acrashb

Every land pipeline, even the buried ones, have above-ground facilities to re-pressurize the flow aka "compressor stations".  So just lean across the fence and flip a switch - or more likely go to your terminal and shut the flow off with a mouse click.  With high enough pressure there can be much more distance between stations, but while I haven't checked the path and distance through Ukraine of the pipelines in question, most likely there is a station in their borders.

Or just dig down a bit and cut the pipe.  Carefully
 

Apropos of a lazy Sunday afternoon, some (many) pages ago there was considerable debate about "signmyrocket.com".

Mine came through a few minutes ago:

"never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."  In other words, it is unlikely that Putin intended surgeons, IT specialists, and highly skilled integrated circuit designers to be chewed up on the front line - there is simply no reason to do that, and every reason not to.  He just started a process that could not competently, or in a controlled manner, be carried out the way things are governed in Russia.  The thugs who are implementing mobilization can't tell, and don't care about, the difference between a Buryat farm worker and an urban surgeon.  Quota filled, on to the next batch.

"never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."  In other words, it is unlikely that Putin intended surgeons, IT specialists, and highly skilled integrated circuit designers to be chewed up on the front line - there is simply no reason to do that, and every reason not to.  He just started a process that could not competently, or in a controlled manner, be carried out the way things are governed in Russia.  The thugs who are implementing mobilization can't tell, and don't care about, the difference between a Buryat farm worker and an urban surgeon.  Quota filled, on to the next batch.

Correct.   Countries don't have friends, they have shared interests.    People in this forum is forgetting that little fundamental reality...

Not that I agree with Aragorn in this, but France wasn't particularly happy about that sub deal.

Because they aren't aggressive enough and don't invest as much in their armed forces as the US would like?

It's possible. Another possibility is that Germany and other West-European countries fear a new 'Warsaw Pact' after the war, in which countries like Poland, Hungary and Ukraine will start to go their own way and tear NATO and the EU apart. That is also my fear. A strong and independent Eastern Europe would also be in the American interest, as a buffer against Russia and as an alternative for NATO. 

Thanks
If that's indeed 'complete' Germany is somewhere along the middle in the same category as my country (NL), Sweden and Denmark. Below Baltics, Poland, UK, US, but above France, Italy, Spain and Finland. 

As a US taxpayer, I actually don't care about the cost.  The US defense budget is enormous and this is what it's meant to do.  How much of the material we've sent was actually new spending?  How much was stuff sitting around in warehouses?  So I'm glad to actually get existing, already paid for equipment into a real fight of good vs evil.  (and there really aren't many wars that are so obviously black & white as this one).  
Plus the US is getting excellent experience in logistics, ISR, planning.  And getting to test out various weapons systems, in real life.  
And the end of this will be a Russia that doesn't have the strength to threaten anyone in europe.  Though Kazahkstan, Georgia, et al, might be on the target list in a few years. 
THis is money very well spent.  The worst, most dangerous serial killing dictator of our times is being crushed -- and best of all he did it to himself!

So we are pretty much going to have to agree to disagree - I think your view of things is a little overly binary.  We seem to disagree on "worse".  Your position is that a functioning Russia is worse for Ukraine, of which there is ample evidence.  My view is that a reduced and boxed in, but functioning Russia with Ukraine within NATO (we took Turkey for fewer reasons than Ukraine currently has) is the way ahead.
Based on your posts, it appears you are arguing that imperial aggressiveness is deeply embedded within Russian culture, which may have some kernels of truth - I personally think you are way over simplifying the Russian cultural construct and are very broadly painting every Russian with the same brush, so to speak.
However, where I think we definitely part ways, and frankly I suspect it will also cause a major rift between a post-war Ukraine and the west is your solution: cultural genocide.  This is very odd because while I do not believe that Russia has the way and means, or even ends to conduct a physical genocide of Ukraine - even the worst horror stories coming out of the formerly occupied areas pale in comparison to other examples of systemic physical ethnic cleansing, such as demonstrated in Rwanda.  However, I do think there is a very strong case that Russia has every intention to conduct a cultural genocide of Ukraine and erase that identity to make the entire population "Russian" in the long run.
Much of what you are proposing is the exact same thing back onto the Russian people - a collapse that erases their identity.  We can go around the trees on this but in the end, my opinion does not matter - what does matter, very much is reconstruction of Ukraine after at this wat that will run well into the hundreds of billions.  Now asking western liberal democracies to invest in a nation that is actively supporting and working towards a counter-cultural genocide - even of a nation as problematic as Russia - is a non-starter.
Your cold-blooded quote here is very telling:
"Russian "refugees" are already not welcome in any EU country that borders them and I don't see much drama about it - I think we will manage just as well. Especially since not letting in proven rapists and murderers that happily did genocide on us is "moral high ground"-free card in itself."
So many of those refugees are going to be elderly and women/children.  It would appear your position is to group them in with the "murders and rapists" and let them freeze to death along the Ukrainian border.  This is very tough talk but you can see my point here (or perhaps cannot, which is the problem); however, in my experience, more atrocities do not make things better.
I do not support your position on a Russian cultural genocide, and I am pretty sure very few in the western political halls of power, nor the voters will either. Ukraine has gained enormous positive momentum on the strategic narrative, your government has brilliantly dominated this arena and it is seeing returns in massive support.
Your narrative that you are putting on this forum only serves an end state that will wash all that good away - likely when you need it most.

If Germany was keeping up in the "how much" department the "what" question would be far less salient. It's doing neither and worse the German government is managing to be smug about it.

I will admonish, no more. But the above should be admonishment itself.

Sorry, but critiquing the US on its provision of supplies is simply *not on*. We've performed relative miracles in this war and without the Biden WH's early and clear eyed understanding of what was coming it would already be over in the worst possible way. I understand Germany's issues and I'm even somewhat sympathetic but no, you don't get to do the above.

In lighter news, Microsoft has announced a new version of Windows for the Russian market:


Seriously, this thread is well inside my OODA loop.  By the time I have absorbed and considered, someone has already either a) said what I had in mind or b) answered the question in my head.

 

Apropos of a lazy Sunday afternoon, some (many) pages ago there was considerable debate about "signmyrocket.com".

Mine came through a few minutes ago:

Apropos of a lazy Sunday afternoon, some (many) pages ago there was considerable debate about "signmyrocket.com".

Mine came through a few minutes ago:

Apropos of a lazy Sunday afternoon, some (many) pages ago there was considerable debate about "signmyrocket.com".

Mine came through a few minutes ago:

Apropos of a lazy Sunday afternoon, some (many) pages ago there was considerable debate about "signmyrocket.com".

Mine came through a few minutes ago:

Apropos of a lazy Sunday afternoon, some (many) pages ago there was considerable debate about "signmyrocket.com".

Mine came through a few minutes ago:

Apropos of a lazy Sunday afternoon, some (many) pages ago there was considerable debate about "signmyrocket.com".

Mine came through a few minutes ago:

Apropos of a lazy Sunday afternoon, some (many) pages ago there was considerable debate about "signmyrocket.com".

Mine came through a few minutes ago:

Apropos of a lazy Sunday afternoon, some (many) pages ago there was considerable debate about "signmyrocket.com".

Mine came through a few minutes ago:

"Hey, this is not what we signed up for..."
This would fundamentally change the purpose of NATO. It would go from a general defensive alliance to being an anti-Russian alliance.
And why would countries sign up for full NATO membership if they knew they could end up getting automatically involved in wars to protect non-NATO countries?
Why would they sign up if they could stay "neutral" but just invite NATO to come protect them if they ever had the need?

There is a reason every defense contractor worthy of the name working on laser systems frantically. It is the only way to kill the bleeping things at an affordable price.