Nord Stream Pipeline Video

[tarponchik]

I'm going to address just this one as an example, but every bit of the above is complete bollocks.

Yes, the US could not stand nukes in Cuba. Just as Russia could not stand nukes in Ukraine. In both cases, the countries gave up the nukes. That was the end of military action by the US towards Cuba. Just in case it's not obvious, no military action is not the same as a full scale invasion.

I do not follow your logic. In 1962, the problem was solved by negotiations, hence no invasion by the US. In 2022-3, the problem was not solved by negotiations, despite Putin's efforts, hence the invasion had begun.

 

[lowwall]

Putin could not stand Ukraine in NATO (de jure or de facto, whatever) for the same reason JFK could not stand Soviet nukes in Cuba. That is, because this was too much of a threat.

I'm going to address just this one as an example, but every bit of the above is complete bollocks.

Yes, the US could not stand nukes in Cuba. Just as Russia could not stand nukes in Ukraine. In both cases, after the application of various levels, the countries gave up the nukes. That was the end of military action by the US towards Cuba. Just in case it's not obvious, no military action is not the same as a full scale invasion.

I do not follow your logic. In 1962, the problem was solved by negotiations, hence no invasion by the US. In 2022-3, the problem was not solved by negotiations, despite Putin's efforts, hence the invasion had begun.

What problem? The Ukraine was never a military threat to Russia.

You brought up the nukes in Cuba. The reasonable analogy was the nukes in the Ukraine. That was solved by negotiations ending in the Budapest Memorandum agreements. Which, not incidentally, included a guarantee of the territorial sovereignty of Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan by Russia, the USA and the UK.

That is the end of the analogous situation. If the US had subsequently invaded Cuba, then you would have a point. But it did not and you do not.

FWIW, I don't believe Russia was responsible for the sabotage of the pipeline. As I posted earlier in the thread, my money is on the Poles, perhaps with assistance from the UK.

 

[tarponchik]

What problem? The Ukraine was never a military threat to Russia.

Sure, although before the war began Zelensky said that Ukraine should reconsider its fulfillment of the Budapest agreement, meaning he was aiming to get nukes somehow. But the upcoming presence of the US was.

Also, keep in mind, this is not up to you to decide what is or can be a threat to Russia. Americans decide what is a threat to them, Russians decide what is a threat to them.

 

[MidOH]

If Russia was using Juarez Mexico to launder millions of dollars, and funnel it back into their politicians pockets, you can bet your butt, that we'd consider it a threat.

Our current administration started this war.

 

[HalcyonDaze]

A standard escape trunk can be used as a hyperbaric chamber, if necessary, but it would be clunky. Now that was from back in the '60's on a normal sub. All bets are off for the "spook" subs, and the Ohio conversions to littoral operations, which are in the business of completing special operations. On those boats, I wouldn't be surprised to see the most advanced hyperbaric chamber available. The 24" size limit is a red herring when one has lockouts for minisubs.

USS Parche that the Carter replaced:

Link to other special operations submarines, US and Russian.
H I Sutton - Covert Shores

The issue is I highly doubt one of the big "special" nuke boats would be in the Baltic - ever hear of someone running a submerged nuke boat, especially one the size of the Carter (450 ft long with a 40-ft beam), under a highway bridge? The Russians have brought a couple big nuke subs (even their last operational Typhoon one year) into the Baltic for parades in St. Petersburg, but they've run the whole way on the surface. One also notes when plotting up the explosions on Google Maps that there are a number of ferry routes in the general area; 260 ft to the bottom is skinny water when you have a lot of shipping traffic overhead and the Baltic has a lot of Hidden Fun Stuff on the bottom.

https://external-preview.redd.it/B_EopvIf6WjqwD_8BB4l1jdHeevf_7C_gaaeDEXmQKQ.jpg?auto=webp&v=enabled&s=978745b40f8ae42e15a5ba2eeb657422f805a273

Russian nuclear submarine lost propulsion in Danish waters, sails submerged outside Norway now

Danish Navy describes the situation as “dramatic” when the giant Oscar-II class submarine “Orel” drifted at 1,5 knots towards the island of Sejerø. Ropes were prepared for towing and two other Russian warships came to assist.

thebarentsobserver.com

That leaves smaller diesel boats native to the Baltic, like the Russian-built Kilo (both Russia and Poland have one example homeported on the Baltic) or the Swedish and German subs.

One other thought regarding the latest reports; supposedly the "rented yacht" was examined on or about January 20 of this year, which is quite a time lag. It would also be interesting to know if the "explosives residue" reportedly found on the table was a match for what was recovered on the pipeline debris.

That's also around the same time as this odd incident in Poland, although if it was some sort of attempt at being Buster Crabb it was carried out by unprepared morons: Three Spanish divers rescued - Baltic Sea

 

[CT-Rich]

And maybe US had no need to invest $5B into "support of democracy in Ukraine" (translation: to turn Ukraine into an anti-Russian puppet state)? There are different kind of wars, and there is one kind born out of fear of a threat. The Peloponnesian Wars started because Athens feared the growing might of Sparta; the wars of 1863 and 1870 were rooted in the fear of Austria and France of the growing power of Prussia; the reason for the 2nd Anglo-Boer War was the threat the Boers posed for Cape Town, which was of paramount strategic value for the British Empire. Similarly, Israel started the war in 1967 because the possession of Sinai by Egypt, then quickly rearmed by USSR, posed a deadly threat to Israel's existence. These are the rules states and nations live by, and likely not much had changed here since our ape-like ancestors. Putin could not stand Ukraine in NATO (de jure or de facto, whatever) for the same reason JFK could not stand Soviet nukes in Cuba. That is, because this was too much of a threat. Luckily, back then JFK and Khrushchev managed things well, but I am not so sure about today.

Russia had no problem with a third world Kleptocracy on it's border, it was a Russia aligned kleptocracy. The Ukrainians had other ideas and voted out the massively corrupt government and elected TV comic. Russia has already invaded two other former republics and had a low level war with Ukraine since 2014. I wouldn't say US expansionism is the central cause of Russia invading Ukraine. The Ukrainians don't want to be part of Russia and with good reason. The Russians have a long history of genocide in Ukraine.

The Ukrainians are the ones that decided to fight. Biden even offered to fly Zelenski out at the beginning of the invasion. If Russia wins in Ukraine, will they stop? A well run military would have bulldozed into Kyev in a few weeks. This was Russia's to f-up. The Ukrainians have been building a Western style military for the last 9 years. They choose not to live in the Russian orbit.

The West can support the Ukrainians and avoid a direct fight with Russia in the Baltic states by letting the Ukrainians grind down Russian reserves and armor. They are not asking for US troops, just our technology. Had Russia thought it through, they would have realized it would become a proxy war with the US (NATO, really), just like the US had in Vietnam.

Back in the 50s and 60s The Soviets invaded their east block client states a few times when they moved towards liberalization, basically keeping an oppressive foot on them. The argument in favor of Russia seems to be that Russian is a sh*tty run country and to make them feel safe the surrounding countries have to remain poor and victimized by the same corrupt system. Poland has been doing infinitely better since ditching the Warsaw block. As have most of the countries getting out of their orbit. The Ukrainians being fed to the Russians so the Russians can stay poor and corrupt makes no sense.

 

[CT-Rich]

If Russia was using Juarez Mexico to launder millions of dollars, and funnel it back into their politicians pockets, you can bet your butt, that we'd consider it a threat.

Our current administration started this war.

Mexico has lots of issues with crime, drugs and corruption and the US has not invaded in the last hundred years (Trump did talk about it a couple of times).

Russia started the war to maintain their feudal system of corruption. Putin worries that Russians seeing a country so ethnically similar becoming prosperous will give the Russian people a thirst for good governance.

 

[tarponchik]

Russia had no problem with a third world Kleptocracy on it's border, it was a Russia aligned kleptocracy. The Ukrainians had other ideas and voted out the massively corrupt government and elected TV comic. Russia has already invaded two other former republics and had a low level war with Ukraine since 2014. I wouldn't say US expansionism is the central cause of Russia invading Ukraine. The Ukrainians don't want to be part of Russia and with good reason. The Russians have a long history of genocide in Ukraine.

The Ukrainians are the ones that decided to fight. Biden even offered to fly Zelenski out at the beginning of the invasion. If Russia wins in Ukraine, will they stop? A well run military would have bulldozed into Kyev in a few weeks. This was Russia's to f-up. The Ukrainians have been building a Western style military for the last 9 years. They choose not to live in the Russian orbit.

The West can support the Ukrainians and avoid a direct fight with Russia in the Baltic states by letting the Ukrainians grind down Russian reserves and armor. They are not asking for US troops, just our technology. Had Russia thought it through, they would have realized it would become a proxy war with the US (NATO, really), just like the US had in Vietnam.

Back in the 50s and 60s The Soviets invaded their east block client states a few times when they moved towards liberalization, basically keeping an oppressive foot on them. The argument in favor of Russia seems to be that Russian is a sh*tty run country and to make them feel safe the surrounding countries have to remain poor and victimized by the same corrupt system. Poland has been doing infinitely better since ditching the Warsaw block. As have most of the countries getting out of their orbit. The Ukrainians being fed to the Russians so the Russians can stay poor and corrupt makes no sense.

OMG, please spare me the CNN's talking points. Just do me a favor, understand, that there is no such thing as a unified mass of Ukrainians who all think collectively in unison. Some are pro-Western, some are pro-Russian, some do not give a damn. Instead of lecturing me on Russian history, try to read Paul Pillar's Why America Misunderstands The World, maybe you'll learn something.

 

[tarponchik]

Mexico has lots of issues with crime, drugs and corruption and the US has not invaded in the last hundred years (Trump did talk about it a couple of times).

Russia started the war to maintain their feudal system of corruption. Putin worries that Russians seeing a country so ethnically similar becoming prosperous will give the Russian people a thirst for good governance.

FYI, Russia's per capita GDP PPP in 2021 was about 2.2x of the Ukraine's. Why would Ukraine become so incredibly "prosperous" all of a sudden? Russia at least has hydrocarbons, it has weapons to sell, and it has become world's number one exporter of wheat. Russia's USC is in the top 10 world's ship builders. In contrast, in 25 post-Soviet years Ukraine could not even get back to their Soviet level of prosperity. In their best year, 2013, their per capita GDP PPP was still only 81% of the 1990 value. In contrast, Russia broke above her 1990 level in 2007 and was at 130% of it in 2021. Ukraine is still the most corrupted country in Europe, according to transparency.org (excluding Russia, but in Russia, at least, governors and even ministers get jail time for corruption while in Ukraine nobody was ever even sentenced). In 2021 the president of friendly Estonia had openly warned investors against investing their capital into Ukraine because "your money and property are likely to be lost, and even if the courts decides in your favor you won't get it back". Again, you are repeating the talking points from CNN.

 

[Bob DBF]

The issue is I highly doubt one of the big "special" nuke boats would be in the Baltic - ever hear of someone running a submerged nuke boat, especially one the size of the Carter (450 ft long with a 40-ft beam), under a highway bridge?

I'm not so sure the US did that deed, but that is the type of mission the Carter was built to accomplish. As for threading the needle, it's been done before.