Wrong thread to drag the Nord Stream pipelines into, but ...

The reason the US opposed the Russian pipelines (NS 1 & 2) is they would make Germany even more dependent on Russia for energy. 

Russia would not hesitate to leverage that supply line to coerce Germany into their corner regarding national security and economic issues.

Without any evidence, saying the US set off 4 explosions taking out 3 of the 4 lines that made up the Nord Stream 1 & 2 pipelines is pure conspiracy theory. 

Plenty of others had reason to see the project fail.  It was the first pipeline project to bypass Ukraine and Poland to deliver Russian natural gas directly to West Europe. Sounds like motive to me.

please prove the US blew up the pipeline
and don't post a video of someone speculating it can be done and call it a "smoking gun"...

Too bad; Trump knows who did it and that's good enough for me.

The reason the US opposed the Russian pipelines (NS 1 & 2) is they would make Germany even more dependent on Russia for energy. 

Russia would not hesitate to leverage that supply line to coerce Germany into their corner regarding national security and economic issues.

First of all, it is not the business of the US empire to make any judgments and/or decision on any sovereign nation's energy policy.

Second, why would the US empire care what Germany does unless it considers Germany a vassal state under its control?

Without any evidence, saying the US set off 4 explosions taking out 3 of the 4 lines that made up the Nord Stream 1 & 2 pipelines is pure conspiracy theory. 

Plenty of others had reason to see the project fail.  It was the first pipeline project to bypass Ukraine and Poland to deliver Russian natural gas directly to West Europe. Sounds like motive to me.

Saying Ukraine or NATO ally Poland had the means to undertake the blowing up of the Nord Stream pipeline without the US empire's prior knowledge or consent is far more a conspiracy theory to me.

so you state it as fact, yet have no proof
got it...

Too bad; Trump knows who did it and that's good enough for me.

Too bad; Trump knows who did it and that's good enough for me.

Based on your comment, you must also believe anyone who pleads the 5th must be guilty, right?

Trump never said the US was involved.  He only said answering the question would get the US in trouble.

If it was any of our allies and we showed evidence it was one or more of them, the US would be in trouble from that.

If it was Ukraine and/or Poland and/or any of our European allies, the US would be in trouble by making that public.

What if it was Syrian rebels, and he is protecting them? 

What if the US gave/sold the explosives and technology used but was never informed of the planned attacks?

Just because he claims to know the guilty party/parties doesn't mean it was the US.

What if he believes it was the group or nation he was told, but the Intelligence agencies lied to him?  Would not be a fiurst.

Duke invites a jew to speak at their graduation ceremony and pro humus grads walk out.

The jew was comedian Jerry Seinfield.



Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

To the Pro Palestinian supporters:  Is this the genocide you are talking about?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/opinion-the-israelis-prove-biden-wrong-on-rafah/ar-BB1mSdZh?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=0df23b84efd8476781f9b0cd839404e7&ei=15

No need to worry, it says anti-semitism isn't allowed.

No need to worry, it says anti-semitism isn't allowed.

so dumb. Like chickens rallyiing for Popeyes and KFC.

so dumb. Like chickens rallyiing for Popeyes and KFC.

 

They all deserve to end up in a 10pc, 14 pc, or 21 pc bucket.

No need to worry, it says anti-semitism isn't allowed.

If anyone wants to meet a college haole chick, this is the place. I'll bet she'd be dumb enough to fall for "just the tip".

Mass murder is wrong no matter who is doing it, and Israel is an apartheid regime currently conducting an ethnic cleansing program.

Palestinians deserve their own state.

I'm still researching the whys as to WHY fellow arab countries are reluctant to help the Palestinian cause.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/02/21/why-arab-states-wont-support-palestinians-qa-00142277#:~:text=Despite%20public%20support%20for%20Palestinian,across%20the%20border%2C%20he%20says.

I'm still researching the whys as to WHY fellow arab countries are reluctant to help the Palestinian cause.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/02/21/why-arab-states-wont-support-palestinians-qa-00142277#:~:text=Despite%20public%20support%20for%20Palestinian,across%20the%20border%2C%20he%20says.

Here's another take with similar points but less beating around the bush when it comes to Israeli policies of displacement and ethnic cleansing

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2023/5/14/the-arab-world-has-forsaken-the-palestine-cause

I'm still researching the whys as to WHY fellow arab countries are reluctant to help the Palestinian cause.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/02/21/why-arab-states-wont-support-palestinians-qa-00142277#:~:text=Despite%20public%20support%20for%20Palestinian,across%20the%20border%2C%20he%20says.

Palestinians are basically like crazy homeless people. You wouldn't want them in your neighborhood.

Most of the Arab countries exist in a uneasy balance where the leadership could be overthrown by admitting the Palestinians.  For example Egypt exists on the fine line  with half the population supporting the current administration which is peaceful, modern, and stable and the other half are militant radicals that want strict Islam.  Hamas is related to the Muslim Brotherhood that took over Egypt in 2011 and was kicked out a few years later.  That could happen again if they admit Palestinians who would have majority rule.

Gaza actually belongs to Egypt, but Egypt doesn't want it back for that reason.

Here's another take with similar points but less beating around the bush when it comes to Israeli policies of displacement and ethnic cleansing

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2023/5/14/the-arab-world-has-forsaken-the-palestine-cause

I'd take that with a grain of salt from Aljazeera which is the CNN of the Arab media.  It explains the Palestinian crisis like how Democrats explain the border crisis.

I'd take that with a grain of salt from Aljazeera which is the CNN of the Arab media.  It explains the Palestinian crisis like how Democrats explain the border crisis.

The Politico article interviewing a former state department official isn't exactly bias free either. Weapons manufacturers make a lot of money off middle east chaos and the CIA controls pretty much all mainstream media in this country.

When you put the to articles together it is curious how the two different narratives converge at some points, which means there are probably some nuggets of truth to be found in the haystack of lies and propaganda surrounding this issue.

Mass murder is wrong no matter who is doing it, and Israel is an apartheid regime currently conducting an ethnic cleansing program.

Palestinians deserve their own state.

Define what you think apartheid is.

Here's the actual definition:

a system of keeping groups of people separate and treating them differently,
especially when this results in disadvantage for one group

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/apartheid

The only way for Israel to be engaged in apartheid is if they were the governing nation over Gaza and the Palestinians.

In South Africa, apartheid was used to describe how the South African government instituted a system under which people of different races were kept separate by law, and white people were given more political rights and educational and other advantages.

So, unless you can show how Gaza and the Palestinians are under the Israeli government, and how the government discriminates among its citizens based on race or ethnicity, then the use of the word apartheid doesn't have any applicability in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Just tossing around terms you merely THINK apply shows how biased you might be.