First serious analysis I’ve seen for the boogaloo. The rural areas would win, of course, as they always have, because they control all the resources the cities need.
5 Likes
Boy, he couldn’t have read my mind better. I, too, believe, though wish it weren’t true, that we will have a military-type civil war, and this time the divisions will be radically different from the last.
I believe fervently that the state militias will be a large component, AND that they will either stand down and refuse to carry out leftist orders OR take an active role. Not so sure about the active duty, though. I think the officer corps has been thoroughly corrupted by left-wing propaganda, but expect the enlisted ranks are still conservative. Would be an interesting situation when lefty officers make some dumb order and the troops refuse to follow. I know in Nam the troops were very attuned to who led them, and the term, “Payback is a MedEvac” had serious meaning for officers who didn’t measure up. One of my scumbag captain/company commander had TWO attempted fraggins before the command finally got smart and pulled him.
8 Likes
8 Likes
12 Likes
5 Likes
7 Likes
5 Likes
I’m posting this for the science guys. How plausible?
https://thelawdogfiles.com/2022/09/nordstream.html
The Wikipedia entry for “2022 Burkina Faso coup d’état” now points to a disambiguation page.
3 Likes
Not very credible. A methane clathrate ice plug in a static gas pipeline is a possibility – but the gas was static, not moving. Hence the idea of the ice plug gaining sufficient velocity to burst through inches of steel is unlikely. The probability that THREE ice plugs formed in three separate pipelines and all popped on the same day? That is just silly!
Remember that Gazprom operates one of the largest (possibly the largest) gas pipeline networks on the planet, including running lines in Arctic conditions. They know what they are doing, as evidenced by the very low incidences of problems.
No, the rational explanation is that the US government organized the large pipeline explosions to prevent Germany from abandoning its rather lukewarm support for the Kiev regime and cutting a separate deal with Russia for gas supplies. Whether the US government did this through the US military, the CIA, or the Polish military remains to be learned.
8 Likes
3 Likes
Bruce Willis has sold the “digital twin” rights to his likeness for commercial video production use, according to a report by The Telegraph. This move allows the Hollywood actor to digitally appear in future commercials and possibly even films, and he has already appeared in a Russian commercial using the technology.
Willis, who has been diagnosed with a language disorder called aphasia, announced that he would be “stepping away” from acting earlier this year. Instead, he will license his digital rights through a company called Deepcake. The company is based in Tbilisi, Georgia, and is doing business in America while being registered as a corporation in Delaware.
Here is the Russian commercial starring deepfake Bruce Willis:
4 Likes
I read that yesterday. Allowing for a lawyer’s paraphrasing of his petroleum engineer acquaintance (hydrodyamic shock, not combustion explosions), it seems more than plausible. Including the timing explanation.
{ Full disclosure: I have extensive professional experience with fracking, but not pipeline operations. }
2 Likes
From the linked article. Scroll down to see an interesting video:
5 Likes
And how do fracers make holes in the much lighter steel tubes used in oil & gas wells? They do not use hydrodynamic shocks, that is for sure. They use explosive shaped charges.
The tell is that three separate massively-strong steel pipes all developed the same problem within hours of each other. As the old saying goes – Once is an accident; twice is a coincidence; three times is enemy action.
4 Likes
Indeed, they want the holes to be precisely placed and precisely sized. Note perforation guns aren’t just for making holes in the casing–they also start (most of) the cracks in the surrounding rock that hydraulic fracturing exploits.
But these points are totally unresponsive to the scenarios suggested by LawDog. Knock down some other strawman.
3 Likes
LawDog – being a lawyer – did not provide any rational explanation of how to accelerate a hypothesized methane clathrate plug to high velocity in pipelines in which the gas was static, not flowing. Nor did he provide any rational explanation of why the same very unusual failure mechanism would occur nearly simultaneously in three separate pipelines – both of the lines in the NordStream1 system and the quite separate pipeline in the NordStream 2 system. But rationality does not seem to count for much when a lawyer hates on Russia.
Here is an alternative explanation involving very strange behavior on the part of a US navy plane on the day of the multiple explosions:
The Nord Stream 2 Pipeline Sabotage — MonkeyWerx (monkeywerxus.com)
Personally, I would guess that the US (not us, our rulers) had placed the explosive charges besides the pipelines some time ago, probably during naval exercises in the Baltic earlier this year. The Navy plane was probably there on the day to trigger and/or observe. Time will tell – although we can reasonably predict that reporting in the West will be … incomplete.
4 Likes
But he did. Go read it again. Getting the plugs to dissipate is prone to triggering sudden decomposition of a solid hydrate back to gas. A pressure spike that itself can rupture a pipe, but can also launch surrounding solids down the pipe like huge projectiles. Projectiles that don’t take corners well, and can trigger further decomposition on impact.
Search google for “water hammer” for some more general background.
I also think it unfair to label LawDog a Russia hater. His article doesn’t assert that this must be what happened, but that incompetence better explains the results than malice. My judgement is that he has a point.
2 Likes
There is no physical reason for a hypothesized methane hydrate plug to suddenly decompose. Remember that the first indication of the problem was that the pressure of static, non-moving gas in the pipeline suddenly dropped from around 1,500 psi to 100 psi – hydrostatic at the presumed depth of the line break. There was no significant pressure differential within the line to cause gas to move until the line was breached, releasing gas to the ocean.
Nor is there any indication on the maps that the disruptions occurred at corners in the line. Big pipelines tend to have rather gentle curves for good engineering reasons, not sharp corners.
And the lawyer’s hypothesis does not explain the “coincidence” of the same ultra-rare failure happening near-simultaneously in 3 separate pipelines.
Incompetence is always with us, and should never be rejected as a primary or contributing cause. But the methane clathrate hypothesis simply does not stand up.
2 Likes
Clearly, you haven’t re-read it. Or are simply filtering the material unconsciously. Your assertions that the explanations are missing or don’t stand up are just that: assertions.
I assert that the explanations are sufficiently complete to make the hypothesis plausible. So there. 
Carry on. I feel no need to respond further.
1 Like