Russian invasion of Ukraine

[Ettan]

Eurasian plate - meets the american araund iceland, the african plate along the mediteranian coast/north italy/greece (the european side).

http://www.efehr.org/export/sites/ef...lts_ESHM20.jpg

http://www.efehr.org/Earthquake-risk...rthquake-risk/

Area in question sits at 0,0002 to 0,0007 on the ESHM20 scale, now thats not 0 but its as low as it gets; scale doesnt go any lower .
Best part tho, if it was something else you would think seismographs would have confirmed that pretty quickly.
Instead they picked up very low readings at 2.2, consistent with that of bombs/ explosions.

Now could it be techinical "accidents" perhaps in three locations on both pipelines at the same time? Yes possible.
But (given our current political climate, europe in an economic war with russia) you have to be pretty retarded to buy that.
I mean Aliens could also fly down from uranus and make you president of the universe.
That could happen.

[Forogil]

No such luck, both pipelines were empty and it won't affect gas supplies to Germany.

They weren't in use - but they still contained gas.

But you are right that it will not impact gas supplies to Germany. On one hand it means Russia no longer has that possibility to dangle it in front of Germany during a cold winter, but on the other hand it means a regime change in Russia wouldn't quickly be able to turn it around.

One current speculation is that it was Russia, which would indicate that they don't believe it would be possible to try to persuade Germany with gas during the winter - indicating they believe Germany is too steadfast, or Russian infrastructure is so broken that they cannot deliver anyway.

- - - Updated - - -

Added: If it were an accident, it would likely be some moron ship dragging an anchor. So, it could be a drunk Russian captain :-)

[Iphie]

They weren't in use - but they still contained gas.

But you are right that it will not impact gas supplies to Germany. On one hand it means Russia no longer has that possibility to dangle it in front of Germany during a cold winter, but on the other hand it means a regime change in Russia wouldn't quickly be able to turn it around.

One current speculation is that it was Russia, which would indicate that they don't believe it would be possible to try to persuade Germany with gas during the winter - indicating they believe Germany is too steadfast, or Russian infrastructure is so broken that they cannot deliver anyway.

- - - Updated - - -

Added: If it were an accident, it would likely be some moron ship dragging an anchor. So, it could be a drunk Russian captain :-)

I'm reminded of the Kursk, if something similar would have happened then obviously russia would be quiet. (Unlikely though with 3 locations, but ya know.)

[zealo]

I kinda wonder, did Russia hit their own pipelines by mistake in an attempt to sabotage Baltic Pipe?

Confirmation coming out the damage is from deliberate explosions, and it being this close to the partial opening of a new pipeline from Norway to Poland, set to enter partial operation on October 1st of this year, is highly suspicious.

[Gorsameth]

I kinda wonder, did Russia hit their own pipelines by mistake in an attempt to sabotage Baltic Pipe?

Confirmation coming out the damage is from deliberate explosions, and it being this close to the partial opening of a new pipeline from Norway to Poland, set to enter partial operation on October 1st of this year, is highly suspicious.

If Russia wanted to further mobilize the West against them, to the point where directly attacking a pipeline could even be pushed as a reason for triggering article 5, then yeah.... sure....

[Iphie]

If Russia wanted to further mobilize the West against them, to the point where directly attacking a pipeline could even be pushed as a reason for triggering article 5, then yeah.... sure....

And that's the thing isn't it? There's literally no gain for russia here, no goodwill, no tactical advantage, risk of art. 5. For them to do it is beyond odd. But then, they have been behaving rather strangely lately.

[zealo]

If Russia wanted to further mobilize the West against them, to the point where directly attacking a pipeline could even be pushed as a reason for triggering article 5, then yeah.... sure....

That's the thing, article 6 is also kinda explicit about what article 5 covers.

For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack:

on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France 2, on the territory of Turkey or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer;

on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in which occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.

That is to say, it has been written deliberately to not cover things happening that are not strictly on the territories of signatories, and the locations for these blasts weren't within that in the most strictest of terms.

[Gorsameth]

That's the thing, article 6 is also kinda explicit about what article 5 covers.

That is to say, it has been written deliberately to not cover things happening that are not strictly on the territories of signatories, and the locations for these blasts weren't within that in the most strictest of terms.

It wasn't an entirely serious point. NATO isn't going to go to open war with Russia over a pipeline. But its probably about as close as Russia could get.

[cubby]

This feels like a slow roll up to some kind of catastrophic nuclear exchange. Putin is already drafting people, and that means they ran out of available peeps already in service (did Russia keep their 2 years conscription requirement from the USSR?).

[Iphie]

This feels like a slow roll up to some kind of catastrophic nuclear exchange. Putin is already drafting people, and that means they ran out of available peeps already in service (did Russia keep their 2 years conscription requirement from the USSR?).

No, they went to 1 year. Among other things to fight the abuse of conscripts by older conscripts and career military.

[Gorsameth]

And that's the thing isn't it? There's literally no gain for russia here, no goodwill, no tactical advantage, risk of art. 5. For them to do it is beyond odd. But then, they have been behaving rather strangely lately.

That's what puzzles me about this. I don't see any country benefitting from this. Russia wants the pipeline to tempt Germany with when the days get cold and get reserves run low. Some people say the US which is just preposterous. They don't need the threaten the entire Western cooperation by attacking a pipe to stop NS1, they can do that with soft pressure and sanctions just fine.

I don't see anyone who benefits from this outside of some radical nature movement who I doubt would just pull of multiple undersea bombings at the same time.

- - - Updated - - -

This feels like a slow roll up to some kind of catastrophic nuclear exchange. Putin is already drafting people, and that means they ran out of available peeps already in service (did Russia keep their 2 years conscription requirement from the USSR?).

Russia still has conscripts but they legally cannot be used in a 'special operation that is totally not a war'.
Ofcourse they could just change the law but its a public step they are apparently not willing to make. They still try to keep up some pretence. Tho no one is buying the 'no losses' line anymore.

[Corvus]

Russia has repeatedly cut off its own nose to spite its face so them sabotaging the pipeline would not surprise me.

They are trying to blame the Ukrainians for it.

[Kronik85]

Congratulations to the newly freed people of the now expanded Russian Federation in what is being universally recognised as a free and fair election. If by any chance any men of fighting age (that's anyone born with a penis within the ages of 9 to....well there is no upper limit) and your new benevolent overlords offer (with your assumed consent) the chance to donate arms (probably a rifle from WW2) to your previous homeland by placing you on the front lines and surrendering then please take the chance to execute your officers before doing so.

In all seriousness though, aside from the ratcheting of nuclear rhetoric, the worst implication of this is Ukrainians being drafted to fight Ukrainians, hopefully these unwilling conscripts can find a work round before making it to safety via surrendering with as much Russian equipment as they can.

[Iphie]

That's what puzzles me about this. I don't see any country benefitting from this. Russia wants the pipeline to tempt Germany with when the days get cold and get reserves run low. Some people say the US which is just preposterous. They don't need the threaten the entire Western cooperation by attacking a pipe to stop NS1, they can do that with soft pressure and sanctions just fine.

I don't see anyone who benefits from this outside of some radical nature movement who I doubt would just pull of multiple undersea bombings at the same time.

I mean, I agree, literally no one who could pull it off would benefit, and those who would benefit, or who have a cause, like radical nature movements, don't have the means. (I hope, because if one of those movements has the means I'm just a bit concerned, no matter how much I support fighting climate change.)

It's puzzling as you say.

[Corvus]

Russia does benefit though. Neither were in use but they happened right near the newly opened line coming from Norway. And Russia still supplies gas via other pipelines. It's yet another warning shot trying desperately to get Europe to stop supporting Ukraine, otherwise other gaslines like the Norwegian one, might also have accidents.

- - - Updated - - -

Lyman is very close to being surrounded with the only road into it under Ukrainian artillery range. Russia are desperate to hold it and have reportedly 5 to 7 thousand troops there.

https://twitter.com/War_Mapper/statu...UPDWBWZZKVHf_A

[Iphie]

Russia does benefit though. Neither were in use but they happened right near the newly opened line coming from Norway. And Russia still supplies gas via other pipelines. It's yet another warning shot trying desperately to get Europe to stop supporting Ukraine, otherwise other gaslines like the Norwegian one, might also have accidents.

- - - Updated - - -

Lyman is very close to being surrounded with the only road into it under Ukrainian artillery range. Russia are desperate to hold it and have reportedly 5 to 7 thousand troops there.

https://twitter.com/War_Mapper/statu...UPDWBWZZKVHf_A

No, sorry I disagree. "Courting war to try to force Europe to stop supporting Ukraine.", is not what I'd call a benefit, in fact I'd say it would be a massive miscalculation. I usually agree with you Corvus but I really think you're wrong here.

[Kaleredar]

No, sorry I disagree. "Courting war to try to force Europe to stop supporting Ukraine.", is not what I'd call a benefit, in fact I'd say it would be a massive miscalculation. I usually agree with you Corvus but I really think you're wrong here.

Well I mean this whole thing has been a "massive miscalculation" on Russia's part at pretty much every step of the way.

[Iphie]

Well I mean this whole thing has been a "massive miscalculation" on Russia's part at pretty much every step of the way.

It has, but when you struggle with one country, supported by other countries who have to exercise restraint lest they become active participants, it is generally not a super good idea to take the restraints of the supporting countries by directly attacking them. (Even russia has to see that it would be a really, really bad idea to draw NATO in actively.)

But then, as said, "massive miscalculation".

[Slant]

If Russia wanted to further mobilize the West against them, to the point where directly attacking a pipeline could even be pushed as a reason for triggering article 5, then yeah.... sure....

It's not going to trigger Art. 5. The West has no interest in a direct confrontation. Actually, the West would prefer if Russia didn't force their hand, because it would look like a typical discussion on here, where you start out with "Russia vs. US, who would win?" and inevitably, on page one, some guy goes "Yeah, but nukes!" and the discussion is over, because all that's left to do is see who is left after the fallout.

Some dumb pipeline that doesn't even belong to Europe? Yeah, not going to make anyone overly uncomfortable, although of course the horse will be beaten to a pulp diplomatically before all of this is over.

[Lathspell]

It's not going to trigger Art. 5. The West has no interest in a direct confrontation. Actually, the West would prefer if Russia didn't force their hand, because it would look like a typical discussion on here, where you start out with "Russia vs. US, who would win?" and inevitably, on page one, some guy goes "Yeah, but nukes!" and the discussion is over, because all that's left to do is see who is left after the fallout.

Some dumb pipeline that doesn't even belong to Europe? Yeah, not going to make anyone overly uncomfortable, although of course the horse will be beaten to a pulp diplomatically before all of this is over.

They bombed a pipeline that is in Sweden and Denmark, regardless of who owns it. This could be seen as a direct military assault against those countries, one of which is a NATO member. The problem is that it is hard to prove who did I guess.