> the locations of the Nord Stream 1 explosions are in some of the deepest water in the area directly surrounding Bornholm. Why would a non-state actor operating off a 50 foot yacht decide to place the explosives at the most difficult and time-consuming location? The vessel was relatively small and not equipped with active AIS, so there would be hundreds of more accessible locations along the pipes for the saboteurs to place the explosive charges. On top of this, blowing the pipeline towards the deepest point in the area reduces the amount of the pipeline that is flooded and as a result makes it easier and cheaper to repair. The group chose the most difficult area to perform the dive where the damage would be the easiest to repair.
Wow. I never knew this. This is the closest Oliver Alexander came to state that the only logical perpetrator of the sabotage were the Russians.
Here, let me spell it out:
- if you are an enemy of Russia, you want to inflict as much damage as possible, with as little effort as possible. You don't pick a deep point to sabotage just because
- if you are Russia, you want to keep your options open. You blow up a part of the pipe that makes subsequent repairs as cheap as possible, so you are ok with performing a more difficult mission to do that.
Wow. I never knew this. This is the closest Oliver Alexander came to state that the only logical perpetrator of the sabotage were the Russians.
Here, let me spell it out:
- if you are an enemy of Russia, you want to inflict as much damage as possible, with as little effort as possible. You don't pick a deep point to sabotage just because
- if you are Russia, you want to keep your options open. You blow up a part of the pipe that makes subsequent repairs as cheap as possible, so you are ok with performing a more difficult mission to do that.