Russia just accused the English navy of participating in the Nord-Stream attacks, English MoD denies involvement


I don't think we need to pay much attention to the denying, whether they did or didn't do it the denial part was to be expected, but let's seriously look at this claim that England was involved. What was the evidence? None. So I myself am taking it with a grain of salt till some evidence or at least more detailed revelations surface. Only then will you see other countries reacting formally, which is why unless the Germans themselves have indications England was involved you don't need to expect a harsh response from Berlin. But does this claim even make any sense and how would Russia know?

First off, don't think Russia would create the Nord-Streams without covertly having their own security/surveillance in the area. I think the way the Swedish and German have handled the investigation and refusal to publicize the details proves that was indeed rather necessary. Now this is where things could get stuck, because if this is indeed how they know, we will most likely never know for sure. They won't risk exposing the source/method by publicizing any info from it and thus compromising it. A second possibility is they uncovered it from second hand info via espionage they collected from spies active in or with access to the Swedish/German investigation, which then means that others outside of Russia know this as well. There are other methods of course such as intercepted communication like the just recently reported hack of former PM Lettuce aka Truss, or perhaps even English (military/naval) intelligence who leaked the English involvement to Moscow 'a la' George Blake, but all this is mostly just speculating on the how, let's focus on the why.

Never forget that the Nord-Stream attack was primarily an economic attack against Germany, who has ever since Brexit been involved in an economic war with England. Sure the French as well, but any fool could see the Germans are the real economic threat to any EU outsider, which is what England effectively became ever since 2020. And how has that worked out for them economically thus far?

43387c2d0c32eb3994937087dec015a5160551590310aa6816a418ad4e154357.png

87559a569cdfbf4e7235eb1ded8fcce244dc580785e2dc5c8bfb49a8d1f3b321.png

"So, how is this even relevant to bombing gas pipelines" you wonder? Anyone vaguely familiar with European dispute/war history and the English sentiment would know, ohhh I guarantee you they would know the most terrifying thing to the English, is a weak economy as the German economy flourishes and is even able to shape other nation's policy as the English can only stand by and watch. Cheap gas to Germany direly via pipelines securing both their needs and circumventing unstable countries who's transition fees make the price higher, would have cost the transit nations over 1 billion Euros per year each, money which Germany profits from since this is what lowers the cost for them. This entire process is de facto making the former transit countries more dependable and in need for (even more) Euro support.

Many people won't know this, but the English fear and precaution for Germany has always been there at unprecedented levels long after WW2. Before the German reunification London actually pleaded with Moscow to keep Germany divided as they did not want to see Germany's return. At one point they even offered to contribute financially in a last effort to try and prevent their withdrawal from East-Germany which would pave the way for a united Germany. Now, they claimed this sentiment was "shared" with other European nations as well, but thus far there's only evidence of high-level English admission. "Britain and Western Europe are not interested in the unification of Germany. The words written in the NATO communiqué may sound different, but disregard them. We do not want the unification of Germany."

One irrelevant but still very interesting point in the conversation was this part: "Therefore capitalism is not a sufficient prerequisite to create a free society. In a word, we never politically differentiated capitalism and socialism. One should rather make a distinction between total centralized control and total control of the economy, and an economic system in which people have freedom within the framework of laws established by the central government."

Uhhmmm, so total centralized government control without total centralized control over the economy? That's like saying there was total centralized control at Celsius, without control over your funds. Like, how? how does that statement even work in any real world scenario? Running on all the norms of decentralization but still obey the ludicrous laws set by the central government? Yeah, nah, "decentralized" app OpenSea showed us how that works out in practice. What's the difference if you were blocked and your funds confiscated by a centralized institution, or a fake "decentralized" one which meddled in anyway at the behest of a foreign, but still central authority aka the government? That's not decentralization, that's outsourcing centralization. Even if you leave crypto out of it, this economic model still falters in practice. Just ask Huawhy wei.😉

In conclusion, what I'm trying to say is logically it makes sense, England is more advanced militarily than other European nations who also opposed the Nord-Stream i.e. Poland, Romania, Lithuania, Estonia, so that gives them both motive and opportunity. But we can not act based on solely intuition and logic. So unless some more details emerge I don't expect anything to develop just yet or have Germany join hands with Russia confronting England. So who knows, Russia might just think exposing the English involvement in this is also worth exposing their method of uncovering it. I mean, at one point you arrest the criminal right? I get that you don't want to arrest a suspected serial killer you're watching for shoplifting, but you won't forever wait and gather info because the evidence you have against him can only put him away for a few months, at one point you act. Even if you didn't get the grand prize and able to put him away for all the things he's done, you weigh the benefits for you against the consequences for him. Once you can prove even one murder you won't allow him wander outside to kill more right? You make the arrest as the consequence will be heavy already and then afterwards try to link the relevant evidence to other cases for maximum result.

How do you rate this article?

9



Geo-Political & Economical developments
Geo-Political & Economical developments

Things are almost never as they seem. If you sincerely think that world powers would spend their money and resources in order to just "help" citizens from foreign nations, you might want to ask yourself why they've been neglecting and out right murdering their own citizens for decades. What are their true motives for wanting to fund foreign (terror) groups, start global confrontations and wars? I'll let you in on a little secret; It has NOTHING to do with "human rights" nor "democracy".

Send a $0.01 microtip in crypto to the author, and earn yourself as you read!

20% to author / 80% to me.
We pay the tips from our rewards pool.