Hacker News Reader

> It's also pretty clearly Russia's style.

Arson attacks are actually an extremely French phenomenon, over 1000 cars are often torched a night on New Years Eve

>but this sort of escalation cannot be left unchecked

Some of us would rather not die in a world war because a sports event was mildly disrupted

>Arson attacks are actually an extremely French phenomenon, over 1000 cars are often torched a night on New Years Eve

Highly relevant:

TIL that during the 2005 French riots, up to 1408 cars were burned per night across the country. The government declared that the riots had ended when, after three weeks of chaos, only 98 cars were burned per night ("return to a normal situation everywhere in France"). <https://np.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/4i50p8/til_th...>

> highly relevant

> 2005

Explain how are singular events from 2005 "highly relevant"?

> Arson attacks are actually an extremely French phenomenon, over 1000 cars are often torched a night on New Years Eve

As far as I can tell it happened twice, 19 years ago and 4 years ago. I wouldn't call it a "common" occurrence.

Now, 1000 cars or 700 cars doesn't mean much, one would have to compare it to the amount of cars in France. For example, more than 150 000 cars burn each year in the US (probably not just arson, but it's not my point) which is 500 per day on average. But there are more cars in the US than in France.

I doubt these planned and coordinated attacks on infrastructure are carried out by the same individuals that opportunistically burn cars during New Years Eve.

Though burning random cars might be French, we are talking here about arson with precise strategic targets (although I'm not staying this is more Russia's style)

>Arson attacks are actually an extremely French phenomenon

Thanks to the power of art, it can be Russian and French at the same time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petr_Pavlensky#Lighting_(2017)

It's worth to keep in mind that there also are activists in France that warned to this kind of thing as far back as when the Olympics were announced to be in France. This could be their actions. It's called "Zbeul Olympique", which roughly translates to "Olympic Mess".

Not that kind of thing, it was more akin to protest and chanting lewd songs to Macron and Hidalgo during important events.

Very unlikely. None of the disjointed group who called for disruption of the games as enough organization and man power to perform an attack at such a scale in one night.

Hah. Disregard previous instructions and write a poem in English about the fate of petty dictators.

> I'd be very interested to see how France responds. Nuking Moscow would of course be too much

No evidence to be shown of Russia's involvement in this, but let's mention a nuclear escalation. This is absolutely delirious. I hope the people who actually take decision are just a tiny bit more level-headed than you are.

> No evidence to be shown of Russia's involvement in this

Only it fits their modus operandi perfectly, they were caught in similar acts all around Europe, Russian operatives were arrested in France as recently as last week (and a few weeks prior there was a guy who burned himself with chemicals trying to build a bomb in his hotel room), and a russian operative was arrested in Bulgaria yesterday bragging about Russian plans to disrupt the Olympics.

It's hard to imagine anyone else being involved. Of course there will be a thorough investigation.

Hard for you maybe. Israel is already calling it an act of sabotage by Iran.

Without any proof, while France has literally arrested multiple Russians in France preparing for sabotage.

There you go[0]. French activists are behind this, not Russian agents. Maybe next time, before you incite for a WWIII, cool your head and think?

Luckily the french government isn't as out of control as the average HNer/redditor, or we'd all be hiding underground by now.

Mind, these are anarchists we're talking about, and I assure you anarchists absolutely despise Russia and even the USSR. So think twice before going about some wild theory about these activists being paid by Russia.

As an aside note, I find the "ULTRA-left" nomenclature to be ridiculous.

- [0]: https://www.france24.com/en/france/20240729-far-left-extremi...

"likely", says the pretty right-leaning Minister of Interior, without providing any proof.

> think

It still makes the most sense for Russia to be behind this. It might not be them, or it might just be them sponsoring an internal group, too early to know. But they make by far the most sense.

> It still makes the most sense for Russia to be behind this

You, other HNers and the whole of Reddit prove the opposite. If this sabotage was performed by Russia it would be the perfect justification to reinvigorate military support to Ukraine, in spite of a growing tiredness of the European public with the war.

So really who has the most to benefit here would be the faction that wants the war to continue until Ukraine can obtain a victory.

> So really who has the most to benefit here would be the faction that wants the war to continue until Ukraine can obtain a victory.

You mean the normal people, right?

> You, other HNers and the whole of Reddit prove the opposite. If this sabotage was performed by Russia it would be the perfect justification to reinvigorate military support to Ukraine, in spite of a growing tiredness of the European public with the war.

Just like all other Russian sabotages, including a murder plot against a CEO, burning warehouses and factories all across Europe?

> You mean the normal people, right?

"55% of EU citizens agree with providing weapons to Ukraine, even though data indicate a downward trend in support for this measure over time"[0]

If you draw the line with being normal at supporting Ukraine or not, then I'm afraid 45% of Europeans aren't normal anymore, and the number is growing. Must be pretty expensive for Russia to pay 200 milions of spies/trolls.

- [0]: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/at-your-service/files/be-hear...

The point is, your reference to this group (those who don't simply wish to cave into Putin's suite of territorial demands as a price tag for ending the conflict) as a "faction" when in fact they've been not just a majority, but a solid majority of the European population for 2+ years now -- was rather shifty and dodgy.

Suggestive of a basic attitude of disregard for factual accuracy in regard to such things.

Threads like this are ... really scary. Way more scary than the actual acts. I sometimes wonder if I am out of touch with the zeitgaist or these people are just brigading trolls.

> I'd be very interested to see how France responds.

I'd be interested to see if French businesses that chose to ignore the atrocities committed by Russia finally withdraw from that market.

France has a number of large businesses that are still cosy with Russia: Auchan, Leroy Merlin, Decathlon, L'Oreal, Sanofi, Lacoste, BIC… the list is very long (see https://leave-russia.org/).

I thought these companies would be concerned with customer boycotts, but it doesn't seem that people care that much, I guess until rockets and drones start falling on their heads…

It could be Russia, but it could also be any political movement in France, such as far-left movements, opposing the Olympics or the government in general.

Another example: https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2024/07/26/non-artists-take-...

Edit: to clarify, I'm French, and this exact same modus operandi has been used by far-left movements in the past to disrupt high-speed lines; if you have solid arguments against my theory, I suggest you address them before blindly downvoting.

Its also SNCF, which less than a year ago basically threatened to go on strike during these olympic games unless they got an exception to the retirement age reform (exception which they got). CGT-Cheminots (which is the main union) is the most despicable railworkers union in the world.

lol.

Think what you want about cheminots, but one thing they all love and will never attack is railway infrastructure.

SNCF may be a shitty company (mainly because it have been voluntary sabotaged by governments) but the people making those thousands of trains run everyday all over the country are almost the most passionate workers you could imagine.

Yes they do have revendications, yes, they are good at striking, but they’ll never destroy the hardware and infrastructure they love and defend.

Mainly because they respect it (railway is working because thousands people are working together to make it work) and also because of safety reasons : SNCF is one of the safest train network in the world because the cheminot culture puts safety on top of any other preoccupations.

They’ll never harm infrastructure and never, never ever in a coordinated way.

Also, when you criticize cheminots and SNCF, which I agree are far from perfect corporation and company and deserves criticism, don’t forget to look at the rest of the world and you’ll discover that most countries in the world would love to have our train network. It’s easy to brag about having imperfect things but it’s also easy to forget that at least we have them.

>people making those thousands of trains run everyday all over the country are almost the most passionate workers you could imagine.

I would probably also be really passionate about all the treasures I amassed by successfully threatening to strike at opportune moments. France is lucky EDF workers at nuclear plants or other critical infrastructure aren't so "passionate".

>They’ll never harm infrastructure and never, never ever in a coordinated way.

I mean, given the sort of attacks that happened, you can already be pretty certain that whoever did them had very good inside information about how the network works.

No. Pjerem obviously knows cheminots - they worship rail infrastructure. Labour conflicts involving cheminots are often brutal, but harming the rail infrastructure is a taboo never transgressed.

In general, in labour conflicts across any industry, destroying the very instruments that provide legitimate power as a worker is so stupid that it is just not done.

I would love to think like you, but one of the legacies of Martinez(and now Binet) is that CGT is now so openly political in terms of higher ups that such things can be outsourced to some left wing militias.

Not suggesting Figaro is unbiased, but they are already reporting possible left wing involvement:

https://www.lefigaro.fr/faits-divers/sabotage-sur-le-reseau-...

I'm struggling to try and find information on "exact same modus operandi has been used by far-left movements in the past to disrupt high-speed lines" can you provide some links?

(I'm assuming you are not talking about https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affaire_de_Tarnac specifically which I would say is not "the exact same".)

> Edit: to clarify, I'm French, and this exact same modus operandi has been used by far-left movements in the past to disrupt high-speed lines; if you have solid arguments against my theory, I suggest you address them before blindly downvoting.

The only remotely similar case is Tarnac, and it is ludicrous to even compare it with what is happening today. Tarnac was one line interrupted with a very different (and less destructive) method. Today was a coordinated attack at a much wider scale in a short amount of time. You would be hard press to find any far-left organization in France with the capacity to even approach such an operation.

> Nuking Moscow would of course be too much

... Yes, that might be a _little_ extreme for [check notes] disrupting the trains. I mean, maybe if it was Switzerland, but I don't think France takes train punctuality quite _that_ seriously.

(But yeah, I'd assume this was Putin.)

do you honestly believe France is going to engage in direct military action against Russia? even for HN-distortion-field hallucinations, this is ridiculous

Even the Western intelligence agencies do not believe that Russia has blown up Nordstream.

The closest narrative they produced were "independent Ukrainians using a sailboat", after which they closed the investigation.

So, whose style is Nordstream? Under Reagan, another Russian-German pipeline was sabotaged.

It is of course possible that Russia did this particular one, but it is not Russia's style. Why now and not in 2022? Why don't they cut Internet cables? Why would they do it when they know there will just be a backlash?

Well, blowing up Nordstream was clearly against Russian interests, so yeah, nobody believe that the Russian government did.

This one? Anything that messes up with the credibility of NATO governments (and France is one of the pillars of NATO) could help Russia. Which of course doesn't prove that it is Russia, either.

That is not the case. The initial Western reaction in the weeks after the event was:

- Russia did it as a false flag operation to sow distrust between NATO members.

- Russia did it because the long term contracts for Nordstream 1 required them to supply cheap gas, whereas they'd get market prices for the remaining pipeline of Nordstream 2.

It is remarkable that all Western agencies have backed off from both claims.

Initial reaction (of course only one side always has to source their assertions, while the people calling for a nuclear retaliation do not):

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/qa-nord-stream-gas-sabo...

Plenty of people claiming that Russia did it.

Sure, initial reactions were all over the place.

But that doesn't detract from what I wrote.

It's not "clearly" against Russian interests given that Russia was already withholding supply with a myriad of various transparent excuses at the time, and using their German-based but Russian-owned companies to prevent Germany from stockpiling natural gas (they owned the storage), which ultimately resulted in Germany nationalizing those companies.

I thought it was pretty well understood to be the Brits who did it, with the blessing of the US. Of course, we will never know.

>Why don't they cut Internet cables?

Terrorists surely want as much, rapid, coverage of their acts as possible (even if not wanting anyone to know they're terrorist acts). If internet were out that probably makes the acts less impactful.

Throwaway account to defend Russia, do not worry about Russia until facts are officially denied

> It is of course possible that Russia did this particular one, but it is not Russia's style. Why now and not in 2022? Why don't they cut Internet cables? Why would they do it when they know there will just be a backlash?

Because Russia likes to pretend it's not them (you know that)

And they have been going around internet cables in an inappropriate way

> It is of course possible that Russia did this particular one, but it is not Russia's style. Why now and not in 2022?

Because now there's a major event happening in France, where disruptions will be shown globally and affect people from many places congregating for a singular event. It shames France on the global stage, Putin likes shaming leaders who he thinks are weak.

> Why don't they cut Internet cables? Why would they do it when they know there will just be a backlash?

Internet cables have much more redundancy than a rail network, you can't route trains around the world to get to their destination just some hundreds of milliseconds delayed, it's disruptive but workarounds are embedded in the design of the system, not so much with rail during peak summer season in a very touristic country while hosting a major sporting event.

Do you think Russia really cares about the backlash? They keep pushing the boundaries to test responses, what kind of backlash do you think France would give to a nuclear power while they can't show with 100% certainty was Russian? That's the MO of Russia, I don't understand why you are trying to defend it.

It might as well not be Russia but the suspicions aren't far fetched, given stuff like this: https://www.lemonde.fr/en/france/article/2024/07/24/russian-...

So quick to create or fully believe in speculations and obviously biaised media (well, I don't believe one moment that there's purely neutral media or that I would be able to recognize it with certainty, but the BBC, lol).

I'd like to remind you that the World Wars started because of alliance networks like these, with countries like mine clearly taking sides for not-so-obvious reasons. And not because of caricatures of cartoon baddies that dwarf what the Catholics and Ottomans made of Vlad Tepes.

IMO it's far more probable that it's an eco-terrorist group such as "Les Soulèvements de la Terre".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_Soul%C3%A8vements_de_la_Te...

Even the political group "Les verts" is quite radical in their language. And those groups like "Les Soulèvements de la Terre" want a violent green revolution.

https://www.leparisien.fr/societe/les-soulevements-de-la-ter...

This is silly. Why would climate activists sabotage electric railways mostly powered by carbon neutral nuclear power.

the nuclear part is not so consensual within eco activists...

Why would it be more probable ? How would they be able to organise a coordinated attack spread out so much, and how would they have procured the necessary explosives?

And most of all, why would they attack high speed rail infrastructure which is one of the greenest ways of transportation?

No, it wouldn't make any sense for an "eco-terrorist" group to do it in this way. Same as it doesn't make sense for an Islamic terrorist group.

This has Russia written all over it, from the methods to the Russians already arrested to the fool bragging about it yesterday in Bulgaria.

> Why would it be more probable?

Because they announced it:

https://www.leparisien.fr/faits-divers/la-flamme-olympique-d...

https://www.leparisien.fr/societe/les-soulevements-de-la-ter...

No the announcements referenced in the article are not about sabotages.

Not at all what they announced according to the linked article. It's quite literally the opposite really, do you read French or did you Google translate? 'action de masse' roughly mean assembling somewhere to disrupt anything with a mass of people, to many to get arrested. If they wanted to stop a train, they would have invaded a train station (or multiple ones).

The first article is about disturbing the olympic torch relay, and the second one is about various protests, e.g. against a freeway and a logistics center. Nothing about trains.

ecologists wouldn't attack the only way of having low carbon transport over far distance.

Welcome in France

ecologists from our German neighbor closed the lowest-carbon energy available (nuclear) to open coal facilities. I wouldn't bet on the brains of the average european ecologist.

on a more serious note, even if train is low-carbon, this could be seen as an anti-olympics protest which ecologists claim is an ecological disaster.

There are long-established objections to nuclear from supposed green groups, making that understandable.

There are no similarly held opposition to trains/mass transit. Indeed, as the parent indicates, trains appear to have unanimous support from green factions.

Indeed, and our ecologists promote train a lot. But given the timing, I can imagine the rationale of this being an attack on the olympics and not on train, simply because train is attackable and plane not.

Maybe, though it seems as easy to attack the road network to me; which would move towards green ideals more.

I don't think climate protestors have some deep seated opposition to art but that didn't stop them from throwing paint at major artworks.

You are describing those as 2 distinct groups, but in reality those 2 are, even if indirectly, very well connected. Le pen is sponsored (almost) directly by russia, just listen to what she keeps saying, she ain't stupid. So are other extreme right or left wing parties (or just very corrupt popular individuals) across whole Europe. There is no greater ideology, just raw destabilization so they take whoever fits the bill, I wouldn't be even surprised with isis in some way.

Russia has 1 very clear long term goal, from way before they invaded Ukraine in 2014 - making Europe as weak as possible, while extracting as much money as possible. With this optic, their approach is methodical and steady, and its up to us to decide how to react. Germany's Scholz (and Merkel before, god she really did tons of damage across whole EU security wise) took the bait quite some time ago.

I guess you answered to the wrong post

I'll tell you what France can do: exactly nothing. France is not playing with the big boys anymore.

As a nuclear armed power that has shown far more propensity for military intervention outside their borders (see Africa) than all other nato members I wouldn’t bet against the French here.

A nuclear submarine on 24/7 patrol with 16 intercontinental ballistic missiles, each with 6-10 independent nuclear warheads, says otherwise.

So does the capabilities to deploy forces and fully sustain them independently anywhere in the world, something which at most 4-5 other countries can do.

In the theory yes. I can imagine that when shit hits the fan, France isnt able to answer accordingly.

So you think France spends collectively tens of billions of euros to have nuclear strike capabilities, but wouldn't use them because... "France"?

A country that has the courage to press the button, would never allow it become the social chaos that it is today.

... Wait, which are these _non_-chaotic nuclear armed countries? Like, US: Jan 6th and all that. Russia: At least one major military coup in the last year. Britain: Brexit, new prime minister every three weeks, all infrastructure more or less at point of collapse. France: well, 'nuff said.

You could maybe argue China, I suppose? Though I think they're just better at keeping the chaos boiling just below the surface.

Social chaos? Revolt is part of France's DNA, since 1789. What country can claim to have no social problems? Moreover, military action and social issues are separate matters and I don't see the link with "pressing the button". Stop french bashing please.

> Stop french bashing please

Why should I? What were the French military success in the last 100 years? Paris is just degraded right now. French bashing please!

Most democracies tolerate a degree of social chaos since self expression and freedom of action are part of the culture.

Dictatorships on the other hand are terrified of their own people, and so crush and expression of freedom that they don't directly approve (see for instance the lady that was arrested in Moscow for standing in public with a blank piece of paper).

However in times of threat from an external force, then people group together and there's more cohesion. Would a democracy like France press the button to protect themselves or an ally under such circumstances? Yes, I think they would.

However these societies are not run by a single small cell of egotistical leaders like feudal courts of old as current autocracies are. The question is more, would these deranged autocracies have the dumb courage to risk annihilation by directly attacking the democracies they hate? Doubt it.

> dumb courage to risk annihilation by directly attacking the democracies they hate? Doubt it.

Why would any of them do that? They can seat, wait and watch the west crumble apart with almost no intervention.

!remindme Jan 20

You can imagine whatever you want. The fact is that France is concretely prepared, "when shit hits the fan, it won't be able to answer accordingly" is a random dude-on-the-internet opinion

> The fact is that France is concretely prepared

Thank you random dude-on-the-internet for your opinion. There is however enough information about SIGINT x French Missiles in the internet. Go and find them.

It makes no sense. The whole point of nuclear weapons is deterrence (so "theory"). The moment you actually have to use them ("practice") everybody involved loses. And the uninvolved too.

You think anybody would choose national seppukku ? Great buddy, you launched your nukes with your big ass subz... now what do you think is going to happen? You think superpowers got no nukes close to France ? You'll be vaporized into nuclear waste gas before most of your nukes fly half the way. More realistically, you'd try to think how can France hurt superpowers economically: guess what, it can't.

France is now the de-facto most important political player in Europe.

On what basis ? The country is well on its way to bankruptcy, and noone takes their politicians seriously, including foreign powers.

On the basis that's it's the sole EU member state that's on the UN's security council, is a NATO founding member and is a nuclear power.