TexasCHLforum.com

powerboatr wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 1:56 pm that seems very odd. not to mention the environmental issue
there are other ways

srothstein wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 9:43 pm Everyone seems to have jumped to a conclusion that this was sabotage. Now people are trying to figure out who did it. Compare this to the recent unpleasantness that started in China. The whole world tried to argue it was natural and then finally said it might be an accidental loss.

The funny thing is when I consider all the known facts (at least known by me), Occam says it was just an accident. We know Russia has not been in the habit of maintaining things well (look at their military vehicles in Ukraine) an pipelines take constant maintenance, especially those exposed to salt water and cold. And we all know that when pipelines are not properly maintained, they can spring leaks or explode.

I think it was just an accident and most governments and MSM are taking advantage of it for propaganda purposes because they can.

Mike S wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 4:20 pm

powerboatr wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 1:56 pm that seems very odd. not to mention the environmental issue
there are other ways

I'm thinking it's Putin's version of the Gulf of Tonkin incident.

Here's my counter to any 'experts' or pundits who claim 'it just doesn't make sense ' for Russia to have sabotaged it's own pipeline that was operating at minimal capacity already. Either these 'experts' don't understand Center of Gravity analysis or don't have the mental capacity to be speaking of grown up topics ((or, they're drinking their own Kool-Aid & clinging to their last 15-minutes of fame by pulling things out of their 4th point of contact)). ((Please note that's not directed at anyone on this forum; there's a difference between a lay person & a so-called expert)).

Why is any of this in U.S. interest? Because our economy is tied to the global economy. When we have global stability, we prosper. ((This is probably why Obama/Trump/Biden didn't overreact to the initial invasion of Ukraine/ annexation of Crimea. By letting it play out, we were able to build capacity within Ukraine & let them do the heavy lifting, empowered by our training, technology, & equipment. It's cost us billions by adding to the national debt, but in the long run the global economy will improve, benefiting us without having to commit troops to the actual fighting. Stability = increased GDP for everyone; when the global economy is strong, our GDP is strong)).

Defending Ukraine is a good thing for us strategically. ((Limiting Russia's disruptive behavior & reassuring the neighboring countries of their security; eventually stabilizing EUCOM; demonstrating to China/Iran/nKorea how the U.S. military power, even when used by a proxy military, is far superior to what was assessed as 'the world's 2nd most powerful military')).

Why is it dumb for the U.S. to have sabotaged the Nord Stream or sponsored someone else to do it?

Sabotaging the European economy, especially a strategic ally such as Germany isn't in our short or long term interest. ((See above; our economy is tied to the world's economy & stability. A strong Germany is good for EUCOM stability / NATO, & enables them to support the coalition providing support for Ukraine)).

Why would Putin/ Russia sabotage their own pipeline?

Target audience for Strategic information ops (ie, International PSYOPS desired effects):

- blame U.S. / U.K. in order to disrupt domestic support within those countries ((remember there is a midterm election coming up here, & many Republicans have sounded off against Xiden's support of Ukraine. Domestic talking points here don't occur in a vacuum, & other state actors play us against each other, because instability here benefits our adversaries)).

- blame Poland for benefiting by opening their own pipeline, coincidentally timed on the same day as the Nord Stream bursting. Cause international stink-eye against a Ukrainian ally, where much of the support inbound to Ukraine is flowing thru. There is also a Russian territory just south of Poland; if Russian was to launch an attack into Poland from this territory ((similar to how Russia used Belarus to attack Ukraine)), Russia can use this as 'justification' for the attack. Or, Russian sponsored asymmetric attacks on Polish infrastructure, especially against the Polish natural gas pipeline supplying the Germans in the middle of winter.

- any other population groups that are sympathetic to Russia, to embolden international support for Russia / degrade international support for Ukraine, or anyone supporting Ukraine.

Domestic PSYOP target audiences / desired effects (domestic as in targeting their own population within Russia):

- the Nord Stream 1 was already operating at 10% capacity, & was needing repairs of it's turbines. Russia had slowed the flow of gas to the E.U to influence Germany to not supply Ukraine with weapons/equipment. Germany / E.U. was scrambling for alternative sources prior to winter, & likely had strategic plans working to mitigate the disastrous effects (ie, the Polish pipeline). Being able to mitigate the lack of Russian natural gas also somewhat neuters Russia's leverage.

- By blaming everyone/anyone else, Russia can play the 'victim' & claim justification with their own people if they attack the Polish pipeline, or the Poles in general with conventional or asymmetrical attacks. Remember that the Russian population was split between supporting the 'special military operation' in Ukraine/neutral because it didn't affect them/didn't support the invasion. Playing the victim allows Russia to play the national pride card & give legitimacy because 'someone attacked them first'.

- The Russian people are feeling some effects of the economic sanctions, & Russia can now blame someone else for the pain they are causing within their own population. "It's not my fault you're not prospering like before; it's someone else's fault". ((This despite the fact that the Russians were already slowing down the tap of natural gas in order to coerce Germany to not supply military hardware to Ukraine, & the only operational pipeline was only at 10% capacity anyway)).

- Russia's 'partial mobilization ' of 300k reservist/conscripts isn't going so well in the face of popular support wavering for their 'special military operation'. The spectre of the might of the Russian military is also shattered, with Russian troops giving up territory. Especially embarrassing that the territory that was just annexed via a 'referendum' / vote has entire units leaving & locals expressing their real feelings when liberated by Ukrainian forces. By staging their own version of the Gulf of Tonkin (ie, blowing up a couple sections of both pipelines & blaming it on U.S./U.K./Poland/anyone else, Russia plays the victim card & legitimizes the need for this mobilization.

- Nord Stream 1 was in need of repairs, & Nord Stream 2 was 'finished' but never made operational. Both reportedly had maintenance issues. Instead of losing face domestically based on inability to maintain a stream of GDP, sabotage it & blame someone else. ((Admittedly this assessment isn't as strong as the others, but national pride is pretty strong & important inside Russia))

---------------- Break ----------------

I'm not a retired Col. I've never served as an advisor to any political appointee, SecDef, or the Pentagon. But, if any of these self proclaimed experts can't cite a single reason why Russia would have sabotaged their own pipeline, I question their competencies. Or, they have their own agenda / interest to gain from. Especially those liberal talking heads linked above.

mayor wrote: Tue Oct 04, 2022 9:59 am This is a lot to digest. I'll get back.

Mike S wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 4:20 pm

powerboatr wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 1:56 pm that seems very odd. not to mention the environmental issue
there are other ways

I'm thinking it's Putin's version of the Gulf of Tonkin incident.

Here's my counter to any 'experts' or pundits who claim 'it just doesn't make sense ' for Russia to have sabotaged it's own pipeline that was operating at minimal capacity already. Either these 'experts' don't understand Center of Gravity analysis or don't have the mental capacity to be speaking of grown up topics ((or, they're drinking their own Kool-Aid & clinging to their last 15-minutes of fame by pulling things out of their 4th point of contact)). ((Please note that's not directed at anyone on this forum; there's a difference between a lay person & a so-called expert)).

Why is any of this in U.S. interest? Because our economy is tied to the global economy. When we have global stability, we prosper. ((This is probably why Obama/Trump/Biden didn't overreact to the initial invasion of Ukraine/ annexation of Crimea. By letting it play out, we were able to build capacity within Ukraine & let them do the heavy lifting, empowered by our training, technology, & equipment. It's cost us billions by adding to the national debt, but in the long run the global economy will improve, benefiting us without having to commit troops to the actual fighting. Stability = increased GDP for everyone; when the global economy is strong, our GDP is strong)).

Defending Ukraine is a good thing for us strategically. ((Limiting Russia's disruptive behavior & reassuring the neighboring countries of their security; eventually stabilizing EUCOM; demonstrating to China/Iran/nKorea how the U.S. military power, even when used by a proxy military, is far superior to what was assessed as 'the world's 2nd most powerful military')).

Why is it dumb for the U.S. to have sabotaged the Nord Stream or sponsored someone else to do it?

Sabotaging the European economy, especially a strategic ally such as Germany isn't in our short or long term interest. ((See above; our economy is tied to the world's economy & stability. A strong Germany is good for EUCOM stability / NATO, & enables them to support the coalition providing support for Ukraine)).

Why would Putin/ Russia sabotage their own pipeline?

Target audience for Strategic information ops (ie, International PSYOPS desired effects):

- blame U.S. / U.K. in order to disrupt domestic support within those countries ((remember there is a midterm election coming up here, & many Republicans have sounded off against Xiden's support of Ukraine. Domestic talking points here don't occur in a vacuum, & other state actors play us against each other, because instability here benefits our adversaries)).

- blame Poland for benefiting by opening their own pipeline, coincidentally timed on the same day as the Nord Stream bursting. Cause international stink-eye against a Ukrainian ally, where much of the support inbound to Ukraine is flowing thru. There is also a Russian territory just south of Poland; if Russian was to launch an attack into Poland from this territory ((similar to how Russia used Belarus to attack Ukraine)), Russia can use this as 'justification' for the attack. Or, Russian sponsored asymmetric attacks on Polish infrastructure, especially against the Polish natural gas pipeline supplying the Germans in the middle of winter.

- any other population groups that are sympathetic to Russia, to embolden international support for Russia / degrade international support for Ukraine, or anyone supporting Ukraine.

Domestic PSYOP target audiences / desired effects (domestic as in targeting their own population within Russia):

- the Nord Stream 1 was already operating at 10% capacity, & was needing repairs of it's turbines. Russia had slowed the flow of gas to the E.U to influence Germany to not supply Ukraine with weapons/equipment. Germany / E.U. was scrambling for alternative sources prior to winter, & likely had strategic plans working to mitigate the disastrous effects (ie, the Polish pipeline). Being able to mitigate the lack of Russian natural gas also somewhat neuters Russia's leverage.

- By blaming everyone/anyone else, Russia can play the 'victim' & claim justification with their own people if they attack the Polish pipeline, or the Poles in general with conventional or asymmetrical attacks. Remember that the Russian population was split between supporting the 'special military operation' in Ukraine/neutral because it didn't affect them/didn't support the invasion. Playing the victim allows Russia to play the national pride card & give legitimacy because 'someone attacked them first'.

- The Russian people are feeling some effects of the economic sanctions, & Russia can now blame someone else for the pain they are causing within their own population. "It's not my fault you're not prospering like before; it's someone else's fault". ((This despite the fact that the Russians were already slowing down the tap of natural gas in order to coerce Germany to not supply military hardware to Ukraine, & the only operational pipeline was only at 10% capacity anyway)).

- Russia's 'partial mobilization ' of 300k reservist/conscripts isn't going so well in the face of popular support wavering for their 'special military operation'. The spectre of the might of the Russian military is also shattered, with Russian troops giving up territory. Especially embarrassing that the territory that was just annexed via a 'referendum' / vote has entire units leaving & locals expressing their real feelings when liberated by Ukrainian forces. By staging their own version of the Gulf of Tonkin (ie, blowing up a couple sections of both pipelines & blaming it on U.S./U.K./Poland/anyone else, Russia plays the victim card & legitimizes the need for this mobilization.

- Nord Stream 1 was in need of repairs, & Nord Stream 2 was 'finished' but never made operational. Both reportedly had maintenance issues. Instead of losing face domestically based on inability to maintain a stream of GDP, sabotage it & blame someone else. ((Admittedly this assessment isn't as strong as the others, but national pride is pretty strong & important inside Russia))

---------------- Break ----------------

I'm not a retired Col. I've never served as an advisor to any political appointee, SecDef, or the Pentagon. But, if any of these self proclaimed experts can't cite a single reason why Russia would have sabotaged their own pipeline, I question their competencies. Or, they have their own agenda / interest to gain from. Especially those liberal talking heads linked above.

Mel wrote: Wed Oct 05, 2022 7:08 am Gas prices dropped in McKinney $.30/gal last evening. Down to $2.88 most places. Sam's $2.85.

philip964 wrote: Wed Oct 05, 2022 1:13 pm

Mel wrote: Wed Oct 05, 2022 7:08 am Gas prices dropped in McKinney $.30/gal last evening. Down to $2.88 most places. Sam's $2.85.

Gas prices in Houston have risen and gone above $3.00 to $3.05 at my local station.

Then there is this:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... rices.html


Maybe the Saudis are trying to influence the midterms rather than aligning with Putin. Or they just want to make some money.