Less Than An Hour – The World Changes

As I type this, it is a little after 2 PM Moscow Time. As I understand it, at 3 PM Moscow Time, Russia becomes larger with the formal addition of 4 republics from former Ukraine to the Russian Federation.

At that moment, any attacks on those 4 republics become an attack on Russia itself. And no, it does not matter at all if anyone in The West recognizes this addition or not. For purposes of Russian Military Response, all that matters is that Russia believes it.

Russia has already “mobilized” some of the Regular Army reserves. IMHO these will be used to reinforce and enforce the new Russian Border. Rump Ukraine will, of course, not accept this and will attack. At that point, the Special Military Operation is over and Ukraine is toast.


The USA (perhaps with help from Poland or perhaps using Ukrainian proxies, but most likely just using their own troops) is THE most likely party to have blown up Nordstream I and II pipelines. A direct attack on a Russian asset. It is quite possible and reasonable for Russia to declare that an act of war by NATO on Russia. I think they will instead just wait for a suitable moment and do something like blow up the pipelines from Norway to the EU; or USA underwater communications cables to Europe.

It is now an open “secret” that NATO is conducting a clandestine war on Russia. Russia knows this. NATO knows this. The EU knows this. The USA knows this. The UK knows this. Heck, even I know this.

So what’s next?

Well, Italy just elected an anti-Globalist Italy First government. Germany had people protesting in the streets about the damage energy sanctions where having on their lives and livelihoods. (And more States too…) Germany & Italy were talking about maybe getting back to using Russian Gas so as not to have complete economic collapse, cold citizens, and worse. With NS-1 and NS-2 both blown up, that’s off the table. The EU is already shutting down industries. Aluminum Smelting is largely closed. Farm fertilizer production is down about 70% (as it depends strongly on natural gas. Many other industries too. With no Russian gas: Germany is shutting down for the winter (and perhaps a lot longer).

Germany is the financial spark plug that keeps the EU running. No industry means no money means no EU Subsidy means the PIIGS collapse as they must recognize they are broke. (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, Spain) which means it is highly likely the EU collapses and reduces to France and some hangers on. Possibly Germany too if the food riots and political turmoil don’t break it.

Cold Hungry people revolt. Europe is about to become very cold, very hungry, and very poor. Things will change.

No, the USA can’t fix this. Available LNG transport and port facilities are already maxed out. Having given the OK, to militaries around the world, to sabotage undersea gas pipelines (via existence proof), all the other EU / USA energy delivery systems are now “fair game” to Russia. Watch for a string of “Unfortunate Accidents”…

Back At Rump Ukraine:

The Ukrainians have burned through all the prior Soviet Union equipment and ammunition of NATO. NATO has also depleted their stockpiles of all sorts of material & ammo to an alarming degree via shipping it to Ukraine to be blown up. There’s not a lot of “extra” left in the cupboards.

Worse, things like HIMARS are not in stock. IF you want more, you place an order to start building them. Figure a year or two to delivery. A Germany that can’t make steel or aluminum (or even keep the soup pot from freezing) is not going to be able to make a lot of new Tiger Tanks for shipment to Ukraine either. Our NATO Proxy War with Russia has already resulted in NATO losing on logistics / material while Russia has only now started to actually mobilize; with an intact industry base and all the energy supplies it could possibly use.

At this point, from a Russian POV, I can see little reason for them to not just take all of Ukraine. Until now, they were willing to just take the Ethnic Russian areas, then end the war and ship gas via NS-1 & 2 to Germany. Now they are subject to Ukrainian blackmail for gas transit and have no NS-1 & 2. The “obvious” answer is to just take all of Ukraine and have a land pipeline that transits through Russia (and the “former” Ukraine) where it can be defended.

But “we will see”.

What is clear is that in just a few minutes, the world changes. After that, things will get very dicey and very bad; but what will be the eventual end game remains unclear. It WILL have a very diminished Europe in it. And a much stronger Russia & China. Good luck with that. IF we are very lucky, this collapse of the EU / Europe and to some extent the UK (especially the currency) will clip the ambitions of the WEFies and Globalists as their world blows up. But that is just a hope.

Subscribe to feed


About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in News Related, Political Current Events. Bookmark the permalink.

175 Responses to Less Than An Hour – The World Changes

  1. Philip Mulholland says:

    You are working with the wrong set of assumptions.
    Vultures love to feast on rotting carcasses.

  2. Steve Crook says:

    Other day I saw someone suggest the blown pipeline was the work of the US to ensure that Germany and a few others stay honest to the cause over the winter. ROFL if true.

    I’m not sure that Russia has enough people to occupy and subdue Ukraine permanently. They have a lot of people they’re conscripting, but they’ll need training and arming. Worse still Russia’s sclerotic C&C systems needs changing, and that’s going to mean altering a ‘top down’ ‘who’s to blame’ mindset that’s been pervasive since Stalin’s time, if not before. None of that is going to be easy for Russia.

    Himars? Interesting, but that latest batch are being played as something to let Ukraine retain its borders in the longer term, not as immediate aid; from what I’ve read.

    My money is still on Ukraine providing EU, UK and US keep up the supply of weapons and ammo. Russian morale isn’t good, and that of the conscripts will be worse. Ukrainians are fighting for their turf. It’s a big advantage.

  3. Canadian Friend says:

    “…Cold Hungry people revolt. Europe is about to become very cold, very hungry, and very poor. Things will change.

    No, the USA can’t fix this….”

    I agree, the USA cannot fix this, but with the Democrats in charge , the USA can make things worse…and probably will.

    Since Biden has become President, pretty much everything has gotten worse… that conflict will probably get worse too because of the Biden-democrat administration.

  4. Simon Derricutt says:

    Yep, does look like NATO will be short of guns and ammo if they intended to have a real war rather than a proxy war, so that option has been removed from the table. Not enough fuel to make more fast enough to get back to a safe position, either.

    AFAIK Poland’s coal mines are still in good shape, and could probably produce more. However, to make use of that you’d also need the coal-fired power stations. Germany is still expanding brown coal extraction, but again has limited facilities to use the stuff so power generation will be limited. Here in France, I’m expecting all the nuclear power stations to be back online by December, but that France will be required to export as much electricity to other parts of the EU (especially Germany) to keep the lights on there. I’ve got a big pile of wood, though, and maybe some hope of new physics actually working and giving me some home-brewed electrical power.

    Looking back in history, country boundaries have changed fairly frequently, so though the Ukrainians may have some problems we can expect that to settle down after some years and they’ll probably be better off overall, or at least no worse off.

    The _idea_ of the EU is basically a good one. If we’re interdependent on our neighbour countries and have good trade relations, there’s a major disincentive to making war on them since we’d suffer as much losses as they would. Wars become a no-win situation. It’s also a good idea to have the same basic laws across a wider area, and free movement of people to where the jobs are, though there’s an implementation problem there if the living-standards differ too widely between regions (and in the EU, that applies). You get a brain-drain from the poor regions to the rich ones, and of course this also applies within the USA and can be seen within most countries. Such free movement tends to increase the gap between poor regions and rich ones, and has done throughout history. If you want higher pay, move to a bigger city, and if you’re OK with low pay and want a quiet life (or don’t have the skills needed in the city), stay in the country.

    Would Russia really want the rest of Ukraine? Seems they might prefer to have a Russia-friendly government there and otherwise leave it as relatively independent. We’ll just need to wait and see. As Winter comes on, I don’t really expect a big appetite for war from anyone – too many indications from history that winning such a war would cost more than it’s worth.

  5. bob sykes says:

    It’s doubtful that Russia wants all of Ukraine, although they might take a few more oblasts.

    Putin’s usually misquoted statement about the fall of the Soviet Union was that the fall was a historical disaster, because it stranded millions of Russians in foreign countries. The annexation of the four oblasts today brings home 5 million ethnic Russians.

  6. rhoda klapp says:

    Western Ukraine would be a poison pill for Russia.

    The whole thing reads like the run-up to WW1. All sides need to back off, to stop provoking and to just stop doing stupid things re energy and climate. We can avert the apocalypse. Or when I say we, it surely is not the public in any of these nations.

  7. David A says:

    Steve Crook, this is my take on why the US GEBs would do this crime…https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2022/09/11/w-o-o-d-11-september-2022/#comment-160276

    I am not sure why the ROFL part of your post?

  8. Weetabix says:

    I just encountered an argument that the explosions could have been due to faulty maintenance:
    It sounds plausible. What do you guys think?

    (*puts on tinfoil hat*) Also, with so much of the world blowing through ordnance (by giving it to Ukraine), I wonder if someone somewhere (Davos?) has been promoting this war to disarm large portions of the world toward some other nefarious end?

  9. Steven Crook says:

    ROFL? Because there’s a certain humour in it, no? On the surface we’re all aligned in support of our brothers in Ukraine, but under the surface there’s tension. Particularly that the EU will wobble when they’re pushed and gas is in short supply. So the US takes unilateral action to make gas from Russia an impossibility.

    Honestly, if I was POTUS I’d probably have ordered something like it.

    I don’t see Russia gains anything because now there’s nothing they can offer the EU to get them to ease up on their support for Ukraine. The EU has no choice but to tough it out.

  10. rhoda klapp says:

    A word about logistics. True NATO has been using stuff faster than it can be made, but OTOH every ATGM that destroys a tank in Ukraine means one less tank which also takes time to be replaced. Every artillery shell spent moving rubble around in Ukraine can’t be used elsewhere by Russia. I don’t know how the numbers stand up but neither side gains from the ongoing conflict. I wouldn’t be too sure Russia’s combat ability is getting comparitively stronger. The mobilization during a fight is like vaccinating in a pandemic. The would-be conscripts are leaving in droves. Those who are slow or dumb enough to be caught may not be the best prospects. And an entire NCO cadre is missing. The morale of the fighting troops is affected by the thought that a lot of rich folks’ kids won’t be joining in. Kinda like Vietman but without the one-year tour. A review of doctrine needs to be carried out because what the Russian army has done to date hasn’t been effective except for the artillery arm. In terms of combined arms it has been found wanting. They really need to regroup and try again, just like they did in Finland in 1939-40.

  11. H.R. says:

    Simon Derricutt: “Would Russia really want the rest of Ukraine? Seems they might prefer to have a Russia-friendly government there and otherwise leave it as relatively independent.”

    They had that Russia friendly government until the Color Revolution in 2014. As I understand it, Russia’s puppet was at the helm and the deep state didn’t want that. It put a crimp on the US Ukraine corruption.

    No, I don’t think Russia wants all of Ukraine. It would probably be an Afghanistan all over again.

    It’s been brought out that Russia is having recruiting problems. I think it’s because the parents of the current pool of recruits still remember the Afghanistan quagmire and are warning off their kids. If Putin could successfully convince his people that his ambitions are only to absorb the Russian areas, then he might get some recruits.

    But it’s an interesting back-door comment on Putin’s ambitions that his people aren’t buying what he is selling, because they are not signing up.

  12. H.R. says:

    @rhoda klapp – Your comment showed when my comment posted.

    It seems we are both getting some ‘Vietnam’ quagmire vibe from the Russian population.

    pg and TonyB definitely think Putin has far greater ambitions than just picking up a few territories that are already willing to go back to Mother Russia. Putin has had no pushback from his people on those little operations.

    The recruitment problems support the “greater ambitions'” position. I think the Russians are sick of the deprivation of USSR times and the losses from the Afghanistan mess and are not eager to give up the relatively good times they have been experiencing for the first time in generations. My take is that they don’t want to support a large war effort just to satisfy Putin’s ambitions.

    I see the military personnel problems as an indication that the Russian people think Putin wants more than the easy acquisitions Putin got with little effort or bloodshed.

    But, I don’t know how right, if at all, that I might be. I just see recruiting problems as information to throw into the pot. It’s certainly telling us something.

  13. jim2 says:

    Of course, I don’t know for sure, but I think the Ukraine operation has cost Putin a lot more than he bargained for. The sanctions and internal discontent may dissuade him from further incursions.

  14. jim2 says:

    @ Weetabix says
    Pure methane isn’t explosive. There would have had to have been an incursion of air and at just the right mixture to be explosive.

    A pipe rupture wouldn’t have registered on seismometers, I’m thinking. And if someone wanted to make a point Europe won’t be getting any gas through those pipelines anytime soon, they wouldn’t worry too much about the timing.

  15. Weetabix says:

    @jim2 – he wasn’t talking about pure methane or even explosions in the chemical sense. An uncontrolled release of lots of energy can be mechanical, too. He was talking about methane hydrate plugs formed by poor maintenance and exacerbated by poor attempts at maintenance on a pipeline under high pressure in challenging conditions – methane hydrate plugs building up in a stagnant line, lack of pigging, etc.

    Like everyone else, I don’t know exactly what happened. I haven’t researched the chemistry of methane and methane hydrate, but some people with high pressure gas commented who concurred that it could happen.

    I’ve only done work on low pressure water and sewage lines. I know, even there, fluid momentum is a thing you need to account for carefully. Thrust blocks along with permissible valve closing rates are very important.

    Say the Russians depressurized one end for maintenance (maybe Ilya releases pressure too quickly because Comrade Colonel said get it done NOW) and a plug worked free. On a 48″ line, that mass moving would have way more energy than anyone wants.

    Not saying this is what happened. Just saying it’s not implausible.

    I also can’t quite wrap my head around who, with a reasonable motive that could be suspected, would want to put all this infrastructure on the table as viable targets. OTOH, lots of the GEB’s don’t make sense to me.

  16. Power Grab says:

    I wonder if the geomagnetic storm (level 6 storm) we had early this week had anything to do with it.

    If, as one writer discusses, methane hydrates had accumulated in the pipelines that weren’t delivering product, and it’s very tricky and dangerous to try to remove methane hydrate plugs improperly, then I can easily imagine that the increased GICs could increase the temperature of the pipelines enough to let the flammable gases accumulate and ignite.

    Just one more thing!

  17. There weas a very interesting programme on the radio this afternoon full of facts and figures on the search for rare earths. Being the BBC there were mentions of climate change of course but that was fair enough as it is that belief fueling green measures requiring rare earths.

    However, they went through the various places where rare earths are found, pointed out there are not enough of them to satisfy demand and that Ukraine and Brazil are two of the rare earth powerhouses (potential or actual)

    Ukraine apparently has an estimated $50/70 Trillion worth of rare earths at todays inflated prices and fully $12/15 trillion worth of that are in the four areas that Russia has just annexed.

    Amongst the other reasons put forward as justification for the invasion is it possible that this access to rare earths was one of the motives? With rare earths plus oil and gas Russia has all the ingredients for their economy to boom. They have also been snapping up reserves in Africa. I was surprised by that one as it is China that gets all the attention for acquiring this sort of asset in Africa.

  18. Graeme No.3 says:

    Re Nordstream pipelines; both 1 & 2 are duplicates i.e. 4 pipelines in total and 4 explosions have shut down the lot. Unlikely to be due to accident.
    Meanwhile the weather in Germany has turned cold and wet, and gas consumption has gone up (14% more than last year) although with all the industry shutdowns that must refer to household use. The German government was hoping for a mild winter and this doesn’t look likely.
    Further the food situation will get worse due to lack of fertiliser factories shutting down and no heating for those plastic tunnels. So a cold and hungry population soon will turn desperate. And many countries elsewhere in Erope will be in worse shape. Collapse of the EU and probably a lot of new governments who may not want to be in NATO as well. New set of politicians or those who’ve changed their minds.
    As for further war measures, how will Europe manufacture any munitions when steel, aluminium and chemical factories are shutdown? Unlikely that the governments will be able to pay their debts, or even the interest on their bonds, which have (by legislation and decree) been pushed into pension funds.
    All in all a real mess.

  19. E.M.Smith says:


    Beware the trap of Proven Reserves vs Reserves vs Resource vs Ultimate Resource. (and a couple of others…)

    Almost nobody knows how to use the terms correctly nor do they grasp the implications of them. One, Ultimate Resource, is all the stuff in the ground that you may theoretically be able to use some day. This is what most folks think they are talking about when they ask “How much FOO do we have?” Proven Reserves is the stuff in the ground that you KNOW where it is, how much it is, and that you can HARVEST IT AT AN ACCEPTABLE MARKET PRICE. (the other categories tend to grade out between these two ends, so “Reserves” are probably there and you can probably sell them at a fair price, maybe, but not today. More or less.”

    So when you read a “Running OUT!!!” article, they are almost always using Proven Reserves and not Resource. But if you care about “how much can I get” you really care a lot more about Recoverable Resource. That’s stuff you have in the ground and CAN get it out, but it may not be profitable enough at this time. But in any shortage, prices rise, and Recoverable Resource moves over into the Reserves column.

    Realize that there are giant mountains of Rare Earth sands in India, and rare earth sands all over the beach from about the Carolinas to way down the Atlantic coast of Florida (as just one example). But that US sand beach is not considered a “reserve” because the USA Laws make it horribly expensive to deal with the Thorium also in the sands. (In a sane world we would not consider that Thorium a “Toxic Waste” but a valuable energy resource…)

    Here’s a link just looking at reserves http://metalpedia.asianmetal.com/metal/rare_earth/resources&production.shtml

    Note that the url says resources while the embedded table says reserves…

    Per their table, Russia has 19% of “reserves” while Brazil has only 0.05% of reserves.


    But that $8.4 Billion is only considered to be a reserve if it is economical to mine it today at the prices in the market today.

    Rare earth mineral deposits are difficult to find in quantities large enough to make it economically viable to mine, but the recently discovered deposit fits the bill. “The price of neodymium is now U.S. $300,000 a tonne,” said Cavalcanti “and we have 28 million tons of it,” he told IG.

    So my guess would be that there are oodles and oodles of Rare Earth Minerals all over the world; but just not yet economical to mine and make a profit today.

    Sadly, pretty much every single Media Story about minerals and mining (and oil and gas and…) do not pay any attention at all to the difference between reserves and resources (and there’s no hope of getting to understand Proven Reserves vs Ultimate Resource).

    Oh, and BTW, lately folks with agenda have been screwing around with the definitions of the terms….

  20. E.M.Smith says:

    A crazy thought on History Rhyming…

    The USA just attacked Germany via assuring they will be cold this winter, have far less food next harvest (due to fertilizer being dependent on natural gas). So they have a reason to reject the USA…

    Russia wants to get gas to Germany.

    Poland and Ukraine have been fairly aggressive in words (and maybe deeds) about all this…

    So what would be the odds that an impoverished out of work Germany in a Depression might elect a charismatic pro-Volk leader who might make an “agreement” with Russia to “share” Poland, Ukraine & Czech / Slovakia? You know, just a little “Partitioning” so they can have a new big safe pipeline between them….

    A “New World Order” just like the old one…

    Nah… that’s just crazy talk…

  21. David A says:

    Steve Cook says…@DavidA
    ROFL? Because there’s a certain humour in it, no?…

    My perspective is that most everything the current US government has done is a deep tragedy. And I am amazed, under Trump doctrine, with the possible exception of China, all boats were rising. Of course to the Malthusian perspective this is a tragedy.
    A growing economy can afford a fair amount of debt and QE. To a contracting recessionary economy the monetary sins tend to come home to roost.

    Over time the world has become far more “one world” not in the GEB manner, but in technology, communication, and trade. So now to plunge Germany, and by extension the EU into a major recession -depression, is to shoot oneself in the foot. Instead of an all boats rising scenario, we appear to have an “all boats sinking, but our boat will sink the least” philosophy and policy. So I see no humor or wisdom in the US action.

    While destruction is a forte of the Left, I maintain they cannot and so will not control the global crisis they have engineered. In the “Wood” thread “The True Nolan” kindly complimented my Birds Eye view post just a bit above his comment…https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2022/09/11/w-o-o-d-11-september-2022/#comment-160305
    AC Osbore posted a very interesting link to a purported “Rand Corporation ” document. https://richardsonpost.com/howellwoltz/28538/u-s-intentionally-provoked-war-in-ukraine-rand-corp/ (If the providence of this is proven it will have global repercussions. Even if it is not true, yet it gains global perception as factual, and it may very well be, it may doom the dwindling US reputation in the world)

    Jim2 commented that the economic claims in that Rand document appear to be very unsupported. https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2022/09/11/w-o-o-d-11-september-2022/#comment-160291
    I agree with Jim2, there is no 7 trillion dollars for the US to gain by plunging Germany into a recession. Indeed, the CAGW agenda, along with these GEB actions, will, via contagion and global interdependence, likely create a global depression. Economic collapse is often the cause of wars, and civil wars.

  22. Foyle says:

    I don’t understand why Ukraine isn’t culprit number 1 for Nordstream – 2 people in a cheap boat with a hand cranked anchor winch and a fish sonar could have done it easily using readily available black-market materials in borderless Europe.

    European winter is survivable – they have full gas storage, and can chop and burn wood in a pinch (not hard to make a fireplace from a 44 gallon steel barrel that can burn fresh-cut wood if need be). They can muddle through and will learn valuable lessons that will hopefully influence a lifetime of voting choices.

    I am sure Russia will have been given clear threats of reprisals behind the scenes should they go nuclear – like losing all their ships in following days, losing shipping axis through black sea, or having 10-20 nukes delivered to Zelensky for use at his discretion, or losing a regional city, or having oil, power and transport infrastructure wiped out by cruise missiles etc etc.

    Ramping up drone tech would be the cheapest way of beating Russia given their tech deficit and rapid loss of educated tech competent workforce. Mass production of kamikaze and observation drones or even say 1 million M31 rockets (Himars) would only cost a few 10’s of billions (costs generally halve for every 10x production) – an order of magnitude less than cost to date of war.

    I am actually optimistic that the hardships of 22-23 will lead to a political renewal and new sanity in western politics as the populace wakes up to the cost of voting for idiots and re-learn that living off borrowing is extremely damaging, and that woke causes are very expensive and destructive luxuries. Western countries are only a few missed meals away from revolution.

  23. another ian says:

    “It’s Not Crazy To Think Biden Sabotaged Nord Stream To Deepen US Involvement In The Ukraine War”


  24. David A says:

    Foyle says, I don’t understand why Ukraine isn’t culprit number 1 for Nordstream”

    Because they are a globalist puppet, and would not take such steps unsanctioned.
    (They are certainly on the list as collaborators, and possibly plan execution participants. There is evidence of this as well.)
    Also, it is not as simple as you state in that the area was most certainly monitored. How well by whom, at what joint or cross purposes, is not easy to ascertain.

  25. David A says:

    Regarding “A crazy thought on History Rhyming…”

    Ya, I don’t think it will go as they plan. It is not easy to control a planned global demolition and global restructure, and history – geography and culture does have a sort of momentum.

  26. Simon Derricutt says:

    Weetabix’s Lawdog link gives a reason for the explosions that could be quite likely. Methane Hydrates (clathrates) forming in the pipelines, blocking them, and maybe the Russians trying to clear them and cocking up. Given the timing and situation in general, it probably doesn’t take sabotage off the table totally, but also gives an “incompetence” explanation where, if we knew that the Russians knew their pipes were blocked and were at that time trying to clear them out, could well be the truth. I’d expect a lot of arse-coversing if it was that sort of error, though – bit like the problem at Chernobyl, except that the people who made the mistakes weren’t around afterwards to cover their backsides and hide the real reason.

    OK, I’d have thought that the input gas would have been free of water, given the known problems when using moist gas, and that NS2 would have been pressurised using Nitrogen (no problems with making ice-balls and blocking the tube) that would be removed and replaced with Methane as part of the final setting-up to deliver gas. Just use a pig to separate the two types of gas as the last stage. Thus a plugged NS1 pipeline, and a problem trying to clear it ready to deliver gas again, makes sense, but NS2 shouldn’t have had that problem, so back to the sabotage hypothesis for that one.

    Foyle – “populace wakes up to the cost of voting for idiots and re-learn that living off borrowing is extremely damaging”. Maybe, but most people I talk to have heard so much propaganda over the years that they think that what the media tells them is true. Often smart and well-educated people, but too reliant on Authority and that that Authority is telling the truth. This is of course something that’s well-known by advertisers and psychologists as being common to humans, which at times makes me wonder if EM’s blog is set up for and populated by aliens (me included).

  27. jim2 says:

    As if there weren’t enough evidence already, Russia once again demonstrates it is willing to forego income in order to punish Europe.

    Russia’s state-controlled Gazprom PJSC suspended natural gas deliveries to Italy, escalating a deepening energy crisis in Europe.


  28. jim2 says:

    There is only one more pipeline feeding Europe from Russia – and it runs through Ukraine. What could go wrong?

  29. andysaurus says:

    As much as I would like to see the back of the WEF, this seems to be one hell of a price to pay for it.
    I think you are dead right about who did it. As I have commented before, it is in the interests of too many people to have perpetual war.
    There must be a point where all the money and power in the World is insufficient to guard you from the disaster around you, but I’m not certain they have the foresight to anticipate that case.

  30. jim2 says:

    Methane hydrates are not explosive. You can put them on a plate and set them afire with no concerns about explosions. Even if clathrates plugged the pipeline, how would this be any different from closing a valve? There’s no there here.

  31. Simon Derricutt says:

    Jim2 – releasing the pressure on them can however lead to a fast evolution of the gas, and thus provide an acceleration of the plug. Point about the Lawdog explanation is that within the business such plugs of clathrate are known to be dangerous and to have caused pipeline explosions in the past. Yep, setting fire to a clathrate isn’t dangerous, but when you’ve got it at a few hundred bar and release the pressure, other things can happen. Lawdog (some way down near the end of comments there) gives an example where someone was sent to use a hand-held torch on the outside of the pipe to melt the clathrate, and it caused a pressure-increase enough to blow the pipe at that point (incidentally incinerating the guy with the torch).

  32. Canadian Friend says:

    That article at the Federalist, it basically says (better than I can and with more details ) the same thing I said.

    That Democrats are both crazy enough and evil enough to make things worse as a way to retain power.

    no time for the entire article?

    just read this excerpt,

    … … …[ Democrats] see criminalizing their political opposition as one of the only paths to retaining power, and are willing to hazard everything to achieve that. If they are willing to weaponize domestic law enforcement for political gain at home, it is not too much to suppose they would pursue a policy of escalation with Russia to cling to power, which in the end is the one thing they really care about…. … …

  33. David A says:

    2014 Back in 2014, Condoleeza Rice was being interviewed about the then-conflict in Ukraine,
    “… we need to have tougher sanctions [on Russia]. And I’m afraid at some point, this is going to probably have to involve involve oil and gas. The Russian economy is vulnerable. Eighty percent of Russian exports are in oil, gas, and minerals. People say, well, the Europeans will run out of energy. Well, the Russians will run out of cash before the Europeans run out of energy. And I understand that it’s uncomfortable…
    Over the long run, you simply want to change the structure of energy independence. You want [Europe] to depend more on the North American energy platform of oil and gas that we’re finding in North America. You want to have pipelines that don’t go through Ukraine and Russia. For years, we’ve tried to get the Europeans to be interested in different pipeline routes.
    It’s time to do that.”

    From the World Socialist web site, (Sheesh) Also a 2014 article…

    “What are Washington’s aims? It would appear that the US has decided to deliberately escalate tensions with the aim of drawing Russia into an invasion of eastern Ukraine, thereby creating the conditions for roping Western Europe into draconian sanctions and even war. …The US is intent on drawing Putin into an intervention in Ukraine, a former Soviet republic on Russia’s border, to protect pro-Russian protesters against the violence of the state. This will then be used by Washington to justify an escalation of economic warfare and military deployments against Russia, potentially igniting a nuclear Third World War.”

    Prophetic? Jeff Childers spoke about the rest of the article… “In language that would be familiar to all of us, the article described nazi forces (real ones) brutally attacking Eastern Ukrainians living in pro-Russian areas, and speculated that the U.S. was encouraging or even directing the violence. It even complains about Victoria Nuland.”

    The pipeline sabotage was no accident, Guilty or not, ending it is long standing US policy, and Victoria Nuland recently said; “One way or the Other”, it will be gone.

  34. jim2 says:

    So far, I find the circumstantial evidence the US blew up the pipeline underwhelming. There is no direct evidence. I think the hypothesis that Russia did it is supported by the fact that before and after the NS pipeline explosions, Russia has cut off gas to Europe by various means.

  35. YMMV says:

    jim2: quoting Bloomberg:
    Russia’s state-controlled Gazprom PJSC suspended natural gas deliveries to Italy, escalating a deepening energy crisis in Europe.

    Compare these two links:

    The Bloomberg link does say, down in the fine print, that [they] “suspended the supplies to Italy because the Austrian operator had refused to confirm “transport nominations” after regulatory changes implemented in Austria in late September.”

    The RT link features that info: “According to a statement from Gazprom on the company’s Telegram channel, the gas flow through Austria has been suspended due to the refusal of the Austrian operator to confirm transit nominations due to regulatory changes that were introduced in Austria at the end of September.”

    “Grid operator Gas Connect Austria has not made any statements regarding the situation so far.”

    Must be a bitch operating a pipeline that goes through hostile territory.

  36. David A says:

    It is undeniable that Russia can turn back on said gas anytime. (If they shut it off)

    Ending the NS pipeline has been US policy for years. The US President and his Assistant SOS, stated very plainly that it would happen.

  37. YMMV says:

    I have not seen or heard of any evidence one way or the other, or any other. Too soon. Nor much about the origins of the Wuhan virus either. But for that one I would place my bets for that on the US (Fauci), in Wuhan, rather than the Chinese. Without the highest politicians being aware of it, but with the complicity of the military faction. And with a similar GEB goal.

  38. Ed Forbes says:

    Excerpts from Putin’s speech. Well worth reading in total to get the Russian view of the world.


    “And all we hear is, the West is insisting on a rules-based order. Where did that come from anyway? Who has ever seen these rules? Who agreed or approved them? Listen, this is just a lot of nonsense, utter deceit, double standards, or even triple standards! They must think we’re stupid.”
    “ Washington demands more and more sanctions against Russia and the majority of European politicians obediently go along with it. They clearly understand that by pressuring the EU to completely give up Russian energy and other resources, the United States is practically pushing Europe toward deindustrialisation in a bid to get its hands on the entire European market. These European elites understand everything – they do, but they prefer to serve the interests of others. This is no longer servility but direct betrayal of their own peoples. God bless, it is up to them.”
    “But the Anglo-Saxons believe sanctions are no longer enough and now they have turned to subversion. It seems incredible but it is a fact – by causing explosions on Nord Stream’s international gas pipelines passing along the bottom of the Baltic Sea, they have actually embarked on the destruction of Europe’s entire energy infrastructure. It is clear to everyone who stands to gain. Those who benefit are responsible, of course.“
    “But people cannot be fed with printed dollars and euros. You can’t feed them with those pieces of paper, and the virtual, inflated capitalisation of western social media companies can’t heat their homes. Everything I am saying is important. And what I just said is no less so: you can’t feed anyone with paper – you need food; and you can’t heat anyone’s home with these inflated capitalisations – you need energy.“

  39. The True Nolan says:

    Of course the US would NEVER destroy another country’s pipeline. Again.

    I remember that explosion and all the speculation about it at the time. The blast was big enough that I was leaning toward the idea that it was a nuclear accident of some kind. At the time I actually discounted the Soviet stories that it had been a pipeline explosion.

  40. jim2 says:

    Putin would never blow up the NS pipelines and blame it on the US.

  41. The True Nolan says:

    @jim2: “Putin would never blow up the NS pipelines and blame it on the US.”

    I know you were being sarcastic — but actually, you and I agree that Putin WOULD blow up his own pipeline if it were a net advantage to Russia and a net disadvantage to the US. (And note that I say “to the US” and not “to Europe”.)

    Where we disagree is that most of us see the destruction of the pipeline as being more advantageous to the US and less advantageous to Russia. Add to that the fact that multiple US political figures have expressed a desire and intent to shut down the pipeline. The US even has a history of pipeline destruction. I am not aware of ANYONE who is pointing the finger at the US based on a belief that Putin’s ethics would prevent him from ordering such a thing.

  42. The True Nolan says:

    One quick addition, just an opinion and one I do not feel particularly enthusiastic about trying to defend:

    If I had to choose a second most likely nation for being responsible for the NS destruction, I would choose Great Britain. GB fought two World Wars for the primary purpose of destroying German economic competition, and for political domination of Europe. Maybe they see this as a great opportunity to finish off Germany once and for all.

  43. E.M.Smith says:

    Just ran into this channel today. “Survival Lilly” is an Austrian Prepper. She is reporting 10% inflation overall, hardships from it including food problems, and how folks are trying to get wood to avoid freezing this winter. That things are looking pretty grim. I don’t know how accurate she is (some “prepper” channels can be over the top paranoid) but she sites verifiable facts (that folks in Europe could verify).

    I tend to find her story somewhat believable as a report by a local.

    We’ll have actual verification about the middle of winter…

    She gives the status of a “Distillery’ that was damaged. I think that is an oil refinery (fractional distillation of crude oil). There does seem to be a LOT of oil refineries being burned down globally…

  44. jim2 says:

    Putin would blow up the pipeline to punish Europe, not the US. We in the US are already selling all the LNG we can muster to Europe, so lack of NS pipelines won’t help the US in that regard. We export about half a trillion dollars per year to Europe. The countries in Europe are our “friends and family” so to speak, and survivability improves by being part of a “social group” in general. It simply make no sense to hurt them.

    I don’t know who blew up the pipelines. Like you, I’m just trying to puzzle it out for now until some hard evidence appears.

  45. anothar ian says:

    More checking back

    “It was a SHAM REFERENDUM! the media screams.”


  46. Terry Jackson says:

    Further from LawDog

    The hydrate-as-cause id looking stronger. A close examination of the damage will offer more evidence, but the confusion and suspicion may need to continue, so no examination.

  47. jim2 says:

    TJ – can you explain how a hydrate “plug” can move at high velocities down a pipeline with a closed valve? I mean, we do have to apply at least an iota of critical thinking, no?

  48. jim2 says:

    The Russians could have built a power-driven pig (so it could move in a closed pipeline) which was loaded with explosives, then detonated it at the desired point. This way, there would be no external sign of activity. (A suicide pig!)

  49. Taz says:

    It’s war. If one doesn’t like uncertainty – don’t invade.

    Others might look at your same observations and conclude Russia could fold much faster than imagined.

    And it doesn’t end. Even after the nukes. Everyone keeps fighting. For as many years as it takes to call a “winner”.

    BTW, US just delivered 18ea more Himars to Ukraine. There’s a photo floating around ….Himars in a cargo hold. Though I can’t imagine one could accept that photo as fact given all the propaganda floating around.

    I doubt those funds for extra Himar launchers would have been expended with no available ammunition.

  50. Taz says:

    Don’t worry, be happy:


  51. Terry Jackson says:

    Pressure differential. The theory is slow loss of pressure on one side over many months, and slow warming of the pipe over many months, and a slow melting of the edges of the plug. Sudden release of the locked-by-freezing-to-the-pipe-walls bond sends the plug toward the lower pressure side, The greater the differential in pressure, the higher the speed. Plug impacts an impediment, such as a turn in the line or a valve and mechanical failure ensues. Each failure appears from the map to be at a turn.

    You need to read both posts (links) by LawDog for the full details. It is quite plausible, but not proven.

  52. E.M.Smith says:

    Oh My but the speculation is going to strange places…

    Methane Hydrate: Yes it’s a problem in pipes. Yes it can cause a pipe to burst. No it isn’t the cause. 1) Various reports have said some or all of the explosions were simultaneous (at least one says one big boom, then a second. For 4 pipes). Getting hydrate plugs to all “do something” at same time is nearly impossible.

    Size Matters: Yes a ton of hydrate doing 100 MPH is a big bang and going to break the pipe. No, it isn’t the 100 ton TNT size the geology folks reported for the bang. There’s a few orders of magnitude of energy missing.

    There’s no oxygen in the pipe so the stuff is not going to have a Chemical Bang. Even if, somehow, the water in the hydrate were dissociated into H2 & O, recombining that O with H from the methane is NO NET ENERGY GAIN. So no chemical explosion. Leaving only way too small mechanical explosion from pipe rupture.

    The gas in the pipe was stagnant. Not moving. You can not deliver a 3 foot diameter by 10 foot long ice plug from 1 gm / M^3 gas holding much less than that entrained water. Hydrates build up by condensing a little water from a LOT of gas as it moves by. At best you would get a thin rime layer over a long run of pipe.

    Similarly the “Russia Did It!!!!” hype.

    1) Do Note it is The Usual Suspects who pushed Russia Russia RUSSIA!!! for 1/2 a decade now. Pathological Liar Press. That alone make it a silly claim. The the assertion Russia did it to hurt Europe? The same could be done with the pump / valve station on their end and without the loss of $BILLIONS of investment. The Russians just are not that dumb.

    2) Russia has continued to deliver gas & oil the whole time with the volume reduced when sanctions prevented Business As Usual. Hardly the actions of someone wanting to hurt their customer.

    3) This removes their best hope to split Europe and get a number of Nations “on their side” via continued gas shipments. Now everyone in Europe has zero incentive to buy gas from Russia, no matter how dire the circumstances, as it can not be delivered.

    Now Consider the “USA Did It” thesis:

    1) The USA has blown up a Russian pipeline before.
    2) The USA was fearful of a fracturing EU with some nations not holding to Sanctions and wanting to continue (resume) buying Russian Gas. This ends that.
    3) The USA / NATO war gamed in just that area as though rehearsing…
    4) BOTH Biden and other key executives have stated they would end the pipeline. That makes it official US Policy to do it.
    5) An impoverished Europe with manufacturing shut down benefits US Corporations greatly. $Billions & $Billions. The “threat” of an EU beating the USA economically is removed.
    6) Russian Gas Revenue gets shifted to USA gas revenue.
    7) It conforms with and accelerates the Zero Carbon goals of Agenda 30 & Paris.
    8) It moves Europe dramatically closer to the desired “Great Reset” status that the Biden Admin and the EU Government advocate. Can’t “build back better” until you have “burned beyond belief” after all.

    It is just dramatically more reasonable to say the USA ‘did it’ than most any other explanation that is not full of fatal flaws.

  53. David A says:

    US policy 8 years ago
    “ Well, the Russians will run out of cash before the Europeans run out of energy. And I understand that it’s uncomfortable…” Condoleeza Rice

    “ Over the long run, you simply want to change the structure of energy independence. You want [Europe] to depend more on the North American energy platform of oil and gas that we’re finding in North America”. C.R.

    Biden said NS II would not happen, and that German perspective or opinion was not even relevant! I take the assistant Secretary of State’s affirmation that NS II would not function, “ one way or the other “ very seriously. Also, clear US policy was to create the Ukrainian conflict, and expand it. Russia wants it to end.

    The circumstances were that disparate European populations were fed up with the sacrifice of their economic lives for an area of Ukraine that voted close to 80 percent for the pro Russian Ukraine party in 2014. .

    If and when, and my view is that it is only a matter of when ( due to the severe economic hardship barreling into the German economy) the people demand that the Russian demands are accepted, Russia will have won.

    Russia did not commit severe economic self-harm, and throw away their best chance at ending the Ukrainian venture in success, with some vague hope that they could pin this on the US and drive a wedge between Washington and the EU. The sane folk if the EU were definitely beginning to drive that wedge. The joint One World crowd is in solidarity with expanding the Ukraine conflict. The NS sabotage is highly capable of doing just that; expanding the Ukrainian conflict, losing your strongest player, harming your own economic health at a critical juncture, risk getting caught in such a foolish adventure, all for a vague hope of pinning this on the US. (All in all great rusk, definite harms, very uncertain gain)

  54. Taz says:


    Putin is like that HOA hag who disapproves of the monthly meetings with California early release serial killers I host in my home. There’s no noise, no bother, no extra parked cars – yet she still complains. Incessantly :( You would think SHE owned our home.

    Now you know, sooner or later that hag will disappear “for the greater good”. Probably to this Dalmer lookalike :)

    Putin doth protest too much. He’s a fraud.

  55. YMMV says:

    “6) Russian Gas Revenue gets shifted to USA gas revenue.”

    Wishful thinking, for a govt that does not like fracking.

    The immediate beneficiary will be Norway, which does have the gas and the pipelines.
    They are seeing drones near their offshore rigs and getting the military to guard them.

    The other shoe — there are lots of undersea internet cables. Say no more.

  56. E.M.Smith says:


    It’s already happening. US Gas prices are up on exports to Europe… It will go higher with the NS 1& 2 taken out. (Even if volume stayed the same, the bidding up of prices will move more money to the USA, but volume will go up over time.

  57. E.M.Smith says:


    Once you put on the Hate Blinders you can not see the truth. When it comes to Putin, you view the world through the Hate Putin lens. I can’t help you with that, only you can. Like Beer Goggles, Hate Goggles warp your perception, limit your ability to see clearly, and lead to bad decisions.

    The people of Russia like Putin rather a lot. He runs one of the biggest and best countries in the world and seems to do it better than most of the crappy leaders in the world (including, I might add, our horrid POTUSino Biden The Deceitful & Decrepit).

    Now that does NOT mean I’m in love with Putin, nor that I think him pure. They are just facts. Facts you can not see if you are wearing the Hate Goggles. He’s also a fairly shrewd tactician with extraordinary patience. (That does not mean I endorse his tendency to have opponents assassinated… only that I can see he makes tactical decisions for his own gain, and for Russian gain, fairly well, and with long term strategic patience) Also something you can not see if the Hate Goggles have you bound to a POV of “Putin the Idiot” or “Putin the Hag”…

    Your comments on your perception of his personality add nothing of use to the discussion; but do illustrate what the world looks like through the warping Hate Goggles…

  58. Simon Derricutt says:

    EM – the question of whether it was Methane Hydrates that caused the explosion or not could be settled if we knew what gas was used to fill NS2. Should have been Nitrogen at this stage of completion of the pipeline, in which case the bubbles coming up would not be flammable. Shooting a flare (or other ignition source) into the bubbling gas would tell us something here, and if it’s Methane then we get a big flare and the Methane gets turned into CO2 which is a far less potent Greenhouse Gas so the greenies should be happier anyway.

    Conceivably the Hydrate hypothesis could be true if both NS1 pipes and NS2 pipes were being depressurised from one end and contained Methane and enough water to produce a blockage from Methane Hydrates and the engineers were incompetent. On the other hand you’d expect the deepest part of the pipe (nearer the Russian end where the Russian engineers would have been depressurising the pipes if that was indeed happening) to have had the problem (and that’s a fair amount North of where the problem happened), and that NS2 would not have been filled with Methane yet anyway.

    Two explosions seen as seismic events, but 4 leaky pipes. Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action…. Plus of course that NS2 shouldn’t have had Methane in it anyway, so somewhat harder to treat it as an unfortunate accident.

    I can’t discount the Methane Hydrate plug idea, just seems far less likely than a couple of bombs. While the pipelines were there, it only needed the order to turn them on again to restore delivery of gas to Europe, and with NS2 functioning the pipeline through Ukraine could be turned off instead given the increased capacity (NS2 was supposed to be twice the capacity of NS1, thus NS1 and NS2 together could deliver more than enough).

    Maybe at some point there will be photos of the damaged pipes that will identify the cause, though then you’d need to trust that the photos are in fact real.

    If those pipelines can be so easily destroyed, then is it logical to suppose that all the others could be easily damaged beyond reasonable repair? Looks like the door has been opened to screwing up the energy supply of any country that relies on imports rather than producing all it needs, and also screwing up the economy of any country that relies on energy exports to earn money. Then with tit-for-tat reprisals when the energy-exporting country (such as Russia) decides to interfere with infrastructure in the countries who are damaging their energy exports. It really doesn’t take much to hit a few energy-distribution centres, or to take out a few big transformers where the lead-time to replace them runs to months or years once the few in stock have been used.

    Still, there’s that thing that in order to Build Back Better you first need to destroy all the current system.

  59. jim2 says:

    Even now the US isn’t a major playing for Europe’s LNG or natural gas (as a gas) supply. There is a long list of countries that supply LNG. The primary beneficiaries of the NS incident will be those countries, not the US. Those countries have shorter supply lines, a closer proximity to Europe. In light of this, I don’t believe the potential for LNG sales by the US to Europe would be sufficient motivation to blow the pipe lines.


  60. jim2 says:

    In the meantime, Russia and China are signing agreements for China to buy Russia’s natural gas. China would stand to benefit from the loss of the NS pipelines. China can “yellow wash” Russian gas and sell it to Europe. Why hasn’t China been mentioned as a suspect in this?

  61. jim2 says:

    Other actors who have gotten little or no play are the Middle Eastern countries. OPEC has decided to cut oil production by 1 million bbls. OPEC could definitely benefit from the demise of the NS pipelines. It seems to me that thusfar the focus has been far too myopic.

  62. rhoda klapp says:

    The True Nolan points to the UK. We have the capability but I don’t think that’s a very high bar. The claim of baiting Germany into war twice is a unique way of looking at what happened. Germany kept invading places the UK was treaty-bound to defend. You have to resist countries which keep invading their neighbours.

    UK strategy has never been to dominate Europe. Only to make sure nobody else does. So we ally with those who oppose the current state most likely to try for domination. Usually France or Germany. Our external interests have always been over the ocean. But a united Europe over the channel was/is a threat. IMHO we joined the EU to derail it from within by not letting it produce a United States of Europe. That went wrong when our ruling class went along with the plan, so the people voted for Brexit. That’s the historical perspective. I have no idea what they are trying to do now, our version of the deep state which I would call the continuing state, which is impervious to passing political fancies.

  63. E.M.Smith says:


    One need not be a major player to have outsized profits. There’s this thing called “Elasticity Of Supply”. There’s a fairly tight match of gas supplied to gas consumed. Folks don’t really do much to control their gas usage (set thermostat and forget it…) so elasticity of demand is very low, as is elasticity of supply.

    In that kind of market, prices can swing widely even with small demand changes.

    That’ what has happened already from New England to the Mid-Atlantic States. Exports are up from those location to Europe; so prices there have risen. EVERY unit of gas sold at retail is getting that price / profit bump, not just the bit sold to Europe.

    U.S. natural gas futures (NGM22) rose more than 4% on Monday morning to $8.456 per MMBtu, as U.S. LNG exports reached a seven-week high to service LNG-thirsty Europe, according to Reuters.

    Natural gas prices in Europe are roughly four times as expensive as U.S. natural gas—a ratio that has enticed many U.S. LNG players to export their product outisde the U.S. market.


    September 9, 20222:14 PM EDTLast Updated 23 days ago
    America exports natural gas, imports high price
    By Robert Cyran

    NEW YORK, Sept 9 (Reuters Breakingviews) – America’s natural gas market was largely disconnected from the world for decades. Transportation limits meant prices reflected local demand and supply only. But the industry’s infrastructure has changed, and it means that U.S. natural gas is going global. That will continue to have an effect on domestic prices.

    The first facility to export liquefied natural gas in the lower 48 states came online in 2016, and America is now the world’s largest LNG exporter, with peak capacity of about 14 billion cubic feet per day. New facilities under construction will raise export capabilities an additional 5.7 billion cubic feet by the end of 2025, says the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

    The demand for U.S. natural gas outside of the states has risen faster than production, though. Between June 2019 and June of this year, LNG exports more than doubled. Meanwhile, natural gas production only increased 7% according to the EIA. As a result, LNG exports now take up over 10% of America’s production of natural gas, or about double what it was in 2019.

    The result is easily seen in the commodity’s costs. Prices this summer are the highest they’ve been since 2008. The spot price of Henry Hub natural gas is $7.85 per million British thermal units on Sept. 7, over three times as high as prices averaged in September 2019.

    I’d say getting a “triple” price on ALL of the gas sold is a nice incentive to remove the Russian supply from the market… making room for that 5.7 Billion cubic feet coming on line going forward…

  64. Ed Forbes says:

    Russia has a fully mechanized army and is currently fighting a Ukraine army that is only partially mechanized and that outnumbers the current Russian forces by better than 2:1. Russia is also not conducting an all out war against Ukraine by destroying its infrastructure that would bring resupply of the front from NATO to a stop. Any internal pressure on Putin is because he hasn’t destroyed Ukraine infrastructure. He has not been as hardline as wanted.
    Russia is using their mobility advantage to its favor. Russia defends hard in areas of importance and conducts a mobile defense that trades space for time in areas of little strategic importance and to enable its MUCH stronger air and artillery forces to inflict massive casualties on Ukraine forces that are then moving outside of entrenchments.
    The areas Russia is trading space for time and ability to fight Ukraine forces out of their entrenchments were also quickly vacated by Ukraine forces early in the war. The area in the northeast is very lightly populated, has little strategic value, and can quickly be outflanked by Russian forces coming from over the Russian border.
    Ukraine resupply of tanks and ammunition from the west is drying up. Almost all x Soviet equipment available on the world market for Ukraine has been expended. No western heavy tanks are being supplied to Ukraine as they are not considered suitable for Ukraine logistics and terrain. All major western contracts for Ukraine resupply is for long term contracts, not for immediate delivery.
    So yes, Russia is winning.
    This war with Ukraine will end with the destruction of the Ukraine army to the point it can no longer resist.
    I believe Russia is not destroying the Ukraine infrastructure because it wants it intact for its own use after the war is concluded. No point to destroy that what you will get in the peace terms anyway.
    Russia is conducting war more like the wars of the 1700’s than as seen in the last century. Positional battles defined by fortifications and maneuver, as opposed to total destruction of the civilian infrastructure and population to degrade enemy forces. This is considered by many to be a more “civilized “ way to conduct wars.

  65. jim2 says:

    One possibility is NATO blew up the pipelines. The explosions happened around the time Russia “annexed” parts of Ukraine. It is possible a joint decision was taken even though it would adversely impact Europe. The cost of the proxy war may have been seen as simply getting too expensive. Cutting off funding to Putin may have made it an attractive option.

  66. jim2 says:

    Good point on the cost of domestic NG, EMS.

  67. jim2 says:

    Here’s a chart of Henry Hub spot prices. We have enjoyed low gas prices for years. We can up production a good bit if politicians don’t get in the way.


  68. rhoda klapp says:

    Ed Forbes, why would Russia not destroy the infrastructure if it did not intend to occupy the whole Ukraine? If they just wanted the disputed territories why did they invade when they already had them?

  69. YMMV says:

    “The explosions happened around the time Russia “annexed” parts of Ukraine.”

    Definitely a clue. One way to look at it was as a response to the annexation.
    For any other explanation, you have to ask “why now?”. Why is sabotaging the pipeline now a better strategy than waiting until the EU is more desperate, this winter? To head off any German thoughts of using Russian gas? I wonder if the Russians will be allowed to fix those pipelines…

  70. E.M.Smith says:

    I find it fascinating that so many people can not even entertain the notion that Putin is not destroying civilian infrastructure (water, power, roads, bridges) simply because he does not want to destroy the civilian population or even cause them great grief.

    Ukrainians are also “Fellow Slavs”, and there’s a fair number of Ethnic Russians scattered all over Rump Ukraine, including even mixed marriages. Kiev was the old capitol of early Russia. Putin just does not want to engage in gratuitous violence or destruction as it is wasteful of resources, history, and fellow Russians & their Cousins the Ukrainians. He’s quite happy to destroy any military sent at him, and kill anyone who opposes him; but he doesn’t want to just kill and destroy without reason.

    It is that kind of thing that you can not see if you view Putin through the lens of hate, but is obvious if you look at his actual actions, hear his actual statements to his people, and read his history. (ONE example: He has restored the Eastern Orthodox church and restored Churches all over Russia. An homage to his mother who was very religious and distraught at the USSR attitude toward the Church).

    Yes, he can be incredibly ruthless (as only KGB guys can be); but only when, in his view, it is needed for a higher goal.

    What impresses me most about Putin is his incredible patience and reluctance to resort to destruction and death until it is the only reasonable answer. 9 years and about 16,000 Ethnic Russians dead at the hands of the NATO Puppet Regime in Ukraine and only when it was clear that the agreements would not be kept, and deaths would be continued, then he moved. I could not (and would not) have waited that long were I in his chair.

    I’d not want to play chess against him, and I’d never ever want to cross him or betray a contract / trust agreement. But I’d have no problem sharing a drink or two and conversation of current events. Just make sure it is clear up front that you are not a threat… as that’s a rocky road.

  71. another ian says:

    Fuel for the fire?

    “Tremendous Opportunity”


    And the comments

  72. p.g.sharrow says:

    “Putin is not destroying civilian infrastructure (water, power, roads, bridges) simply because he does not want to destroy the civilian population or even cause them great grief.”

    You need to inform yourself on facts on the ground. Everything in that statement is RT- Putin propaganda, 180 degrees from the truth. Putin has promised to use all weapons including nucs to defend “Russia” and then makes all of the contested area “Russia” Hello!~ Putin’s forces bomb and invade with impunity from recognized Russian territory. meanwhile insists that he does not recognize the validity of Ukraine’s International accepted borders that Russia is treaty bound to protect.

    I keep hearing about the deaths of 16,000 ethnic Russians at the hands of Ukrainians. But the facts on the ground belie that. both as to number as well as to cause. More RT-Putin propaganda to be used to justify ignoring International treaties. Putin’s Wagner Group has been heavily involved in false flag actions against both sides to drum up fodder for conflict and propaganda.

    As to sharing a beer and conversation…….. No way! I’ve been known to play with Rattle snakes, and stand up to bears and bulls, but Putin, no way.

  73. The True Nolan says:

    @YMMV: “For any other explanation, you have to ask “why now?”. Why is sabotaging the pipeline now a better strategy than waiting until the EU is more desperate, this winter?”

    Maybe because the woman who won the Italian election for Prime Minister the day before, had announced that she was in favor of meeting with the Russians to see about reopening the pipeline?

    @rhoda klapp “The True Nolan points to the UK. ”

    Only as a long shot second suspect. I am still firmly in the “US did it” camp — although as jim2 points out, yes, one can think of reasons why the Chinese would benefit. My opinion of who is guilty is in no way a matter of mathematical or even theological rigor. It is just that, all things considered, (and I think EM did a good job of listing the major points) it looks like the US is most likely. When I hear hoofbeats, I think horses. If someone comes along with a video showing a bunch of black and white stripes, I will switch to zebras, but so far it sounds like horses.

  74. E.M.Smith says:


    You left out the important preamble:

    “I find it fascinating that so many people can not even entertain the notion”

    Thanks for the existence proof…

  75. jim2 says:

    And then there’s this tidbit …

    An article from the English-language edition of German left-wing “Der Spiegel” magazine claims the US secret service tapped the Russians and learned they had expressed the suspicion that Kyiv was planning an attack on the pipelines. The Ukrainians are said to have even tried to rent a boat in Sweden for this purpose.


  76. E.M.Smith says:

    Oh, and BTW, the assertion that Putin was not hitting infrastructure due to some affinity for the citizens of Ukraine & Donbass was not my creation, nor did I read it on RT. It first came to my attention from some Western Military Guy blog ( I’ve lost the link …) who was mostly exploring tactics and rationals.

    IIRC, I’d later also seen it on a major western news channel as a talking point / muse question (though again I don’t remember which one. BBC? Sky? France24?) as a speculation. This was early in the war and before everyone MSM had settled on a Putin Evil, Putin Monster propaganda push. After that it disappeared. About the time they were saying that the tank column pointed at Kiev was out of gas (instead of realizing it was a “Fixing operation” and had no intent of attacking Kiev directly)

    I remember thinking it was an interesting idea, but there was no data to support it. That it could just be that military targets were higher value and with limited ability to take things out, the military is what you attack.

    To the best of my observation, I’ve never seen it on RT (then again, I only read one or two articles there every few weeks, so it could easily have gone by without my seeing it).

    Your implication that I soaked it up from “RT Propaganda” is, IMHO, another example of how preconceptions blind. I don’t jump immediately to “Putin Evil” so I must have fallen to Propaganda. No thought that I might have no opinion yet.

    I have no idea why Putin is doing what he does. I can only speculate, and poorly at that, since I don’t have access to the inside of his head. (As I’ve stated a few times before). In his speeches to the Russian People that I’ve seen, he has not addressed that point (not taking out civilian infrastructure when possible).

    My opinion that is speculative is that the reality is somewhere between the two points. Putin sees little military gain from attacking civilian infrastructure, and that Putin doesn’t want to do gratuitous harm to the civilian sector (for his own reasons… anywhere from caring about the people to hoping it helps pacify them later as a pragmatic thing). I also expect (again, speculation) that this will change now that Rump Ukraine has attacked “Novo Russia”… At this point, I’d not be surprised at all to see Russian Air taking out power plants and bridges all over Rump Ukraine.

    But my original point remains:

    Be it The True Case or be it A Fraud Of Error was not my concern. What surprised me is how many folks will not even entertain the NOTION at all, even just to discuss and evaluate the merit of it. I’m quite willing to entertain the NOTION for the purpose of exploring it. Why? Precisely because I don’t have a position on Putin’s motive in not attacking the infrastructure. I find it an interesting curiosity that could be explored. Yet most folks are set in cement that “Putin Evil. Putin Monster.” so can’t even examine why he might be acting as he has. There’s no space for discussion or even asking the question.

    You see, I don’t have a set opinion on Putin. I know he’s ruthless with his enemies, but also takes care of Mother Russia and is loved by many in Russia. (Something of a curiosity…) I know he has patience to spare, but can move in a flash if the time is ripe. He cares deeply about Russia and Russian Culture, yet can also be happy to take a cut of the action. It is precisely because I’ve seen these contrasts in his personality that I’d entertain BOTH the notion that he’s Evil Incarnate, and that he is concerned about the welfare of innocents in Rump Ukraine. Precisely because I don’ t know which it is; and it may be some of each.

  77. E.M.Smith says:


    Interesting … but that they wanted to rent a boat says they lacked the capacity. Then the size and coordination of the blasts returns me to USA as the player with motive, capacity and lots of opportunity what with their war games actions…

  78. The True Nolan says:

    @EM “motive, capacity and lots of opportunity ”

    I would add “motive, capacity, opportunity, history, and stated intention to shut it down.”

    We are left with a precarious political situation. Europe (at least most of Europe, most of the time) has benefited from its relationship with the US. Is that mutual support at an end? Even if the political leaders in the EU can be convinced to remain allied with the US, how many average European citizens will believe that we are responsible for causing them to freeze and go hungry this winter? If a new form of social cohesion develops in Germany, Italy, and France, one based on the idea that the US can no longer be trusted, what will be the result? Will this turn in WW3 just to stop any alliance of Russia and Europe?

  79. David A says:

    I cannot fathom Ukraine doing that on their own. An important consideration is risk, what is the risk if you are caught? For Ukraine to make such a decision, and get caught, they would be risking their existence.

    China also would be taking great risk to make such a decision, and their gain is small relative to said risk.

  80. Taz says:

    Russian deputy and retired general Andriy Gurulev reported that 1.5 million sets of military uniforms of the Russian Armed Forces, which were intended for the mobilized, disappeared from warehouses in Zabaikalia in an inexplicable way.
    11:51 AM · Oct 2, 2022

    Russian lines at the Dnieper River completely collapsed. All surviving Russians units in that sector try to establish new perimeter at Dudchany. I believe that Ukrainian forces are in all towns North of Dudchany.

    Sources are various Pro-Russian sources which I find plausible because the Western Bank of the Dnieper River is almost impossible to defend against an army coming from North, once the defense lines are broken.

    Russian forces here are not supplied with artillery ammunition. They have already run out. And without artillery, the Russian troops are defenceless. Their entire strength lay in flooding the enemy with artillery shells. They must surrender or die.

    The biggest so far. And if rumours are true, and they’ve got cluster munitions(perhaps the reason for the breakthough) for HIMARS, it could be bad for Rus.

    the whole front is collapsing because the Russian soldiers simply want to give up, have Putin end the war, and they can go home alive…

    But in the end, fashion (missing uniforms) will be decisive. As Russians now seek to identify the yacht those funds purchased.

  81. Taz says:


    Americans liked Putin, Europeans liked Putin, and certainly most Ukrainians liked Russians.

    Until Putin invaded.

    You might have kindly feeling for the old geezer next store, but I guarantee you will kill him cold when he starts running over the neighborhood kids. Bottom line is that no one can afford someone making life/death decisions for others.

    Putin IS the reason so many are dead, Europeans are cold, and the US treasury much reduced. If he’s just one big tumor inside – it’s the Russian’s duty to push him aside. They failed. So now many consequences will be on them.

    Just don’t understand all this hand wringing regarding “had we behaved better, Putin would not have eaten us”? It’s silly. So is this argument that Ukraine needed Russian approval for ANYTHING.

    I don’t expect rational competence from the Russian government or our government. Both are comprised of flawed people. I DO expect them to get along and not drag “rest of us” into their screwups.

    There is a close analog to the Ukrainian conflict in our own history. Texas slaughtered Santa Anna’s army at San Jacinto, but in a flourish of generosity set the general free and allowed him to go home. But Santa Anna did not stay “bought”. He tormented Texans for 14 yrs thereafter. With his powerful and vast European army which had defeated Napoleon. Texas joined the union with a serious grudge. The Mexican American war soon followed.

    That was the bloodiest war the US ever fought. 17% fatalities. The war crimes were beyond the pale – mostly inflicted by Texan militia and rangers. It was so bad careers were ruined within the US Army once word escaped. You see, Texans had genocided the Comanches over decades as practice – then let all of that fury loose upon Mexico. Comanches had raided other tribes and Mexico for hundreds of years without consequence. Killing them stopped them cold.

    Russia has played with fire. If you attack another, you had better get him. Because if he survives there’s a good chance he’ll get you. Ukraine has put up with Russia now for 8 years. It was stupid to bring this situation to a head. But Putin did.

    The next time, Ukraine eats Russia.

    Russia needs to go home. It’s done.

  82. yarpos says:

    “(not hard to make a fireplace from a 44 gallon steel barrel that can burn fresh-cut wood if need be)” yes and so simple to put it in your lounge room in Munich. Good grief.

  83. Simon Derricutt says:

    Since my sister-in-law and husband have just left to go home to Munich, I’d asked them what alternative heating they could arrange. No chimney, so they have a choice of gas or electricity, and if the electricity goes out then the gas heating won’t work either. Though they could install a solar panel on the balcony, integrating it into the house power would mean a qualified electrician and quite a large expense, and of course also needs the sun to be shining.

    Yep, that 44 gallon steel drum isn’t an option….

  84. jim2 says:

    There is whining about the methane leaks from the pipelines exacerbating global warming. All it would have taken is a flare gun …

  85. Simon Derricutt says:

    Jim2 – it would also tell us whether all the leaks are Methane or whether the NS2 leaks were Nitrogen. Maybe that information would be too obvious, though, and pin the cause to being a few bombs rather than accident/incompetence.

  86. Taz says:

    Andrius Tapinas @AndriusTapinas • 6h •••
    To the Russians such as @max_katz who are questioning European values
    because of closed borders to fleeing Russians who were OK since Feb24
    but suddenly are not so Z anymore

    We owe you – zero
    We like you – zero
    We trust you – zero

    Look in the mirror and ask yourselves why.

  87. jim2 says:

    It’s methane Simon. Nitrogen doesn’t have a near IR signature.


  88. Canadian Friend says:

    I cannot prove the USA did it, maybe they did not ( I think they did ) but if they did it, of course they will deny that they did.

    The USA will never admit they destroyed the Russian pipelines, they will say it is Ukraine, China, Global Warming or little gremlins before they ever admit it was them.

  89. David A says:

    Excellent link
    Some actual crime scene evidence
    Points to the US.

  90. p.g.sharrow says:

    This guy provides in depth research from Australia on world events and gives his analysis of the results. I don’t always agree, but he seems to be honest in his facts. This episode is one his best.

  91. jim2 says:

    So, by bakerjim’s lights, the US used all kinds of assets in Europe rather than employing, say, a submarine. So all of Europe knew what was happening, no?

  92. Ed Forbes says:

    Taz, the Russian withdrawal at the river is not as dramatic ( for Russia) as portrayed.

    The Russian withdrawal was back to a second line of defense that stopped the Ukraine advance cold with heavy Ukraine losses, mainly by artillery from Russian batteries on the OTHER side of the river.

    With the current rains making the fields boggy, the Ukraine advance is now stretched along the road next to the river and under continuous artillery fire from across the river that Ukraine can not get to. No supply problems for Russia on east bank at all.

    The rain season has started, and movement in Ukraine will become very difficult off paved roads. This makes artillery fire even more deadly as slow targets are easy targets.

  93. The True Nolan says:

    @barkerjim: Really good link you gave to monkeywerkus. Believable scenario, and by flying out of the US and refueling it prevents the chance of UK either objecting or observing armaments. IF (and this is still an “IF”, as is almost everything these days) it is correct, this is a real smoking gun for the US. More accurately, this is a smoking gun for the US Military. Whether they are still strictly following orders from the civilian government is another interesting “if”. Maybe they acted on their own.

    I saw an article this morning that Poland is demanding $1.3T reparation from Germany. At present, Germany is saying no, but will they say that this winter now that the pipeline from Norway to Poland just opened?

  94. p.g.sharrow says:

    Materials and equipment abandoned by Russian troops as they make their well “Ordered advancements in a different direction” has made the Russian Army the largest contributor to the equipment of the Ukraine Army. The Successful mauling of the Ukrainian military has made the Ukrainians eager for combat, while the Russian troops greatly fear further contact ! Yep! Russians are winning and Putin is celebrating his Victory………………………..yeah right.

  95. David A says:

    The True Nolan

    My understanding is the new pipeline can carry about 10 percent of Nord Stream.
    Supposedly adequate for Poland’s needs only.

    I have not confirmed amy of this.
    Regarding barkerjims link, the evidence, if accurate ( airport logs etc…) speaks for itself.
    Jim2 criticism is valid, why not a far more clandestine submarine?
    Yet a part of me thinks the globalist want the US fingered.
    Why the overt Biden threats and assertions that German denial of their goal, closing NS, was not relevant. Why the former Polish PM public thanks to the US.?
    Why the current public proclamation of a US opportunity for financial gain from the SOS?
    Why the willful embarrassment of the US military in the Middle East.
    Why the purposeful breaking of the global economy?
    Why the willful illegal immigration of million, most of whom have grown up taught to dislike your nation. ( repeated all over Europe)
    On and on

  96. Canadian Friend says:

    The USA so far has spent $ 65 Billion helping Ukraine fight Russia…with not very impressive results

    Maybe the Biden administration figured that blowing up the pipelines themselves ( yet pretending it was not them ) would save them a few Billion dollars since Ukraine is not exactly winning so far despite the 65 Billion in help from the USA…

    There is about a dozen other reason why the USA would benefit from blowing up nord stream 1 and 2

  97. Graeme No.3 says:

    I am not certain that the Biden administration is quite that stupid given the probability of such action being exposed. I am quite sure that Russia did not destroy its best bargaining position with Europe and little hope of ever getting the business back.
    From what I read the explosions used far more explosives than any expert team would have done, so it is unlikely to be a State action. That leaves some ‘unofficial’ group but were they motivated by ‘revenge on Russia’ or a longer term aim? The result is that Germany (and parts of the EU) will be short of gas for years and that may have been the objective. There are people who think the world is coming to an end because of CO2 and who, as one put it recently, want to “go to Net Zero and return the world to the benign atmosphere of the 20th century” and might have seen this as a chance to force Germany to lead “The Great Reset”.

  98. another ian says:

    Re that “barkerjim” scenario – weren’t there two explosions?

  99. The True Nolan says:

    @Canadian Friend: “The USA so far has spent $65 Billion helping Ukraine fight Russia…with not very impressive results”

    Just for a sense of proportion, that $65B is approximately equal to the ENTIRE annual Russian military budget. (The estimates I see are around $69B/year.) Not sure how much money the Ukrainians themselves budget for their military.

    The annual US military budget is almost impossible to find. You see figures like $700B and $750B, but then again, the Department of Energy spends part of its budget on military projects (nuclear weapons, mostly), and even the Department of Agriculture has part of its budget going to maintenance of military bases. And should FEMA’s budget allocated for continuity of government be counted as a civilian cost or as a military cost? And so on and so on. Also, even if we got a complete set of numbers for the US budget (not just military, but EVERYTHING) we still wouldn’t know. Why not? Because in 2018 a new accounting standard, FASAB 56 was put into place which allows authorities to lie about government spending. In layman’s terms it says, “We can lie about what we spend and what we spend it on, but only for purposes of national security. Oh, and yes, WE decide what is national security and what is not.”

    @David A: “My understanding is the new pipeline can carry about 10 percent of Nord Stream. Supposedly adequate for Poland’s needs only.”

    That is pretty much what I heard as well. Assume that is true. It still gives Poland the opportunity to tighten its own energy belt (say, by 30%) and sell the remainder at (very high) market prices to Germany.

  100. jim2 says:

    Spy 2: So the plan it to bomb the pipeline from aircraft?

    Spy 1: That’s right.

    Spy 2: But what about that monkeywerxus guy? He’s busted two of our airborne missions before.

    Spy 1: Number 2, he just got lucky. You worry to much!

  101. E.M.Smith says:

    Looks to me like December is the Freeze Date that would be fairly reliable for ground hardening enough for a major mechanized maneuver.

    has a climate chart down a ways. November is above freezing during the days, but December is reliably frozen all day long…

    My guess would be that Russia will mobilize in October, position in November, and be ready for a major offensive in December. Until then it would mostly be tit-tat behaviour with “holding the line / border” and occasional attempts at entrapment (as I think is the game done just now where a soft front line fell back to a highly defensible line at a river; then proceeded to hit (with artillery) the Ukrainian troops on the muddy other side of the river.

    It is my opinion that we’ve seen a regular pattern / tactic from Russia. A 2 line of defense structure, leave the front thin and ready to rapidly retreat, then when Ukraine launches and offensive, fall back (creating a salient / pocket) and at the 2nd hard line, start shelling the Ukrainians like crazy. Thus the leveraged kill ratio.

    Basically trade low value land (temporarily…) for an opportunity to destroy a lot of men and material when the Ukrainians attack over muddy terrain.

    Russia, IMHO, knows to wait for frozen ground to launch their Winter War.

    At least, that’s what it looks like to me. I’m certain reality will be different as surprises always happen in battle.

    Just to pot stir some:

    This guy impresses me as a bit OTT and I think he sells disaster prep supplies and stuff so has motive to cause angst. But it does look like we have moved to DEFCON 3 per some other sites I checked (though just when … I did not check.) He’s claiming that LookingGlass has been launched (flying nuke command) and that DEFCON has gone up a notch. (Frankly, I thought we always had LookingGlass in the air 24 x 7 x 365, but maybe that’s an old datum from back in the SAC days of the ’70s…)

    He also asserts a Russian advanced Sub is now at sea with some kind of 10,000 km nuclear underwater drone that can make massive tsunami taking out whole cities. Never heard of them, but something else to take a look at.

    But it might bear keeping tabs on that…

  102. rhoda klapp says:

    I don’t know where Russia is going to get an effective army, they one they have shown us up to now has been very unimpressive indeed. Russia is losing, but Russia cannot actually lose, all they need to do is hang in there, Ukraine can do nothing outside of its former borders. It can’t beat Russia. But one wonders what Russia thought was going to happen, I can’t see that this is what they planned for, a war without end ala vietnam, korea, afghanistan, iraq and syria. Or indeed a broken army and the bluff of countless corrupt officials and officers called. (In Russia, it is claimed, corruption goes with a degree of complicity that beggars belief, a thing isn’t made, but it can be shipped, stored and issued and everybody takes a cut, until poor Ivan at the front ends up with no kit or ammo.)

    Oh, and artillery in the muddy season doesn’t inflict as many casualties. For obvious reasons. That is where precision munitions combined with good intel gives Ukraine an advantage. As long as the PGMs keep coming. I don’t think the western (printed) money is going to run out but I don’t know how quickly industry can replace the physical goods.

  103. The True Nolan says:

    @rhoda klapp: “But one wonders what Russia thought was going to happen, I can’t see that this is what they planned for”.

    What Russia thought was that they HAD to stop NATO from completely cutting off access to Europe and putting nukes (and conventional arms as well) literally right on their border. What Russia thought was the same thing that the US would think if China were in the process of putting nukes in Toronto and Juarez. It is the same thing that England would think if Scotland declared independence and let North Korea put nukes on the English border.

  104. Canadian Friend says:

    It is the same thing the USA felt when Russia was gonna put nukes in Cuba

  105. p.g.sharrow says:

    I watched the above offering…. a waste of time , but I did trip over this 6 month offering ,a retired American General being interviewed about the “New” Ukrainian war and how it would progress. His vision has pretty much been born out so far. Good man to listen to.

  106. rhoda klapp says:

    Nukes on the border is nonsense. Wadda they gonna do, walk them across? Nukes come with rockets or jets, they come in shipping containers, they come via Fedex if you want them to. They live in the sea. Proximity across a border is not a special concern. Armies on the border are another thing but it hasn’t worried Russia when it was their army.

    Further, what threat has Russia removed? A little bit of lightning war, overwhelming force, fast, would have worked. This is a quagmire. And they still have the possibility of nukes on the border if they truly care about that.

  107. Taz says:

    Current Himars rocket production capacity is 10000 units per year. Mid 2024 it will increase to 20,000 units per year.

    By then, the Army’s 1000 mile ramjet artillery should also be available:


    This weapon exists if a leaked photo is to be believed. The issue is cost per round and the value judgements ahead.

  108. leece says:

    Regarding the Ukraine infrastructure, well that is a fact that it has been spared so far. At one point, after the Ukrainian Kherson counter offense, they struck the electricity for a few hours, and then it was restored. Watch Scott Ritter, he talks about it a while back. He said, it would be the first he or the Americans would strike (actually did, he was involved in the Iraq planning exactly for that), and then it would not come back on.

    Scott Ritter also interviewed a few days ago a former Russian general, who sits now in the Duma. Very interesting for the Russian thinking. He suggests, that once Russia has been extended and Ukraine keeps fighting on then Russian ground, they will hit the infrastructure hard all over the country. I think we will find out very soon, how official that position was.

    In that same last interview, what was even more striking was the former generals comment regarding Nord Stream. He said a few things. About Russia did it, replied, yeah, the West also says they striked their own nuclear power plant.. More series, he was smiling, saying, if the plan is to deindustrialize Western Europe, they can of course be of help. Like mysteriously cut the new Norway pipeline or insinuating what gas prices will do for Europe if no LNG tank ship will reach any European harbour anymore!!!! Well, I am not sure about his affiliation with Putin, but one thing seems clear. In Russia, Putin is not the hardliner the West makes him out to be.

    What shocks me personally the most about the Nord Stream incidence, how open this has been done, in everybodies face. Is impossible to proof, but is impossible it was an accident.
    And the Russians do know if they did it themselves. As in German press no one mentions the US as suspects, it seems to me, then Germany is a suspect themselves (Governments of course).

    PS. the video was on youtube with search term 5 days old: “Scott Ritter brink of nuclear war”
    PPS. and the Russian’s name was Andrey Gurulyov.
    PPPS. Sorry if anything was redundant, didn’t read the 100 comments. But the main article was spot on!

  109. E.M.Smith says:


    “Nukes on the border” is not nonsense. It is existential threat. From the prior Ukrainian border it is under 5 minutes flight time to Moscow. That puts nuke arrival inside their reaction time to get to the bunkers… It is that very short flight time from being based so much closer that is the issue.

    That “5 minutes to Moscow” was specifically called out as a major reason by Putin in his address to his population.

    Note: It does not matter at all if you think it is unimportant. What matters is that the decision makers in Moscow think it is very important.

    It was precisely this “Moving NATO to the Russian Border” (especially where it was a 5 minute flight time to Moscow…) that was causal of this mess. NATO had promised NOT to move closer, violated those agreements, launched a Color Revolution to remove the elected government of Ukraine and install one “Western Friendly” and then proceeded to ask Ukraine if they would like to join NATO (again in violation of the agreements with Russia).

    You can only break so many treaties, lie about your goals, overthrow governments you don’t like, and start the process of moving to where a First Strike would be successful (oh, and while killing Ethnic Russians and forbidding their children to be taught in Russian…); you can only do those things so long before it turns into blowback. And it did. Russia simply could not accept a successful 1st Strike capability sitting on their border. So they didn’t.

    With 10 minutes from launch, you have time to run downstairs to the bunker, issue a “Go Code” to your counterstrike forces, and have the majority of Government survive. With 5 minutes from launch to gone, you have enough time to say “What did you say? Really? Oh Shit….”

    This is the whole core of why Putin changed from “Donbass has our support” (for 9 years of shelling of the Donbass Russians by Ukraine…) to “Donbass has our military on site”.


    I don’t think it is the rockets that’s the issue. It’s the rocket launchers. Those take a very long time and we’re already unable to ship more as we have removed them from as much of our own troops as we dare.


    A CNN analyst? Really? Talk about bias right out the gate. So far, about 1/3 into it, I get a lot of FUD (Fear Uncertainty and Doubt) along with a load of Putin Bad. Some of it sounds like flat out propaganda. “Scorched earth” “wipe out civilian population” “bombing schools, churches” “conduct terror operations”. So are his troops these evil superior attack monsters laying destruction on civilians far and wide; or are they bogged down incompetent losers who can’t even retreat in good order? Those are the two “narratives” being pushed by CNN. I think reality is something other than those two. IMHO, way too much emotional loading (“Pariah Leader”) and not enough math and force on force analysis. Like “What will happen when the Russian Air Force is let loose?” So far they have not bothered with it much. or “What will happen when Russia takes out infrastructure instead of playing nice?” Crickets.

    At 2/3 we’ve got a load of speculation claiming failure when we have no actual data or evidence for that. Much of it is of the form “IF we assume the goal was the thing they did not do, then they failed as they did not do it.” Very little (i.e. none) of the form “What might be the thing we are missing? IF this is a rational actor, what might be hidden from our view that makes it a reasonable ?” Like now, he’s going on about a beach landing in Odessa. All daydreams. So “Putin will fail when he tries to do my daydream”. How about “What would Putin do that will surprise us and succeed?” That’s the thing to prepare for.

    Now he’s talking about how hard it would be to take Kiev and Putin failed at it; when that is an ASSUMPTION about his motives (that I think is in error). Most likely they just ran a tank column at it and stopped as a Fixing Operation to anchor defensive troops near Kiev. That it succeeded at. Color me unimpressed with this “analysts” insight if he doesn’t even have enough clue to realize Kiev is not on the table. Putin stated his goals and he’s been doing exactly that. Taking the Ethnic Russian Areas. Not Kiev.

    Per my “offering”: I have not asserted the guy was a fount of wisdom. I specifically said “This guy impresses me as a bit OTT” where OTT is “Over The Top”. Not a ringing endorsement.

    What I was doing was asking if anyone had a clue about DEFCON changing and the Russian deployment of nuclear assets. I was hoping for someone to explain the strange submarine and the exotic autonomous nuclear torpedoes. Thinking IF it is real, maybe we ought to take a look at it instead of leaving it an unknown.

    You seem to be taking the position that it was an assertion of Great Russia Dominance. It was no such thing. Just a “WT? Anyone got some info on what this guy is talking about?”

    For one thing, on my own I’ve found out the torpedoes have a 2 MT nuke, not a 100 MT, so he was clearly wrong on that point. Yet it does look like they can go almost anywhere in the world and make a tsunami to take out a coast…

    Having a special purpose submarine with 30 or so weapons that bypass all our air defenses and can take out 30 coastal bases / cities (and maybe more) and where we have not shown a capacity to stop them; along with a DEFCON bump up: Sure seems to me like something worthy of a “Maybe someone can dig here”.


    When I hear Putin say he’s going to take the Donbass and protect the Ethnic Russians there, and that’s what he does, that sure looks like his army was effective to me. It is not effective at doing things they were not tasked to do, but that Western Talking Heads assert was their Big Goal. I find it hard to assert failure for not doing what was never the goal.

    Yes, a huge number of flapping lips and talking heads make Grand Assertions like “FAILED to take Kiev!” when there is zero evidence taking Kiev was ever a goal. Yes, a tank column was driven toward it, then when anchoring troops there was no longer important, left. That’s just good strategy in a Fixing Operation.

    You can not measure how effective an army is by measuring it against YOUR DREAMS of their goals. You can only measure it against their actual goals, and those are often hidden. Though Putin did say he just wanted to protect the Ethnic Russian regions; and that is what they have been doing.

    I continue to not have an opinion on the Russian Army professionalism or preparation. All I have an opinion on is what Putin said they would do, and what has been established as done. Beyond that is the fog of war. I just can’t know if they are on the verge of collapse, or just resting / holding the important turf, while waiting for the 300,000 new guys to show up.

  110. Ossqss says:

    Well, FWIW on the tactical nuke subject.


  111. The True Nolan says:

    The below is cut and pasted from an email from Tom Woods’ public mailings.

    Nobody ever accused economist Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University of being a radical libertarian or indeed a radical anything. He is a comfortable member of the Establishment.

    But even he can’t stomach the “Russia blew up its own pipelines” absurdity that nobody in the world except U.S. television viewers believes.

    In a recent television broadcast, Sachs stunned his regime mouthpiece hosts when he said:

    I was attacked in the Atlantic for being on the side of peace. And I confess I’m on the side of peace. I am very worried that we are on a path of escalation to nuclear war, nothing less than that. We have essentially a war in which Russia feels that this war is at the core of its security interests. The United States insists that it will do anything to support Ukraine’s defeat of Russia. Russia views this as a proxy war with the United States. And whatever one thinks about this, this is a path of extraordinarily dangerous escalation. And I am very fearful….

    A lot of the world is watching the events in horror and a lot of the world doesn’t like this NATO expansion, which they interpret as at the core of this. They want to see compromise between the US and Russia in vote after vote in the United Nations. Basically, it’s been the Western countries that have been voting for sanctions and denunciations and other actions, whereas most of the world, certainly most of the world counted by population, is on the sidelines.

    They just view this as a horrible clash between Russia and the United States. They don’t view this, as we describe it in the media, as an unprovoked attack by Russia on Ukraine. Anyone in the United States, they’d say, well, what else is it? But that’s because the way that our media have been reporting; this conflict [actually] goes back a long time.

    It didn’t start on February 24th, 2022. In fact, the war itself started in 2014, not in 2022. And even that had antecedents. And so most of the world doesn’t see it the way we describe it. But most of the world is just terrified right now, frankly, because it’s unbelievable to be hearing only one side, Well, we’ll use nuclear weapons if we need to, and the other side saying, no, you can’t frighten us….

    Europe is in a very, very sharp economic downturn. The sharp decline of output and living standards also shows up as a rise of prices. But the main fact is that the European economy is getting hammered by the sudden cutoff of energy. And now to make it definitive, the destruction of the Nord Stream pipeline, which I would bet was a US action, perhaps US and Poland.

    One of the anchors demands his evidence for this claim. Sachs replies:

    Well, first of all, there’s direct radar evidence that US helicopters, military helicopters that are normally based in Gdansk, were circling over this area. We also had the threats from the United States earlier this year that one way or another we are going to end Nord Stream. We also have a remarkable statement by Secretary Blinken last Friday in a press conference [in which he said] this is also a tremendous opportunity. That’s a strange way to talk if you’re worried about piracy on international infrastructure of vital significance.

    I know this runs counter to our narrative. You’re not allowed to say these things in in the West. But the fact of the matter is, all over the world, when I talk to people, they think the US did it. And by the way, even reporters on our papers that are involved tell me privately.

    What Sachs is saying is eminently sensible, but we have an American public raised on conformity and compliance (thank you, government schools), so anyone dissenting from the Establishment-supplied narrative is automatically demonized.

    People, I assure you, Hillary Clinton and Mitch McConnell and the CIA are not your friends. I promise.

    This is seriously the most bizarre case of Stockholm Syndrome of all time.

    If we could educate people in a way that doesn’t portray the ruling class as wonderful geniuses looking out for our welfare, maybe we wouldn’t be so cavalier about nuclear war, and maybe we wouldn’t be so inclined to accept whatever line CNN feeds us, dismissing everyone else as traitors.


    Sounds about right to me.

  112. David A says:

    Delivery time of nuclear weapons matters. It is perhaps the most important consideration. The tighter the timeline, the more critical the response time, the greater the chance of tragedy. All theoretical scenarios of “winning “ a nuclear war depend on rapid delivery time.

    When millions of lives depend on you, it is a heavy responsibility to get it correct. Everything that has happened in Ukraine as a consequence of NATO actions, and Russian response, was predicted by MANY.

  113. AC Osborn says:

    All the noise in the media about Russia having to resort to Nuclear weapons because they are losing sounds like they are preparing the public for a US false flag use of a tactical nuke and then blame Russia.

  114. another ian says:


    “Might Russia be facing Islamic terrorism coming out of Afghanistan?”


  115. Simon Derricutt says:

    David A – I think it’s not so much the delivery time of missiles, but the amount of notice you get between when you detect the launch and when the boom happens. Thus nukes on the border may not be quite as worrying as a nuke delivered by an extreme hypersonic flight or those submarine nukes that you can’t even detect until they explode and produce a tidal wave. Cruise missiles that hug the ground and thus don’t show up on radar will also reduce the time between detection and boom.

    Like EM, I’m seeing Russia’s responses as being measured rather than excessive, and again I’d point to Russia continuing to pay Ukraine the transit fees for the gas pipeline through Ukraine during all the hostilities as indicating this isn’t an all-out war as such. This despite a while back there was news of Ukraine taking gas from that pipeline for their own use and not paying for it – again Ukraine breaking agreements, and Russia sticking to them. At that time, Ukraine had just had the price of gas increased from the “mates price” to world prices, and couldn’t afford the new price, so took what they needed figuring that the Russians still needed to put enough gas into the pipe that the rest of Europe received what they paid for, and the losses in Ukraine would be swallowed. IIRC that was what actually happened, and the Russians couldn’t do much about it.

    I wonder if Julia Timoschenko is still in prison? Dangerous job trying to lead Ukraine….

    Looks to me that COVID escaped from the Wuhan Virology lab, and that the USA blew up the pipelines, and that the people saying otherwise are playing CYA (cover your arse) to try to avoid the blame. Sure, I’m not seeing all the reasons and motivations of the big players here, but I’m pretty certain Russia was no real danger to the West if we didn’t attack it. Sure, they’ve probably been financing various Green causes such as Extinction Rebellion, and agitating to stop fracking or intelligent energy policies, and likely so has China and a few other countries, but that’s sort-of Business As Usual and we should be able to deal with that. Rudi Dutschke’s Long March has been going on for a very long time, though, reducing general capabilities of a strong response. Also, of course, we’re hampered by CAGW (again a general belief not based on data) and I can’t avoid the suspicion that this was political rather than science-based. The thing here is that the more wind and solar power you have, the more you need dispatchable power for when the wind drops (or gets too high) and the sun doesn’t shine, and at the moment that means more gas-fired power generation because it can respond fast enough.

    Yep, I’m tying a lot of things together in this post, and could go on a lot longer. Seems to be a fight between people who want to have a centrally-regulated world and those who want to be left alone to do what they see necessary. At the moment, the uber-controllers seem to be winning.

  116. David A says:

    Simon says
    “ David A – I think it’s not so much the delivery time of missiles, but the amount of notice you get between when you detect the launch and when the boom happens.

    Yes, yet a distinction without a practical difference, as clearly time to respond is proportional to flight distance. So yes, hypersonic missals equate to limiting the time to respond. ( And this may explain some of the US push in the Ukraine, as apparently Russia has an advantage in hypersonic technology) The potential of almost zero time to respond, or possibly not knowing to whom to respond to, from a sudden manifesting tidal wave, is concerning. All of these threats weaken MAD. “ If not brothers in life, then brothers in violent death.”

  117. David A says:

    I fully support the “Right to be left alone”.
    Big Government, Global Government, trans-human tech, involuntary vaccines, Central Bank digital currency, social credit scores, government digital monitoring of all social life, CAGW policies, central control of food production, is all a very direct challenge to the right to be left alone.

  118. rhoda klapp says:

    If you are the launcher of a surprise nuke attack what you are worried about is the effectiveness of that strike. I don’t see ever having an ensured decapitation of the other side or avoiding a descent into chaos. Both sides have contingency plans for cutoff from national command authority. I would expect MAD to hold. But if a surprise strike was my plan it would be via container, or a bomb in my embassy or many ways to trigger that first confusion. Civil airliners maybe, I don’t know. But then nuclear war scenarios are not my interest. The reason for buffer states on the border is conventional threats.

    No I don’t trust our leaders or our MSM to do the right thing or stop lying. I don’t trust NATO, the EU or the US. Or the Russians or Ukraine. But Russia it was who put military forces into Ukraine, in 2014 and 2022 and who know what in between. At least the second instance counts as invasion of a sovereign country and that is what cannot be allowed. Corruption and subversion of foreign countries is wrong too, but it’s part of the great game. IMHO nobody is right but Russia is wrongest, but I appreciate that’s not the view of other reasonable people.

    Their army IS crap though.

  119. David A says:

    I consider the governments ( globally) response
    to Covid, the complete halt of economic activities for months, the forced vaccines, the vaccine harms, and the breaking of the supply chain and the destruction if cheap energy, all to be crimes far exceeding the Russian action in Ukraine ( which is deeply tied up in history and NATO misdeeds)

    George Washingtons advice to stay away from foreign conflicts is deeply ignored, and sorely missed.

  120. The True Nolan says:

    Jimmy Dore commentary on the Rand Corp papers showing preplanning for US to incite Ukraine proxy war.

  121. YMMV says:

    Russell Brand has just celebrated getting six-million YT subscribers!
    (as YT threatens to kick him off)
    and he is in good form

  122. The True Nolan says:


    Major weapons factory in Bulgaria blows up on Tuesday:

    And on Wednesday, Bulgaria announces they will resume buying fuel from Russia:

    My guess? Either there is NO connection, just a coincidence, or… The Russians are putting behind-the-scenes pressure on Bulgaria to force it out of the US-EU coalition against Russia.

    Russia: “Nice weapons factory you have there. It would be a shame if it blew up the same way our pipeline did. So unfortunate!”
    Bulgaria: “No reason why we should let sanctions stand in the way of a beautiful relationship. How about we buy some fuel from you?”

    Pure speculation on my part — but the truth is we are in a slow motion world war already. Bad things happen.

  123. Canadian Friend says:

    For what this is worth,

    this morning I saw a video where they show at least 3 democrats saying that the idea that the USA might have blown up the Nord Stream pipelines is ” Russian disinformation”

    Well… that is what they said about Hunter Biden’s laptop, and about a few other things that turned out to be true…

    These days when they say it is Russian disinformation it is about as credible as when a kid tells his teacher ; the dog ate my homework…

  124. The True Nolan says:

    @Canadian Friend: RE “Russian disinformation”

    Yes. So far EVERY SINGLE TIME the Dems and the MSM have claimed Russian disinformation it has (eventually) been shown not to be the case. At this point, the default response to claims of Russian disinformation should be “LIAR!!”

  125. another ian says:

    FWIW –

    “Did Uncle Sam, a.k.a. Wile E. Coyote, Blow Up the Wrong Pipeline?

    After “parties not-so-unknown” bombed the Nordstream gas pipeline, Anthony Blinken celebrated the “tremendous opportunity.” He assumed the whole Nordstream operation was out of commission. That would have given US producers the chance to make billions of dollars robbing Europe blind selling overpriced gas.

    But Blinken may have celebrated too soon.

    After the suspected sabotage of the network last week in a series of explosions, Gazprom said on Monday three of the lines were affected and one wasn’t. The gas giant has lowered pressure on the unaffected line B of Nord Stream 2 to inspect the link for damage and potential leaks, it said in a statement on its Telegram account.

    An Unz Review commenter explained:

    “The vaunted US Navy screwed up. In the murky depths of the Baltic Sea they planted their explosives to blow up the ***FOUR*** pipes of the NS 1 & NS2 gas pipelines.


    I’ve stopped laughing now…”


  126. another ian says:

    E.M. – FWIW

    “USDA now asking people to register their vegetable gardens for national database”

    “These standards essentially define every community garden in the country. Now, the government organization that shells out billions every year to companies whose products, like high-fructose corn syrup, are responsible for a massive epidemic of obesity across the planet, will have a database of them.


    You vill only eat ze crickets zat ve allow you to have…”

    Via Jo Nova

  127. another ian says:

    Questions from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream

    If Rolls Royce PLC supplied the turbines that drive the compressor for the Russian end of NS 1 how come Siemens and Canada are the block to fixing things?

    And seems that the pipes are about 4 feet diameter so Lawdog is a bit remiss on that bit of research as he talks 5 feet.

  128. E.M.Smith says:


    An alternative explanation would be that Bulgaria was being Russia Friendly and / or providing “stuff” to Russia, so “Our Side” blew up an asset potentially useful to Russia.

    Note: I have NO IDEA what “side” Bulgaria is on or IF they were being “Russia Friendly”. EITHER explanation would work. Just finishing out the Venn Diagram…

    What is very clear is your point that we are in a “Slow Motion WW”. Yup. But in fact all wars start out slow motion. The US Civil War (“War Of Northern Aggression”) took years to reach the shooting stage and then years to end. The Pearl Harbor attack was 7 Dec 1941 and D-Day was 6 June 1944; about 2 1/2 years between them. (And then we were much more motivated to “move fast”…)

    It is only in retrospect that the time is compressed when history teachers put 2 years into 5 minutes of talking head time.

    On “Disinformation”: When someone says “That is Russian Disinformation” I now think “That is Disinformation about Russia”… Russia has moved from subject to object… Actor to patient. My reflexive act is to substitute “This is…” for “That is”. Simply because, so far, it has been 100% accurate to swap that way.

    We KNOW that there is an Evil Cabal running “The West”. It is closely aligned with (if not actually the same as) the WEF, UN Idiologues, and likely the Bilderbergers (with a side of Soros…). They are following a “Green Agenda” put forward by the Club Or Rome (many folks in the same groups, BTW). Made up of $Billionaires and Wannabees out to remake the world in a Socialist Authoritarian model.. They have NO moral compass and are quite happy to use murder and destruction to achieve their ends. They also make $Billions out of parasitizing governments and forcing “creative destruction” in the name of “Doing Well by doing ‘good'”. It has also been clearly demonstrated that they (literally) own and control all the major media companies and the “social media” giants. They also have been shown to be following the dictate to “accuse your opponent of what you do” (C&P) and love to lie.

    Given all that, you simply can NOT at all trust anything said in that media set. IF they say it is raining in Florida, best to check a radar source… or look out the window for some of us…

    @Another Ian:

    Your wiki link is unclear as to what is NS-1 and what is NS-2 parts. It also said Siemans was the one doing maintenance so it is possible Rolls sells the turbines but Siemans got the maintenance & repair contract. There isn’t much I see of interest in sorting that set of weeds, but maybe something interesting is hiding in there.

    One interesting bit: One of those links said “3 explosions” happened. Now I’ve heard (read) various claims from “simultaneous” explosions to “2 explosions” to now 3. But what is interesting is 3 pipelines down, and 3 explosions? Perhaps there is a 4th un-exploded munition on the bottom somewhere….

    Folks were fixated on the nuclear tsunami making ability of the ‘missing’ submarine from Russia, but it also has a kind of a mini-sub docked to the belly for doing various things on the bottom of the ocean… That has me wondering if it MIGHT have been dispatched to a deep hole near the pipelines (partially to monitor activity and provide protection to any Russian boats sent over) and then dispatched their roving submersible to see if they can recover / disarm a failed bomb… IF it were to happen, I mean, Shades Of Gary Powers and the U2…

    My guess would be somebody at the Pentagon is crapping their pants and sending out a deep water team to figure out how to blow up the evidence (and likely the pipeline with it) without being spotted and without dying in the process… and before the Russians can post video of them doing it… Kind of like Water Polo but with 500 lb bombs, and in the mud…

    Per Gardens:

    Note that there is a thing here called a “Community Garden” that is not the same as a personal garden. These are often run by Cities. You sign up for a plot and get a modest sized garden space on community land. They come with the usual local government “command and control”…

    So what is unclear to me (but I don’t have time to “dig here” on it) is just: Does this desire for Registration only apply to these government run Community Gardens, or to more than that?

    In any case, I’m not planting a garden. I’m doing “Edible Landscaping”. Everything is for decoration. That fact that you can also eat it is just a happy coincidence ;-)

    FWIW, while the summer humidity seems to have been hard on the summer squash (that is usually planted in winter here), some of the beans did OK even with neglect and the Sweet Potatoes are absolutely going to town. One video by a Southern Gardener pointed out that down here, they are just INVASIVE and you ought to only plant them in a defined place. Now THAT is my kind of Apocalypse Garden Plant. Plant it once, it comes back all by itself even if you dig up all the big tubers, and it can make a few hundred pounds of food from one plant (plus edible leaves). All with no real pests and only modest fertilizing,

    IF you want less starch and more sweet, there’s a tempering process to do. Something like 1 week at 80+% humidity and 80-ish degrees, then a cold step at about 50 F and low humidity. In a Real SHTF ™, I’d be happy with more starch and less sugars… either way is fine.

    I’ve also scored some Sunchokes. These were “invasive” in California and supposedly do well in Florida too. They make a bushel of starchy roots in about a 4 x 8 foot area, all looking like small sunflowers. (Yes, the “windy root”… but what with beans as a major Aw Shit food, there’s going to be plenty of “gas” anyway…)

    I do need to work out which beans are best here. My first start of Runner Beans failed (likely because I stuck the sprouts in the ground and left town for 2 weeks…) so I’ve got to try again, and add some Lima beans too. I want to get some seeds for more “decorative” looking beans (like Hyacinth Beans). While the Runners don’t look like a garden bean, they need an alternative companion…

    I’ve got 4 chayote trying to sprout. Planted on a fence, few non-Mexicans know what they are…

    That’s the “core plantings” so far. There’s some odds and ends, like the “surprise” pineapples that came with the house (looks like about 5 or 6 that I’ve found so far…) and it looks like I have a fruit tree by the back fence that the Squirrels just love… I’m also pretty sure I’m not getting any of the acorn crop… but OTOH, they are busy turning it into Squirrel Meat…

    So I’m not worried about “Garden Registration”. What garden?…

  129. H.R. says:

    Hey, E.M. – I don’t mean to scare anyone, but I had a thought ;o)

    Take some chicken wire and make a topiary frame for those runner beans. Maybe something like this.

  130. E.M.Smith says:

    I like topiaries. I don’t like trimming hedges….

    Maybe I can hire a guy…

  131. H.R. says:

    It’s for the runner beans, E.M. Edible landscaping. You need to plug any sumbitch that tries to trim it.

  132. E.M.Smith says:

    It’s a topiary. If you don’t trim it to shape, the runner beans will just make it a big round mound of green… It would look like a big green bump. Vines up to 12 feet long without any shape.

  133. another ian says:

    Latest Pointman



  134. H.R. says:

    Hmmmm… I guess I don’t know what runner beans are. I’ll look them up.

    My pole beans climb my trellis and that’s pretty much it. When they are reaching out and hitting nothing but sky, they fall back into themselves on the trellis.

    Runner beans must be slightly different and “go walkabout” looking for another place to climb? Yeah, I’ll go look them up.

    On a more serious note than Roadrunner runner bean topiaries, a neighbor made the best tomato cages evah! out of the wire ‘cloth they use with the rebar when pouring cement. The squares in the cloth are what, 6″ x 6″?

    Anyhow, the width is about 4′ and it comes on a roll. I can’t recall the diameter, he’s using, but he cuts his length of the roll, it curls to the circle naturally, and he spot welds the cut end to make that circular cage. They could be wired together, but it’s easy enough to just zap a strong tack with a borrowed welder.

    If cut lengthwise from a roll instead of across the width of the roll, it would be easy enough to make a column about as tall as one could practically reach.

    I just put in a 4′ x 8′ raised bed. I think I might put in some 8’ high columns about, oh……. 20″ diameter or so, at each corner instead of the arch.

    I have some steel electrical conduit to tie the corners together at the top. I’d have not a topiary, but a bower or gazebo-like structure made of something green and leafy.

    It could get interesting. I like it. Just plant vining plants at the corners and that leaves more room in the bed for row plants.

    Now all I have to do is remember the idea when we get back from Florida next Spring.

  135. H.R. says:

    Runner beans… oh my!

    They are way, w-a-y bushier than the pole beans I put on the cattle fence arch.

    At least, that’s what I’m seeing in the images that my search returned. I’ll have to check them out next year. I would probably get a much better yield from the runners than from the pole beans.

  136. Here in the UK I generally grow a mixed variety of runner beans


    They are very decorative in their own right with up to 5 different colour varieties in each packet and would win a place in the flower border. They are generally grown on a wigwam of bamboo poles or up a trellis. Easy to grow they can be planted out when the last frosts are past which in this part of the UK would be end April-if we get a frost. They do like warmth and water and a well fertilised soil. Expect to pick beans from June to September

  137. H.R. says:

    My pole beans are not as bushy as the runners. Not as attractive either. These (image link) are on poles. On my cattle fence arch, they spread to the side a little better, but they still don’t leaf out like those runner beans.

  138. The True Nolan says:

    More disappearing critical infrastructure. The bridge between Russia and Crimea has suffered a major explosion and has a span dropped. The bridge is the longest in Europe and the major supply point from Russia into Crimea.

    Who could possibly benefit from cutting a major artery of transportation?! (Yeah… end sarc)

  139. YMMV says:

    Who could possibly benefit?

    Another no-flag attack. Pretty clear it was a truck bomb. Pity the poor people in the car alongside. There are surveillance videos. This link is a video of two of those videos.

    Off the wall impression. One, to damage infrastructure. Two, to annoy Putin. Three, to provoke Putin into doing something so big so that all of NATO attacks Russia.

  140. YMMV says:

    On the other hand…

    That does not look like the right bridge. Fake news?

  141. YMMV says:

    Long telephoto? The blast was not near the high part of the bridge, but telephoto can make it look like that. Russia says the blast was 6:07 a.m. (0307 GMT) on 8 October.

    Putin turned 70 on 7 October.

    The head of Ukraine’s National Security and Defence Council posted a video of the bridge on social media alongside a video of Marilyn Monroe singing “Happy birthday, Mr President”


  142. David A says:

    On the one hand, it is war, and war is hell. On the other hand it may be a few rungs deeper in hell if Putin takes the gloves off.

  143. another ian says:


    That is hardly Russian propaganda when it is quoting a site that would be available to the western YSM who didn’t bother to mention it

  144. another ian says:

    “EU nation temporarily waives anti-Russia sanctions
    Bulgaria will exempt fuel supplies from the embargo, in view of the country’s economic plight”


    Via https://thepointman.wordpress.com/2022/10/07/blame-america-for-all-your-troubles/#comment-55312

  145. The True Nolan says:

    Remember the explosive drone removed from the Nord Stream Gas Line in 2015? It was deactivated by the Swedes, but the nationality was never released. Russia is now saying it was a NATO drone.

  146. The True Nolan says:

    And on a brighter note…
    (“Brighter” is used here in the Stefan-Boltzmann sense of “Radiated power is proportional to the fourth power of the temperature”. In this case, that being thermonuclear explosions, temperature is approximately equal to 100,000,000K.)

  147. The True Nolan says:

    Hey HR! All that talk about runner beans… Looking for seeds? Still some available.

    By the way, I have done business with the site linked above. Very good people, good place to buy from.

  148. E.M.Smith says:


    Cruising their site, they have some very interesting and novel varieties of seeds!

  149. YMMV says:

    Hmmm, does not look like a fertilizer bomb…

    “The explosives were disguised as rolls with plastic construction film, which were shipped on pallets and weighed 22,770 kg”


  150. David A says:

    It appears that Russia is doing all possible to keep europe viable, and avoid escalation to global war…

    🇷🇸🇵🇱🇷🇺🇩🇪Deputy PM of Serbia Zorana Mihajlovic – about the accident at the Druzhba oil pipeline: We should know that there is an energy world war going on in the world. We are not yet in a world war as we imagine it, there are no atomic weapons, but this is an energy world war. What is happening with the Druzhba oil pipeline, which is the longest oil pipeline in the world, about 4000 kilometers long and through which only Russian oil goes, looks like a continuation of what happened on the Nord Stream gas pipeline.
    At first we thought it was a maintenance issue, it was said that there was a breakdown, and then it turned out that this was not the case, but that it was a diversion. This is an energy world war, because we are talking about critical infrastructure, if there is no transport and energy infrastructure, there is no economy, industry, and always the next step is a world war.


    🇧🇾⚡The KGB of Belarus is aware that the West is considering the possibility of using tactical nuclear weapons against the republic and Russia, said the head of the department Ivan Tertel on the air of the Belarus-1 TV channel.


    At someone else’s command, the EU is deliberately going to deindustrialize its countries — Putin

    The Russian President quoted the American economist Friedman:
    “If you want to create a shortage, for example, of tomatoes, you need to pass a law according to which sellers cannot sell tomatoes at a price of more than 2 cents per pound, you will immediately get a shortage of tomatoes. It’s the same with oil and gas.”

    Vladimir Putin noted that it should be clearly understood that if prices are limited, price ceilings are set, this will increase the shortage of energy resources.


    Russia is ready to supply energy resources to Europe, including the current autumn-winter, the ball is on their side – Putin

    Russia is not to blame for the fact that Europeans, as in the Middle Ages, stock up on firewood for the winter – Putin


    Putin: We could create a major gas hub for Europe in Turkey

    Russia could move the lost volume of transit via the “Northern Streams” to the Black Sea region, creating a hub for supplies via the “Turkish Stream

    Russia will continue to switch to settlements in national currencies – Putin
    Despite sanctions pressure and sabotage on infrastructure, we do not intend to give up our positions – Putin


    🛢 🇷🇺 🇹🇷 🇪🇺 The idea of Putin’s proposal to move transit from the “Nord Streams” to the Black Sea will be considered at a meeting with Erdogan in Astana,Kazakhstan tommorow,Turkish State Television reported


    Yet if sabotage continues, or is deemed not stoppable, Russia may have to move their exports elsewhere, and…

  151. another ian says:

    And another FWIW

    “The Russians are modernizing hundreds of 1960’s-era T-62 tanks, for multiple reasons”


    And comments

  152. E.M.Smith says:

    @Per T-62 tanks:

    It is important to remember the history of the tank. Originally invented to break out of trench warfare of W.W.I, it is basically mobile artillery (of modest range) with mobile machine guns for anti-personnel action.

    To the extent you take out tanks, you just return to “Trench warfare with artillery” as in W.W.I era.

    Tanks then got into “tank on tank” battles. Most tank “advances” were intended to make them better in Tank on Tank fighting. Bigger guns, more armor, much heavier, etc. BUT in W.W.II we (allies) defeated the best tanks in the world (German monster tanks that were superior in just about every way but maintenance) with overwhelming production and the willingness to lose several to take out one.

    The crappy little Sherman did that. While also providing lots and lots and lots of fire support to infantry. We had tanks everywhere while the limited number of German Super Tanks meant far less areal coverage.

    To the extent the T-62 is like the Sherman, it can do the same thing as there are massive numbers of them in storage.

    This eventually lead to the desire to make a ‘man portable’ ant-tank weapon that would actually work against modern tanks and be cheap enough to deploy in numbers. We are “kind of there” now. As that video showed, even very modern big tanks get all ‘splody when you drop a smart anti-tank weapon on the thin top armor.

    To the extent these weapons change the shape of anti-tank warfare, we again go back to trench warfare and artillery.

    So what makes the T-62 NOT a dumb idea, today?

    First off, they have thousands of them in storage. “Quantity has a quality all its own” as the Sherman showed.

    Second, huge numbers of Russian Soldiers know how to operate them already. Training time and costs near nil.

    Third, being already in inventory, they are cheap to field. Crews are more valuable than the tank. Not a lot of precious finance needed to put them in action.

    Fourth, as shown in the video, the autoloader with ammo exposed in the turret is a big problem with the more modern tanks. It is likely that the T-62 will be safer for the whole crew, (though not the gunner / loader…)

    Fifth, with LOTS of these, especially in a blitz type use, it is likely that your army can simply over-run and crush the opposition before they can set up and fire a lot of man portable anti-tank rounds. You lose some old tanks, but win the assault rapidly.

    Sixth, maintenance of ANYTHING old and iron is a lot easier and less costly and can be done with more primitive facilities (something Russia has long appreciated and that the USA / NATO does a crappy job at. Look at the maintenance package for “modern” stealth fighters, for example. Most time is spent on the ground being repaired after a short flight time.) They can keep a LOT of these in the field without a lot of western inputs or repair time / methods / materials.

    Seventh, as “self portable light artillery” and as infantry support weapons, just about any tank does a great job especially compared to no tank. Basically, an old black powder Walker Colt will kill you just as dead as a modern 9mm pistol. Sure, not nearly as ideal and with “issues” that make the 9mm preferred… BUT, alone at night with banging on the door, I’d be happy with that Walker Colt (or 2, or 3…) and not happy with nothing. Similarly, an advancing line of 5000 infantry with a few hundred T-62 tanks is a lot better than 5000 infantry with no tanks. And anyone facing a few hundred T-62 tanks is very likely to have a Very Bad Day. Old weapons still do their job.

    Eighth, as “post war occupation weapons” they are just fine. “A tank on every corner” of an occupied town has a certain utility… Most folks will not be saying “Oh, that tank in front of the train station is only a T-62, not a T-72, so let’s have that demonstration!”

    THE big counter to that above: We don’t know how many of the NATO / Modern western anti-tank weapons are deployed to the field. To the extent it is enough thousands to take out any approaching tanks, we are back to trench warfare and artillery again, at least until the artillery takes out the infantry with the anti-tank weapons.

    Note that for purposes of the above: Rockets are part of “artillery”.

  153. David A says:

    The Western GEBs started the monetary war. They are losing it.


    “Like many of our Asian partners, we believe that it is necessary to start a revision of the operating principles of the global financial system, which for decades allowed the self-proclaimed “golden billion,” which has been using capital and technology flows to its sole advantage, to largely live at others’ expense.

    As a priority measure, we believe it is necessary to more actively use national currencies in mutual settlements. These measures would definitely help strengthen the financial sovereignty of our states, develop domestic capital markets and deepen regional economic integration.”

    China, and even Russia to a lesser extent, played along with CAGW doctrine as long as it harmed their competition. Yet we do have a global economy, and the GEBs wars and actions only bring out the old divisions in disparate ways. I have often said, “The reset will not go like they think”. My view is that all nations will lose big time. What will humanity learn.

    Does anyone have an opinion on if the CBs, will do one more round of QE. When will the hikes break the markets?

  154. The True Nolan says:

    @EM: “So what makes the T-62 NOT a dumb idea, today?”

    In my opinion, you hit all the bases except for what may be the biggest factor. That factor? Smart ammunition.

    Yes, inexpensive anti-tank weapons place older tanks at risk. (Whew! I had to bite my tongue to type that. “Inexpensive” in a military context means “less than an average professional person makes working a full time job for a year”. Or two.) But the development of smart ammo allows an older tank to stand back farther from either infantry or other tanks. If Russia maintains air superiority, they can even use plane spotting for targeting locations which are over the horizon for the tank. The smart ammo has a small rocket built in which allows the projectile to travel five or ten miles and home in on the coordinates transmitted by the spotter planes or by friendly infantry on the ground. How much retrofitting is required to change a dumb tank to a smart ammo launching platform? Obviously the design of the new ammo will determine that. But if the new ammo is designed specifically to be easily retrofitted to existing equipment (which would be the smart way to have proceeded) then Russia could quickly have a very formidable fleet of effective weapons. Trench warfare? I do not think we will see that with upgraded tanks.

    @David A: “Does anyone have an opinion on if the CBs, will do one more round of QE. When will the hikes break the markets?”

    The markets are already broken. There has been no legitimate price discovery mechanism in any major market for years, maybe decades. Not that I am saying anything you don’t already know, but world markets are a gigantic auction. There is NO FAIR AUCTION when some of the bidders have access to unlimited counterfeit money, and the auctioneer is continually changing the rules to favor those same criminals.

    The QE done so far have been the equivalent of shooting up a mortally injured soldier with morphine and adrenaline so that he can stay on his feet just a little longer, just enough longer that the Generals and Industrialists can safely exit the war zone with all their profits intact. Will the CBs do one more QE? Crystal Ball says “YES! But they will call it something else.” No doubt they are working on a name right now. Maybe the “Emergency Stabilization Funding Act”. Or perhaps the “Save The Kittens and Make Everything Warm and Wonderful Again Act”.

  155. The True Nolan says:

    This just in:

    Russian sources say that saboteurs have been caught attempting to damage a gas pipeline running from Russia to Turkey. “Following the sabotage of the Nord Stream, TurkStream remains the only conduit for Russian NatGas to Europe besides the pipelines that pass through Ukraine.”

    There have been multiple discussions here at Chiefio’s over the years centering around the subject of how vulnerable infrastructure is to attack, and at how odd that with the 20 year focus on TERRORISTS! that so few attacks had taken place. Looks like we are now in an infrastructure war, but the bad guys are not terrorists, but more likely are national forces. So far, the US looks to have not had any high profile destruction, but one does wonder about the plethora of food production and processing plants which have been shut down.

    Please, God, let the US mainland stay out of any tit-for-tat infrastructure war. We have far too many targets and essentially none of them are adequately guarded. I will leave it as an exercise by the reader to consider what one bomb laden boat could do to the central pier of a tall bridge on a river or harbor mouth.

  156. AC Osborn says:

    E.M.Smith says: 13 October 2022 at 2:43 pm
    “THE big counter to that above: We don’t know how many of the NATO / Modern western anti-tank weapons are deployed to the field. To the extent it is enough thousands to take out any approaching tanks, we are back to trench warfare and artillery again, at least until the artillery takes out the infantry with the anti-tank weapons.”

    The one thing we haven’t seen in Ukraine is “carpet bombing” as we have seen from B52s a couple of times in the past, I am sure that Russia has bombers that can do that. You just need to ensure that your troops are far enough away not to get caught up in it. It makes artillery look like peashooters.
    The Russian air force has been very restrained, either by choice or because they do not really control the skies

  157. YMMV says:

    The True Nolan: “We have far too many targets and essentially none of them are adequately guarded.”

    I have seen the future and it is a third world country. Banks with guards at the door with shotguns. Airports with guards with machine guns. Back yard fences with razor wire equivalent on top. Windows with iron bars. Crime.

    We like to think we have progress, but where it counts, we do not. You probably lock everything now and you probably did not when you were growing up. Civilization is only possible with trust and trust only comes from civilization. If you break that trust, progress runs backwards.

    It takes a long time to build up, but it is destroyed very quickly.

  158. The True Nolan says:

    @YMMV: “Civilization is only possible with trust and trust only comes from civilization. If you break that trust, progress runs backwards. It takes a long time to build up, but it is destroyed very quickly.”

    You may win the prize for the most important thing said on the Internet today.

    Long, long ago, in a galaxy far away, back when I was a young man, I worked for a year or so in the cotton brokerage business. Imagine a bunch of Southern good ol’ boys — not yahoos, but VERY bright, some of them old money. They would buy, sell, and trade cotton sometime in deals that were worth millions of dollars (multiply that by ten for inflation adjustment to today’s values). It was all done on a handshake, and any man who broke his word would never do business again. That may sound like some mythical country now, but I was there and I saw it.

    I currently live in a very small, very rural town, population under 3,000. The next larger town is an hour away, and the next major city is 2.5 hours drive. We recently had a group of big city thieves pass through one night. They stole five cars, all of which were parked unlocked, with keys in the ignition. The Sheriff has reminded everyone that they need to lock their cars.

    It is my opinion that humans are not psychologically well adapted to live in large cities. We have at present “too many rats in the box” and they are biting each other’s tails. When people interact with hundreds of strangers every day, it soon becomes advantageous to cheat whenever the chance of being punished is low. Sure, that one victim may hate you, but there are always thousands of other strangers who will sell you groceries, wash your car, paint your house, etc. In other words, the ratio of potential victims to trusted comrades, (i.e. the ratio of prey to pack members) becomes so high that the most advantageous strategic choice is to become a predator.

    You can’t solve the “rats in the box” by legislation and police. That would require laws for every single action, as well as impartial enforcement. You MIGHT be able to solve it if the civilization would universally somehow embrace a strict cultural code of honor — but I think we know that is, huh, unlikely. The only other response I can see is a general loss of respect for authority and a return to vigilante reprisal and all the violence which accompanies it. That is certainly not my first choice, but once trust is gone, the rule of law goes next, and then it become every man for himself.

  159. The True Nolan says:

    BERLIN, Oct 14 (Reuters) – Sweden has rejected plans for a joint investigation with Denmark and Germany of the recent ruptures of Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines, German weekly Spiegel reported on Friday, citing German security sources.

    Sweden has determined that it could not share findings of its investigation with other states for security reasons, the report said.


    IF (big IF) the investigation indicated the sabotage was done by Russia or by Russian allied actors, can anyone give a plausible reason why they would keep such a tight lid on the results? (Remember also that Sweden refused to release information on the nationality of the explosive drone found at the pipeline in 2015. Currently, the only available information (from Russia) is that it was a NATO weapon.)

  160. another ian says:

    Starlink and Ukraine


    And some “keyboard art” that I haven’t seen before in comments

    “They all can kiss my (_i_) ”

    On Germany

    “Is Germany on the Edge of the Abyss?



  161. David A says:

    History of US biological laboratory GOF research domestically and around the world.
    Looks to be well researched, and while the report gives extensive history, the programs really took off under Obama.


  162. YMMV says:

    another ian: “A CRIMEAN BRIDGE TOO FAR?”

    Excellent journalism. Truck bomb + bomb on bridge + hack to halt the train.
    And what did they get by poking the bear?
    “the regime in Kiev and those supporting it are now considered as legitimate targets”
    “General Armageddon is on the loose”

    Further info: “UK intelligence officials apparently commissioned a study in April examining ways to blow up Russia’s Crimea Bridge”

  163. another ian says:

    Serious reading here IMO

    “Complications of the Ukraine War”


  164. YMMV says:

    another ian: “Complications of the Ukraine War”

    oooooooh, that’s gooooood!

    “The U.S. is not just supporting Ukraine. It is fighting a war in Ukraine’s name.”
    Expensive, but not a war on US soil. But for how long? US vs. Russia, scary.

    “This is a war with no natural stopping point. One can easily imagine scenarios in which winning might be more costly than losing.”
    Escalation, here we come!

  165. another ian says:

    Goes with Russell Brand on the “Jerk Thread” – FWIW!

    “First photographs of the Nord Stream explosion damage”


    But look at the settings on the images?

  166. E.M.Smith says:

    @Another Ian per NS2:

    The BDA (bomb damage assessment) in that link is a bit naive. Looks at pipe, metal bent outward, so must be bomb inside pipe (in essence).

    This ignores several things. Most importantly, it ignores that the pipe is highly pressurized. Putting exterior pressure on a highly pressurized pipe reduces the strain on the pipe. It takes a whole lot more above that point to squash the pipe inward.

    A similar problem exists with ships. The hull is designed to take the external pressure of water pushing on them, even in major storms and swells.

    The answer is to set of an explosion UNDER the ship that lifts it into the air near the middle. Now both ends are torquing down on the middle, and the middle tears in half. Which will leave “outward bending” metal at the tear. (Tensile strength being a lot less than compressive strength, you want to to tension if at all possible to tear metal apart.)

    Now think about a pipeline. They even hint at this when talking about the trench in the mud under it. You want a torpedo to bury in the mud under it, then explosively lift it up, tearing it in half. That’s the way to approach the pipe at it’s weakest. In tension and with the internal pressure helping you tear it open, instead of fighting your attempt at compression. This, BTW, will also give you outward bending metal at the point where it starts to tear open as the pressure inside pushes the weakened spot outward (after lifting and bending forces have stretched it a bit thin & induced cracking)

Anything to say?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.