules East Europe commands the Heartland;

who rules the Heartland commands the World-Island;

who rules the World-Island commands the world

A particular path to this goal that he and many others leading US/NATO/UK security strategy saw was a German/Russia alliance, something US has wanted to prevent for over 100 years. Putin would never throw away potential for this, something he was building towards for decades, in a matter of weeks before circumstances could lead to its realization.

[Larrikin]

This is a very long list of your unsourced "opinions" when all nations that have inspected the damage and assessed the intelligence have pointed the blame at Russia. Everyone but Russia.

[_kbh_]

America is more than component enough to blow up a gas pipeline, so why was one of the pipes of Nord Stream 2 spared? Pressuring Germany to certify it giving Russia a huge win.

The obvious answer is because regardless of how much text people write, it was clearly Russia who had the most to gain and the easiest ability to do it.

Gazprom has maintenance robots that can be sent down the pipes and could be used to cause an internal explosion.

Much more likely and reasonable than some sort of fanciful special operations mission.

[HyperSane]

You got issues man.