Who Sabotaged The Nordstream Pipelines?

Who Sabotaged the Nordstream 2 Pipeline? And Why?

  • Germany

    Votes: 1 1.0%

  • Great Britain

    Votes: 1 1.0%

  • France

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • USA

    Votes: 47 46.5%

  • Russia

    Votes: 26 25.7%

  • China

    Votes: 5 5.0%

  • Other (list your theory)

    Votes: 4 4.0%

  • Ukraine

    Votes: 4 4.0%

  • Trump

    Votes: 2 2.0%

  • Bama

    Votes: 11 10.9%
  • Total voters
    101
#201
#201
Rasputin_Vol said:
She had just been in office less than three weeks at the time it happened. Not exactly rote.
Click to expand...
Oh sure. And she hadn’t been involved whatsoever in government prior to assuming the post. This is an incredibly stupid assertion that these people use unencrypted SMS text. Hell you can go download Signal for free
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#202
#202
NorthDallas40 said:
Oh sure. And she hadn’t been involved whatsoever in government prior to assuming the post. This is an incredibly stupid assertion that these people use unencrypted SMS text. Hell you can go download Signal for free
Click to expand...
Also, you are assuming that the Russians don't have the ability to hack even encrypted communications. Hell, wasn't it about 5-6 years ago when it was reported that the US had been listening in on calls from Angela Merkel and other European allies?
 
#203
#203
Rasputin_Vol said:
Also, you are assuming that the Russians don't have the ability to hack even encrypted communications. Hell, wasn't it about 5-6 years ago when it was reported that the US had been listening in on calls from Angela Merkel and other European allies?
Click to expand...
Yep I’m absolutely assuming that and feel completely comfortable doing so based on their keystone cops progress thus far Moe.

Hell they aren’t even using secure comms in Ukraine and wind up getting their asses blow up because everyone is listening in! 🤡
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#206
#206
Last edited:
#207
#207
NorthDallas40 said:
More linked more conjecture on this earlier. The Brit’s discovered this back in the summer while she was still foreign minister and before the pipeline attack. I’m going to give them enough credit to assume they corrected the situation immediately?
Click to expand...

Weird that she is out now as well..Dont trust anything and their fault. Always a mountain of lies.
 
#208
#208
Orangeburst said:
Weird that she is out now as well..Dont trust anything and their fault. Always a mountain of lies.
Click to expand...
As I jumped on Moe about these people don’t use unencrypted SMS text to communicate with each other as pertaining to speculation on exchanges between Truss and Blinkin. Not on anything sensitive anyway. I’m sure they do have casual non sensitive exchanges. They have any number of secure and encrypted comms available. And as I also said even you and I can go download and install Signal for free.

And no I don’t blame you for not trusting them nor am I offering this up as support that they wouldnt lie. There is simply no reason for them to be so incredibly stupid about sensitive info on unsecure comms.

Hell when I was working even we were paranoid about it. While you cannot discuss classified info on cell phones you have the latitude to get into technical discussions which are company property. And we’d always point out if someone was on a cell line. It’s just what people do 🤷‍♂️
 
Last edited:
#211
#211
NorthDallas40 said:
😂🤡 because the leaders of the most powerful countries in the world would automatically default to unencrypted SMS texts instead of any number of STU/STE secure telephones to discuss their just executed terrorist acts, Moe! 🤣🤣🤣
Click to expand...
I had forgotten about this, but Ben Wallace's rushed visit to Washington a few weeks ago was caused by concerns that the communications had been compromised.

Defence Secretary Ben Wallace jets to US amid fears that Putin will launch 'nuclear show of force' | Daily Mail Online

A defence source told The Telegraph the meeting Mr Wallace had could have been held in person because of concerns about the security of communications between the Pentagon and Ministry of Defence.
Click to expand...
 
#212
#212
Rasputin_Vol said:
I had forgotten about this, but Ben Wallace's rushed visit to Washington a few weeks ago was caused by concerns that the communications had been compromised.

Defence Secretary Ben Wallace jets to US amid fears that Putin will launch 'nuclear show of force' | Daily Mail Online
Click to expand...
Oh ok sure that totally sounds legit. I’m sure the Russians have cracked our encrypted STU/STE phones Moe

And of course I shouldn’t have wasted time reading it. “Security concerns” as used in the article make no hint on comms security but rather reference regional security as your asshat man crush keeps threatening nukes 🙄
 
#213
#213
NorthDallas40 said:
Oh ok sure that totally sounds legit. I’m sure the Russians have cracked our encrypted STU/STE phones Moe

And of course I shouldn’t have wasted time reading it. “Security concerns” as used in the article make no hint on comms security but rather reference regional security as your asshat man crush keeps threatening nukes 🙄
Click to expand...
So Ben Wallace just suddenly felt the urge to fly to DC from London when it could have been done on these secure lines?

OK
 
#214
#214
Rasputin_Vol said:
So Ben Wallace just suddenly felt the urge to fly to DC from London when it could have been done on these secure lines?

OK
Click to expand...
Apparently he chose to go have face to face meetings about security concerns due to your asshat bromance target being flippant about nukes. Again. As he has done multiple times now. Yes Moe that is exactly what the article was about.

Can you point out in the article where communications security is explicitly pointed to? 🤡

Directly from the article: Womp Womp

Following the attack, Mr Wallace cancelled a meeting with MPs and travelled Washington DC to discuss 'security concerns'.

Fears are mounting that the Russian president is considering detonating a low-yield nuclear warhead over the Black Sea - after he said last month that he is prepared to do so in order to defend Russia's 'territorial integrity'.

A security source told The Sun that 'the threat has increased recently'.
 
#215
#215
It was Russia. Sweden has the proof. But that labels Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism. Which means the US won’t trade with countries that trade with Russia. But Europe must get energy from Russia for their own commerce to function.

Rock

We are here

Hard place
 
  • Like
Reactions: tvolsfan
#219
#219
Orangeburst said:
Not buying it. Why would they sabotage the line to deliver their gas when they can turn the spigot off?
Click to expand...
Because if they close the spigot they break the contract and piss off the Europeans. If it's sabotage they can deny it's them who did it. And maybe too because as noted Putin is a loon.
 
#220
#220
EasternVol said:
Because if they close the spigot they break the contract and piss off the Europeans. If it's sabotage they can deny it's them who did it. And maybe too because as noted Putin is a loon.
Click to expand...

Oh right..the same Europeans that are arming Ukraine? I think contracts and feelings are not on Putins radar.
 
#221
#221
EasternVol said:
Because if they close the spigot they break the contract and piss off the Europeans. If it's sabotage they can deny it's them who did it. And maybe too because as noted Putin is a loon.
Click to expand...
Russia and Gazprom had every reason to declare force majeure the moment the EU and US placed sanctions on them back in the spring, so it had nothing to do with breaching contract.

But nice try at gaslighting.
 
#222
#222
Rasputin_Vol said:
Russia and Gazprom had every reason to declare force majeure the moment the EU and US placed sanctions on them back in the spring, so it had nothing to do with breaching contract.

But nice try at gaslighting.
Click to expand...
But you get the point of plausible deniability, no?
 
#223
#223
EasternVol said:
But you get the point of plausible deniability, no?
Click to expand...
Yes, you mean such as the US using a proxy like the UK or Poland to carry out the demolition of the pipelines? The US can (technically) keep their hands clean about that situation.

Now what does plausible deniability have to do with Russia simply turning off the taps instead of blowing up it's own infrastructure?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top