Defense confirms: Russia had special vessel near Nord Stream's detonation point

a reply to: gortex

Russia decided to use it for political advantage and blame the West , we've seen how that narrative gained traction.

False flags are a tactic in war that is used to build a rally call and get the fight started. Already got enough conflict in Ukraine to do that. If I was in Russia looking at this event, it comes across as a heads up that there is a lot of hostility with NATO, especially with the delays in getting it back online.

From reports at the time, Russia said it was repairable. As for dealing with the political situation around Nord was a much tougher problem to fix.

I don't know how the repair process is going, if at all? I don't know where or what resistance might be causing delays to get the pipe fixed.

a reply to: gortex

Sure Jan...

a reply to: gortex

Pipelines need to be kept pressurised so they're not damaged by the pressure of the water , not sure what they use but gas wasn't flowing as the pipeline wasn't opened.

It was gas flowing, as I’ve already said there was a picture of huge amounts of it bubbling up to to the surface.

a reply to: surfer_soul

I added this to my previous reply.

Hydro testing of the gas pipeline is a mandatory stage. For that, the pipeline is filled with water under requisite pressure and left for some time to identify possible defects. Condition of the gas pipeline is carefully monitored after its commissioning as well. Special electronic devices for in-pipe inspection are used in this process
www.gazprominfo.com...

Regardless of what was bubbling out the pipeline wasn't in use , pressures on Germany before Russia's invasion of Ukraine ensured it would never be opened.

a reply to: surfer_soul

It was not gas.
The pipeline was not operational.
We have know this for some time now.
Gortex perfectly explained all of that and even went a step further to explain how the lines must stay pressurized.
It is not a hard concept.

Well now I know the one thing that is without a doubt NOT the truth. Thanks!

originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: gortex

So they sabotage their own pipeline, for what purpose? How would it benefit them?

The same reason people claim the USA carries out false flag operations. Duh 🙄

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: surfer_soul

It was not gas.
The pipeline was not operational.
We have know this for some time now.
Gortex perfectly explained all of that and even went a step further to explain how the lines must stay pressurized.
It is not a hard concept.

Only gas bubbles to the surface, have you ever farted in a bath? Think of it like that only on a massive scale.

In the link Gortex provided it says water is used at the requisite pressure to test a pipeline. Water mixes with water, it doesn’t bubble to the surface like gas does.

a reply to: gortex

Didn’t you see seemore hersch’s paper ? It was usa . You know the same people who said that it’d be no more and then it was no more. You should get a job at the f b I

a reply to: gortex

Didn’t you see seemore hersch’s paper ? It was usa . You know the same people who said that it’d be no more and then it was no more. You should get a job at the f b I

a reply to: Tough2fool

You should get a job at the f b I

No thanks , I'll stick with MI5.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Whats happening with that info now and who stands to gain the most and whose moving WHAT.........thats all im saying

The information is part of the investigation being carried out by Denmark , Sweden and Germany into the circumstances of the explosion , a report will be released when the investigation is concluded , no timeline has been announced yet.

This sure sounds like damage control. I cannot possibly imagine a reason Putin would cut off a huge source of income for Russia to spite his own needs.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: glen200376

"We've got pictures but you can't see them,national security and all that."

Hardly unusual is it.

Big yawn,more fuel for the sheep to # themselves with.

Then move along Chuckles , nothing for you here , fresh grass over there.

The irony of the poster telling others to rethink when his thinking is always done for him by MSM.

I think the irony is in asking Russia supporters to think at all.

Quit acting like a nitwit. It's very unusual they would not show you the evidence. But let's not forget... Russia is so dastardly

THEY BLEW UP THEIR OWN PIPELINE

a reply to: Allaroundyou

I’ve just done a quick search to jog my memory and it turns out both Nord Stream pipelines 1 and 2 were sabotaged. Nord stream 1 was definitely operational which would explain the huge gas leak. It may be that pipeline 2 wasn’t yet opened and hence the confusion.

With that said I fail to see how Russia benefits from blowing up its own pipelines. A false flag to blame the west is suggested, in which case wouldn’t Russia then follow through by declaring it an act of war? That’s the whole point of a false flag. Logic dictates that Russia loses far more than it gains by this act of sabotage. They had already invaded Ukraine, so that’s out and it hurts their economy massively.

C

originally posted by: DerBeobachter
Btw:

USS Kearsarge (LHD-3)

"On September 25, it left the Latvian port of Riga fogr the North Sea and passed through the Kattegat in the dead of night on September 30, 2022,[10] bound for Norfolk home port, where it docked on October 13, 2022.[11] On September 26 and 27, 2022, a sabotage attack occurred on the Nord Stream pipelines."
Wikipedia (German)

The Kearsarge is also a special ship.... for amphibious warfare.....

Good research thanks.

a reply to: Ksihkehe

Is your position that Western assurances they would end that pipeline were false or they were incapable of doing it?

That's the thing though it was already ended and didn't require explosives. Insurance might though?

It makes no difference to me which terrorist group did it, but one of them told me they were going to and one of them lost infrastructure in the process. Pretty strong evidence unless there is some compelling reason to doubt it.

That makes a lot more sense if the pipeline was operational and had future prospects of profitability. Were those prospects evident when it went pop?

I'm not invested in sides or energy production either.

a reply to: gortex

Anyone who believes it wasn't Russia needs to have their head examined.

6 Months ago Russia said it had evidence that The British blew it up. And yet they have never shown any evidence.

thank u for sharing. I had not heard this.

my theory is that some Putin apparatchik did this and the reaction wasn't what they wanted so they're keeping it quiet.

not really a rational action.

a reply to: WhateverYouSay

Quit acting like a nitwit. It's very unusual they would not show you the evidence.

The evidence will likely be in the report when it's released , problem these days is people seem to think they are entitled to everything now when in reality we are entitled to nothing when National security is involved.

Now who's acting like a nitwit ?

But let's not forget... Russia is so dastardly

THEY BLEW UP THEIR OWN PIPELINE

Just like why did Russia blow up apartment blocks in Russia to justify actions they wanted to take.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Ksihkehe

Is your position that Western assurances they would end that pipeline were false or they were incapable of doing it?

The pipeline was never opened and following Russia's invasion of Ukraine never likely to be opened as the customers it was intended for are moving away from Russian gas , the pipeline was ended before it began.

I can see a political reason for Russia to sabotage it but for the West it would be like shooting a dog that had already died.

If your intent was to throw an insult in the OP and then dodge questions when people don't take your bait, then this is more appropriate for the mud pit.

Failing to elaborate on the political reason you see makes it appear that it's even more weak than this answer you just gave. It also renders this a non answer regarding the statements that they would end the pipeline. Now you're saying it was already dead before it started. Zero substantive reply to the questions.