>But who is that?
The USA has long wanted to interfere in Germanys' relations with Russia and has done so, over and over, to ensure they are never true allies.
So, it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume the US is behind these attacks.
The USA has long wanted to interfere in Germanys' relations with Russia and has done so, over and over, to ensure they are never true allies.
So, it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume the US is behind these attacks.
> Biden: “If Russia invades -- that means tanks or troops crossing the border of Ukraine, again, then there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2,”
> Journalist: “But how will you do that exactly, since the project and control of the project is within Germany’s control?”
> Biden: “We will, I promise you, we’ll be able to do it,” Biden replied.
I don't want to play conspiracy guy, but the statement stuck in my mind since he said it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy
It is a conspiracy.
Did you not read the quote?
Besides which, the US unilaterally gives itself the right to do these sorts of things at its own discretion on a regular basis.
I have no strong opinions yet in the argument over whether or not the USA conspired to sabotage the NS pipelines. I'm just here to point out that secrecy is not a required part of a conspiracy. The literal translation of "conspire" from Latin would be something like "to breathe together", insinuating a synchronization of movements, a plotting together.
But, in our world today, all conspiracies (both confirmed and theoretical conspiracies) seem to get bucketed together. And so in common parlance, as soon as a thing is publicly confirmed as actually happening, in most people's minds it moves out of the "Conspiracy" bucket into the "History" bucket. But that's just a loss of language on our part. As always, my go-to resource in recovering the meanings of English words is Webster's 1828.