The Lusitania had nearly 1,200 of its passengers killed when it sank. It was clearly sunk by a German submarine. That was a much more overt act of war.
There is no such thing as NATO waters, only the territorial waters of NATO members, who must choose to invoke Article 5.
Re:Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea
by eternalban on Wednesday September 28, 2022 @11:44AM
(#33009314)
In the sense that it is chuck full of NATO military naval bases and must be monitored extensively.
I had the same thought regarding passengers as you when posting that item, so your point is well taken. It was in the sense of it doesn't have to be state property: anything that ultimately is deemed a malicious act directed at a nation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Lusitania (not state property)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9b/19150508...
> This is not an act of war with Germany.
It can be construed as such, but certainly not by Germany. They are not strong enough to make a stink about it. Powerful states can take offense at the smallest thing. Weaker nations put up with lots of shit. (Is not, for example, what is done to Russia economic warfare? Do you see them declaring war? No. Because they are weaker.)
So boundary of what constitute an act of war is somewhat fuzzy not completely crisp.
> This happened in international waters.
Yes, and NATO waters.
> The pipeline is already shut down. This does not affect Germany's gas supply, as they were already receiving no gas from Nordstream
Addressed multiple times in this thread. Options closed. Decision trees altered. Game theory.
p.s.
A nice map to go with this thread. The remaining functional gas pipelines from Russia to Germany both go through Poland and Ukraine. Both Poland and Ukraine have 'difficult' relations with Germany and 'hostile' relations with Russia.
https://nitter.net/pic/orig/media%2FFdranneXoAIxgAL.jpg