←back to thread

Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

(www.cnn.com)
577 points mooreds | 8 comments | 18 Nov 24 14:31 UTC | HN request time: 1.669s | source | bottom
Show context
Etheryte ◴[18 Nov 24 19:49 UTC] No.42176174[source]▶
So to keep score, in the last year we've seen cables sabotaged between Finland and Germany, Lithuania and Sweden, Estonia and Sweden, Estonia and Finland. Any others I missed? You might say it's too early to call it sabotage, but the earliest two cable incidents were exactly the same, so it's hardly a coincidence at this point.
replies(5): >>42176529 #>>42176719 #>>42177150 #>>42177199 #>>42177263 #
barryrandall ◴[18 Nov 24 20:39 UTC] No.42176719[source]▶
Russia warned that they were going to do this last week. I think it's pretty reasonable to conclude that 1) this was sabotage and 2) it was Russia.
replies(2): >>42176971 #>>42177112 #
JumpCrisscross ◴[18 Nov 24 21:00 UTC] No.42176971[source]▶
> Russia warned that they were going to do this last week

Source?

replies(2): >>42177009 #>>42177018 #
1. stavros ◴[18 Nov 24 21:04 UTC] No.42177018[source]▶
https://www.newsweek.com/russia-pipeline-gas-patrushev-putin...

I guess they warned in their own way, of "nice cables you've got there, it would be a shame if someone... sabotaged them".

replies(1): >>42177045 #
2. JumpCrisscross ◴[18 Nov 24 21:07 UTC] No.42177045[source]▶
They're constantly saying this about everything.
replies(2): >>42177160 #>>42177180 #
3. baq ◴[18 Nov 24 21:18 UTC] No.42177160[source]▶
every once in a while they actually follow through with some. they need some prison mafia credibility to not look like total clowns.
4. ivandenysov ◴[18 Nov 24 21:20 UTC] No.42177180[source]▶
They also threatened UA with a full scale invasion by doing troop trainings on the border for several years before the real thing.
replies(1): >>42177195 #
5. JumpCrisscross ◴[18 Nov 24 21:22 UTC] No.42177195{3}[source]▶
The point isn't that they don't do things, it's that there are people issuing a constant stream of threats and people doing things, and it's not entirely clear there is even a correlation between the two.
replies(1): >>42177372 #
6. jasonfarnon ◴[18 Nov 24 21:38 UTC] No.42177372{4}[source]▶
in other words, we need their false negative rate
replies(1): >>42177422 #
7. JumpCrisscross ◴[18 Nov 24 21:42 UTC] No.42177422{5}[source]▶
> we need their false negative rate

We have it. It's almost 100%. They've been threatening WWIII and nuclear armageddon since 2022.

replies(1): >>42181545 #
8. lazide ◴[19 Nov 24 09:34 UTC] No.42181545{6}[source]▶
That is not as comforting a comparison as you might think it is.

In my experience, the problem is also that one group of people refuses to act on what the other side actually says (because it’s inconvenient/dangerous).