The Poland missile thing was Ukraine, not Russia (probably accidentally), this is actually already known. Only Ukraine actually ever claimed it was Russia, and the claims were quite suspect (since Russia wasn't bombing close to that area).

Polish government members were literally saying it was a Russian missile, US sources told the AP it was a Russian missile, only after Biden met with Polish officials did everyone change their tune.

And it still hasn't been officially confirmed where the missile came from, the investigation is ongoing.

I think it was always carefully phrased (by the PL gov anyway) as "Russian-made" missile. Which could be either Ukraine or Russia.

> the West's weakness

Not weakness. A proxy war is much safer than an overt war between nuclear powers. It would be irrational to escalate unless there was no other choice. Since feigning ignorance is a choice, that's preferable to escalation. The ability to maintain this status quo, in which Russia depletes itself in a quagmire, is very advantageous to NATO. Maintaining this status quo is a show of NATO's strength.

If NATO let itself get baited into an overt war with Russia, that would be weakness.

> it was Russia

Blowing up its own pipeline that cost billions and years to build, effectively weakening its strategic position and limiting bargain options with Europe?

Yeah, sure.

You really haven't paid attention to anything Russia's done for the last 20 years, have you?

They love letting the west know they can "touch" us while maintaining plausible deniability...

Also, it's not the only pipeline to Europe... And the US could have pressured EU allies into not purchasing Russian gas regardless of what Russia did.

Try to sit back and think through things before you hit submit.

It makes no sense for Russia to destroy the only carrot it has for Europe.

While it makes perfect sense for the US to do this.

The US position and and influence over Europe strengthens while the opposite holds for Russia.

So who do you think did it?

> It makes no sense for Russia to destroy the only carrot it has for Europe.

> While it makes perfect sense for the US to do this.

As I said, people who think things like this haven't paid attention to Russia at all.

Also, as I said, the US can pressure allies into refusing Russian gas; pipeline or no pipeline.

By destroying the pipeline the US ensures that their “allies” (some may call them vassals) will toe the line. After all, those who were dependent on Russia are now dependent on the US.

Those with independent minds won’t suspend reason just because “Mikeb85” said it twice on hackernews.

> You really haven't paid attention to anything Russia's done for the last 20 years, have you?

> They love letting the west know they can "touch" us while maintaining plausible deniability...

This is just a feeling of self-importance having a crossover with years of typical boogeyman narratives.

Reality doesn't function that way, nobody will be losing sleep and precious resources just for the kicks and to stick it to the westerners, without any substantial gain - let's keep it sane and reasonable.

> Also, it's not the only pipeline to Europe...

And? Please be specific, it's impossible to guess what someone is imagining and implying.

> And the US could have pressured EU allies into not purchasing Russian gas regardless of what Russia did.

Not sure what you mean. They tried and failed. Not that they tried too hard - it would have been impossible anyway. NordStream pipelines weren't even the biggest carriers of Russian gas to Europe.