Despite the fact it can be apparently repaired, I still don't see the Russians blowing up their own pipeline as a false flag.
Arch was saying it yesterday in a livestream, if they wanted to stop the flow, they could easily do it with any excuse (a part broke that we don't make but Germany has but sanctions stop us so can't fix it till you ease sanctions). There's no point in them destroying something that took so long to make and somehow do it without the NATO countries in the area catching them do it despite an US patrol in the area.
I can come up with reasons for why they did it. It's not hard, though I'd still think it unlikely that they did.
It actively punishes the west even more by preventing gas being sent through, vs before when it was merely not flowing by choice.
Second, Having to put more pipe in place would require access, which the west is currently sitting on the area, and you could pick up elint.
Third, it forces people to be paranoid about the west doing this and creates more of a pushback on being involved in ukraine, since nobody thinks this is worth it anymore (and wants to not freeze to death this winter).
Fourth, this also means they have a logical reason to sell more to China/India et al since they know they can't sell it to the west.
I can keep going, but it's not like there's not reasons for thinking russia could have done it. Do I actually think they did? Eh. Not super likely, but the US doing it also seems short sighted in some ways (yeah, we get europe relying more on us, but...then all the ukraine money shrivels up after a while, so no kickbacks for the MIC complex). Maybe we're trying to engineer the collapse of the EU, which this will likely accelerate.
At this point you're arguing for particulars, the crux is they could reduce and turn off whenever they want, so no point sending some special forces under NATO's watch to blow up your own pipe.
I can't tell if the false flags are getting dumber or just because we're so aware of it nowadays they're getting easier to spot?
Literally the only reason I can think of for Russia to blow up their own pipeline is for an excuse to release a shitton of methane into the air.
Russia benefits from global warming in two ways, Siberia becoming livable and the West throwing money down the toilet to electrify everything, which raises the price of gas since Western policy wants high fossil fuel prices to mask the cost (no new drilling/leasing under Biden for instance).
Yeah..... that kind of climate change is less out of mankind's control (unless geo-engineering becomes a thing) and more the result of, say, yellowstone exploding.
Though if that were to happen, and we all still had Internet somehow, I have good news and bad news on this forum
The good news is they'd be no more posts about leftists, they'd be dead
Bad news, all future topics will be where the raiders are, different ways to enjoy gruel and which plant can I eat without dying.
Releasing a shitton of methane would be geo-engineering. It's like 100x more effective per volume than CO2.
Apparently this pipeline explosion was the single largest release of methane to date and is equivalent an entire year's worth of other methane emissions (~500 million tons of methane). Other sources say only 100,000 tons were in the pipeline so the 500 million must have been fake news.
Although this should only boost greenhouse gasses like an extra 1% or 2% tiny amount this year so it's not a good reason to suspect Russia... but could make sense in a two birds with one stone type situation.
Yeah it gives Russia too much credit that they played this 5D chess move to false flag
When the simple answer is America did it, it's allies are all denying they did it, they hope either Ukraine stops pushing or that Putin is bluffing that if Ukraine cross the new Russian territory that nukes are going to be used.
That Nord stream explosion is not even a drop into an ocean. You need something with much more power (say, Yellowstone or a big asteroid) to make significant changes in the climate.
But Russia does indeed something in the Arctic: a "Polar Silk Road", together with China. It would cut ship travel from Asia to Europe almost by half. Here a video: https://youtu.be/pvy9usF7ohE
Currently 580 million tons get into the atmosphere/yr so if Russia went scorched earth they could increase methane by 40%.
Methane accounts for about 20% of warming. So they could increase climate change by 10%.
Not enough to melt Siberia anytime soon, but you definitely don't need a supervolcano or asteroid to change the climate - it's well within out power as humans to destroy the climate just as we can save it with geo-engineering.
A question: You DO realize that these data come from the same type of nutters that were wrong about climate and "climate change" for like 60 Years straight, right?
Why?
Because it was never about the climate.
Not about you, but I would trust their "science" as far as I can throw it (that goes even more now, since the WEF just said that they are "owning the science" on climate change, and that they are cooperating with Google to manipulate/censor results. Totally trustworthy indeed)
What's nutty is their prognostications of doom and the fecklessness of their solutions, not the basic physical science.
Molecules absorb or reflect energy at different wavelengths, this basic mechanism is not open to interpretation for anyone who has actually studied chemistry and physics.
Siberia is warming that's why there's methane explosions from permafrost melting, sea level is rising a bit, glaciers melting, and so on. But we don't solve it by overhauling our entire energy infrastructure with something way more costly and impractical, we solve it with seeding iron in the ocean, debris near L1 lagrange, increasing albedo with sulfates, and so on. Even fission combined with direct air capture is a better solution, more so if we get fusion working which seems likely since commercial magnets are so strong now.
The people that think 100 years from now we'll have a climate crisis have zero imagination or perspective on how radically fast technology advances; there's zero chance in 100 years we'll have a climate crisis unless civilization ends in which case who cares.
There's no reason why they would need to do that by blowing up their own very expensive pipeline. This could easily be done in Russia with no negative consequences.
watch.....wouldn't be surprised if none of it happened. They told us a thing and we just take it as truth. Same as the money to Ukraine thing. What better way to fool the entire world.
Easily? It would be at least 18 months, i.e., likely after the war is over. And even then, German industry won't just start back up where it was. Prior to the sabotage Peter Zeihan was predicting that if Germany lost access to gas for even a short time, its industry would be not be able to recover for 5 years or more. Since he's usually right, RIP to German bros.
Then it is far less plausible. The slight propaganda bump with communities who already mostly don't support Ukraine would not be worth the massive amount of lost money and time.
The pipeline was laid in pieces by a ship designed for that purpose. Obviously all they'd need to do is send the ship out there and take out the damages sections and then replace them.
Notice how he glosses over that "There are technical possibilities to restore the infrastructure" because he doesn't want to talk about that, HIS priority is to talk about who did it: "As of today, we proceed from the fact that it is necessary, first of all, to figure out who did it, and we are sure that certain countries, which had expressed their positions before, were interested in it. Both the US and Ukraine, as well as Poland"
This is exactly what I would expect if Russia blew up the pipeline themselves in order to play the victim and rally domestic support for the regime by pretending to be under attack.
Hey, people are mad about this whole conscription thing, what are we going to do about it?
THEY BLEW UP OUR PIPELINE! IT'S A GLOBAL CONSPIRACY AGAINST MOTHER RUSSIA!
nice one, we distract with a false flag attack, right out of the FSB playbook comrade.
This is exactly what I would expect if Russia blew up the pipeline themselves in order to play the victim and rally domestic support for the regime by pretending to be under attack.
And what would be different in their response if it was an attack by NATO or Ukraine?
And what would be different in their response if it was an attack by NATO or Ukraine?
I need to correct you first on your use of the term "NATO". Russia didn't say NATO, it said the US and Ukraine. Big difference.
And to answer your question very obviously, Russia would run crying to Germany and try to make nice with Germany to collaborate against the US, while at the same time swearing IMMEDIATE repair, and IMMEDIATE re-activation and resumption of gas deliveries to Germany.
Of course none of that happened, because Russia doesn't want to turn it back on, hence why they blew it up, and also isn't going to bother trying to make common cause with Germany, because Russia knows it did the job itself and they'd never be able to fool the Germans into thinking the US did it.
So, the only way Russia can demonstrate they didn't sabotage their own pipelines is by immediately kowtowing to everything NATO wants them to do? Got it.
Why would NATO blow up Russia's pipeline if NATO desperately wants the pipeline to supply gas?
Clearly whoever blew up the pipeline does NOT want it to supply gas, so if it was an enemy of Russia, then Russia should want to thwart said enemy by doing the opposite.
Your Russophobia is off the charts. The apartment bombings claim is crazy enough (like I showed you from the recent biography, only for you to call the author a 'dumbass' for disagreeing with you), but this? I would not expect this in the least, so dangerously risky it is.
For the Americans? Not at all. Germany probably agreed to them blowing it up, so domestic pressure would be relieved. "Hey, we want you to not starve and freeze to death, but our hands are tied!"
The apartment bombings claim is crazy enough (like I showed you from the recent biography, only for you to call the author a 'dumbass' for disagreeing with you)
You linked a tweet of pictures of a few pages of the book "Putin: His Life and Times" by 77 year old Brit Philip Short, which admits that Russians generally believed that the Ryazan incident was proof the bombings were a false flag, with further evidence found later in a similar incident in Volgodonsk.
Short's arguments - not evidence - are laughably bad: (1) one of the bombing killed some military families and the Russian govt would kill civilians, but not dependas. "In Stalin's time, perhaps." LOL shit argument. Putin didn't give a flying fuck about his actual soldiers let alone their families, and choosing that target made it seem to align more with the rebel motives, which is the whole point of a false flag. (2) Other false flags were "prevented" in time. Why would they block their own false flags? Duh. The obvious answer is that while they needed a bodycount, once that bodycount was established, it would have an even better effect to "catch" the "bombings" in time since it would have the same fear effect while also making the government look competent. (3) "the sheer, bumbling incompetence of the FSB operatives" means they couldn't have done it. LOL. Yeah that's why that team got fucking caught. The others did not. This is a toupee fallacy.
Short's book is as close to a hagiography of Putin as could be published in the west now. From the NYT book review: "As critics observed about those volumes, Short’s determination to present a fully realized portrait of Putin may strike some as excessively sympathetic... In fact, he does absolve Putin of several crimes. Short opens with an extended examination of the never-solved apartment bombings of 1999 that were blamed on Chechen terrorists but suspected of being a government conspiracy to cement Putin’s path to power. Short exonerates Putin."
The moment anyone tells you what you want to hear or believe for ideological purposes, you take it as gospel truth. The evidence doesn't matter. It's like arguing with a liberal. Short's arguments are trash and he clearly decided he was going to put positive spin on Putin for the book.
Germany probably agreed to them blowing it up, so domestic pressure would be relieved. "Hey, we want you to not starve and freeze to death, but our hands are tied!"
Germany already has stockpiles of energy for the winter. It bought them in August, hence why prices spiked then. The prices have come back down as supply chains have adapted and demand has softened in September. There is no reason to believe that the EU is subject to any winter gas extortion anymore.
Cut the crap, you wouldn't be fanatically backing a shithole like Ukraine if you weren't.
The evidence overwhelmingly supports that Putin ordered the apt bombings, and his FSB agents were caught by locals trying to plant a bomb in Ryazan.
Yes, as a training exercise. No evidence was ever provided that this was an actual bomb.
You linked a tweet of pictures of a few pages of the book "Putin: His Life and Times" by 77 year old Brit Philip Short
Oh wow, 77 years old.
That definitely refutes his book!
which admits that Russians generally believed that the Ryazan incident was proof the bombings were a false flag
Pssh... people in non-Western countries are extremely suspicious and believe basically everything is a conspiracy. That doesn't prove it.
Putin didn't give a flying fuck about his actual soldiers let alone their families
Obviously, like your Biden, he doesn't give a damn. The argument is that he wouldn't be able to get away with it. Just because the USG wouldn't give a damn about blowing up the WTC, it is highly unlikely (contrary to the opinions of some of the spergs here) that it would be able to get away with it.
Short's book is as close to a hagiography of Putin as could be published in the west now. From the NYT book review: "As critics observed about those volumes, Short’s determination to present a fully realized portrait of Putin may strike some as excessively sympathetic... In fact, he does absolve Putin of several crimes. Short opens with an extended examination of the never-solved apartment bombings of 1999 that were blamed on Chechen terrorists but suspected of being a government conspiracy to cement Putin’s path to power. Short exonerates Putin."
Ah, so now you find the NYT reliable. Go read what they write about the Republicans that you worship. Same for Wikipedia. The moment anyone tells you what you want to hear or believe for ideological purposes, you take it as gospel truth. The evidence doesn't matter.
Germany already has stockpiles of energy for the winter. It bought them in August, hence why prices spiked then. The prices have come back down as supply chains have adapted and demand has softened in September. There is no reason to believe that the EU is subject to any winter gas extortion anymore.
Those stockpiles are a joke and won't get Germany through the winter. You need a constant flow of natural gas.
Pangs of conscience over what you did with their pipeline if they end up starving and freezing?
The US isn't helping Ukraine because it is scared of Russia, it is helping Ukraine because Putin's war of aggression is morally wrong, as well as an unacceptable attempt to engage in empire-building, which is inconsistent with the desires of the guarantors of free trade.
Nobody credulous really believes the "training exercise" excuse, as it is obvious bullshit. You only "believe" it because you're a partisan.
Yes, Philip Short being 77 is a small strike against him, however that was not a significant part of my refutation of him, so I don't know why you singled. Oh wait, I DO know: you lack confidence on any of my substantive points.
I disagree, I think Biden cares about US soldiers far moreso than Putin cares about Russian soldiers, which is admittedly a low bar. People who shill for obviously evil people love the cope that they pretend that everyone in the world is equally evil, the "good guys" just hide it better. That's a childish world view.
Americans absolutely would not blow up the WTC, because they have morals and ethics and do not want to murder their fellow Americans. They aren't heartless killers like Putin, who routinely engages in murder of anyone who he simply dislikes, even if they are not a threat to the regime.
I knew you'd whine about my citing the NYT. NYT book reviews are one of the most famous and well known.
I don't worship Republicans. You worship Putin, a loser and failure who tricked you into thinking he gives a fuck about your political goals so that he could get you to be an internet janny shill for him. You're a useful idiot for his desire to rebuild the USSR, and she doesn't give the slightest shit about you or what you want culturally or politically. Republicans, on the other hand, are actually fighting the culture war and in the trenches and starting to get some victories. So yeah, my support of Republicans is moving the ball in the direction you claim to cherish. Your support of Putin is not. Hence why I suspect the possibility that you're some kind of agent. You claimed goals and what you write don't actually line up. Your devotion to and shilling for Putin cannot be explained away by the mere fact that Putin doesn't like gay pride parades. Like why the fuck do you need to shill for him on Ryazan? You wouldn't give the slightest shit if you only saw Putin as a useful tool against the wokes.
"The moment anyone tells you what you want to hear or believe for ideological purposes, you take it as gospel truth. The evidence doesn't matter." Outstanding job describing yourself, not me. "accuse your opponent of that of which you are guilty" is probably in your employee handbook.
"Those stockpiles are a joke and won't get Germany through the winter" Sure they can, because of course Germany still has months to obtain more energy before and during the winter from other sources. Russia didn't have a monopoly on gas. The stockpiles are there as a cushion. Nobody believes that all energy supplies are going to get cut off and Germany is going to have to solely ration out the stockpile.
"Pangs of conscience over what you did with their pipeline if they end up starving and freezing?" Accusing me of what your Daddy Putin did, "accuse your opponent of that of which you are guilty" twice in one comment. If you remain this predictable you might get replaced by an AI.
The US isn't helping Ukraine because it is scared of Russia, it is helping Ukraine because Putin's war of aggression is morally wrong
BAHAHAHA. No way you believe this. Your shithole of a country has done nothing but engage in aggression for the past few decades. You bombed Serbia and Libya to smithereens, and now you claim that your country opposes wars of aggression. What a joke. World-class hypocrites you are.
Nobody credulous really believes the "training exercise" excuse, as it is obvious bullshit. You only "believe" it because you're a partisan.
Yes, the credulous people believe in false flags. (This is why my English better than yours. I actually know what the word means.)
I think Biden cares about US soldiers far moreso than Putin cares about Russian soldiers, which is admittedly a low bar. People who shill for obviously evil people love the cope that they pretend that everyone in the world is equally evil, the "good guys" just hide it better. That's a childish world view.
It's childish to pretend that your politicians are better than the other guy's politicians, because MURICA AMIRITE?
Americans absolutely would not blow up the WTC, because they have morals and ethics and do not want to murder their fellow Americans. They aren't heartless killers like Putin, who routinely engages in murder of anyone who he simply dislikes, even if they are not a threat to the regime.
You would only murder... check notes... Russians, Serbian, Yemenis, Nicaraguans, Grenadites, Iraqis, Afghans, and basically every other nationality throughout the world. Oh, and also Anwar Al-Awlawki, an American citizen, and his 16-year-old son and then his 8-year-old daughter.
By the way, I totally believe that ordinary Americans wouldn't do it. We're talking about your government though, which proposed Operation Northwood, and killed that 14-year-old Sammy Weaver kid, not to mention Ashlii Babbitt.
I knew you'd whine about my citing the NYT. NYT book reviews are one of the most famous and well known.
Wow, famous and 'well-known'. Like Jussie Smollett. Do Americans judge everything by how famous it is?
I don't worship Republicans. You worship Putin
What's the proof that I "worship" Putin? You certainly defend Republicans more than I defend Putin.
You worship Putin, a loser and failure who tricked you into thinking he gives a fuck about your political goals
Putin doesn't lose, Putin doesn't fail. You'll do well to remember that, before you force him to turn all of America into Chicago. And you know full well that I don't think that Putin cares about my political goals. Yet he opposes the regime.
so that he could get you to be an internet janny shill for him.
I don't get it. First you accuse me of being biased against you, then you say that I wasn't biased against you, and now you say that I was a 'shill' for Putin as a moderator. Have you forgotten who instantaneously approved all your requested for approved submitter status, regardless of your opinions? Of course, it was just 90D chess to throw you off your brilliant scent, because I could tell that you were about to blow my FSB cover! But then again, I'm very "stupid" according to you, so how could I play such 90D chess?
Republicans, on the other hand, are actually fighting the culture war and in the trenches and starting to get some victories.
Right, you have to wait until kids are 8 before you groom them. Great victory. 10/10.
Like why the fuck do you need to shill for him on Ryazan?
Someone disagrees with dekachin on the highly improbable and dangerous plot to... blow up Russian citizens in order to justify a highly improbable and unlikely to succeed campaign against Chechnya, so he must be a Russian agent! Brilliantly done.
The moment anyone tells you what you want to hear or believe for ideological purposes, you take it as gospel truth. The evidence doesn't matter." Outstanding job describing yourself, not me. "accuse your opponent of that of which you are guilty" is probably in your employee handbook.
Well, you did it, because you quoted the New York Times as well as Wikipedia. If you think those sources are reliable, you should check what they write about your beloved Republicans.
Sure they can, because of course Germany still has months to obtain more energy before and during the winter from other sources. Russia didn't have a monopoly on gas. The stockpiles are there as a cushion. Nobody believes that all energy supplies are going to get cut off and Germany is going to have to solely ration out the stockpile.
It's not nearly enough. Not sure why you persist in such insanity.
Accusing me of what your Daddy Putin did, "accuse your opponent of that of which you are guilty" twice in one comment. If you remain this predictable you might get replaced by an AI.
I mean, you blew up their pipeline, you forced them to enact sanctions, so yeah. It was you. Your denials are about as credible as you calling me an FSB agent.
So I opposed both of those so idk why youre coming at me with those. In both cases the US was only going along with Euros and willingly acting as their enforcer and muscle so Democrats could ingratiate themselves to the filthy, degenerate, globohomo euros. Clinton bombed Serbia. Obama bombed Libya. I doubt that Trump would have been willing to join the Euros in either endeavor.
But those weren't "wars of aggression" anyway. Serbia was bombed to stop its invasion of Kosovo and to stop a fake genocide that was believed to have been happening. Libya was just a civil war where the Euros + US gave air support to the rebels.
Yes, the credulous people believe in false flags. (This is why my English better than yours. I actually know what the word means.)
My statement obviously meant "even gullible people would not believe that excuse because it is so obviously bullshit", and you stupidly misread it and assumed I am an idiot who meant to use fastidious or something. Your ego is suffering right now, and you're desperate to cling to anything that will help you feel smarter. It's sad.
You're getting tilted because (1) I've been landing too many hits on your lately, and (2) your Daddy Putin's war is going very poorly and there is a general malaise and frustration among Russian warmongers these days. Losing Izyum was bad, but the shills thought "ok we were caught sleeping, but we will shorten the lines and recover" BUT THEN UKRAINE KEPT ON GOING and now has successfully taken Lyman, with the Russians just getting bitch slapped around now for a month straight with no end in sight.
This must weigh heavily on you and your coworkers.
Putin doesn't lose, Putin doesn't fail. You'll do well to remember that, before you force him to turn all of America into Chicago.
lolololol I honestly hope you're getting a paycheck for this, bro.
So I opposed both of those so idk why youre coming at me with those.
Ehm, you said "the United States opposes wars of aggression".
Clearly not.
Serbia was bombed to stop its invasion of Kosovo
Its own country. In which case, Russia bombed Ukraine to stop its invasion of the Donbas.
Libya was just a civil war where the Euros + US gave air support to the rebels.
Now what implications would this have for the Ukraine thing? You don't think things through, do you? I really do hope you serve your clients better than you do your Eyepatch McCain-tier opinions.
My statement obviously meant "even gullible people would not believe that excuse because it is so obviously bullshit",
Your statement obviously means "no one who is gullible believes this". Again, you try to blame others for your own slip-ups.
Your ego is suffering right now, and you're desperate to cling to anything that will help you feel smarter.
Well, this is about as accurate an analysis as I expect from a guy who believes that cricket noises create brain damage...
You're getting tilted because (1) I've been landing too many hits on your lately
Dude, I'm not even cross with you, despite all your attempts even way back when on Reddit. You sometimes even manage to make good arguments. At other times, you're just batshit crazy. It's all fine, as you seem well-intentioned to me even when you're wrong (which is often).
This must weigh heavily on you and your coworkers.
LOL! See, I can't even tell if you're joking or legit crazy.
lolololol I honestly hope you're getting a paycheck for this, bro.
Pretty crazy to think that you could get a paycheck for posting on the internet. But maybe you have personal experience with something I don't. Any Langley statements on your bank account?
You also failed to address the rest of the comment. Must be the first time that you had nothing to say, because you usually make up some BS to say in reply. Did I land one too many hits on you?
This is exactly what I would expect if Russia blew up the pipeline themselves in order to play the victim and rally domestic support for the regime by pretending to be under attack.
Ah yes, "come die for a pipeline we weren't even using". What rallying cry could more inflame the patriotistic passions? Even the reddest of commie Russians would run to their local recruitment office after hearing that.
Despite the fact it can be apparently repaired, I still don't see the Russians blowing up their own pipeline as a false flag.
Arch was saying it yesterday in a livestream, if they wanted to stop the flow, they could easily do it with any excuse (a part broke that we don't make but Germany has but sanctions stop us so can't fix it till you ease sanctions). There's no point in them destroying something that took so long to make and somehow do it without the NATO countries in the area catching them do it despite an US patrol in the area.
No one legitimately thinks Russia did it. The only people who claim to do so are shills and npcs.
I like it when this happens because you get to see who are the sensible people and who are the NPCs/shills.
Nah, I know a couple slack jawed retards.
I can come up with reasons for why they did it. It's not hard, though I'd still think it unlikely that they did.
It actively punishes the west even more by preventing gas being sent through, vs before when it was merely not flowing by choice.
Second, Having to put more pipe in place would require access, which the west is currently sitting on the area, and you could pick up elint.
Third, it forces people to be paranoid about the west doing this and creates more of a pushback on being involved in ukraine, since nobody thinks this is worth it anymore (and wants to not freeze to death this winter).
Fourth, this also means they have a logical reason to sell more to China/India et al since they know they can't sell it to the west.
I can keep going, but it's not like there's not reasons for thinking russia could have done it. Do I actually think they did? Eh. Not super likely, but the US doing it also seems short sighted in some ways (yeah, we get europe relying more on us, but...then all the ukraine money shrivels up after a while, so no kickbacks for the MIC complex). Maybe we're trying to engineer the collapse of the EU, which this will likely accelerate.
No one legitimately thinks Russia did it. The only people who claim to do so are shills and npcs.
Even if they wanted to false flag, how would they be able to get men to the site of the damage without NATO and the US Navy right there noticing?
Why do clueless people keep commenting on this. They had already stopped the flow a month before.
Yes, this makes it even more idiotic to believe that Russia blew it up.
Yes I know that, its why in gave the exact excuse they used in brackets.
That was the excuse they used before they reduced flow. They later stopped flow altogether, which you post implies hasn't happened yet.
At this point you're arguing for particulars, the crux is they could reduce and turn off whenever they want, so no point sending some special forces under NATO's watch to blow up your own pipe.
I can't tell if the false flags are getting dumber or just because we're so aware of it nowadays they're getting easier to spot?
I'm arguing for writing in a way that isn't misleading or ambiguous. Also it wasn't a false flag.
Literally the only reason I can think of for Russia to blow up their own pipeline is for an excuse to release a shitton of methane into the air.
Russia benefits from global warming in two ways, Siberia becoming livable and the West throwing money down the toilet to electrify everything, which raises the price of gas since Western policy wants high fossil fuel prices to mask the cost (no new drilling/leasing under Biden for instance).
Yeah..... that kind of climate change is less out of mankind's control (unless geo-engineering becomes a thing) and more the result of, say, yellowstone exploding.
Though if that were to happen, and we all still had Internet somehow, I have good news and bad news on this forum
The good news is they'd be no more posts about leftists, they'd be dead
Bad news, all future topics will be where the raiders are, different ways to enjoy gruel and which plant can I eat without dying.
Releasing a shitton of methane would be geo-engineering. It's like 100x more effective per volume than CO2.
Apparently this pipeline explosion was the single largest release of methane to date and is equivalent an entire year's worth of other methane emissions
(~500 million tons of methane).Other sources say only 100,000 tons were in the pipeline so the 500 million must have been fake news.Although this should only boost greenhouse gasses like an
extra 1% or 2%tiny amount this year so it's not a good reason to suspect Russia... but could make sense in a two birds with one stone type situation.Yeah it gives Russia too much credit that they played this 5D chess move to false flag
When the simple answer is America did it, it's allies are all denying they did it, they hope either Ukraine stops pushing or that Putin is bluffing that if Ukraine cross the new Russian territory that nukes are going to be used.
That Nord stream explosion is not even a drop into an ocean. You need something with much more power (say, Yellowstone or a big asteroid) to make significant changes in the climate.
But Russia does indeed something in the Arctic: a "Polar Silk Road", together with China. It would cut ship travel from Asia to Europe almost by half. Here a video: https://youtu.be/pvy9usF7ohE
670 billion cubic meters of natural gas production * 0.55 kg/m^3 / 1000 kg/ton = 370 million tons
Currently 580 million tons get into the atmosphere/yr so if Russia went scorched earth they could increase methane by 40%.
Methane accounts for about 20% of warming. So they could increase climate change by 10%.
Not enough to melt Siberia anytime soon, but you definitely don't need a supervolcano or asteroid to change the climate - it's well within out power as humans to destroy the climate just as we can save it with geo-engineering.
A question: You DO realize that these data come from the same type of nutters that were wrong about climate and "climate change" for like 60 Years straight, right?
Why?
Because it was never about the climate.
Not about you, but I would trust their "science" as far as I can throw it (that goes even more now, since the WEF just said that they are "owning the science" on climate change, and that they are cooperating with Google to manipulate/censor results. Totally trustworthy indeed)
What's nutty is their prognostications of doom and the fecklessness of their solutions, not the basic physical science.
Molecules absorb or reflect energy at different wavelengths, this basic mechanism is not open to interpretation for anyone who has actually studied chemistry and physics.
Siberia is warming that's why there's methane explosions from permafrost melting, sea level is rising a bit, glaciers melting, and so on. But we don't solve it by overhauling our entire energy infrastructure with something way more costly and impractical, we solve it with seeding iron in the ocean, debris near L1 lagrange, increasing albedo with sulfates, and so on. Even fission combined with direct air capture is a better solution, more so if we get fusion working which seems likely since commercial magnets are so strong now.
The people that think 100 years from now we'll have a climate crisis have zero imagination or perspective on how radically fast technology advances; there's zero chance in 100 years we'll have a climate crisis unless civilization ends in which case who cares.
There's no reason why they would need to do that by blowing up their own very expensive pipeline. This could easily be done in Russia with no negative consequences.
So they want to give Germany some hope that there may be some reprieve from the starving and freezing this winter.
If possible, this would take years, so no
watch.....wouldn't be surprised if none of it happened. They told us a thing and we just take it as truth. Same as the money to Ukraine thing. What better way to fool the entire world.
Admittedly if they can easily fix it then it could be a small propaganda gain for minimal loss, so them blowing it up isn't all that crazy after all.
Easily? It would be at least 18 months, i.e., likely after the war is over. And even then, German industry won't just start back up where it was. Prior to the sabotage Peter Zeihan was predicting that if Germany lost access to gas for even a short time, its industry would be not be able to recover for 5 years or more. Since he's usually right, RIP to German bros.
Then it is far less plausible. The slight propaganda bump with communities who already mostly don't support Ukraine would not be worth the massive amount of lost money and time.
The pipeline was laid in pieces by a ship designed for that purpose. Obviously all they'd need to do is send the ship out there and take out the damages sections and then replace them.
Notice how he glosses over that "There are technical possibilities to restore the infrastructure" because he doesn't want to talk about that, HIS priority is to talk about who did it: "As of today, we proceed from the fact that it is necessary, first of all, to figure out who did it, and we are sure that certain countries, which had expressed their positions before, were interested in it. Both the US and Ukraine, as well as Poland"
This is exactly what I would expect if Russia blew up the pipeline themselves in order to play the victim and rally domestic support for the regime by pretending to be under attack.
And what would be different in their response if it was an attack by NATO or Ukraine?
I need to correct you first on your use of the term "NATO". Russia didn't say NATO, it said the US and Ukraine. Big difference.
And to answer your question very obviously, Russia would run crying to Germany and try to make nice with Germany to collaborate against the US, while at the same time swearing IMMEDIATE repair, and IMMEDIATE re-activation and resumption of gas deliveries to Germany.
Of course none of that happened, because Russia doesn't want to turn it back on, hence why they blew it up, and also isn't going to bother trying to make common cause with Germany, because Russia knows it did the job itself and they'd never be able to fool the Germans into thinking the US did it.
So, the only way Russia can demonstrate they didn't sabotage their own pipelines is by immediately kowtowing to everything NATO wants them to do? Got it.
Why would NATO blow up Russia's pipeline if NATO desperately wants the pipeline to supply gas?
Clearly whoever blew up the pipeline does NOT want it to supply gas, so if it was an enemy of Russia, then Russia should want to thwart said enemy by doing the opposite.
Yeah, just wait until Putin assassinates himself in order to make America look bad. That’ll show everyone!
If you think Russia did this shit, then there’s no limit to what you will believe.
Your Russophobia is off the charts. The apartment bombings claim is crazy enough (like I showed you from the recent biography, only for you to call the author a 'dumbass' for disagreeing with you), but this? I would not expect this in the least, so dangerously risky it is.
For the Americans? Not at all. Germany probably agreed to them blowing it up, so domestic pressure would be relieved. "Hey, we want you to not starve and freeze to death, but our hands are tied!"
I'm not scared of Russia. Nobody is.
The evidence overwhelmingly supports that Putin ordered the apt bombings, and his FSB agents were caught by locals trying to plant a bomb in Ryazan.
You linked a tweet of pictures of a few pages of the book "Putin: His Life and Times" by 77 year old Brit Philip Short, which admits that Russians generally believed that the Ryazan incident was proof the bombings were a false flag, with further evidence found later in a similar incident in Volgodonsk.
Short's arguments - not evidence - are laughably bad: (1) one of the bombing killed some military families and the Russian govt would kill civilians, but not dependas. "In Stalin's time, perhaps." LOL shit argument. Putin didn't give a flying fuck about his actual soldiers let alone their families, and choosing that target made it seem to align more with the rebel motives, which is the whole point of a false flag. (2) Other false flags were "prevented" in time. Why would they block their own false flags? Duh. The obvious answer is that while they needed a bodycount, once that bodycount was established, it would have an even better effect to "catch" the "bombings" in time since it would have the same fear effect while also making the government look competent. (3) "the sheer, bumbling incompetence of the FSB operatives" means they couldn't have done it. LOL. Yeah that's why that team got fucking caught. The others did not. This is a toupee fallacy.
Short's book is as close to a hagiography of Putin as could be published in the west now. From the NYT book review: "As critics observed about those volumes, Short’s determination to present a fully realized portrait of Putin may strike some as excessively sympathetic... In fact, he does absolve Putin of several crimes. Short opens with an extended examination of the never-solved apartment bombings of 1999 that were blamed on Chechen terrorists but suspected of being a government conspiracy to cement Putin’s path to power. Short exonerates Putin."
The moment anyone tells you what you want to hear or believe for ideological purposes, you take it as gospel truth. The evidence doesn't matter. It's like arguing with a liberal. Short's arguments are trash and he clearly decided he was going to put positive spin on Putin for the book.
Germany already has stockpiles of energy for the winter. It bought them in August, hence why prices spiked then. The prices have come back down as supply chains have adapted and demand has softened in September. There is no reason to believe that the EU is subject to any winter gas extortion anymore.
Cut the crap, you wouldn't be fanatically backing a shithole like Ukraine if you weren't.
Yes, as a training exercise. No evidence was ever provided that this was an actual bomb.
Oh wow, 77 years old.
That definitely refutes his book!
Pssh... people in non-Western countries are extremely suspicious and believe basically everything is a conspiracy. That doesn't prove it.
Obviously, like your Biden, he doesn't give a damn. The argument is that he wouldn't be able to get away with it. Just because the USG wouldn't give a damn about blowing up the WTC, it is highly unlikely (contrary to the opinions of some of the spergs here) that it would be able to get away with it.
Ah, so now you find the NYT reliable. Go read what they write about the Republicans that you worship. Same for Wikipedia. The moment anyone tells you what you want to hear or believe for ideological purposes, you take it as gospel truth. The evidence doesn't matter.
Those stockpiles are a joke and won't get Germany through the winter. You need a constant flow of natural gas.
Pangs of conscience over what you did with their pipeline if they end up starving and freezing?
No wait, anything is justified for empire.
The US isn't helping Ukraine because it is scared of Russia, it is helping Ukraine because Putin's war of aggression is morally wrong, as well as an unacceptable attempt to engage in empire-building, which is inconsistent with the desires of the guarantors of free trade.
Nobody credulous really believes the "training exercise" excuse, as it is obvious bullshit. You only "believe" it because you're a partisan.
Yes, Philip Short being 77 is a small strike against him, however that was not a significant part of my refutation of him, so I don't know why you singled. Oh wait, I DO know: you lack confidence on any of my substantive points.
I disagree, I think Biden cares about US soldiers far moreso than Putin cares about Russian soldiers, which is admittedly a low bar. People who shill for obviously evil people love the cope that they pretend that everyone in the world is equally evil, the "good guys" just hide it better. That's a childish world view.
Americans absolutely would not blow up the WTC, because they have morals and ethics and do not want to murder their fellow Americans. They aren't heartless killers like Putin, who routinely engages in murder of anyone who he simply dislikes, even if they are not a threat to the regime.
I knew you'd whine about my citing the NYT. NYT book reviews are one of the most famous and well known.
I don't worship Republicans. You worship Putin, a loser and failure who tricked you into thinking he gives a fuck about your political goals so that he could get you to be an internet janny shill for him. You're a useful idiot for his desire to rebuild the USSR, and she doesn't give the slightest shit about you or what you want culturally or politically. Republicans, on the other hand, are actually fighting the culture war and in the trenches and starting to get some victories. So yeah, my support of Republicans is moving the ball in the direction you claim to cherish. Your support of Putin is not. Hence why I suspect the possibility that you're some kind of agent. You claimed goals and what you write don't actually line up. Your devotion to and shilling for Putin cannot be explained away by the mere fact that Putin doesn't like gay pride parades. Like why the fuck do you need to shill for him on Ryazan? You wouldn't give the slightest shit if you only saw Putin as a useful tool against the wokes.
"The moment anyone tells you what you want to hear or believe for ideological purposes, you take it as gospel truth. The evidence doesn't matter." Outstanding job describing yourself, not me. "accuse your opponent of that of which you are guilty" is probably in your employee handbook.
"Those stockpiles are a joke and won't get Germany through the winter" Sure they can, because of course Germany still has months to obtain more energy before and during the winter from other sources. Russia didn't have a monopoly on gas. The stockpiles are there as a cushion. Nobody believes that all energy supplies are going to get cut off and Germany is going to have to solely ration out the stockpile.
"Pangs of conscience over what you did with their pipeline if they end up starving and freezing?" Accusing me of what your Daddy Putin did, "accuse your opponent of that of which you are guilty" twice in one comment. If you remain this predictable you might get replaced by an AI.
BAHAHAHA. No way you believe this. Your shithole of a country has done nothing but engage in aggression for the past few decades. You bombed Serbia and Libya to smithereens, and now you claim that your country opposes wars of aggression. What a joke. World-class hypocrites you are.
Yes, the credulous people believe in false flags. (This is why my English better than yours. I actually know what the word means.)
It's childish to pretend that your politicians are better than the other guy's politicians, because MURICA AMIRITE?
You would only murder... check notes... Russians, Serbian, Yemenis, Nicaraguans, Grenadites, Iraqis, Afghans, and basically every other nationality throughout the world. Oh, and also Anwar Al-Awlawki, an American citizen, and his 16-year-old son and then his 8-year-old daughter.
By the way, I totally believe that ordinary Americans wouldn't do it. We're talking about your government though, which proposed Operation Northwood, and killed that 14-year-old Sammy Weaver kid, not to mention Ashlii Babbitt.
Wow, famous and 'well-known'. Like Jussie Smollett. Do Americans judge everything by how famous it is?
What's the proof that I "worship" Putin? You certainly defend Republicans more than I defend Putin.
Putin doesn't lose, Putin doesn't fail. You'll do well to remember that, before you force him to turn all of America into Chicago. And you know full well that I don't think that Putin cares about my political goals. Yet he opposes the regime.
I don't get it. First you accuse me of being biased against you, then you say that I wasn't biased against you, and now you say that I was a 'shill' for Putin as a moderator. Have you forgotten who instantaneously approved all your requested for approved submitter status, regardless of your opinions? Of course, it was just 90D chess to throw you off your brilliant scent, because I could tell that you were about to blow my FSB cover! But then again, I'm very "stupid" according to you, so how could I play such 90D chess?
Right, you have to wait until kids are 8 before you groom them. Great victory. 10/10.
Someone disagrees with dekachin on the highly improbable and dangerous plot to... blow up Russian citizens in order to justify a highly improbable and unlikely to succeed campaign against Chechnya, so he must be a Russian agent! Brilliantly done.
Well, you did it, because you quoted the New York Times as well as Wikipedia. If you think those sources are reliable, you should check what they write about your beloved Republicans.
It's not nearly enough. Not sure why you persist in such insanity.
I mean, you blew up their pipeline, you forced them to enact sanctions, so yeah. It was you. Your denials are about as credible as you calling me an FSB agent.
So I opposed both of those so idk why youre coming at me with those. In both cases the US was only going along with Euros and willingly acting as their enforcer and muscle so Democrats could ingratiate themselves to the filthy, degenerate, globohomo euros. Clinton bombed Serbia. Obama bombed Libya. I doubt that Trump would have been willing to join the Euros in either endeavor.
But those weren't "wars of aggression" anyway. Serbia was bombed to stop its invasion of Kosovo and to stop a fake genocide that was believed to have been happening. Libya was just a civil war where the Euros + US gave air support to the rebels.
My statement obviously meant "even gullible people would not believe that excuse because it is so obviously bullshit", and you stupidly misread it and assumed I am an idiot who meant to use fastidious or something. Your ego is suffering right now, and you're desperate to cling to anything that will help you feel smarter. It's sad.
You're getting tilted because (1) I've been landing too many hits on your lately, and (2) your Daddy Putin's war is going very poorly and there is a general malaise and frustration among Russian warmongers these days. Losing Izyum was bad, but the shills thought "ok we were caught sleeping, but we will shorten the lines and recover" BUT THEN UKRAINE KEPT ON GOING and now has successfully taken Lyman, with the Russians just getting bitch slapped around now for a month straight with no end in sight.
This must weigh heavily on you and your coworkers.
lolololol I honestly hope you're getting a paycheck for this, bro.
Ehm, you said "the United States opposes wars of aggression".
Clearly not.
Its own country. In which case, Russia bombed Ukraine to stop its invasion of the Donbas.
Now what implications would this have for the Ukraine thing? You don't think things through, do you? I really do hope you serve your clients better than you do your Eyepatch McCain-tier opinions.
Your statement obviously means "no one who is gullible believes this". Again, you try to blame others for your own slip-ups.
Well, this is about as accurate an analysis as I expect from a guy who believes that cricket noises create brain damage...
Dude, I'm not even cross with you, despite all your attempts even way back when on Reddit. You sometimes even manage to make good arguments. At other times, you're just batshit crazy. It's all fine, as you seem well-intentioned to me even when you're wrong (which is often).
LOL! See, I can't even tell if you're joking or legit crazy.
Pretty crazy to think that you could get a paycheck for posting on the internet. But maybe you have personal experience with something I don't. Any Langley statements on your bank account?
You also failed to address the rest of the comment. Must be the first time that you had nothing to say, because you usually make up some BS to say in reply. Did I land one too many hits on you?
Ah yes, "come die for a pipeline we weren't even using". What rallying cry could more inflame the patriotistic passions? Even the reddest of commie Russians would run to their local recruitment office after hearing that.
I guess something can't be propaganda as long as you personally don't find it to be highly convincing. lol
If it is propaganda, RIP to Russia's propaganda department.
It would also give an excuse to rebuff the gas barons in Russia wanting to sell gas to Europe by stopping the war.