Nord Stream Pipelines Sabotage - Deep Dive

1. 71

   Ken Burgessposted 23 months ago

   Three (or four depending on sources) deep-water explosions destroyed the Nord Stream pipelines under the Baltic Sea on Monday.
   
   One of the three explosions measured 2.3 on the Richter Scale of earthquake intensity, but this was no earthquake. It was an explosion, confirmed by Swedish seismologists.
   
   Bjorn Lund, seismologist at the Swedish National Seismic Network at Uppsala University, said seismic data gathered by him and Nordic colleagues showed that the explosions took place in the water and not in the rock under the seabed.
   
   The explosions ensure Germany and the EU won’t back track with regard to sanctions against Russian energy imports.
   
   Even if Germany were to cry “uncle” as civil unrest intensifies over lack of heat and energy, even if Russia decided to turn the power back on, the conduit for Russian gas to Europe is broken.
   
   America stepped in within hours of the "leaks" being detected to promise that the EU's energy needs would be met, they could count on the U.S. to supply them.
   
   No military exercises were in the area during the time of the explosions, but there were military exercises in the area recently enough, which will be considered later.
   
   To fix a crime on a suspect, police try to establish means, motive, and opportunity.
   
   If we bounce all three elements against the reasonable suspects, one suspect stands out.
   
   Means eliminates most suspects.
   
   Only a government with an advanced naval warfare capability could have executed the sabotage. That limits the suspects to Germany, Great Britain, France, the United States, and Russia.
   
   Now lets consider motive.
   
   Germany has no motive to damage its energy lifeline. Germany is highly dependent on Russian natural gas. Entire German industries are being nationalized because of the lack of energy due to sanctions against Russia. Germans held massive protests over the weekend demanding Germany pull out of the anti-Russian alliance in exchange for a return of energy.
   
   Great Britain has also suffered under the sanctions imposed after Russia invaded Ukraine in February. The UK’s central bank had to pivot back to quantitative easing. Despite this, the Brits are notorious for getting into it with Russia.
   
   Russia didn’t need to blow up the pipelines. Russia controls the valves that send or halt gas flow to Europe, they can turn off the spigot at any time. Why would Russia cut off its own nose, considering how much of its GDP relies on selling its energy to the EU?
   
   More importantly to that thought, why would Russia blow up their own pipeline but NOT the Norway-EU pipeline that’s right next to it and just opened the day after their pipeline was sabotaged?
   
   That leaves the United States (or the US and UK). So what are its motives?
   
   First, the US became the number one exporter of liquified natural gas to Europe once Russia cut off the flow.
   
   Second, with winter approaching and German unrest on the rise, the Biden Administration would have been concerned the Germans would cave, reduce sanctions, cut off arms to Ukraine, beg Putin for energy. The loss of the Nord Stream pipelines eliminates that path to renewed gas imports to Germany.
   
   Third, the Biden family has long been heavily involved with Ukraine and their natural gas supply. Hunter Biden was on the board of Ukraine’s largest natural gas company. To say this power struggle with Putin is personal would be no small stretch.
   
   Only the United States has a compelling reason to destroy Europe’s energy lifeline from Russia as well as both the means and the motive.
   
   So when was this done?
   
   In all probability these explosives were set during BALTOPS 22 and detonation was held off until the Norway-EU pipeline was ready to be activated.
   
   https://seapowermagazine.org/baltops-22 … echnology/
   
   https://twitter.com/AZmilitary1/status/ … 8497118209
   
   The world’s largest amphibious ship, the USS Kearsarge, had recently been in the area.
   
   The U.S. Navy had the opportunity to plant explosives on the pipes in June for remote detonation at the time of the President’s choosing.
   
   Also in June, as Operation BALTOPS 22 was underway, the CIA, allegedly, warned Germany that sabotage to the pipelines was imminent.
   
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OS4O8rGRLf8

   replyreport
   1. 80

      Kathryn L Hillposted 23 months agoin reply to this

      ... to what benefit to US?
      
      or did we do it for Ukraine? (You know, instead of nuking Russia as Zelensky requested.)
      
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_xUFfe2yVc

      replyreport
      1. 71

         Ken Burgessposted 23 months agoin reply to this

         I wrote about why more than 6 years ago.
         
         
         Why America wants war with Russia:
         https://discover.hubpages.com/politics/ … ith-Russia
         
         That we have a psychopath as president right now, one who has been entangled (and his son) with Ukraine for over a decade, only makes it that much more certain.
         
         It takes two or more nations to start WWIII... that America is on Russia's border supplying the money, weapons and experts to fight this war, shows how determined America is to have it.

         replyreport
   2. 86

      Sharlee01posted 23 months agoin reply to this

      I must say all the puzzle piece fit. And all makes perfect sense.

      replyreport
      1. 71

         Ken Burgessposted 23 months agoin reply to this

         It is a far more important incident than many realize.
         
         First, this was not a military target, nor was it in Russia or Ukraine.
         
         Second, it directly impacts the stability not of Russia or Ukraine, but the EU, in particular Germany.   If someone wanted to motivate the EU against Russia, one key element to that is eliminating the most important thing Russia had to offer them... energy.
         
         We have entered into WWIII.
         
         Americans will not be made aware of this reality until after the November elections.  But have no doubts, we are in WWIII.
         
         Only the assassination of Putin and his closest advisors will deter it from going nuclear, as Biden (those in DC directing these actions) is not going to let up until we are fully engaged in war with Russia.
         
         
         After reading some more details IE:
         
         The underwater pipes for Nord Stream are made of steel grade DNV grade SAWL 485 (similar to grade X70) for wall thicknesses ranging from 26.8 to 34.4mm and were manufactured by six qualified producers (one in Russia, four in Europe and one in Japan). The pipes are encased in concrete. Deliberate damage would be no easy matter.
         
         the pipelines are buried 80–110 meters below sea level
         
         There are very few, extremely few, military teams that could have pulled this off.  Extremely few.  They would have needed the support of vessels in the area to transport the equipment and the explosives required complete it.  Or if this was done with drones/robots, again, that really leaves only one country capable of it.

         replyreport
         1. 86

            Sharlee01posted 23 months agoin reply to this

            Ken, this all makes so much sense. I will admit although from day one I felt Biden promoted this proxy war, I have not been able to put two and two together.   
            
            Do you feel the Republicans in Washington suspect that Biden is going down this path?

            replyreport
            1. 71

               Ken Burgessposted 23 months agoin reply to this

               This is not a Dem vs Rep issue.
               
               This is an establishment issue, this is a Pentagon issue, this is about a lot of things that will never be mentioned by the MSM.
               
               This goes beyond Rep or Dem.  This is about power, global dominance, greed, psychopathy, and corruption which is too abundant within the Halls of DC.
               
               However, Biden is very much a part of it, he as much as anyone wants this war to develop, he wants to take down Putin, he does not want peace.

               replyreport
2. 80

   Kathryn L Hillposted 23 months ago

   "Democracy building" is profitable?
   I guess so.

   replyreport
   1. 80

      Kathryn L Hillposted 23 months agoin reply to this

      Who cares about human lives? Dollar bills and world dominion is the important thing.

      replyreport
      1. 80

         Kathryn L Hillposted 23 months agoin reply to this

         My advice? Get a coffin and jump in it at the appropriate moment.

         replyreport
      2. 71

         Ken Burgessposted 23 months agoin reply to this

         Exactly.
         
         Does anyone remember the Billions of dollars Ukraine lost during the Biden VP years?
         
         Does anyone know where the Billions of dollars we are sending to Ukraine is now?
         
         I can tell you this, our government can't confirm what it went to or where it is. It could be anywhere, in anyone's bank account.
         
         https://www.theburningplatform.com/2019 … 5-million/
         
         https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/0 … n-ukraine/

         replyreport
   2. 71

      Ken Burgessposted 23 months agoin reply to this

      You might like this, a break down of the Russia - Ukraine conflict by Dave Smith on Joe Rogan's show. 
      
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVXzwnU1H6U

      replyreport
3. 89

   Nathanvilleposted 23 months ago

   I don't understand the statement you made about Britain.  Copy of your comment repeated below: -
   
   "Great Britain has also suffered under the sanctions imposed after Russia invaded Ukraine in February. The UK’s central bank had to pivot back to quantitative easing. Despite this, the Brits are notorious for getting into it with Russia."
   
   Can you please clarify?

   replyreport
   1. 71

      Ken Burgessposted 23 months agoin reply to this

      Which part would you like me to elucidate on?
      
      The British - Russian friction?
      
      The economic pressure due to higher energy costs?

      replyreport
      1. 89

         Nathanvilleposted 23 months agoin reply to this

         I'm basically trying to understand what you are trying to say!
         
         Taking your three sentences in turn: -
         
         1.     “Great Britain has also suffered under the sanctions imposed after Russia invaded Ukraine in February.”
         
         Yes, Britain has suffered from the global (world) hyper rise in the international world-market of natural gas because of the Ukraine/Russian war (but so as the rest of the western world); if that is what you mean?
         
         2.    “The UK’s central bank had to pivot back to quantitative easing.” 
         
         This is a false statement:  For clarity:  Quantitative Easing is part of ‘Monetary Policy’, which in the UK the Bank of England (which is independent of the Government) is responsible for - whereas ‘Fiscal Policy’ is the responsibility of the UK Government. 
         
         Quantitative Easing is where the Bank of England buy bonds (predominantly, but not exclusively Government bonds) in order to lower interest rates and to help keep inflation down.
         
         The stock of assets (bonds) held by the Bank of England peaked at £895 billion in November 2021 as the result of the Bank of England using Quantitative Easing during the pandemic:   £875 billion was Government bonds, and £20 billion was UK Corporate Bonds.
         
         Since November 2021, until last week the Bank of England has been steadily selling the bonds; until last week when the new Prime Minister’s mini budget screwed the economy and so on 28th September 2022 the Bank of England had to intervene and buy up £65 billion of bonds to salvage the economy from the damaged caused by the UK Government’s ‘poor’ fiscal policy.
         
         Therefore, there has been no quantitative easing during the period, or for the reason, that you suggest.
         
         3.    “Despite this, the Brits are notorious for getting into it with Russia."
         
         What does that mean e.g. does it mean that there is always friction between Britain and Russia - which if so, would be a correct statement.
         
         4.     Moving onto your first reply above, where you say, “The economic pressure (in Britain) due to higher energy costs?”
         
         Economic pressure due to higher energy costs is a worldwide issue, not just peculiar to Britain, and it was a crisis initially caused by the pandemic disrupting supply chains; the war in Ukraine has exasperated and prolonged the situation – that is the reality, but what is your point?

         replyreport
         1. 99

            DrMark1961posted 23 months agoin reply to this

            Are you saying that the quantitative easing has nothing to do with pipeline sabotage or the statement is false because the bank did not insitute quantitative easing?

            replyreport
            1. 71

               Ken Burgessposted 23 months agoin reply to this

               He is saying quantitative easing has nothing to do with the pipeline or the war with Ukraine.
               
               Giving this some more thought, he is correct, as we have moved into a time where central banks are now selling the assets off that they collected during the pandemic.
               
               This is actually going to exacerbate the economical problems people have, because it is going to lower the value of assets they use to "store" their savings in.
               
               Whether that be Stocks, or Real Estate.  Most (non-elites) have no money put into bonds because until now, they offered no interest, so they stored their money in stocks and property, both of which, are now losing value at a fast pace... anyone who stays in the Market waiting for it to return to its former highs, or anyone that hangs on to properties in most parts of the country, will never recoup their losses, it will take years, perhaps a decade or more for the highs to return... their wealth, their savings, has been permanently garnished.
               
               The Black Rock and Chase, the Soros and Gates of the world have gotten richer, the rest have lost money... be they in China, UK or USofA.

               replyreport
            2. 89

               Nathanvilleposted 23 months agoin reply to this

               It's basically as expressed by Ken's reply to you.

               replyreport