It’s an observation and surprise that somebody could lack basic reasoning skills to understand that there is zero benefit for Russia to blow up their own infrastructure.
Oh wow that sure is more skepticism than you’ve ever shown regarding any rumor about Russia. It’s like you have some sort of a bias here. While we don’t know definitively who is responsible, it’s pretty easy reason about who has a history of blowing up pipelines, has threatened to stop the pipeline, and who most benefits from the pipeline being destroyed.
Only a handful of countries have the capability to carry out such an attack. The place where the attack occurred is where NATO was just doing naval exercises and US had ships present. Putting two and two together here is not hard. Any definitive proof here may never come, and NATO is already refusing Russia being part of the investigation. Unless all parties involved are allowed to investigate then the whole investigation is a sham.
There might never be proof of who did it, but that hasn’t stopped you from speculating:
There’s still the possibility that Russia can use this as a leverage. “Sure, we will fix the pipes if you ease up with the sanctions” etc.
🤦
Assuming the damage is even reparable (which it sounds like it might not be) how would that leverage be better than the leverage they had, where they controlled the supply to four functioning pipes?
Resorting to cheap shots and personal insults is a weakness, not a strength. All it does is cheapen debate. That’s especially true in spaces like Lemmy that tend towards an echo chamber where minority opinions routinely get shouted down.
deleted by creator
It’s an observation and surprise that somebody could lack basic reasoning skills to understand that there is zero benefit for Russia to blow up their own infrastructure.
deleted by creator
Oh wow that sure is more skepticism than you’ve ever shown regarding any rumor about Russia. It’s like you have some sort of a bias here. While we don’t know definitively who is responsible, it’s pretty easy reason about who has a history of blowing up pipelines, has threatened to stop the pipeline, and who most benefits from the pipeline being destroyed.
deleted by creator
Only a handful of countries have the capability to carry out such an attack. The place where the attack occurred is where NATO was just doing naval exercises and US had ships present. Putting two and two together here is not hard. Any definitive proof here may never come, and NATO is already refusing Russia being part of the investigation. Unless all parties involved are allowed to investigate then the whole investigation is a sham.
deleted by creator
Wow first time we agree on something.
mf deleted their comments lmao
There might never be proof of who did it, but that hasn’t stopped you from speculating:
🤦
Assuming the damage is even reparable (which it sounds like it might not be) how would that leverage be better than the leverage they had, where they controlled the supply to four functioning pipes?
Who’s investigation?
when your ‘discussion’ is of such low quality, why wouldn’t he insult you?
Resorting to cheap shots and personal insults is a weakness, not a strength. All it does is cheapen debate. That’s especially true in spaces like Lemmy that tend towards an echo chamber where minority opinions routinely get shouted down.
The “debate” is cheap and meaningless to lib posties like you
Gasp, me, liberal? Caught in the act! If you are going to try to insult people, maybe don’t use the ideology they openly identify with.