Legendary journalist Seymour Hersh has reported America destroyed the NS pipeline.

https://www.patreon.com/posts/radio-war-nerd-78596220

https://seymourhersh.substack.com/p/...he-nord-stream

We all knew it, but now it is in the public eye.

everyone awfully quiet about this

No, it was Poots! More Billons to Ukraine!

Is there any new evidence or is this just more conjecture?
Conjecture from Seymour Hersh is still just conjecture.

Based

Seymour Hersh who was right about My Lai, Abu Ghraib, the death of Osama Bin Laden?

The story coming from someone that credible isn't easily dismissed. There is also the fact that Russia blowing up their own pipeline is retarded, and that the Euros don't seem particularly upset or keen on investigating (because they know it was us).

But no, the evidence is still "anonymous sources".

The commies here would be losing their chit of trump did this

This. I mean, I agree it was probably the US, but ultimately without proof it doesn't matter.

How else are we supposed to launch 40 million dollar investigations if not for conjecture, un-named sources, and fake documents?

yep lol

No US is our friends they wouold never do that to a friend.

cliffs on death of Osama Bin Laden?

In equally surprising news, bear sh!t has been discovered in the woods.

A guy from Pakistani intel walked into the US embassy and told them where Bin Laden was. He had been held under house arrest by the Pakis. It wasn't extracted from "enhanced interrogation". Also, Bin Laden was unarmed and ill, and he and some of his family were just executed outright. And the Pakistanis knew about the raid in advance. That's why there was no huge freakout over it.

https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v37/...sama-bin-laden

Wouldn’t surprise me. It’s the first thing I thought of when it did happen.

I had heard some of that. The whole thing was fishy Day 1 when the US lets a seal team 6 guy go on a frigging media tour and tell everyone what happened.

Imagine it was Isreal rofl

Yea. It's way less dramatic than "we killed him in cold blood and killed some others just to make it seem legit".

But hey we also green lit Saddam to attack Kuwait, then paid a crying girl to sell our war effort to the public. We also had an incredibly ridiculously successful terror attack, followed by a war in afghanistan to "take out the terrorists" of whom there were only around 200 or so. So, we declared war on the Taliban, which had zero to do with anything, and invaded a nation of over 20 million people. Oh and when their leader offered to turn over Bin Laden, we refused to accept...

But Afghanistan does border Iran and China...Hmm...

And then there was the yellow cake Uranium we never found. Then a huge war over that in Iraq lol. Then there was the viagra rape armies in Libya. Ended with Gaddafi sodomized with a bayonet. (Don't you pay any attention to Sarkozy's motives or Hillary's coverups!) Oh and then Assad supposedly gassed his own people in Syria because reasons. And we have the "genocide" in China that has a bodycount of under 1000. And there are no nazis in Ukraine, and Russia is clearly shelling nuclear plants under their control and blew up their own pipeline.

And we have biolabs in Ukraine, but we don't have biolabs in Ukraine. We arm moderate jihadis in Syria and moderate nazis in Ukraine.

Srsly when are our people going to wake the fuk up and fix our broken and insane foreign policy? How many more people are going to die over this chit? These nation building projects generally fail and bring ruin to the countries we claim to want to "help". We jump in bed with the absolute chittiest people, and they are even worse than the ones we are trying to overthrow. And our govt just blatantly lies and people swallow this diarrhea and trust the fuking CIA. I mean holy chit dude.

inb4 Dogkrack says it was the Jews in the US government behind this.

The only credible, albeit lottery-winning-odds chances, of doing anything with our foreign policy in my lifetime boils down to three and only three shots:

1) Ron Paul
2) Tulsi Gabbard
3) Donald Trump

Paul and Gabbard, long shots b/c their own parties despise them and will work as hard as they can to undermine, disavow or cuck them outright. Trump, long shot because he had slim (but far better) odds in 2016 but despite better odds, he was a wildcard.

We had one of those 3 shots miraculously come to be for a brief time. I gave Trump support, largely on the hope he might reign in at least some of our insanity. More or less he did, although very little.

Trump blew a lot of hot wind about draining the swamp but he played ball quite a bit with a lot of alligators. I feel like had Ron or should Tulsi ever get that close, they'll probably just have to JFK them if they are sincere and may make a good attempt to do something about it.

The thing is if Tulsi actually gains power, they won't be able to JFK her without making her a martyr. The public would then know for a fact how corrupt they are. They've been smearing her with this Russia angle, but nobody is buying it. A lot of the GOP likes her, and many on the left from the Bernie camp, like me, like her too, in spite of the democrat hit job. But I don't see her ever winning.

Ron Paul's too old, and as a committed libertarian who wants to go back to the gold standard, he's unelectable (this is in spite of his noble and principled antiwar views). His son may gain prominence at some point, but he has burned bridges with much of the scientific community by going after Fauci. Still, I feel like Rand Paul will emerge as the most formidable GOP leader in the future. He could win if the public starts caring about foreign policy again.

Trump was a sellout. He did the same thing Obama did. He came in and claimed he'd change the system, but ended up listening to horrible people. Now that many of those people oppose him openly, he may yet switch sides and challenge the hawks. But he's basically unelectable.

IDK how this plays out, but it is encouraging to see Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham having Tulsi on their shows. She's getting a lot of exposure, and it seems a lot of the GOP is embracing her view. It would be hilarious if the GOP becomes an antiwar party. War is costly and bad for a lot of businesses. It also necessitates the expansion of govt power. So there are definitely going to be conservatives leaving the hawk camp.

Rand is 5'7".

Not happening there.

I disagree about Trump and Obama. Obama wasn't a sell out, he knew exactly what he was going to do. Trump either sold out or was in way over his head, is my best guess.

Obama went in hoping for a reset with Russia and wanted to reduce military presence globally. The foreign policy establishment resisted him at every turn. Obama really isn't the villain you think he is. In fact, he resisted the enormous pressure to arm Ukraine. Trump was an idiot who went in surrounding himself with hawks and xenophobes. But most importantly, neither made foreign policy their primary goal. They were not able to take down the blob. Rand or Tulsi would. I believe they have that kind of conviction to achieve what Obama and Trump could not. But that may also be why they won't win. Who will support them? It's sad, but much of our public are hawks. What is completely bizarre and alien thinking to you and me is the norm to them. They like the idea of war. They think it helps us get rid of the baddies and makes the world better. They are drunk on power.

The other possibility is Bernie. He's been quiet about Ukraine, but if he were in power, he would definitely change our foreign policy.

Oh yeah, that cuck would really stand up to the establishment.

I believe he would, and he's also politically savvy enough to know when something is a lost cause. He picks his battles carefully. That's how he lasted this long. And he represents a large bloc of people who would give him the power to make real changes. But yes, he is a cowardly worm compared to Tulsi Gabbard or Ron Paul, but so are most.