Russia invades Ukraine

Edit: I remember when I saw that clip, the same day that he said he'd shut it down. I thought "the Russian propaganda machine is going to have a field day with this. And yup.

The pipeline was not blasted by any propaganda machine. But even if we exclude what Biden, Nuland and Johnson said, we still got the Radar Evidence, suspicious sequences* + time stamps, reporting from investigative pulitzer-awarded journalist, sheer logic**, strong hints from New York Times, even an ex American President pretty much admits it, do make a strong case. Not beyond any doubt, but pretty strong. What are the counter arguments even speculative for the opposite? The only thing I saw is that funny story with the yacht which again suggest that Ukrainians did it without the official consent of Kyiv of Washington. But I haven't seen anything trying to build a case that Russians did it.

*US military airplane flying for hours above third countries and the place of the first blast with CALL SIGN turned off even before the blast, going circles around the location for hours. What the airplane was hiding flying above friendly and allied countries?

**Mats Ljungqvist, a senior prosecutor leading Sweden’s investigation: “Do I think it was Russia that blew up Nord Stream? I never thought so. It’s not logical. But as in the case of a murder, you have to be open to all possibilities.”
 
The pipeline was not blasted by any propaganda machine. But even if we exclude what Biden, Nuland and Johnson said, we still got the Radar Evidence, suspicious sequences* + time stamps, reporting from investigative pulitzer-awarded journalist, sheer logic**, strong hints from New York Times, even an ex American President pretty much admits it, do make a strong case. Not beyond any doubt, but pretty strong. What are the counter arguments even speculative for the opposite? The only thing I saw is that funny story with the yacht which again suggest that Ukrainians did it without the official consent of Kyiv of Washington. But I haven't seen anything trying to build a case that Russians did it.

*US military airplane flying for hours above third countries and the place of the first blast with CALL SIGN turned off even before the blast, going circles around the location for hours. What the airplane was hiding flying above friendly and allied countries?

**Mats Ljungqvist, a senior prosecutor leading Sweden’s investigation: “Do I think it was Russia that blew up Nord Stream? I never thought so. It’s not logical. But as in the case of a murder, you have to be open to all possibilities.”
What Donald Trump says does not make a strong case. At all (and I suppose that might be why you didn't mention him by name but rather the title. "Donald Trump says" doesn't have a very good vibe). You're on a limb if he's corroborating your narrative here. A journalist far from his pulitzer days-turned conspiracy guy does not make a strong case. The *sheer logic* does not unilaterally point to the US either (in fact, the logic can just as well point to the opposite, that it would be extremely risky for the US to attack Russian infrastructure; Biden has been slowly scaling up the military supplies ambition, and at that point they were not very extravagant); you can make logic arguments for Russia as well. What we can say, is that we do not know. Circumstancial evidence does not mean much. I know that you really want it to be the US; that much is clear, but pre-concevied desires do not make it so. It is a possibility, yes. Russia is a possibility. Ukraine is a possibility, rogue groups are a possibility.

Now, there was a recent exposé though, making the case that it could be tied to Ukranians and a Crimean Russian official. https://www.expressen.se/nyheter/misstankta-sparen-fran-sabotaget-mot-nord-stream/
 
Last edited:
For example, I also don't know what exactly happened with JFK's assassination, but no matter Warren Commission's hundreds of pages reporting, I know that it was not (just) Oswald. Yes, once in a trillion you could have a magic bullet trajectory. Do I buy it? No.

There's no such thing as a "magic bullet trajectory". Kennedy's and Connally did not sit in a straight line. Oliver Stone didn't take that into account in his film. That's literally all there is to it.
 
There's no such thing as a "magic bullet trajectory". Kennedy's and Connally did not sit in a straight line. Oliver Stone didn't take that into account in his film. That's literally all there is to it.

Magic bullet is not just in film. And besides, there is clear video evidence that Kennedy shot also from front which I can see with my own eyes.

I know that you really want it to be the US; that much is clear, but pre-concevied desires do not make it so.

No. I don't want it to be anyone particular. I want to keep my eyes open and understand what is really happening.

Now, there was a recent exposé though, making the case that it could be tied to Ukranians and a Crimean Russian official. https://www.expressen.se/nyheter/misstankta-sparen-fran-sabotaget-mot-nord-stream/

But Yax, if Ukrainians did it who do you think was behind? No way they did such an operation without support from a State.
And there's no way that Poland or anyone else provided support without US agreed first.

EDIT: Fresh article. Can't read it, but from the title + twitter feeds I understand Germans imply Ukraine with Polish backing. Again. No way US didn't know.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ukraine-blew-up-nord-stream-2-pipeline-german-fbi-2023-95d58fgkv

EDIT2: I had some more thoughts but I can't express them, better left unsaid, they are too painful to think even for me.
I understand you guys, the more I think of it, if any State knew, it would be too painful, uncomfortable and sad to realise.
I didn't pay too much attention to Nordstream case until recently.
I will stop here.
 
Last edited:
So, second day of something happening in Belgorod region. If it's not ruzzia's false flag operation we can say that this country is totally f* up. A giant with feets of clay. I woud be zero surprised if army of Ukrainians would reach moscow and take kremlin under siege. Of course this scenario will not happen, but russia is so lame and will crumble out of the blue. Just a general feeling.
 
Last edited:
I think whether it was Russia, China, US, Ukraine, Algeria, Italy or the moon, accident, act of H: good riddance, It effectively ended Russia’s natural gas leverage. So good riddance.
 
It effectively ended Russia’s natural gas leverage. So good riddance.

But this is the problem, it didn't. Russia is doing well, EU is the one suffering and this will not end anytime soon. The LNG is much more expensive than Natural Gas, which will be devastating for the German economy and essentially EU's economy. Already you see inflation hitting Europe and prices going up by the day.

Countries have no friends they only have interests and one day things will get better. Thus you don't need to burn bridges; if the pipeline is there I would like to use it when things get better and have cheaper energy for my industries and my people. But if it's not there I'll have competitive disadvantage against China & India that would get cheaper energy.

I might never use the pipeline ever again but why not having options readily available?
 
It's very funny to me that the existence of a US plane in a NATO sea is considered "suspicious". They're flying everywhere, all the time, especially above NATO waters and international waters. You could point to the same thing in the Sea of Japan or the Arabian Sea, too. I bet there's planes flying over the Black Sea, too.
 
It's very funny to me that the existence of a US plane in a NATO sea is considered "suspicious".

It had turned the CALL SIGN off the whole time even before the blast, plus circling around the place of incident. I don't know about planes but ships they turn off their AIS when they don't want to be seen, i.e. passing close to Somalia to avoid pirates, doing illegal activities, or generally to hide their identity.
 
But this is the problem, it didn't. Russia is doing well, EU is the one suffering and this will not end anytime soon. The LNG is much more expensive than Natural Gas, which will be devastating for the German economy and essentially EU's economy. Already you see inflation hitting Europe and prices going up by the day.

Countries have no friends they only have interests and one day things will get better. Thus you don't need to burn bridges; if the pipeline is there I would like to use it when things get better and have cheaper energy for my industries and my people. But if it's not there I'll have competitive disadvantage against China & India that would get cheaper energy.

I might never use the pipeline ever again but why not having options readily available?
No, Russia is hardly doing well; they are doing much better than anticipated though, thanks to eastern exports. But again, timeline. Even before the war, Russia was already leveraging Europe through the pipelines, driving the prices up and putting themselves in a position of power ("oh, the pipeline is, eeh, broken and capped at 20% capacity). That continued throughout the early stages of the war, and Russia used that leverage to try and secure concessions (like pay in the Russian currency to keep it from diving) and they would use the pipeline to turn the public opinion to hanging the Ukranians out to dry (no more weapons, or we'll cut the supply!). They threatened with a freezing cold winter, Europe cut its energy consumption by 20% or something (at least, Sweden has at this point) and natural gas by I don't know how much, but a lot. Europe was not getting, and would not get, a consistent flow of gas. It had been weaponized to project power and divide. Europe should never put itself in that position and I'm glad the pipeline is out of the equation.
 
Last edited:
It had turned the CALL SIGN off the whole time even before the blast, plus circling around the place of incident. I don't know about planes but ships they turn off their AIS when they don't want to be seen, i.e. passing close to Somalia to avoid pirates, doing illegal activities, or generally to hide their identity.
Like...a military mission, right? What sort of military mission might two anti-submarine vessels be on over the Baltic? Might they be...looking for a submarine? And given that situation, it seems unlikely that those airplanes would broadcast their location.

It's very funny to me that the exact behaviour that NATO forces would do if they detected a Russian submarine entering the central Baltic is selected as proof that no Russian submarine was there. I'm not ruling out anything, it's just that there's no real evidence. It's all conjecture. The behaviour of the airplanes is the exact same as it might be in both ways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jer
But this is the problem, it didn't. Russia is doing well, EU is the one suffering and this will not end anytime soon. The LNG is much more expensive than Natural Gas, which will be devastating for the German economy and essentially EU's economy. Already you see inflation hitting Europe and prices going up by the day.

No, actually. Speaking for Germany: Everyone expected the winter to be tough, but we got out of it alright. There were no brownouts or rationings. We now have the same amount of time to prepare for the next winter as we did last year, and a lot more sources for energy imports. Inflation is not as bad as we feared and slowing down significantly. Most of the goods missing from German supermarkets a year ago are back in full stock. Germany's economy wasn't hit nearly as hard as everyone expected. The only European country really suffering - apart from Ukraine, of course - is the UK, but I'd say that's the triple-punch of Brexit, Pandemic and war taking its effect.

Sorry mate, but we're not suffering from making ourselves independent of Russia. Putin lost this gamble.
 
I know that you really want it to be the US; that much is clear, but pre-concevied desires do not make it so.
Quoted for truth.

But even if we exclude what Biden, Nuland and Johnson said, we still got the Radar Evidence, suspicious sequences* + time stamps, reporting from investigative pulitzer-awarded journalist, sheer logic**, strong hints from New York Times, even an ex American President pretty much admits it, do make a strong case.
And this is where you betray both your bias and the weakness of your argument. Here you've just fallen back on your own original talking points while completely ignoring the copious counterarguments that have been offered against each of these. You did the same thing over in the Taiwan & Pacific geo-politics thread, endlessly repeating the PRC party line about what "One China" means as if that were some kind of checkmate maneuver, while the west has clearly always interpreted it differently.

Repeating your same weakened or discredited points doesn't strengthen them, it just makes you sound like a propaganda mouthpiece. You are unfairly minimizing any arguments or evidence that work against your preferred theory, while irrationally amplifying anything that might support it.

Half the shit you mention above is innuendo. You keep falling back on Hersh winning a Pulitzer 53 years ago while completely ignoring multiple cited examples of his lack of journalistic integrity over the past 15+ years in order to irrationally bolster his credibility. Somehow it doesn't register with you that the rest of the world media didn't run with Hersh's story because it didn't meet their own journalistic standards. And the capper is that you treat Donald Trump as a reliable source of information. I mean, come the fuck on.

What are the counter arguments even speculative for the opposite?
I don't know, maybe try actually reading and considering the other posts in the thread you're participating in...?
 
The only European country really suffering - apart from Ukraine, of course - is the UK
Sweden is too, sadly (higher inflation than most, negative GDP growth), partly due to that The Crown is a shit currency. Over-leveraged households that have zero margins now or negative) price gouging and an increasingly underfunded welfare state that cannot cope with the increased costs are other factors. The over-leveraged households was already a bubble waiting to burst though.
 
Last edited:
Sorry mate, but we're not suffering from making ourselves independent of Russia. Putin lost this gamble.

Sorry? You got it wrong mate. Your suffering doesn’t make me happy. If you are doing great, that’s great for me too. Europe independent from Russia, Russia independent from Europe, World independent from dollar. Manufacturing back to US, back to Europe. Europe independent from US. West independent from China. China and US living together instead of fighting against each other. Why not. Just we don’t screw up and go Nuclear or WWIII.

I don’t think Europe will benefit from anything that‘s going on now in the mid term. In the longer term I hope and I think we could eventually be the third pole, not enemies with anyone not vassals of anyone.

The only European country really suffering - apart from Ukraine, of course - is the UK,

I wouldn’t call it suffering after what we had to endure for almost 10 years, but I hear a lot of complaints from back home for prices going up.
 
*US military airplane flying for hours above third countries and the place of the first blast with CALL SIGN turned off
Are you refering to flightradar24 here? Or more generally, the transponder function used by such flight trackers? If so, I can say this much; in much of the world, most if the time, this is the rule and not the exception. Just because you can't see its callsign on the internet doesn't mean the flight is a secret to everyone.

For example, Norwegian Air Force planes only show on FR24 when they specificially have permitted this (and it is rare). I still occasionally see F16s do test flights and they are never shown on FR24. Some air forces have different practices.
 
Are you refering to flightradar24 here? Or more generally, the transponder function used by such flight trackers? If so, I can say this much; in much of the world, most if the time, this is the rule and not the exception. Just because you can't see its callsign on the internet doesn't mean the flight is a secret to everyone.

For example, Norwegian Air Force planes only show on FR24 when they specificially have permitted this (and it is rare). I still occasionally see F16s do test flights and they are never shown on FR24. Some air forces have different practices.

Thank god. I was hoping for such an expert insight since the start. I don't know the industry practices let alone for Air Force. I've forgotten about you, otherwise I'd had you mentioned since my first post.
I would think a foreign military plane fly over the airspace of an allied country, over the landmass of the country itself would be required to have FR24 turned on.
Can you have a look on that YouTube video (last Twitter thread) and give us your comments?

 
Thank god. I was hoping for such an expert insight since the start. I don't know the industry practices let alone for Air Force. I've forgotten about you, otherwise I'd had you mentioned since my first post.
I would think a foreign military plane fly over the airspace of an allied country, over the landmass of the country itself would be required to have FR24 turned on.
Can you have a look on that YouTube video (last Twitter thread) and give us your comments?

I don't really want to meddle into the NordStream saga as I believe we won't have the facts necessary to know who did what until at least the war in Ukraine is over and possibly the current Russian administration gone. There are enough ideas floating around that, with the right dose of confirmation bias, could lead to any conclusion.

But I took a brief look at that Twitter thread and bits and pieces of the Youtube vid. And I can assure you that the guy behind that video is making a big deal out of stuff that could mean everything or absolutely nothing. But when he makes the "NO CALL SIGN" thing sound important, it proves he is clueless when it comes to what the information means.

Flightradar24 is just a civilian website by aviation nerds, for aviation nerds. Everything it presents on the website is dependent on information that is either available from the data transmitted by aircraft, or data entered by users (for example, it is not given that FR24 knows the aircraft registration and type, even if the transponder mode transmits a unique ID for that aircraft. That depends on someone knowing the aircraft entering that info).

To give an example, I frequently see aircraft from our club showing up with "NO CALLSIGN" and then later being shown with the registration as their callsign, and I know that there is nothing we can do from the cockpit to influence that. We set our transponder into "altitude" mode before takeoff and keep it there until we land.

The transponder is basically a receiver/transmitter unit that registers a signal from ATC radar, and sends a signal back to say "here I am". This signal can contain more information, and this information can be used by anyone who can receive it. FR24 and similar websites use ground-based receivers to pick up that information, much like ATC would.

Now, military aircraft usually have transponders with all the "civilian" modes available, and then some more (usually so they can show their position and identity to friendly aircraft without revealing the same information to enemy aircraft). When they fly with their transponder set in what we call "mode S", the standard setting for civilian aircraft with modern transponders, all other aircraft can see their identity, altitude, heading. This is actively used by traffic coillision avoidance system (TCAS) which all airliners have.

Now, military aircraft don't always use Mode S, but even when they don't, they usually have their transponder switched on. But FR24 might not be able to parse the information and show it. ATC still could. In some cases, but this is rare in peacetime, military aircraft could be allowed to fly in controlled airspace without ATC following, but that would mean they had full responsibility for separation from other aircraft and that would be dangerous. So that' very unlikely, except in areas that have been designated as danger areas. This would be publicly available information for all pilots, airlines etc.

But all this is completely unrelated to the callsign shown on FR24. Just that you can't see the callsign on FR24 doesn't tell you anything except the pilots might not have entered the callsign for that particular flight into a data system that FR24 has access to.

Also, the information could be available but FR24 would be asked not to show it. This is why for example most fighter jet flights don't show up even when they fly in civilian airspace with transponder in civilian mode.

Bottom line, "no callsign" is not mysterious, doesn't tell anything about the nature of the flight, and by the way - which information would the flight callsign give you that you didn't already see in the video? Aircraft type? Shown. Full route? Shown.

Feel free to continue this discussion, but accept it will be without me.
 
Bottom line, "no callsign" is not mysterious, doesn't tell anything about the nature of the flight, and by the way - which information would the flight callsign give you that you didn't already see in the video? Aircraft type? Shown. Full route? Shown.

Traceability only, i.e. which exactly aircraft, which would unveil the exact line of command of this operation.

Feel free to continue this discussion, but accept it will be without me.

Warm thanks for your insights doctor, as I said this was exactly the type of counter-argument I was looking for. Technical, free of heat and preconceptions. I am now convinced that the No Call Sign thing holds no water here. The story is still up there food for thought and for constructive conversation like you just demonstrated.

I don’t have any desire to continue this discussion either.
 
Back
Top