←back to thread

688 points hunglee2 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.337s | source
Show context
stephc_int13 ◴[] No.34715513[source]
There is one thing that is really bothering me in this story.

I don't really care who is behind the sabotage, they would certainly not admit it for obvious reasons, and it could be more complex than it seems.

But the press, here in the UK, in France and in the US, has been suspiciously "clueless", avoiding with great care to imply that anyone in the west could be behind it, even if it really seems obvious that it could very well be the case.

Why? Why are they so careful? They usually are not afraid to speculate, especially on such a scale.

I find it disturbing to think that they could either have received instructions from their respective governments or are simply afraid push any inquiries on this subject.

replies(4): >>34715588 #>>34716244 #>>34718516 #>>34719146 #
SergeAx ◴[] No.34719146[source]
Can you please elaborate how exactly it was obvious (that anyone in the West could be behind the attack)? What is a motivation for the West?
replies(2): >>34719341 #>>34722179 #
dmatech ◴[] No.34719341[source]
The most straightforward reasons would be:

1. Russia would get income from the pipeline, empowering their economy. 2. This sort of infrastructure would represent increased German dependence on Russia for their energy needs. 3. This would also tend to increase economic and diplomatic ties between Germany and Russia.

Destroying the pipeline (even if it's not being used) could theoretically send the message that these infrastructure projects are not safe and that relying on Russia for energy is strategically unwise.

replies(2): >>34720554 #>>34721746 #
1. hanspeter ◴[] No.34720554[source]
Invading Ukraine sent the message that relying on Russia for energy is unwise as well as unethical.

No country in the EU thinks it's a good idea to buy gas from Russia and it's going to end broken pipes or not.

There's really nothing to gain for the US from blowing up the pipe that couldn't easily be accomplished via conversations.