Well, silence is not the correct word, I agree. But the reaction was kind of mild, when you think about that it was a terrorist attack on seemingly very important infrastructure and thus on Germany’s sovereignity. And that holds especially true after it became clear that it wasn’t the Russians but someone who wanted to influence Germany’s stance on Russia’s invasion. Nobody cared.
I mean, Germany is obviously not in the position, but the US basically devastates whole regions for less. Thus it can be argued, that the reaction was comparably “silent”.
It still is quite strange for him to focus on Nord Stream. Yeah, it was important infrastructure. But it was switched off for quite a while due to sanctions against russia before the attack. So not great, but there was no immediate impact for people.
I could understand if he was focussing on silence in regard of the Ukraine war or even Gaza, but Nord Stream is strange
I think he took it as an example, because it was basically an direct attack on Germany. So the example is crass, as in “if it doesn’t fit into the mainstream story, we even ‘ignore’ direct attacks”.
While the silence on the Gaza genocide holds just as true, it is not a direct attack and thus not such a strong example for the point.
NS2 should not have existed in the first place. Don’t you feel shame for building huge pipeline around whole Eastern Europe just so your trade wouldn’t be interrupted as russia invades everything? Because you should feel the shame. It have been built when russia already invaded Ukraine.
And yes, it wasn’t yet used, but almost finished state of it gave russia more courage to launch full scale invasion.
The shame already begins in still burning gas in the 21st century, no matter where it comes from and how it gets to Germany (or other countries for that matter) ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I mean, when Nordstream was conceived, everybody and their mother loved it: in the public opinion of the late 00s Ukraine was basically the devil and state enemy, stealing “our gas which we paid for”. Dumb take even then, but instead of just saying “ok, let’s start an effort to not use gas anymore” somebody came up with Nordstream. Turns out infrastructure projects take longer than huge shifts in the geopolitical landscape.
You do understand that late 00s is when pro-Ukrainian president in Ukraine have been elected, and russia was using economic pressure as an instrument to make him unpopular and, as a result, installed pro-russian puppet Yanukovich?
And instantly all the gas issues vanished, 30% discount was given, in exchange for permission to extend Russia’s lease of a major naval base in the Ukrainian Black Sea port of Sevastopol for an additional 25 years - the soldiers from this base occupied Crimea in 2014.
Well, silence is not the correct word, I agree. But the reaction was kind of mild, when you think about that it was a terrorist attack on seemingly very important infrastructure and thus on Germany’s sovereignity. And that holds especially true after it became clear that it wasn’t the Russians but someone who wanted to influence Germany’s stance on Russia’s invasion. Nobody cared.
I mean, Germany is obviously not in the position, but the US basically devastates whole regions for less. Thus it can be argued, that the reaction was comparably “silent”.
It still is quite strange for him to focus on Nord Stream. Yeah, it was important infrastructure. But it was switched off for quite a while due to sanctions against russia before the attack. So not great, but there was no immediate impact for people.
I could understand if he was focussing on silence in regard of the Ukraine war or even Gaza, but Nord Stream is strange
I think he took it as an example, because it was basically an direct attack on Germany. So the example is crass, as in “if it doesn’t fit into the mainstream story, we even ‘ignore’ direct attacks”.
While the silence on the Gaza genocide holds just as true, it is not a direct attack and thus not such a strong example for the point.
NS2 should not have existed in the first place. Don’t you feel shame for building huge pipeline around whole Eastern Europe just so your trade wouldn’t be interrupted as russia invades everything? Because you should feel the shame. It have been built when russia already invaded Ukraine.
And yes, it wasn’t yet used, but almost finished state of it gave russia more courage to launch full scale invasion.
The shame already begins in still burning gas in the 21st century, no matter where it comes from and how it gets to Germany (or other countries for that matter) ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I mean, when Nordstream was conceived, everybody and their mother loved it: in the public opinion of the late 00s Ukraine was basically the devil and state enemy, stealing “our gas which we paid for”. Dumb take even then, but instead of just saying “ok, let’s start an effort to not use gas anymore” somebody came up with Nordstream. Turns out infrastructure projects take longer than huge shifts in the geopolitical landscape.
You do understand that late 00s is when pro-Ukrainian president in Ukraine have been elected, and russia was using economic pressure as an instrument to make him unpopular and, as a result, installed pro-russian puppet Yanukovich?
And instantly all the gas issues vanished, 30% discount was given, in exchange for permission to extend Russia’s lease of a major naval base in the Ukrainian Black Sea port of Sevastopol for an additional 25 years - the soldiers from this base occupied Crimea in 2014.