65 comments

    1. With Richter scale explosions. A second hours after it was realized the first wasn’t enough. Good thing that same week a new pipeline went online. What a coincidence!

  1. we already have enough to worry abt with climate change that we don’t need governments intentionally blowing up pipelines ๐Ÿ˜ซ

    1. @Anthony Williams Damm is this argument stupid.
      1. New York isnt built at sea level but 33 feet above sea level
      2. This is already causing problems which is why New York builds a system of walls and flood gates for 1.4 billion
      3.Lakes are not connected to the ocean so rising sea levels are not affecting them. But droughts (which are also something that can become more regular due to climate change) do.

  2. Why would Russia damage their own pipeline when they could just close the valve? It’s a short term problem that forces Germany to find a long term alternative source of gas.

  3. โ€œItโ€™s focused I say I think itโ€™s I I havenโ€™t look I have trouble even mentioning even saying to myself my own head the number of years. I no more think of myself as being as old as I am than fly. I mean itโ€™s just not uh uh I havenโ€™t observed anything in terms of thereโ€™s not things I donโ€™t do now that I did before whether itโ€™s physical or mental or anything elseโ€
    – Joe Biden

    1. Of course you do. You must lower your quality of life so they can maintain theirs. What did you think serf life would be like?

  4. Good lord, while we’re at it let’s just keep up all this back and forth until we’re trying to learn how to smelt iron again (whatever smelting is) while rubbing two sticks together to start a fire (because it’s SUPER easy…obviously) all while dealing with this weird bomb sickness thing..

    ๐Ÿคฆโ€โ™‚๏ธ

  5. There are a few questions that need an answer.
    1. Who has the capability to destroy these pipelines?
    2. Who has a history of destroying foreign property?
    3. Who was fiercely against the existence of these pipelines?
    4. Who threatened earlier on to be determined to disable these pipelines?
    5. Who benefits most of destruction of these pipelines?

    1. @F. W. I think this is a more relevant set of suggestive questions:

      1) Who has already killed several Gazprom oligarchs?

      2) Whoโ€™s weaponization of gas is costing Russian oligarchs billions in revenue?

      3) Who pulled a stunt with a turbine to stop the gas flowing through Nordstream?

      4) Who stands to lose his life if his underlings can turn the money faucet right back on if they get rid of him and abandon his invasion of Ukraine?

      5) Who just annexed parts of Ukraine so he can paint any and all opposition as interfering directly with the defense of the motherland?

      ๐Ÿ˜„

    2. Why would Russia damage a pipeline that it made(invested) when it could just be shut-down?Threats against Nord stream were made by none other then the U.S….so, who do you think did this? Not sure?…U.S.-European military exercises on the island of Bornholm (Sweden-organized), also the area where pipeline-leaks occurred in both 1 and 2. The arrogance and corruption of Amerikan politicians is beyond acceptable .

  6. What would the Biden admin do without cnn ???? You guys deserve like a bonus or some kind of special reward from the Biden admin

    Itโ€™s amazing to see a media channel just repeat and help whatever their handlers are told to say at cnn

    1. @Ver Coda to be fair, here in the UK we also think journalists are scum, although most of you aren’t actually real journalists anyway.

  7. I fully agree with one of the speakers who said ‘we should look at who might benefit from this?’ while speaking about who were behind Nord Stream Pipeline sabotages. Besides looking at motives (ie the benefit question), one also need to investigate who has the technology and military might to do so. With both of these questions addressed, the suspect becomes so obvious.

    The world should loathe the party responsible for the sabotage. First, this is a deliberate act to cause massive environmental damage. Second, non-military targets are the subject of attacks. And that in turn affects the likelihood of their end-users (energy consumers in Europe) and its investors (Russia primarily, followed by Germany, Dutch and France). And lastly, we shall not understate the consequence of someone opening the ‘pandora box’ – an extremely bad precedent for conflicting parties to destroy civilian infra-structures and utilities.

    1. @Kristy Campbell We now you are a paid agitator and its a confirmation that ther’s trhut in this remark thanks for the validation

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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