Quote:
Originally Posted by Table 5
There’s an old NATO maxim that basically says that to keep peace in Europe, you need to “keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.“
The destruction of Nordstream 2 did exactly that…it weakened Russia’s influence in Europe and eliminated a potential source of energy income (income which amongst other things, helps to funnel war), it weakened the Germans in terms of energy security (and removed a point of hesitancy in action against Russia), and kept the Americans in (by not only keeping influence, but now also benefitting from being the ones who bring in the Gas).
When you consider past historical action and ask yourself the old “cui bono”, there’s really only one country that make sense. I’m just not really seeing any one else having the incentive, covert ability, and political balls to do this:
• The Russians? Why would a resource-based country that relies on energy exports for income and political influence, do this? Nordstream and cheap gas is what they had over the Germans and Europe. This would be like a drug dealer eliminating the network to his best customers.
• The Germans? They were addicted to cheap Russian energy for years (all while reducing their own resources). Why would the worlds 4th largest economy sacrifice themselves, and put their country into an energy crisis? For Ukraine? What drug addict would willingly do this?
• The Ukrainians? I guess I could see some incentive there to punish Russia, and eliminate German hesitancy. But I don’t really seem them being able to pull this off on their own.
• Anyone else in Europe? I’m not really seeing the incentive either. Norway has some incentive as they get to supply more gas to Europe…so I’m not completely surprised they’d be involved, but definitely not on their own.
• The Chinese? I guess they are someone who could technically pull this off, but I’m not sure why they want to get involved. They are too busy reaping the benefits of this conflict as-is. This also doesn’t seem like their style.
If people want to go the ad hominem route with the author, that’s fine I guess, but to dismiss the idea of the article because “Putin talking point!” seems naive to history. The CIA has been willing to get dirty around the world for decades…I’m not sure why now would be any different. Putin being evil, and the Americans being involved in the muck, are not mutually exclusive.
|
I don't think a single poster has disputed that the Americans could have done it. What's being disputed is the 'facts' in the article, which look to have all been fabricated by an author who now has an almost 20 year history of making things up and being a conspiracy nutjob.
The article (propaganda really) was crap and sheds no light on who actually blew up the pipes. The suspects remain: USA, Russia, Poland, Ukraine, someone else. If we ever find out, it will probably be decades from now.
All people are mad about is giving a known conspiracy hack more exposure and presenting him as a reliable reporter when he is fully discredited. He certainly could be right that the Americans did it, but he isn't privy to any information that proves it, so it's just one guy who has suspicious motives opinion.