Who sabotaged the gas pipelines?

[BC Landlord]

Nord Stream 1&2 pipelines running under the Baltic sea supplying Russian natural gas to Europe have been sabotaged, apparently by massive amounts of explosives planted underwater. This is no work of amateurs.

Any thoughts on who could be responsible for this?

[65deluxe]

Gotta be the US or Ukraine. War is fought in many ways and having the world think it was Russia is a win for both. Russia had nothing to gain by blowing it and everything to lose. The west will and has spun it to blame Russia.

[BC Landlord]

Some blame Russians. If Russians wanted to cut the gas supply off to Europe, they could have just turned the taps off. Why blowing pipelines up, destroying infrastructure?

[77TA]

If Russia just turns it off they look really bad. If they blow it up, USA looks really bad. We will never know the truth. Hopefully whoever blew it up bought a lot of carbon credits first.

[WESTman]

I don't think Ukraine has the means to pull something like that, my money is on US.

[normaM]

I say Russia, they financed it and felt it was theirs to do with what they wanted while avoiding the stigma so shutting off supplies
GUess we'll know for certain when info gets declassified

[GordonH]

If Russia just turns it off they look really bad. If they blow it up, USA looks really bad. We will never know the truth. Hopefully whoever blew it up bought a lot of carbon credits first.

Putin blew it up and points his finger at the West, gullible fools buy it hook, line and sinker.

[seewood]

Putin blew it up and points his finger at the West, gullible fools buy it hook, line and sinker.

Thats my thinking.
No way now can Russia supply gas to Europe from those pipelines, no excuses, just not going to happen. Russia will keep the valves closed for some time, at least while poo-tin is in power.

[Spiff]

Speculation abounds.

[GordonH]

Speculation abounds.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WRK03q76GKU

[BC Landlord]

Some facts ...

- The depth where the explosions happened is about 50m
- The pipeline was made of steel 4 cm thick wall, and "wrapped" in a 10cm thick reinforced concrete.
- There were two explosions a couple of km apart, around Bornholm island.
- Some say it would take at least 200-300 lbs of explosives (not sure what type) to damage it.
- The explosion registered as a 2.5 earthquake in Denmark, or Poland I believe.

Certainly not done by amateurs. But, I am surprised that there are no records of any suspicious vessels (a ship or a sub) in that area. From what I know, Baltic sea is very well monitored for underwater activity (proximity of Russia), and I believe there is always a bird's view of that area 24/7.
Any other thoughts?

[Drip_Torch]

Some blame Russians. If Russians wanted to cut the gas supply off to Europe, they could have just turned the taps off. Why blowing pipelines up, destroying infrastructure?

Simple. Too simple really.

"force majeure"

You'll notice when Russia did disrupt the flow of gas, it claimed there were maintenance issues. Every. Single. Time. That's because Gazprom has contracts in place and failure to deliver would have cost them money. Now Gazprom can claim "force majeure" disrupted the flow of gas for the winter, which quite coincidentally, is what Russia intended to do the whole time.

Russia did it.

[BC Landlord]

Simple. Too simple really.

"force majeure"

You'll notice when Russia did disrupt the flow of gas, it claimed there were maintenance issues. Every. Single. Time. That's because Gazprom has contracts in place and failure to deliver would have cost them money. Now Gazprom can claim "force majeure" disrupted the flow of gas for the winter, which quite coincidentally, is what Russia intended to do the whole time.

Russia did it.

So, why is not anyone coming up with material evidence? As I mentioned earlier, it's such a small, shallow, and very well monitored area. An operation like that would involve substantial resources on site. Poles, Danes and Swedes and all of Baltic states are very leery of Russian activity there. I bet you, they know more than they are telling. And that is probably that it was NOT Russia who did it.

[Drip_Torch]

Simple. Too simple really.

"force majeure"

You'll notice when Russia did disrupt the flow of gas, it claimed there were maintenance issues. Every. Single. Time. That's because Gazprom has contracts in place and failure to deliver would have cost them money. Now Gazprom can claim "force majeure" disrupted the flow of gas for the winter, which quite coincidentally, is what Russia intended to do the whole time.

Russia did it.

So, why is not anyone coming up with material evidence? As I mentioned earlier, it's such a small, shallow, and very well monitored area. An operation like that would involve substantial resources on site. Poles, Danes and Swedes are very leery of Russian activity there. I bet you, they know more than they are saying. And that is probably that it was NOT Russia who did it.

Nat Sec. That too is simple. The evidence would give away the methods of collecting that evidence and right now we're facing a belligerent, unlike any other belligerent we've known in the last 31 years. All in due time, I'm sure. I doubt a fish farts without triggering an analysis in that area of the world right now.

[Tyrian-Quill]

I doubt a fish farts without triggering an analysis in that area of the world right now.

•