Hacker News Reader

Comment by cm2187 | Hacker News Reader

I would think the US would be more subtle than two simultaneous leaks. That looks like an actor who doesn’t care about being identified.

View on HN

Or like an actor who likes to be misidentified. There's one player in the global propaganda game who has completely given up convincing anyone of their positions, they've gone all in on the fallback strategy of making noone trust anyone. They wouldn't care if a false flag operation fails to really convince antibody, just casting doubt would already be good enough.

> I would think the US would be more subtle than two simultaneous leaks.

There are three leaks.

> That looks like an actor who doesn’t care about being identified.

I don't see anyone being identified, do you?

My bet is on some sort of deniable operation from either Ukraine, or one of the other former soviet countries with a bone to pick against Russia. It's not like Russia isn't shy in waving around how much an asset the pipeline is to them.

Well it’s not hard to connect the dots so why be subtle? If Russia knows it wasn’t Russia, it sure as hell wasn’t Germany. Who else is there that would have the desire and the means?

Why would the US care if they were seen as doing it when they already announced that they were going to do it[1]?

1. https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1490792461979078662

This would probably be helped by some kind of citation, or at least an explanation of what is meant here.

It is linked above. https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1490792461979078662

It is a tweet posted in February 7th by ABC News:

Pres. Biden: "If Russia invades...then there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it."

Reporter: "But how will you do that, exactly, since...the project is in Germany's control?"

Biden: "I promise you, we will be able to do that."

They clearly meant via the use of either sanctions or other political / legal means, which is exactly what happened because Nord Stream 2 never opened.

I think that's far from clear, verging on very naive. They spent the existence of both pipelines trying doing exactly what you described but could not stop them. Clearly they meant bomb it. And, no, I'm not saying they did. As my other comment indicates Russiais just as if not more likelythe culprit.

It is was very naive why did no one take it literally when he first said it? Back then it was very clear what he meant.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com