zlacker

When it happened it was clear that the US, Russia, and Poland were likely the only suspects, except they're all really weird! The US absolutely has not made return on investment, which was obviously going to happen because shipping it over is much more expensive than the pipeline, and in the meantime Biden has to deal with increased gas prices. His incentives go the other way on this. But why the fuck would Russia do it? Poland is like...there, which is why they're worth a mention, but they don't have the same operational capacity and also do not benefit from it at all. But I mean come on, we know it was sabotaged deliberately. Such a weird thing

>>ravi-d+(OP)
Ukraine? I am not sure if they have the means, but they have the motive, the nord stream pipelines bypass the Ukraine pipeline.

My knowledge on this is very, very sketchy, but my understanding is the there is still a large amount of Russian gas transiting the Ukraine pipelines, Europe needs the gas so they buy it, Ukraine needs the transit money to defend against Russia so they keep the operation running. and Russia needs the gas money to attack Ukraine so they keep the operation running.

Honestly if true it is one of the weirdest situations I have ever heard about in the middle of a war.

I deliberately used an RT link because it is probably full of Russian propaganda and yet says basically the same thing as other articles. I originally learned about it via the Perun youtube channel(the best place to start if you want actual information not propaganda) but am unable to find the episode where it is mentioned.

https://www.rt.com/business/570805-russia-ukraine-eu-gas-tra...

>>ravi-d+(OP)
> But why the fuck would Russia do it?

Why do so many people act as if it's so unlikely that Russia did it? They had the least to lose, their relations with the west were already ruined at that point and such an incident couldn't make them any worse.

What would be their motive? Before the explosion, Russia had illegally shut down the pipeline. Now that the pipeline has exploded, they have plausible deniability and they can say it's not their fault the gas isn't flowing. Because of that, they won't have to pay additional fines when the economic relations with the west are restored.

And don't forget that one pipe of NS2 was left intact and, unlike NS1, there was no contractual obligation to pump gas through it.

>>pepper+47
>They had the least to lose, their relations with the west were already ruined at that point and such an incident couldn't make them any worse.

>Now that the pipeline has exploded, they have plausible deniability and they can say it's not their fault the gas isn't flowing.

How the hell thinking they have nothing to lose and also worried about a contract at the same time sound or consistent?

>>ravi-d+(OP)
> The US absolutely has not made return on investment, ...

Umm, the US has made a terrific return on investment. EU supplies have shifted dramatically away from Russia to Norway and the United States following the end of Nordstream.

>>licebm+2M2
As I wrote in my comment, the contractual obligations will matter in the future, when (if) the economic relations are normalized. Settlement of the outstanding financial disputes will be a prerequisite for that.