|
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. |
|
|
United States44386 Posts
On October 02 2025 15:26 zatic wrote:
KwarK is really going to die on the hill of weird mental acrobatics that despite all evidence, all perpetrators identified, some of the arrested, intelligence from multiple Western agencies, it was Russia over some contractual legalty. .
I’m less informed on it than you probably. Did they tell us why they did it? I’m on the hill of Russia being the party that had already taken the step of cutting off the gas supply in Nordstream and Ukraine being the party that has kept gas flowing for the last few years. I’ve been there for a few years and I’ve not been keeping track of new developments, I’ll leave it if the evidence is right, I just haven’t been checking for new evidence. This isn’t a hill that I care enough about to stay informed on.
Essentially my stance is that if it wasn't Russia they did an excellent job of framing themselves for the crime.
What we all agree on:
1. Russia told Germany that if Germany didn't change their stance then the Nordstream gas would be cut off.
2. Germany didn't change their stance.
3. Russia cut the gas off in the short term citing mechanical issues.
4. Russia again told Germany that the gas supply would only resume if Germany changed their stance.
5. Germany still didn't change their stance.
6. The mechanical issue cutoff excuse started to wear thin, to keep Germany cut off a more permanent solution by Russia would be required.
7. "Someone", likely a state actor, did a more permanent solution.
If it turns out that 7 was Ukrainian intelligence then I won't cry about that. Their national existence was at stake and Germany shouldn't have been buying Russian gas anyway, the forced resolution only prevented Germany from collaborating which they shouldn't and wouldn't have done anyway. It's justifiable. If anything I'd find it being Ukraine funny because of how hard Russia set themselves up, it becomes a "sucks to suck" situation. Maybe don't keep threatening to set fire to a building if you don't want to be accused when it catches fire.
Either Russia did it in which I'm content to blame them or Russia kept threatening to do it and then got framed in which case it's funny to blame them.
|
On October 02 2025 15:26 zatic wrote:
KwarK is really going to die on the hill of weird mental acrobatics that despite all evidence, all perpetrators identified, some of the arrested, intelligence from multiple Western agencies, it was Russia over some contractual legalty. .
Not much of weird mental acrobatic if I'm honest. Right now, there are no publicly known evidence that proves anything one way or another. I'm sure more will be brough to light in the coming months. Currently, all we can do is speculate
|
On October 03 2025 00:14 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2025 15:26 zatic wrote:
KwarK is really going to die on the hill of weird mental acrobatics that despite all evidence, all perpetrators identified, some of the arrested, intelligence from multiple Western agencies, it was Russia over some contractual legalty. . Not much of weird mental acrobatic if I'm honest. Right now, there are no publicly known evidence that proves anything one way or another. I'm sure more will be brough to light in the coming months. Currently, all we can do is speculate
My take is that even regardless of who's "proven" to be at fault, there's going to be a significant proportion of the population that just doesn't trust the result.
|
On October 03 2025 02:07 Lmui wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2025 00:14 Excludos wrote:On October 02 2025 15:26 zatic wrote:
KwarK is really going to die on the hill of weird mental acrobatics that despite all evidence, all perpetrators identified, some of the arrested, intelligence from multiple Western agencies, it was Russia over some contractual legalty. . Not much of weird mental acrobatic if I'm honest. Right now, there are no publicly known evidence that proves anything one way or another. I'm sure more will be brough to light in the coming months. Currently, all we can do is speculate My take is that even regardless of who's "proven" to be at fault, there's going to be a significant proportion of the population that just doesn't trust the result.
That statement is true about just about everything these days.
|
On October 02 2025 18:10 Silvanel wrote:
I wouldn't go as far as to say that there is a clear picture of this. Over here (in Poland) NOONE is trusting germans on this. The issue is political, as always was with Nordstream. They have to put someone in jail, doesnt matter if they are guilty or not.
There really is no need to trust Germany about this.
The way Sweden and Denmark allowed their investigations to die shows clearly that the strike was executed by someone Ukraine affiliated.
How much permission they've asked from Kiev is another matter.
|
If Russia wanted to cut off NS2, couldn't they just have...cut off NS2?
Occam's Razor puts that one squarely in the Ukraine-affiliated camp.
|
On October 03 2025 03:52 Admiral Yang wrote:
If Russia wanted to cut off NS2, couldn't they just have...cut off NS2?
Occam's Razor puts that one squarely in the Ukraine-affiliated camp.
Not at all. "just turning it off" would incur political pressure to turn it back on. Blowing it up makes that impossible. Blowing it up and blaming the Ukrainians is a huge win.
So Occam's razor isn't really all that obvious in this case, as motivation points in either direction
|
United States44386 Posts
On October 03 2025 03:52 Admiral Yang wrote:
If Russia wanted to cut off NS2, couldn't they just have...cut off NS2?
Russia never delivered any gas through NS2. Your assertion that they didn’t cut it off is flawed. A cut off would be when they decide that from now on the gas flow will be zero. That happened. You’re just not calling it a cut off because it was already not flowing.
To put it another way, let’s say Putin went on national tv and declared for all to see that NS2 was being cut off by Russia. How would that look different to what they were already doing by not sending any gas? Isn’t “just have cut off”, as you put it, what they did?
They did decide to not send gas to Europe down NS1 though. That is a thing that Russia did. So your premise of what it would look like if Russia decided to cut off Europe did happen. They asserted a mechanical issue would prevent pumping until sanctions were removed by Germany. Germany started legal proceedings and Russia declares force majeure after the sabotage to NS1.
|
Also once Putin falls, he'd want things to be so bad he'd look good. Trump is succeeding in something similar. Do so much damage in a short time that the consequence starts showing the minute he is out of power and blame Biden.
|
Another refinery got "technical difficulties" as Russians put it now. Apparently this brings down their oil refinement capabilities down by 50% pre-war. They also had to stop some crude oil extraction because there are no markets for it (easily accessible) and no more storage capacity since there's nowhere for it to go as it can't be refined or exported.
If this keeps up and they'd have to stop extraction in Siberia when winter comes those facilities are never coming back up online because of permafrost.
|
Russian Federation193 Posts
On October 03 2025 03:52 Admiral Yang wrote:
If Russia wanted to cut off NS2, couldn't they just have...cut off NS2?
Occam's Razor puts that one squarely in the Ukraine-affiliated camp.
Why would we cut off NS2? We were going to give Germany gas via the pipeline that is not located in Ukraine
|
Russian Federation193 Posts
On October 06 2025 10:27 Manit0u wrote:
Apparently this brings down their oil refinement capabilities down by 50% pre-war.
Where do you get these numbers?))
|
On October 06 2025 17:50 EEk1TwEEk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2025 10:27 Manit0u wrote:
Apparently this brings down their oil refinement capabilities down by 50% pre-war. Where do you get these numbers?))
From multiple sources, you know things are getting bad when propagandists are switching their subject.
The thing about this number is that it is not something symmetric and linear.
You can produce more than you need until you don't. It is a hard wall and the collapse is very fast after that. The only thing more serious than oil shortage, is food shortage. It's weird how things went from a 3 days conquest of ukraine to "well, it's not technically 50% of our oil refinery capacity that has been destroyed, it is 47.5% fact check your numbers, you are victim of western propaganda."
Do dumb stuff, have dumb consequences.
|
The important thing is the trend, it means that Ukraine can hit refineries faster than they can fix, fixing them become increasingly hard. It also mean that current capacity is still sufficient for Russians not to be impacted in major cities. Some place start to see crazy gas queues, but that's not general yet. This is interesting and followed closely, because it is 1. a victory condition, 2. It happens over night.
You have gas, then you don't, there is no "we have 95% of the gas we need". When that 5% is missing, the whole economy stops because people panics. Panic takes about 2-3 weeks, to spread to 100% of the population when you are talking about gas.
To avoid the panic, the government doesn't start rationing early enough, which worsen the problem furthermore. This has been seen through out history. When it is toilet paper, we can laugh about it 
|
On October 06 2025 19:43 0x64 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2025 17:50 EEk1TwEEk wrote:On October 06 2025 10:27 Manit0u wrote:
Apparently this brings down their oil refinement capabilities down by 50% pre-war. Where do you get these numbers?)) From multiple sources, you know things are getting bad when propagandists are switching their subject. The thing about this number is that it is not something symmetric and linear. You can produce more than you need until you don't. It is a hard wall and the collapse is very fast after that. The only thing more serious than oil shortage, is food shortage. It's weird how things went from a 3 days conquest of ukraine to "well, it's not technically 50% of our oil refinery capacity that has been destroyed, it is 47.5% fact check your numbers, you are victim of western propaganda." Do dumb stuff, have dumb consequences.
Last week it was reported they lost around 40% of their refining capacity. And now they've lost 3 more refineries in 3 days. 2 of them close to Moscow.
|
United States44386 Posts
On October 07 2025 01:23 Manit0u wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2025 19:43 0x64 wrote:On October 06 2025 17:50 EEk1TwEEk wrote:On October 06 2025 10:27 Manit0u wrote:
Apparently this brings down their oil refinement capabilities down by 50% pre-war. Where do you get these numbers?)) From multiple sources, you know things are getting bad when propagandists are switching their subject. The thing about this number is that it is not something symmetric and linear. You can produce more than you need until you don't. It is a hard wall and the collapse is very fast after that. The only thing more serious than oil shortage, is food shortage. It's weird how things went from a 3 days conquest of ukraine to "well, it's not technically 50% of our oil refinery capacity that has been destroyed, it is 47.5% fact check your numbers, you are victim of western propaganda." Do dumb stuff, have dumb consequences. Last week it was reported they lost around 40% of their refining capacity. And now they've lost 3 more refineries in 3 days. 2 of them close to Moscow.
I think some media are playing games with output capacity vs actual output in the quest to report ever higher numbers. If you assume that there is 25% slack capacity in the system then you can turn a drop from 80 to 60 into a 40% destruction in capacity.
|
I'm also pretty sure many outlets are conflating striking refineries responsible for 40-50% of the capacity with taking out 40-50% of the capacity. The former can happen over a long period of time, so by the time another refinery gets hit, some of the previously hit facilities may be fully operational. That said, Ukraine has increased the frequency of the attacks significantly.
|
On October 07 2025 02:06 maybenexttime wrote:
I'm also pretty sure many outlets are conflating striking refineries responsible for 40-50% of the capacity with taking out 40-50% of the capacity. The former can happen over a long period of time, so by the time another refinery gets hit, some of the previously hit facilities may be fully operational. That said, Ukraine has increased the frequency of the attacks significantly.
Additionally, a lot of journalists are really bad with numbers. So that can always play into this kind of stuff, too. They studied journalism, not maths or sciences.
Kinda slightly related anecdote time: + Show Spoiler +
I worked for a local newspaper as an internship during corona. We regularly got some numbers from the local government and published them. I, as an intern, looked at those numbers and said "These numbers are not correct." Basically no one there could understand what i was trying to explain. They were sets of numbers like "Last weeks number" "This weeks number" "Increase in the last week" for a lot of local area codes. And looking at them, very obviously "Last week" + "Increase" didn't fit "Today". So after a bit of convincing i got to call the guy from the local government who sent the numbers, who immediately understood the problem i had with them. About an hour later a new mail with updated numbers arrived, apparently they just didn't update the "last week" number. And also apparently, no other local newspaper noticed that, either. So i got "check the numbers from the government" as a new task each week.
The basic core idea stands and is usually correct, clearly a lot of refineries get blown up. But i wouldn't always trust detailed numbers by journalists. They are almost certainly just repeating some number someone else told them without accurately understanding what that number exactly means.
|
On October 07 2025 06:20 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2025 02:06 maybenexttime wrote:
I'm also pretty sure many outlets are conflating striking refineries responsible for 40-50% of the capacity with taking out 40-50% of the capacity. The former can happen over a long period of time, so by the time another refinery gets hit, some of the previously hit facilities may be fully operational. That said, Ukraine has increased the frequency of the attacks significantly. Additionally, a lot of journalists are really bad with numbers. So that can always play into this kind of stuff, too. They studied journalism, not maths or sciences. Kinda slightly related anecdote time: + Show Spoiler +
I worked for a local newspaper as an internship during corona. We regularly got some numbers from the local government and published them. I, as an intern, looked at those numbers and said "These numbers are not correct." Basically no one there could understand what i was trying to explain. They were sets of numbers like "Last weeks number" "This weeks number" "Increase in the last week" for a lot of local area codes. And looking at them, very obviously "Last week" + "Increase" didn't fit "Today". So after a bit of convincing i got to call the guy from the local government who sent the numbers, who immediately understood the problem i had with them. About an hour later a new mail with updated numbers arrived, apparently they just didn't update the "last week" number. And also apparently, no other local newspaper noticed that, either. So i got "check the numbers from the government" as a new task each week.
The basic core idea stands and is usually correct, clearly a lot of refineries get blown up. But i wouldn't always trust detailed numbers by journalists. They are almost certainly just repeating some number someone else told them without accurately understanding what that number exactly means.
There is one Polish source where they annotate every single refinery attack, including how many fuel transit lines were disabled, what was the refinery's output, when was it last attacked, when was it repaired etc.
Based on that you can make some extrapolations and more concrete numbers. Russia has plenty of smaller refineries but not much that can output 8 million tons of fuel for example. One of the reasons why they're now banning fuel exports and stopping some of the crude extraction. They simply can't keep up.
But it's all pretty much moot until the shockwave from that reaches Moscow, St. Petersburg etc. Rural Russia doesn't matter to them since they can live on vodka and potatoes but when richer areas and big cities start experiencing fuel and food shortages this is when the shit will really hit the fan.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
