>

x    Doubt
Russia: US has questions to answer. 
U.S.: What are the questions?
Russia: We won't know until you give us answers. >

The answer is 42 >

So long! And thanks for all the fish! >

That's my wake up alarm. >

Wasn't it some time traveling Anglo Saxon? >

John Titor did it. >

I find that most people can't grasp the power and influence of John Titor. Now that he finally has the old computer hardware from 20 years ago, the world is merely a marionette dangling from his puppeteer's hands. >

It was lost debugging hardware, and he says his timeline is different from ours.
Do you think a time traveler would lie to us? >

US: Russia has questions to answer over Ukraine invasion >

I was going to say.  U.S. should reply that they will give all the information they know willingly, as soon as Russia answers questions regarding war crimes committed in Ukraine. >

US using old Russian whataboutism tactics 2023 😳😳😳 >

What came first the invasion of Ukraine or the attack on Nord Stream? >

Invasion of Ukraine, following Russia limiting the gas flow then cutting the gas flow completely, Finally blown up in September to put pressure on Europe and driving prices through the roof. >

And then Europe rushing changes to become less dependent on Russian gas. Then, finally... the West being completely independent on Russian gas.
The culmination of Russia blundering. Again... and again... and again. >

Well, threats and blackmail wasn't working so maybe shooting themselves in the foot will work.... If the entire thing wasn't so tragic it could be a comedy. Hopefully they learn their lesson quickly. They will never get Ukraine to surrender. They have to know this by now. The only way to end this is to withdraw from all of Ukraine (Including Crimea). Take their citizens with them if they want to be Russian. >

Just tell Putin the pipeline fell off a balcony. >

lol, take my upvote. >

I heard it fell out of a high window. >

"We didn't do it."
Q&A over. >

Just to add a bit of context to this - dude has also been characterized as a bit of a conspiracy theorist. He has one anonymous source claiming that the US blew up the Nord-Stream and idk, that's not really enough to base a claim on. Not saying it's not true and I do think it warrants a closer look but I'd be personally skeptical. >

Agreed. That's fair, it should not be blindly believed, nor blindly dismissed yet. >

That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. >

Lotta Hitchens fans in these comments ha. Fair enough. He doesn't have hard evidence. But he lays out a fairly sensible case for it. >

Almost all fiction is written sensibly in a way that the reader can believe it to be true. 
The problem is, this guy is spouting this junk as if its fact, when he doesn't have any hard evidence to prove it.
And what he's doing (spouting unverified claims) is disruptive towards geopolitics, the stakes of which literally cannot be any higher. 
So, I don't care how sensible the guy sounds. He's play fast and loose with facts whilst pitting two nuclear superpowers against one another. >

"He's play fast and loose with facts whilst pitting two nuclear superpowers against one another."
Same could be said for most politicians in America advocating for more weapons for Ukraine and military aid for Taiwan >

What facts are those politicians playing fast and loose with? >

Russia needs to GTFO of the Ukraine. >

The far bigger question: who shot J.R.? >

Not sure you're gonna like the answer: it was Hunter Biden. >

Dang it! 
My money was on Andy Dick being the culprit this whole time. >

You ever see Andy Dick and Hunter Biden in the same place at the same time? Boom -- same guy. >

I wouldn't wanna be in that room, Andy dick makes me cringe. >

U.S.: "One Russian-made pipeline puncturer."
Putin: [to U.N.] "That's not mine."
U.S.: "One credit card receipt for a Russian-made pipeline puncturer, signed by Vladimir Putin."
Putin: "I'm telling ya baby, that's not mine."
U.S.: " One warranty card for Russian-made pipeline puncturer, filled out by Vladimir Putin."
Putin: "I don't even know what this is! This sort of thing ain't my bag, baby!"
U.S.: "One copy of 'Foundations of Geopolitics' by Alexander Dugan signed 'Good luck sabotaging the pipeline, Vladimir. That kind of thing is your bag, baby.'" >

I give you an upvote for the awesome reference >

"Why did you allow Russian ships to get so close?"...or "What are the names of the Russian agents that planted the explosives?"...tough questions for the U.S to answer for sure. >

The US has wanted Nordstream gone for many years, warning Europe that it’s a huge mistake as it gives Russia leverage in case of conflict. Russia gains nothing from Nordstream being gone, quite the opposite. An operational Nordstream could’ve been making Russia a ton of money to fund their war right now and lower the demand for US oil and gas. So the US really is the player with a strong incentive to have it gone. So it wouldn’t surprise me at all if the US blew it up (possibly in concert with European partners) so that Russia can’t use it for their “Europe, do what we say or we’ll turn off the gas”-gambit.
Edit: no I’m not some Russian stooge or bot. I even think it might been the smart thing to do from a US perspective. Mostly I think it’s naive to think that anyone is above suspicion in this. >


An operational Nordstream could’ve been making Russia a ton of money to fund their war right now and lower the demand for US oil and gas. So the US really is the player with a strong incentive to have it gone.

This is so out of touch it hurts. The pipeline HAD ALREADY BEEN SHUT DOWN. There was no need to blow it up to begin with. Secondly, the person with the strongest incentive to blow the pipe was Russia, and that's because their pipes were now full of natural gas with nowhere to go. The pipe isnt a 2 way street. Blowing the pipe allowed the gas to vent away from Russia and not burst on their land. There just isnt any evidence the US would want to do this. There's tons of motive for Russia. >

Why wouldn't Russia just switch the pipeline off? >

Cuz the pressure would build and explode on their land. >

I have a hard time believing there wouldn't be some way to turn the pipeline off without risking an explosion. >

The gas is coming out of the ground and into the pipeline whether they are selling gas or not, it's not a situation where they can just set aside the gas for later. >

Yeah... that's not even remotely close to how pipelines work. >

I think the US should release a statement that makes it sound like some group of senators is going to subpoena Russia and ask hard questions. “Why has the Ukrainian invasion gone so poorly for Russia? How do you explain these war crimes? Was any preliminary work done to ensure a successful annexation? What percentage of high-level military personnel were budgeted from the beginning for elimination? Does Putin have cancer, and when will it kill him?” >

So.....You want to make those Senators do something for the benefit of the USA? How novel. >

Nothing about those Russian warships right next to where the explosions took place days earlier, nope, ignore that.... >

Or the US navy conducting under water explosive excersizes the day before. Read the article by hersch. Why would Russia blow up their own pipeline, which was the main source of leverage it had on most of Europe, and Germany in particular. >

Simple: internal Russian politics. On the 12th of Sept. several municipal leaders sent a petition to Vladimir Putin telling him to stop the war. This pipeline is a major source of their income, and it will not operate until the war ends. Unfortunately for them, their political power (read: money) is tied to the theoretical profits of getting the pipeline back up and running. So on the 26th of Sept (just 2 weeks later), Putin blows up the pipeline, their power dries up, and Putin is free to imprison them without fear of the next person making the same argument. >

No one needs to answer Russian questions for the foreseeable future. Your pathetic inbred president destroyed any semblance of respect the world had for your country. So you can go right ahead and fuck yourselves. >

That which is asserted without edvidence can be dismissed without evidence. AKA, Russia, put up or shut up (also, just shut the fuck up in general). >

The story comes from Seymour Hersh, the guy who exposed the My Lai massacre and the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse. Russia in the headline is specifically to get dummies who only read headlines to say things exactly like this. >

Russian gaslighting a little to literal >

I think we all remember the Russian shenanigans when their submarine was bobbing about in the waters of the Nordic states a few years back. Planting explosives for the future? Possibly >

Nobody who wasn't a complete moron ever thought the Russians attacked their own pipeline. The prime suspect was always the US, followed by the UK and other Nato allies. And today Seymour Hersh, the guy who exposed the My Lai massacre, Abu Graib and the secret war against Cambodia, came out with an article where he laid out in detail how the US planned and executed the bombing. Information he got from people who were directly involved in the project. >

Yeah, what possible gain would the ruzzians get from blowing up a pipeline that they can easily repair, while simultaneously using it as a propaganda tool to proclaim the world is against the ruzzians? It isn't like ruzzia isn't prone to false flag attacks or anything. It certainly isn't the case that the current leader of ruzzia cemented his power by starting a war after ordering the bombing of an apartment complex as a pretext for war. Nope. Certainly just not the ruzzian way >

As I said, you have to be a complete moron to believe it. The mental gymnastics required to come to that conclusion are really something. >

Hardly, the Russians were hawking NS 2 at the same time. It makes perfect sense. 
Add this to the fact that multiple Russian ships were in the vicinity before the explosion.  C'mon man.
Who are the idiots here? >

Russia has questions to answer over the downing of flight MH17 >

How dare the US not blow up the pipeline that Russia blew up.  Russian ships were documented near the site ahead of the explosion. >

i have questions why kalliningrad STILL EXISTS?
and did they come from THERE??? >

Bc everyone living there is Russian, and neither Poland, Lithuania or any other interested party wants to deal with governing an all Russian province, nor do they want to do ethnic cleansing. Russia keeps it as a warm water port. >

at this point for the whole world Russia has lost any credibility for blaming other countries. >

Russia to US: “How could let us sabotage NordStream?” >

i thought that in December it was the UK who blew them up... now they think it is the US? maybe next they will accuse the swiss navy of blowing it up... >

It was Santa Claus for all anyone knows for FACT, hell it could have been a Columbian Cartel Submarine taking out the pipeline for all we know. 
Russia deserves all the shit they get, keep piling it on!
​
And everyone knows the swiss only have knives, not explosives..... >

The Russian bots are hard at it today. >

Yes they are for sure. Isn’t it strange how they show up all at once? >

They are about to start their large scale invasion into Ukraine. This is typical Russia. >

How about Russia can suck eggs >

Guilty dog always barks first. >

This article literally contains no evidence. It’s just “credible sources” according to the author. 
Remember kids not everything on the internet is true >

A Credible source told me it was you ??? >

I'm the sauce >

That’s putin speak for u.s. has no questions to answer over nord stream explosions. >

Russia has questions to answer about the Ukraine explosions... 
Honestly, even if it was the US somehow trying to sabotage Russia - GOOD. Fuck Russia. >

Coming from a country that provides missiles for shooting down passenger planes. 🙄 >

Gotta rest the nuke threats for a few days. Really gotta work on new material though. >

No it doesn't.  The story printed by the UK newspaper is pretty fracking hilarious.  Is based on comments from "one anonymous source" and is from a writer has all the credibility of a worm in heat and has floated some remarkable bullshit in the past. 
IMHO this is 100% a russian funded psyops operation and if it is not then the editors at the publication should be thrown in jail for stupidity above and beyond the call of duty as the article is a Russian propagandist's wet dream come true. >

I especially like that Hersh states that all 4 pipelines had bombs on them, but non-politically affiliated seismologists can tell from their detect equipment that there were only 2 explosions. >

Like how could the US, the undisputed world champions of blowing shit up, fail to harm the stationary, undefended, unarmored Nord Stream 2 pipe B at all? 
Because there is only one nation in the world whose purposes were served by destroying Nord Stream 1 but only one pipeline of Nord Stream 2: Russia. >

There is absolutely no evidence of the United States being involved in its destruction.  None.
That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. >

Just as much evidence the US did it as Liechtenstein could have done it. >


as Liechtenstein could have done it

now you mentioned it... >

It was the Liechtensteiner Navy! >

my bet is the papal state scuba batallion >

Uzbekistan, take it or leave it >

The US warned Germany in the summer of 2022 that they had intelligence of a possible attack on the Nord Stream pipeline. It seems absurd that the US would pass along this info to their ally and then attack the pipeline themselves shortly thereafter.
The EU was already making serious efforts to reduce their dependence on Russian gas at the time, so why would the US risk attacking the pipeline? The juice wouldn't have been worth the squeeze as they say >

Your logic is precisely why it actually makes sense in an indemnifying sort of way. 
Like farting then proclaiming "who farted?" >

Ahh the josh duggar approach i see how well that went for him. >

Uncle Sam doesn't answer to Vladimir Puto. >

No but the Big Guy does. >

Old Whatshisname? Washed up has been. Weak. >

No, I do not believe that we do. Everyone already knows exactly who blew them up >

Actually we don't and maybe never will. Each suspected country had motivations for and against blowing it up. >

Yet only one country has been planning to use those exact gas supplies as a political weapon for decades. The US wouldn't have left any of the pipelines operational because that makes no logical sense.
The country that kept claiming that they were not going to invade Ukraine right up until they invaded Ukraine does not deserve any benefit of the doubt. >

Gosh, if it's so clear, why do some western leaders now doubt that Russia was responsible? >

Anonymous officials are not leaders. Those are the exact same people who were 100% convinced that Putin wasn't about to invade Ukraine despite the mountain of evidence that was put in front of them which said otherwise. >


Those are the exact same people who were 100% convinced that Putin wasn't about to invade Ukraine despite the mountain of evidence

They literally are not. Everyone knew Russia was invading. They were just denying it publicly to prevent war. Do you not know how public vs. private statements work?
23 diplomatic and intelligence officials in nine countries > anonymous redditor who knows fuck all >

Holy revisionist history batman. Face it, Russia has been infiltrating these shitty, barely funded European intelligence services for decades >

So in your reality, Russia has compromised the entirety of European intelligence services...but you, an anonymous moron on reddit, know what's really going on? Did I get that right? >

Not just intelligence services, they owned German Prime Ministers too just ask Gerhard Schroder.
Its your reality too, you're just too dumb to realize it >

"A former Prime Minister who's been out of office for two decades openly works as a lobbyist for Gazprom" to "the entirety of European intelligence services is compromised by Russia" is a giant leap you're making without any supporting evidence. >

Nobody gives a shit about Nordstream. Fuck Russia, and fuck their gass. >

We do care about the ocean though. >

Just confirms that Russia did it. >

There is no "russia".... it is putinistan. >

Maybe I could answer on behalf of the US, who do you think, it was those lying Russian bastards, who else would be stupid enough to pretend they didn’t do it when the whole world knows it was them, they are really not to bright when it comes down to it.
There’s your questions ANSWERED ! >

I thought the UK did it, do they just accuse whoever they like the least in any given week >

Every grand public accusation Russia makes has been later proven to be an admission of guilt, I'm assuming its the same with this.  Russia has been playing games with these things regarding EU energy security since the start of the war and this tracks with their politics.  Meanwhile it would be political suicide for the US to get caught in terrorist activity regarding energy security of sworn allies... 
So question is, did Biden make this play against sworn allies for zero political gain?  Or did proven Russian liars do a false flag against sworn enemies for political reasons that align with everything they are trying to accomplish in Ukraine?
Nobody has proof but I'm going to reason that Russia is lying about this, like they always do. >

I have a stern E-mail I want to send to Russia. >

....I don't think you're in a position to be the one "asking questions", Russia. >

Russia in deflection mode with their dialogue again? >

U.S.: Russia has questions to answer over the invasion of Ukraine >

It was me, sorry >

i'm sure r/worldnews is capable of treating what journalists allege about russia and the united states equally, i'm sure their posters aren't all just completely disregarding this story and then going apeshit over every insane story about putin shitting and farting all over himself >

Hey Russia,  the jerk store called and they're all out of you! >

Cui bono is a Latin phrase that means “who benefits?”, and is used to suggest that there's a high probability that those responsible for a certain event are the ones who stand to gain from it...
Russia gained very little. >

U.S.: Russia has questions to answer over Ukraine Invasion >

Seymour Hersh made his reputation in Vietnam exposing the My Lai massacre for the New York Times. He’s also been wrong sometimes but he has good sources. He’s closer to the anti-war left than the right. The article is very detailed, and the parts about Norway are interesting.
I’d thought it was a British/Ukrainian operation but this makes sense too. It never made any sense that Russia would blow up its own pipeline as it still has friends in Germany and that’s the weak link in the NATO alliance. It makes more sense that we’d take the decision on reopening out of the Germans’ control. >

Is “gone off the deep end” the approved bot term? It’s everywhere on this thread. >

Bro that's just me commenting twice 🤣 You can tell which ones are the bots because they're the ones who keep harping on how you know it's legit because Seymour Hersh reported on the My Lai massacre (appeal to authority) >

Ah, I see. Using two different accounts to post basically the same comment on a thread. Totally not bot behavior. >

Huh? I only have this one account and the two comments in this thread are both from me in this account. 🧐 >

Then it must be some other guy posting basically the same thing. You have admirers! >

"President Biden says it's not US. I don't see any reason why it would be,"
Great talk! >

I’m sorry bro but the burden of proof falls on the one making the claim. 
There’s zero incentive for the US to do this. Biden already got what he wanted, NS2 was shut down. 
Let’s assume the typical pro-rus argument of forcing Germany to sever oil ties with Russia and have them import US natural gas. 
Ok, the first is somewhat guaranteed, cool beans. The second is not. It’ll come down to how cheap the LNG is from the US versus other nations that are significantly closer and can transport it far cheaper than the US. Second of all, if this was discovered by Germany then it would destroy decades of good ties and relationships not just with Germany but nearly all of Europe. It’s also fundamentally not Bidens MO. 
If your next argument is of course there wouldn’t be any consequences from Germany, Germany is just a US lapdog. Then by that logic, there would have been zero reasons for secrecy. It would be “we will blow it up” and everyone else would just fall in line. 
Meanwhile, Russia has spent the entire length of the war doing everything it can to dissuade Europe and the US from helping Ukraine. This has taken multiple forms including but not limited to: nuclear concern trolling,  playing stupid games with gas and oil delivery, sending troll farms to try and influence social media, paying off multiple politicians and influential folks into preaching pro-Russian policies, etc, etc. In addition, one pipeline was left undamaged. Gazprom gets to weasel its way out of it by saying this was sabotage and isn’t obligated to abide by the contractual agreements with Germany. It also allows Russia to send gas back to Germany with the only remaining pipeline in NS2 that was unharmed should the situation somehow change. If the US did it they would blow up all the NS2 pipelines. 
This conspiracy theory isn’t anywhere near as bad as the bio labs but it’s so laughable to westerners. >

Where was the proof when the west blamed Russia? >

Find one political leader in the west blaming Russia 
We all know it’s them. We’re just waiting till the evidence is sufficient to publicly name and shame >

Hersh isn't a legitimate source of anything nowadays. He's compromised as fuck. Why do you think Russia pushes his stuff so much like they did on his reporting in Syria during Russian intervention there? He's a stooge.
His source for that story is quite literally, "trust me dude, I know a guy." >

Yeah I get the issue, ig I'll take the discovery skeptically for the time being >

The prosecutor's office in Germany said there is no evidence that Russia did it. Sweden and Norway are quite. Usually investigations into this in Sweden are concluded after 20 yrs.
We all know that if there was even 0.001% evidence that Russia did it, western countries would have published the evidence. 
USA had more to gain but I believe they didn't do it. 
My money is on Poland. >

The most interesting aspect of this event is that all the countries have been so quiet about it >

When investigating you generally say nothing as you don't want those guilty to get the idea you are on to them.  They may destroy evidence they forgot about (push someone out a window...). >

Genuinely I hate the Russian government but the US does need to explain that >

To remove the threat of Germany becoming too reliable on Russian gas and thus forming an actual threat to the US if there was ever an alliance based on that supply of gas? Or at least, so I've heard some internet sources say. 
Europe in general has been super reliant on Russian gas and there is really only 1 major country that would benefit from that reliance being gone. Anyway, we Europeans have our own issues and are just thrown around between these powerhouses since we don't have any actual power. So it doesn't matter to me. >

Russians have limited the flows to Europe already in the summer of 2021. Nothing beyond the contractual obligations. That brought the prices up and made the LNG supplies from the US price-competitive. That is the opposite of forming a threat to the US. Your internet sources are typical propaganda outlets. >

There are so many federal agents in this thread holy shit >

I’ve got a few questions myself… like, how much longer do you think we will tolerate you before we remove you from planet earth or how do you fit your arm all the way up Dmitriy’s ass to make him talk like that? >

Russia: Answer our questions. 
US: We will just as soon as you fucking leave Ukraine. >

Whoever did it, did Europe a favour. It was for the best! >

I love how the major media outlets are breaking this story with Russia's accusations of the story in the headline, rather than the story itself, knowing full well that people will be less likely to believe it if it looks like it's coming from Russia. >

War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.
The ignorance is strong. Imagine believing anything the US government says after Iraq and Afghanistan. >

It seems pretty clear Russia did this, as a way to justify the first round of mobilization, as well as a way to try to sow division among the countries supplying Ukraine by destroying an asset that was clearly not going to be used any more.
If the US were going to clandestinely attack Russian assets, there are many places they could have done so in a way that more directly impacted Russia’s ability to wage war in Ukraine. >

As US citizens we should want this more than the Russians do. Our government shouldn’t be lying about these kinds of things to it’s citizens. >

I mean yeah the US literally did blow it up. Anybody who says otherwise is incapable of critical thinking. >

Anthony Blinken.
This represents a great opertunity for America.
Victoria Nuland. 
We are very gratified the pipeline is a hunk of metal at the bottom of the sea.
Most people know the US had a part in this or you could be believe that Putin decided not to just turn off a tap and instead go into international waters and send divers to blow it up. >

To be fair as a pole I think it was either USA or us with USA cooperation but this article is dubious >

OH NO
Russia is lying again?
My shock is absolutely palpable. >

That pipeline was Russia to Germany. Germany needs energy. Russia has energy.
Neither Germany nor Russia did this. 
The US position on the EU has always been, "keep Germany down, keep Russia out" >

We don't feel like coming back a third time. >

Do we, though? >

"Fif!" Darkest Brandon. >

The Chewbacca defence? >

Nuland: "Fuck the EU" >

Nope ! No we don’t you have to answer some questions about why you are trying to infiltrate america 🇺🇸! >

Nobody owes you a godamn thing. >

It was me, sorry not sorry. >

This is the eric andre meme of him shooting hannibal. >

Is one of the questions, "Why would Russia want to blow up the Nord Stream pipeline"?  
Another question is probably, "Can we prove Russia blew up the Nord Stream pipeline"? >

Or what?  Oh noes!!  Is he gonna threaten the nukes again??? >

I saw russian tv, so nord stream was blown by the USA command but button push Norwegians, seems legit. >

Usual MO. Zero evidence, but just keep repeating it anyway to entrench it as firmly as possible. >

"we are allowed to interfere with you but you aren't with us, no fair" >

Russia: we know who did it, trust us citizens we are under attack so kiss our boots a little longer and we will keep you safe -- i know a revolution is imminent but you have bigger enemies than your own government.. just trust us >

Russia is full of gas. That we know for sure. >

Transference >

Russia: “Some guy with a blog says you did it. Confess!” >

Uh, no it doesn’t. Go away puny Russia. >

It blew up. That was easy. Next question. >

A more interesting observation is:  Europe is doing just fine this winter without Russian gas, isn't it? >

Russia is pulling an Alex Jones. >

So, Russia provided information to an investigative journalist or Russia paid an investigative journalist? I mean Russia is lying and putting out threats and propaganda on a daily basis so both those are more plausible than the US blowing up the pipeline putting all of their NATO allies at extreme risk over the winter. Eventually the Russian rhetoric is either going to stop or go too far. At this point people really need to stop listening to them at all. >

Question 1: how did Russia do it? >

Get off our huge, veiny dick, Putin. >

Sure, send putin to the US so he can ask. >

"Hersh has appeared increasingly to have gone off the rails. His stories, often alleging vast and shadowy conspiracies, have made startling — and often internally inconsistent — accusations, based on little or no proof beyond a handful of anonymous "officials".  This was said about the author of the report >

Russian threats are ringing more and more hollow by the day. >

Seems kinda open-shut… so many Russians are having to use the VPN service to stream content after that web ban so why not just increase the bandwidth?? >

Yep, we did it. >

I think it's either Russia themselves or Saudi Arabia. >

Reuters continues to peddle Russian propaganda. >

Fuck em. >

Wondering when news agencies will stop publishing and trying to hype up absolutely everything Russia says and does. If it weren't for their nukes they wouldn't even be relevant anymore. >

I did it. >

Yeah we blew up your stupid little pipe, we'll do it again to. >

The pipelines are rusting away on the bottom of the baltic sea and nobody in the west cares anymore. And that makes the russians even more angry lol. >

I have some answers!
42, an isosceles triangle, the Battle of the Pelennor Fields, Crazy Ex-Girlfriend, and Mr. and Mrs. Brian Norris' Ford Popular. >

United States answer:  Keyser Söze >

Didn’t they blame the UK already? 🥱 >

Id like to know what happened, they have to know what happened >

Yeah ok /s >

Well my blog says it was Leprechauns who did it. >

Got a few questions for you too putin baby >

Yes! Like, “How did you know we (russia) did it?” >

No questions for Russia. We all know they are fascist war criminals that need to go back to Mordor and do some penance. >

Yes you do Russia. >

Like how Russia did it?