This fits the pattern of sabotage all across Europe. The obvious candidate is Russia who are using hybrid warfare against Europe/UK for a long time. Why does this post have so many... strange comments, mostly from new accounts? More hybrid warfare?
Now I wouldn’t call myself a student of European terrorism per-se, but haven’t virtually all of the countries listed had some form of domestic terror groups in the post WW2 era? Why am I not to believe this is domestic?
You can't self-fund more than very small terror groups. "Domestic" groups aren't. Note how all the Marxist groups withered away after the fall of the Soviet Union.
Mostly useful idiots. Many HN posters are tech people from US. They are mainly left leaning all the way into tankie territory. And those are a prime target for russians.
They use “test” cars that have bright lights or xenon flashes pointing down. They take thousands of pictures of the track every night and store the images in a database that can match them up precisely so you can see cracks growing over time like a movie.
I also remember reading about an application of fibre optics where a long strand is placed directly under each rail. Pulses of light through the fibre are reflected at the points where axles press down on the rail and compress the fibre. Similar techniques can be used to detect accidents and (completely) broken tracks.
Yep. And the DOM (Digital Optical Monitoring) in consumer fiber optic modules (eg. SFPs) is sensitive to detect stuff like this!
I can tell when and where we have significant wind storms, because it oscillates the fiber lines on the poles in a particular way which in turn generates a graph with specific signal oscillations.
If you do a somewhat bad thing with no pushback it becomes possible to do a somewhat worse thing with no pushback. Gradually you end up doing really bad things with total impunity.
Devil’s advocate: you should still have a reason to do the bad thing in the first place. I’m not a good enough politician to understand how this benefits anyone’s interests (don’t get me wrong, I do suspect Russia to be behind this, but still don’t get the objective - but then again I don’t get the objective of their special bullshit operation either)
Indeed many people who subscribe to Rational Actor theory of politics are stupefied by this. However the thing about personalistic dictatorships is their foreign policy and aggression are all subject to the whims of one person, even though the media still refers to them as if they are real countries with collective decision-making. And they indeed may be acting rationally just not in the axiomatic framework any sane person would even consider.
Say some dictator lived through a trauma that he projects onto some group of people. Or that he considers himself a spiritual successor (perhaps even the reincarnation) of Ivan the Great, the Collector or Lands. Once you ease yourself into this mindset you see the logic.
"personalistic dictatorships is their foreign policy and aggression are all subject to the whims of one person, even though the media still refers to them as if they are real countries with collective decision-making. And they indeed may be acting rationally just not in the axiomatic framework any sane person would even consider."
Hmmm...why does that sound so familiar with a major western country??? ;-p
The reason is resentment rooted in an inferiority complex. Russia's state ideology is that they're being oppressed by "the West", and they really believe it up to the highest levels of government. They're quite convinced that hurting their "enemy" this way amounts to securing their interest, because by damaging "the West", their own relative power is elevated and that makes them a serious player on the international stage.
Russia is desperate for leverage. Apart from China, they are severely isolated from rich markets. Targeted violence is an attempt at generating leverage, in the same way some racketeers would hit shops that refuse to pay "protection" money.
I think sabotage is at least partly signalling: "Don't support Ukraine too much, or more bad things will happen to you."
The point of the "special operation" was that there would not be a culturally-adjacent functioning democracy next door, because that might give the Russian people ideas.
For signalling you need the signal. You need to break the train track and then say if you keep supporting Ukraine we'll do worse things. If you stay quiet, it doesn't work.
For the record, it was me. I committed terrorism to bring awareness to Rust's excessive use of punctuation marks.
No, (apparent) ambiguity works fine, as long as the recipient of the message understands it. The Mafia can put a brick through your window, and you know what's going on, even without them signing the brick.
Only if you recently did something that you know the Mafia hates. If I got a brick through my window right now, my best theory would be that they got the wrong window. What would yours be?
Creating chaos in democracies is forcing the elected politicians to focus on the interior, thus leaving them less resources (or public interest) for stopping remote invasions.
Russia has been involved in covert sabotage operations in Europe for more than a decade [1][2]. You can learn more about this from investigative journalist Christo Grozev [3].
What are the chances that the high-speed rail crash that occurred in Spain a few weeks ago was also caused by them? [4]
Such groups are manipulated. Easy enough to do, especially if you provide money in exchange for doing things. Russia has been caught doing it in Ukraine, why in the world would you think it couldn't happen elsewhere? There are enough desperate suckers out there.
With social media encouraging and promoting divisive bullshit it’s really not hard for a hostile power to influence local groups to do their bidding.
Social media should be the main target of all these defense groups, but sadly politicians themselves derive their power from it so it’s unlikely anything tangible will be done.
The bad actors here are the social media platforms who host and promote divisive content since it generates more engagement thus ad revenue. Those are very much in reach of law enforcement and regulations can be passed to forbid such engagement-maximizing behavior. Simply moving back to chronological feeds of accounts the user explicitly chose to follow would be a big first step in curbing the spread of propaganda.
I was coming out of Barcelona on a train to France on the 18th, and through the window spotted a blacked-out quadcopter just hovering quite high over the tracks. No incidents happened in that area of Spain though so I'm wondering why it was there, I suppose it could be civilian or police?
Anyone can fly a quadcopter though? You can buy one right now for a couple hundred bucks off Amazon (and strap explosives to it if you wanted to).
If anything, the fact we’re not seeing random drones carrying explosives and diving into groups of people on a daily basis shows the vast, vast (99.999%) majority of people is actually well-meaning and has no desire to kill or hurt anyone.
If you’re legitimately baffled by a random guy being able to fly a quadcopter around without any kind of government approval or oversight, I encourage you to buy one and play around (without explosives please!), just make sure to not fly it over places where people could be standing - terminal velocity is real and even a light one could cause serious injury if it were to lose control and fall on someone’s head.
Russia is a candidate, but it's far from the only candidate, and it's not clear how this advances their interests. Why not China, for instance? Or a random terrorist group? Speculation is fun but it's important to actually make statements grounded in reality.
Israel responds to words with words. They respond to force with force. And they are busy enough dealing with the trouble that Iran keeps stirring up, they're not going to do anything to Spain. (Not to say that it would be out of the question for them to go after terrorists who were in Spain, but it would be very focused. Look at what happened after Munich--multiple European countries were incredibly inept about extraditing the attackers so Israel responded with assassination teams. Not strikes on anything they didn't believe had hurt them.)
(And there never was a genocide, but this isn't the thread for it.)
You seem to approve extrajudicial killing / assassination. Would be interesting if some countries decide to start assassinating Israeli terrorists in West Bank.
I don't believe that without evidence. Europe tacitly supports Israel even while some parts of it claim not to, and Spain is internationally irrelevant.
Exactly why they are singled out for chilling effect. They cannot retaliate substantially.
Evidence is not easy to find on these topics. It's espionage for christ's sake. You need to analyze material incentives and be familiar with the methods used. You cannot expect the media to hand you the answers, because that is not the purpose of the media especially on topics like this.
I'd suggest that radical left-wing elements indigenous to Italy, such as those behind the Turin protests that left 100 police officers wounded a few days ago, are a perfectly plausible candidate; not every attack comes from without. There was another protest against the Olympics in Milan itself last night by left-wing elements who believe the games are economically and socially unsustainable [0]
Unfortunately with stuff like this, nation states will use groups like that as proxies.
Lots of governments.
For example, there's some other news at the moment that the USA is financing pro-MAGA groups across Europe, which I mention more because of Jan 6 happened at all than due to any specific evidence that the US government has knowingly given state support for terrorists.
After 6 weeks in Taiwan, one thing became very evident, mainland China can take the island in 3 days without firing a single shot. The only thing that can stop mainland China taking from taking Taiwan is a US president like Bill Clinton who had the courage to put two United States aircraft carrier strike forces between the mainland and the island to defend democracy which gave us TMSC. I don't see the current snowflake leadership doing that. While I was there, mainland China told the people of Taiwan to shut their mouths and nobody said a word about China after.
The reason mainland China hasn't taken Taiwan is because they don't have to.
I do not like the government of China, however, they are building infrastructure around the world especially in Africa, Asia, and South America. They are not destroying things like Russia does every single day. Their approach to diplomacy now is building.
For the same reason, China isn't commit terrorist attacks on other countries. However, Russia is committing terrorist attacks on other countries so it easy to believe that they are responsible for terrorist attacks.
China most certainly can destroy Taiwan. What would be very hard is taking it intact. That needs lots of boots on the ground--and how do you get those boots on the ground when any ship that tries to get too close finds itself facing a variety of seeker weapons. China shoot them down when they are fired from a few miles out? Not likely. Even not near land, look at what happened to the Moskova--targeting a sea skimmer is hard.
And it's a sea battle--drones can pick their own targets and thus can't be jammed. What happens when the ship is met by a hundred drones with explosives? Doesn't take much of a processor to compare the image of a ship with the ocean.
One month ago the Chinese navy surrounded the island. [0] That is a siege. Nothing comes in and nothing goes out. The eastern side of the island's infrastructure is complete shit because corrupt local governments. They can't defend it. The Chinese can land and take the mountains and have the high ground easily. The west side can be completely obliterated with rockets from the mainland.
The citizens wouldn't challenged the mainland in 2024, they won't challenge the mainland today, and they won't challenge the mainland in the future.
Likely the reason the mainland hasn't taken the island yet IS because they can take it in 3 days if they wanted.
> After 6 weeks in Taiwan, one thing became very evident, mainland China can take the island in 3 days without firing a single shot
This does not reflect the opinions of any military person I know who has knowledgeably commented on the topic, all of whom have spent quite a bit longer than 6 weeks on Taiwan.
Their defense system is as big a joke as the architecture design in Hualien. Nobody living on the island will openly criticize the mainland for the same reason nobody will point a weapon at anyone from the mainland. They know if the mainland wants the island, they surround the island on day 1, take over the island on day 2, and install their own government on day 3. They know they do not want a record of opposing the mainland in words or violence because of the consquences.
I'm not saying this to be mean. I'm being honest and because the current United States administration is a bunch of snowflakes, it puts the democracy in Taiwan in great danger you need to honest about that too.
The only country I think that is prepared to defend against China is Vietnam.
> if the mainland wants the island, they surround the island on day 1, take over the island on day 2, and install their own government on day 3
Now add typhoon season, the artillery batteries in the mountains, China’s lack of blue-water naval operations (let alone combined arms) and, in terms of allies, the Philippines and Japan.
This will be much more like the Taliban recapturing Kabul. If the artillery batteries are like the infrastructure on the east coast, likely they don't work. Taking the train out there is very dangerous. Not 1 in every 100 people dying because the architecture is shit and the local governments are super corrupt dangerous, but incompetence and people just don't care about maintaining them dangerous. They have ~400 combat aircraft but the mainland won't allow them acquire f35s or patriot missiles and anything that would really be a threat.
The Taiwanese are not going to fight. China told them to be quiet and under threat that if they speak out they and their families will later face retribution, everyone went silent. They are surely not going to take arms against China. My dad had a friend, an scientist from China, in the 80s. She was a critic of the government. She had one child in China. They removed one of her young son's testicles and told her to shut up or they would remove the other. The Taiwanese know how it works.
I spent 3 weeks in the Philippines and 2 months in Japan. Neither can afford a war. The Philippines is too poor and Japan's debt is hovering around 235%–263% of its GDP. Japan doesn't even have official diplomatic relation with Taiwan let alone a defense treaty. Japan is a mess with or without a war.
The only thing that will stop China from attacking Taiwan, is a US president who isn't a whining snowflake. If you are US citizen I would recommend electing a US president with a backbone who isn't a pedophile -- for Taiwan's sake.
> Taiwanese are not going to fight. China told them to be quiet and under threat that if they speak out they and their families will later face retribution, everyone went silent
Sorry, this is nonsense. I'm not Taiwanese. But I have a lot of Taiwanese friends, none of them in politics, half of them in America. They all speak out. Forcefully. Exhibit A for this being B.S. is the electoral history of Taiwan, particularly since Xi started his wolf-warrior bullshit in the late 2010s.
> I spent 3 weeks in the Philippines and 2 months in Japan. Neither can afford a war. The Philippines is too poor and Japan's debt is hovering around 235%–263% of its GDP
You have to be joking. Both have prominent militaries they're building up.
> Japan doesn't even have official diplomatic relation with Taiwan let alone a defense treaty
This is your first valid point.
> Japan is a mess with or without a war
This is Zero Hedge nonsense. Japan is a financial mess. They're also an industrial power, scientific powerhouse and potent–and building–military force.
> If you are US citizen I would recommend electing a US president with a backbone who isn't a pedophile -- for Taiwan's sake
Americans don't vote on foreign policy unless there is a draft.
The sea still makes quite a barrier to invasion. The Russians had to abandon Kherson because there was a river in the way and have had to abandon most of the black sea because Ukraine sinks their boats with missiles and drones.
To be fair to a US president who doesn't deserve any kind of fairness, the US/China dynamic 30 years ago is very different from today's dynamic -- and this has a lot more to do with China's growth than anything the US has done (or not done).
The only thing that can stop China from taking Taiwan is a US president willing to put two aircraft carrier strike groups between the island the mainland. That is the same today as it was 30 years ago. However, today, unlike in the 90s the mainland can take the island in 3 days without firing a shot.
> this has a lot more to do with China's growth
That is my point. Because of China's growth they don't need to take the island by force or commit terrorist attacks against other countries especially in Europe. Today, countries like the Bahamas, Peru, Afghanistan, and Nigeria are welcoming China and their infrastructure money (not destroying infrastructure like Russia does) with open arms.
1. China's not particularly known to conduct this sort of activity this far from their mainland.
2. What would be their motive? China is actively trying to fill that "superpower" void being left in Europe by President Trump's unpredictable behavior.
> Or a random terrorist group?
Plausible.
> Speculation is fun but it's important to actually make statements grounded in reality.
I look at it from the standpoint of motive and history. See "GRU Unit 29155"[1]. Russia has both. Russia is on the brink of war with Europe.
This comment is correct, but puts undue agency on EU/NATO. Russia is already at war with EU/NATO, and EU/NATO will only tick the box that says there's a war.
In this specific case, becuase China has historically had significant FDI within Italy's infrastructure sector.
China has significant issues with the EU and is aligned with Russia, but it isn't in China's incentive to conduct violent actions outside of the Chinese diaspora within Europe (which is a separate sticking point).
Russia has its back against the wall and has little reason to invite retaliation. Israel has the means, motive, opportunity, and lack of restraint to punish its critics with these means, as well as the sway to cover their tracks with nonsensical disinformation. Media is pushing hard for the Russia Orc narrative and it says a lot about the people who are happy to buy it.
> Europe should stop tolerating these sabotages and go to war with Russia
Unnecessary. Just (a) pursue and seize its shadow fleet and (b) give Ukraine long-range weapons. (And radars so you can profile Russia's air defences.)
Russia is operating so comically outside its circle of competence, material constraints and international law that you don't even have to go kinetic to hurt it.
NATO could certainly rollover the Russian army in a conventional war, but that was just as true before the Ukrainian war. The idea that Russia is/was a serious threat is a convenient fiction: It helps maintain Russia's image as a superpower, and it provides a justification for the existence of NATO and the associated military industrial complex that supports it.
What is true however, is that Russia does possess a huge arsenal of nuclear and other weapons:
Despite Putin's posturing, Russia's never going to risk deploying them in a conflict with Ukraine. But in an actual war between NATO/Europe and Russia, with the regime facing an existential threat, then there's a very good chance they would. But even before it got to that point, the nature of the conflict itself would make nuclear escalation very likely. Both sides would be firing huge numbers of missiles, attempting to gain air superiority by wiping out the other's own missile launchers, radar bases, etc. With that many missiles flying, and stressed people and automated systems making split-second decisions, it's very likely that an error or miscalculation would result in an accidental nuclear strike, at which point it would be impossible to put the genie back in the bottle.
Which is why we must never give Ukraine enough firepower to pose a threat to the Russian regime.
But that does not mean we can't arm them with long range stuff, just in fairly small quantities. A Tomahawk can't take down Russia. A Tomahawk a day raining down in areas away from the battle front--that can make Russia very much want to quit provoking them. Provide such weapons on the basis that the supply will be immediately cut off at status quo ante.
This of course assumes that you are not just delaying the inevitable and giving time for Russia to recover will just make the nuclear escalation worse when it happens (not if it happens)
You know what, yeah, I will, in exchange for EU citizenship and it must be fully financed so we have available the best weaponry money can buy (and a written contract that has a big payout for my parents if I die in combat)
If you get EU citizenship in western EU countries and survive you’re signing up for having any kind of respectable wage taxed at over 50% with rent being over half of your post-tax earnings. Be careful what you wish for. You are better off settling in and/or fighting in Ukraine where my understanding is that at least taxes are much lower.
Only if you can’t fly to a neutral low-tax country and enjoy low tax and not being sent to war. But you do you, I do me.
(And of course, if they don’t have a problem with stealing over half of the fruits of your labor, do you really think they won’t send you to fight for them when the chips are down anyway?)
50% tax is absolutely not typical in the US as far as I know unless you can provide sources? I thought it was around 30% thanks to all the various schemes and deductions one can use?
I live in Bulgaria. My effective tax rate here is around 20%. Next destination is Dubai which is even lower, because again, if rich politican assholes’ kids are going there to live the good life, why not follow them in their grift?
(Would I recommend Bulgaria? Well the tech money you make is enough to live like a king and privately pay for all the services a government is supposed to provide… but then again it’s no different from the UK where I also had to pay for everything privately except I could barely afford it because I also had to burn 50% of my income on taxes with nothing in return, so from that perspective Bulgaria wins. Make of it what you will. Switzerland appears to be the only place with a functioning government and fair taxes, except the property Ponzi is reaching such breaking points that whatever you save on taxes is getting burnt immediately on rent, so you’re no better)
“Decent” in the form of hopefully not dying while you’re on the waiting list.
And bankruptcy is only a problem when you actually have significant assets, something not easy to acquire in western EU countries. If you’re the average under-30 western EU resident, bankruptcy won’t make a major difference in your lifestyle, it’ll be shit either way.
If you are spending an amount which rounds to zero on world-class healthcare, all of a sudden rent being even half your post-tax income (which would indicate you are living near the edge of your means, if not beyond) isn't so bad.
80k is 6.6k/month. That’s pre-tax, but for the benefit of the doubt let’s go with this figure instead of the post-tax.
Have you seen the prices of stuff nowadays? Whether energy, cars, technology or rent? 6.6k doesn’t go far at all anymore. Of course the post-tax is even lower.
> which would indicate you are living near the edge of your means
Real-estate being an investment means its price will adjust to extract maximum value. There’s an entire industry there that makes sure you can’t just work around this problem by adjusting your living standard or eating less Starbucks & avocado. Move to a farther away place? Well now you’re spending that rent reduction on transport instead. Move to a lower quality place? Well now you’re spending it on higher energy bills trying to keep the house warm. Willing to sacrifice all your social life and move in the middle of nowhere with ultra-cheap rent? Most roles are “hybrid” to prevent this very scenario, so can’t do that either.
>Have you seen the prices of stuff nowadays? Whether energy, cars, technology or rent? 6.6k doesn’t go far at all anymore. Of course the post-tax is even lower.
You said tax would be "over 50%". I disproved it. Stop moving the goalposts.
At least on this Materialistic app available on F-Droid, all those comments are flagged and unable to be seen
Its absolutely senseless to take on a position on something when not knowing what's coming from both sides
I'd presume this place to be frequented by those who would also find it similarly foolhardy to be taking a stance on an issue when not all parties are privy to the same objectivity/impartiality (in terms of information and the different sides of the story)
This fits the pattern of sabotage all across Europe. The obvious candidate is Russia who are using hybrid warfare against Europe/UK for a long time. Why does this post have so many... strange comments, mostly from new accounts? More hybrid warfare?
Now I wouldn’t call myself a student of European terrorism per-se, but haven’t virtually all of the countries listed had some form of domestic terror groups in the post WW2 era? Why am I not to believe this is domestic?
The “domestic terrorist” groups immediately proclaim they did the act for propaganda purpose while an adversary like Russia prefer to do it quietly.
Possible but Russia seems the most active at the moment. There was some discussion of their activities the other day https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46866089
I wonder if this stuff actually help them much?
You can't self-fund more than very small terror groups. "Domestic" groups aren't. Note how all the Marxist groups withered away after the fall of the Soviet Union.
Hmmmm another weeeeird comment. Try this on for size:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Vrb%C4%9Btice_ammunition_...
Edit: I guess all the downvotes are from totally "domestic" groups and not Russian bots, right? Get fucked Ruskies.
It could also be any of the millions of people whose families we killed. No way to know, really.
> More hybrid warfare?
Mostly useful idiots. Many HN posters are tech people from US. They are mainly left leaning all the way into tankie territory. And those are a prime target for russians.
Israel.
So that is Poland, Spain, England and now Italy in the past few months?
Have I missed any - very brazen!
Probably Germany
Our railways don't need sabotage - trains fail to run anyway.
True but I was talking about cut glass fibers at train tracks.
Yeah but what about that electricity sabotage in Berlin, drones over airports etc.
Drones also harassed Danish airports IIRC.
I know nothing about railways, but is there any sort of Time Domain Reflectometry (TDM) technology that railways use to detect issues with the rails?
I suppose with the distances we're talking about and the resistance of steel this isn't visible without a whole bunch of signal generators?
Edit: Be sure to read jiggawatts' reply below.
They use “test” cars that have bright lights or xenon flashes pointing down. They take thousands of pictures of the track every night and store the images in a database that can match them up precisely so you can see cracks growing over time like a movie.
I also remember reading about an application of fibre optics where a long strand is placed directly under each rail. Pulses of light through the fibre are reflected at the points where axles press down on the rail and compress the fibre. Similar techniques can be used to detect accidents and (completely) broken tracks.
Excellent! Thank you. Both these processes make more sense than the TDR scheme I was referring to.
With the fiber scheme they are using optical TDR.
You can even use fiber-optic cables running in cable throughs next to the tracks to detect and track trains: https://www.dbsystel.de/dbsystel-en/Digital-Stories-en/A-dig...
Yep. And the DOM (Digital Optical Monitoring) in consumer fiber optic modules (eg. SFPs) is sensitive to detect stuff like this!
I can tell when and where we have significant wind storms, because it oscillates the fiber lines on the poles in a particular way which in turn generates a graph with specific signal oscillations.
This was sabotage of the control equipment.
I don’t get it what’s the goal here? did anyone claim responsibility
State actors do not claim responsibility.
Why would someone do this?
If you do a somewhat bad thing with no pushback it becomes possible to do a somewhat worse thing with no pushback. Gradually you end up doing really bad things with total impunity.
Devil’s advocate: you should still have a reason to do the bad thing in the first place. I’m not a good enough politician to understand how this benefits anyone’s interests (don’t get me wrong, I do suspect Russia to be behind this, but still don’t get the objective - but then again I don’t get the objective of their special bullshit operation either)
Indeed many people who subscribe to Rational Actor theory of politics are stupefied by this. However the thing about personalistic dictatorships is their foreign policy and aggression are all subject to the whims of one person, even though the media still refers to them as if they are real countries with collective decision-making. And they indeed may be acting rationally just not in the axiomatic framework any sane person would even consider.
Say some dictator lived through a trauma that he projects onto some group of people. Or that he considers himself a spiritual successor (perhaps even the reincarnation) of Ivan the Great, the Collector or Lands. Once you ease yourself into this mindset you see the logic.
"personalistic dictatorships is their foreign policy and aggression are all subject to the whims of one person, even though the media still refers to them as if they are real countries with collective decision-making. And they indeed may be acting rationally just not in the axiomatic framework any sane person would even consider." Hmmm...why does that sound so familiar with a major western country??? ;-p
The reason is resentment rooted in an inferiority complex. Russia's state ideology is that they're being oppressed by "the West", and they really believe it up to the highest levels of government. They're quite convinced that hurting their "enemy" this way amounts to securing their interest, because by damaging "the West", their own relative power is elevated and that makes them a serious player on the international stage.
Russia is desperate for leverage. Apart from China, they are severely isolated from rich markets. Targeted violence is an attempt at generating leverage, in the same way some racketeers would hit shops that refuse to pay "protection" money.
I think sabotage is at least partly signalling: "Don't support Ukraine too much, or more bad things will happen to you."
The point of the "special operation" was that there would not be a culturally-adjacent functioning democracy next door, because that might give the Russian people ideas.
For signalling you need the signal. You need to break the train track and then say if you keep supporting Ukraine we'll do worse things. If you stay quiet, it doesn't work.
For the record, it was me. I committed terrorism to bring awareness to Rust's excessive use of punctuation marks.
No, (apparent) ambiguity works fine, as long as the recipient of the message understands it. The Mafia can put a brick through your window, and you know what's going on, even without them signing the brick.
Only if you recently did something that you know the Mafia hates. If I got a brick through my window right now, my best theory would be that they got the wrong window. What would yours be?
Creating chaos in democracies is forcing the elected politicians to focus on the interior, thus leaving them less resources (or public interest) for stopping remote invasions.
The New Yorker article had:
>A source in the German security establishment told me, “It’s a show of force, a way of taking off the mask and saying, ‘So, Germany, what are you going to do about it?’ ” (https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2026/02/09/to-build-a-fir...)
hybrid warfare: inflict costs with deniability
Because they weren't invited.
Russia has been involved in covert sabotage operations in Europe for more than a decade [1][2]. You can learn more about this from investigative journalist Christo Grozev [3].
What are the chances that the high-speed rail crash that occurred in Spain a few weeks ago was also caused by them? [4]
[1] https://www.csis.org/analysis/russias-shadow-war-against-wes...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GRU_Unit_29155
[3] https://m.youtube.com/@thechristofiles/videos
[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Adamuz_train_derailments
France had the same kind of sabotages during the JO. It was later confirmed to have been sponsored by Russia.
what? they were local anarchist. what the hell are you saying?
Such groups are manipulated. Easy enough to do, especially if you provide money in exchange for doing things. Russia has been caught doing it in Ukraine, why in the world would you think it couldn't happen elsewhere? There are enough desperate suckers out there.
With social media encouraging and promoting divisive bullshit it’s really not hard for a hostile power to influence local groups to do their bidding.
Social media should be the main target of all these defense groups, but sadly politicians themselves derive their power from it so it’s unlikely anything tangible will be done.
But how do you do actually deal with it? The bad actors are not in reach of law enforcement.
The bad actors here are the social media platforms who host and promote divisive content since it generates more engagement thus ad revenue. Those are very much in reach of law enforcement and regulations can be passed to forbid such engagement-maximizing behavior. Simply moving back to chronological feeds of accounts the user explicitly chose to follow would be a big first step in curbing the spread of propaganda.
There was also a spree of migrants attacks in Germany, just before the election, which greatly swung public opionion to the AfD.
Source for these claims?
I was coming out of Barcelona on a train to France on the 18th, and through the window spotted a blacked-out quadcopter just hovering quite high over the tracks. No incidents happened in that area of Spain though so I'm wondering why it was there, I suppose it could be civilian or police?
Anyone can fly a quadcopter though? You can buy one right now for a couple hundred bucks off Amazon (and strap explosives to it if you wanted to).
If anything, the fact we’re not seeing random drones carrying explosives and diving into groups of people on a daily basis shows the vast, vast (99.999%) majority of people is actually well-meaning and has no desire to kill or hurt anyone.
If you’re legitimately baffled by a random guy being able to fly a quadcopter around without any kind of government approval or oversight, I encourage you to buy one and play around (without explosives please!), just make sure to not fly it over places where people could be standing - terminal velocity is real and even a light one could cause serious injury if it were to lose control and fall on someone’s head.
Or it shows mass surveillance is working so well as a deterrent. If we got rid of the cameras everywhere, someone might rig a drone with explosives.
Russia is a candidate, but it's far from the only candidate, and it's not clear how this advances their interests. Why not China, for instance? Or a random terrorist group? Speculation is fun but it's important to actually make statements grounded in reality.
No, Russia is the prime (if not only) candidate.
Why? They've been developing a system of "single-use agents" to overwhelm European governments and keep them on their back foot.
This is likely a test run.
A lovely article on this was recently published in The New Yorker that you may enjoy: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2026/02/09/to-build-a-fir....
Israel is another candidate, given that Israel has beef with Spain for Spanish government not supporting/approving the genocide in Gaza.
This makes no sense.
Israel responds to words with words. They respond to force with force. And they are busy enough dealing with the trouble that Iran keeps stirring up, they're not going to do anything to Spain. (Not to say that it would be out of the question for them to go after terrorists who were in Spain, but it would be very focused. Look at what happened after Munich--multiple European countries were incredibly inept about extraditing the attackers so Israel responded with assassination teams. Not strikes on anything they didn't believe had hurt them.)
(And there never was a genocide, but this isn't the thread for it.)
You seem to approve extrajudicial killing / assassination. Would be interesting if some countries decide to start assassinating Israeli terrorists in West Bank.
Or in Israel.
I don't believe that without evidence. Europe tacitly supports Israel even while some parts of it claim not to, and Spain is internationally irrelevant.
Exactly why they are singled out for chilling effect. They cannot retaliate substantially.
Evidence is not easy to find on these topics. It's espionage for christ's sake. You need to analyze material incentives and be familiar with the methods used. You cannot expect the media to hand you the answers, because that is not the purpose of the media especially on topics like this.
I'd suggest that radical left-wing elements indigenous to Italy, such as those behind the Turin protests that left 100 police officers wounded a few days ago, are a perfectly plausible candidate; not every attack comes from without. There was another protest against the Olympics in Milan itself last night by left-wing elements who believe the games are economically and socially unsustainable [0]
[0] https://www.cnn.com/2026/02/07/europe/italy-protests-rail-da...
Unfortunately with stuff like this, nation states will use groups like that as proxies.
Lots of governments.
For example, there's some other news at the moment that the USA is financing pro-MAGA groups across Europe, which I mention more because of Jan 6 happened at all than due to any specific evidence that the US government has knowingly given state support for terrorists.
After 6 weeks in Taiwan, one thing became very evident, mainland China can take the island in 3 days without firing a single shot. The only thing that can stop mainland China taking from taking Taiwan is a US president like Bill Clinton who had the courage to put two United States aircraft carrier strike forces between the mainland and the island to defend democracy which gave us TMSC. I don't see the current snowflake leadership doing that. While I was there, mainland China told the people of Taiwan to shut their mouths and nobody said a word about China after.
The reason mainland China hasn't taken Taiwan is because they don't have to.
I do not like the government of China, however, they are building infrastructure around the world especially in Africa, Asia, and South America. They are not destroying things like Russia does every single day. Their approach to diplomacy now is building.
For the same reason, China isn't commit terrorist attacks on other countries. However, Russia is committing terrorist attacks on other countries so it easy to believe that they are responsible for terrorist attacks.
China most certainly can destroy Taiwan. What would be very hard is taking it intact. That needs lots of boots on the ground--and how do you get those boots on the ground when any ship that tries to get too close finds itself facing a variety of seeker weapons. China shoot them down when they are fired from a few miles out? Not likely. Even not near land, look at what happened to the Moskova--targeting a sea skimmer is hard.
And it's a sea battle--drones can pick their own targets and thus can't be jammed. What happens when the ship is met by a hundred drones with explosives? Doesn't take much of a processor to compare the image of a ship with the ocean.
One month ago the Chinese navy surrounded the island. [0] That is a siege. Nothing comes in and nothing goes out. The eastern side of the island's infrastructure is complete shit because corrupt local governments. They can't defend it. The Chinese can land and take the mountains and have the high ground easily. The west side can be completely obliterated with rockets from the mainland.
The citizens wouldn't challenged the mainland in 2024, they won't challenge the mainland today, and they won't challenge the mainland in the future.
Likely the reason the mainland hasn't taken the island yet IS because they can take it in 3 days if they wanted.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_Mission_2025
> After 6 weeks in Taiwan, one thing became very evident, mainland China can take the island in 3 days without firing a single shot
This does not reflect the opinions of any military person I know who has knowledgeably commented on the topic, all of whom have spent quite a bit longer than 6 weeks on Taiwan.
Their defense system is as big a joke as the architecture design in Hualien. Nobody living on the island will openly criticize the mainland for the same reason nobody will point a weapon at anyone from the mainland. They know if the mainland wants the island, they surround the island on day 1, take over the island on day 2, and install their own government on day 3. They know they do not want a record of opposing the mainland in words or violence because of the consquences.
I'm not saying this to be mean. I'm being honest and because the current United States administration is a bunch of snowflakes, it puts the democracy in Taiwan in great danger you need to honest about that too.
The only country I think that is prepared to defend against China is Vietnam.
> if the mainland wants the island, they surround the island on day 1, take over the island on day 2, and install their own government on day 3
Now add typhoon season, the artillery batteries in the mountains, China’s lack of blue-water naval operations (let alone combined arms) and, in terms of allies, the Philippines and Japan.
Sorry. But this analogy reeks of Moscow ca. 2022.
The Taiwanese are not going to fight.
This will be much more like the Taliban recapturing Kabul. If the artillery batteries are like the infrastructure on the east coast, likely they don't work. Taking the train out there is very dangerous. Not 1 in every 100 people dying because the architecture is shit and the local governments are super corrupt dangerous, but incompetence and people just don't care about maintaining them dangerous. They have ~400 combat aircraft but the mainland won't allow them acquire f35s or patriot missiles and anything that would really be a threat.
The Taiwanese are not going to fight. China told them to be quiet and under threat that if they speak out they and their families will later face retribution, everyone went silent. They are surely not going to take arms against China. My dad had a friend, an scientist from China, in the 80s. She was a critic of the government. She had one child in China. They removed one of her young son's testicles and told her to shut up or they would remove the other. The Taiwanese know how it works.
I spent 3 weeks in the Philippines and 2 months in Japan. Neither can afford a war. The Philippines is too poor and Japan's debt is hovering around 235%–263% of its GDP. Japan doesn't even have official diplomatic relation with Taiwan let alone a defense treaty. Japan is a mess with or without a war.
The only thing that will stop China from attacking Taiwan, is a US president who isn't a whining snowflake. If you are US citizen I would recommend electing a US president with a backbone who isn't a pedophile -- for Taiwan's sake.
> Taiwanese are not going to fight. China told them to be quiet and under threat that if they speak out they and their families will later face retribution, everyone went silent
Sorry, this is nonsense. I'm not Taiwanese. But I have a lot of Taiwanese friends, none of them in politics, half of them in America. They all speak out. Forcefully. Exhibit A for this being B.S. is the electoral history of Taiwan, particularly since Xi started his wolf-warrior bullshit in the late 2010s.
> I spent 3 weeks in the Philippines and 2 months in Japan. Neither can afford a war. The Philippines is too poor and Japan's debt is hovering around 235%–263% of its GDP
You have to be joking. Both have prominent militaries they're building up.
> Japan doesn't even have official diplomatic relation with Taiwan let alone a defense treaty
This is your first valid point.
> Japan is a mess with or without a war
This is Zero Hedge nonsense. Japan is a financial mess. They're also an industrial power, scientific powerhouse and potent–and building–military force.
> If you are US citizen I would recommend electing a US president with a backbone who isn't a pedophile -- for Taiwan's sake
Americans don't vote on foreign policy unless there is a draft.
>for Taiwan's sake.
They can't even vote in their own interest. Something or somewhere else isn't even on their radar.
If what you say is true, why ever would the US want to defend them?
I would not want to risk American money or lives defending defending a country that doesn't want to defend itself.
That said, your anecdotes don't match my experience with sentiments in taiwan
The sea still makes quite a barrier to invasion. The Russians had to abandon Kherson because there was a river in the way and have had to abandon most of the black sea because Ukraine sinks their boats with missiles and drones.
The Chinese navy surrounded the island and nobody did a fucking thing! [0]
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_Mission_2025
> The Chinese navy surrounded the island and nobody did a fucking thing!
Because nothing happened. If your neighbour is on an acid trip, you leave them alone. They're not actually breaking into your house yet.
To be fair to a US president who doesn't deserve any kind of fairness, the US/China dynamic 30 years ago is very different from today's dynamic -- and this has a lot more to do with China's growth than anything the US has done (or not done).
The only thing that can stop China from taking Taiwan is a US president willing to put two aircraft carrier strike groups between the island the mainland. That is the same today as it was 30 years ago. However, today, unlike in the 90s the mainland can take the island in 3 days without firing a shot.
> this has a lot more to do with China's growth
That is my point. Because of China's growth they don't need to take the island by force or commit terrorist attacks against other countries especially in Europe. Today, countries like the Bahamas, Peru, Afghanistan, and Nigeria are welcoming China and their infrastructure money (not destroying infrastructure like Russia does) with open arms.
> Why not China, for instance?
A couple reasons:
1. China's not particularly known to conduct this sort of activity this far from their mainland.
2. What would be their motive? China is actively trying to fill that "superpower" void being left in Europe by President Trump's unpredictable behavior.
> Or a random terrorist group?
Plausible.
> Speculation is fun but it's important to actually make statements grounded in reality.
I look at it from the standpoint of motive and history. See "GRU Unit 29155"[1]. Russia has both. Russia is on the brink of war with Europe.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GRU_Unit_29155#Activities
Ok, this is actually substantial - much more so than GP's speculation. I think you've convinced me.
Perhaps reading the sources the GP provided would further cement your understanding.
Thank you, I just started as an intern in CCP counter-intel. 不要相信任何人 :-P
> Russia is on the brink of war with Europe.
EU / NATO is on the brink of making war with Russia official.
There, FTFY.
This comment is correct, but puts undue agency on EU/NATO. Russia is already at war with EU/NATO, and EU/NATO will only tick the box that says there's a war.
I don't see the EU and NATO agitating Russia. Quite the opposite, but I'm coming from a western standpoint. Can you elaborate?
As they should. Because the old politics of looking the other way had the only effect of emboldening the bullies to bully more.
> Why not China, for instance
In this specific case, becuase China has historically had significant FDI within Italy's infrastructure sector.
China has significant issues with the EU and is aligned with Russia, but it isn't in China's incentive to conduct violent actions outside of the Chinese diaspora within Europe (which is a separate sticking point).
What about USA.
>What are the chances that the high-speed rail crash that occurred in Spain a few weeks ago was also caused by them?
As someone who works in the industry: quite slim.
Russia has its back against the wall and has little reason to invite retaliation. Israel has the means, motive, opportunity, and lack of restraint to punish its critics with these means, as well as the sway to cover their tracks with nonsensical disinformation. Media is pushing hard for the Russia Orc narrative and it says a lot about the people who are happy to buy it.
What would Israel stand to gain from having any remaining sympathy eliminated upon the discovery that they were behind it?
Chilling effect against detractors who are unable to retaliate in kind. Do they seem concerned at all with courting sympathy to you?
And can I ask you, what would Russia gain from this?
Europe should stop tolerating these sabotages and go to war with Russia and take advantage of their weakened military due to their war with Ukraine
> Europe should stop tolerating these sabotages and go to war with Russia
Unnecessary. Just (a) pursue and seize its shadow fleet and (b) give Ukraine long-range weapons. (And radars so you can profile Russia's air defences.)
Russia is operating so comically outside its circle of competence, material constraints and international law that you don't even have to go kinetic to hurt it.
NATO could certainly rollover the Russian army in a conventional war, but that was just as true before the Ukrainian war. The idea that Russia is/was a serious threat is a convenient fiction: It helps maintain Russia's image as a superpower, and it provides a justification for the existence of NATO and the associated military industrial complex that supports it.
What is true however, is that Russia does possess a huge arsenal of nuclear and other weapons:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia_and_weapons_of_mass_des...
Despite Putin's posturing, Russia's never going to risk deploying them in a conflict with Ukraine. But in an actual war between NATO/Europe and Russia, with the regime facing an existential threat, then there's a very good chance they would. But even before it got to that point, the nature of the conflict itself would make nuclear escalation very likely. Both sides would be firing huge numbers of missiles, attempting to gain air superiority by wiping out the other's own missile launchers, radar bases, etc. With that many missiles flying, and stressed people and automated systems making split-second decisions, it's very likely that an error or miscalculation would result in an accidental nuclear strike, at which point it would be impossible to put the genie back in the bottle.
Which is why we must never give Ukraine enough firepower to pose a threat to the Russian regime.
But that does not mean we can't arm them with long range stuff, just in fairly small quantities. A Tomahawk can't take down Russia. A Tomahawk a day raining down in areas away from the battle front--that can make Russia very much want to quit provoking them. Provide such weapons on the basis that the supply will be immediately cut off at status quo ante.
This of course assumes that you are not just delaying the inevitable and giving time for Russia to recover will just make the nuclear escalation worse when it happens (not if it happens)
will you go to the frontline?
You know what, yeah, I will, in exchange for EU citizenship and it must be fully financed so we have available the best weaponry money can buy (and a written contract that has a big payout for my parents if I die in combat)
If you get EU citizenship in western EU countries and survive you’re signing up for having any kind of respectable wage taxed at over 50% with rent being over half of your post-tax earnings. Be careful what you wish for. You are better off settling in and/or fighting in Ukraine where my understanding is that at least taxes are much lower.
20% extra tax doesn't seem that high a price for not being sent to fight in a war
Only if you can’t fly to a neutral low-tax country and enjoy low tax and not being sent to war. But you do you, I do me.
(And of course, if they don’t have a problem with stealing over half of the fruits of your labor, do you really think they won’t send you to fight for them when the chips are down anyway?)
Where do you live? 50% tax and 25% rent is typical in the USA as well, isn't it?
50% tax is absolutely not typical in the US as far as I know unless you can provide sources? I thought it was around 30% thanks to all the various schemes and deductions one can use?
I live in Bulgaria. My effective tax rate here is around 20%. Next destination is Dubai which is even lower, because again, if rich politican assholes’ kids are going there to live the good life, why not follow them in their grift?
(Would I recommend Bulgaria? Well the tech money you make is enough to live like a king and privately pay for all the services a government is supposed to provide… but then again it’s no different from the UK where I also had to pay for everything privately except I could barely afford it because I also had to burn 50% of my income on taxes with nothing in return, so from that perspective Bulgaria wins. Make of it what you will. Switzerland appears to be the only place with a functioning government and fair taxes, except the property Ponzi is reaching such breaking points that whatever you save on taxes is getting burnt immediately on rent, so you’re no better)
But you do get decent healthcare without the risk of bankruptcy.
“Decent” in the form of hopefully not dying while you’re on the waiting list.
And bankruptcy is only a problem when you actually have significant assets, something not easy to acquire in western EU countries. If you’re the average under-30 western EU resident, bankruptcy won’t make a major difference in your lifestyle, it’ll be shit either way.
>any kind of respectable wage taxed at over 50% with rent being over half of your post-tax earnings.
What sort of easily-disprovable horseshit is this?
https://www.economie.gouv.fr/particuliers/impots-et-fiscalit...
Income 11k-30k taxed at 11%, 30k-80k at 30%.
80k puts you in the top 5% of wage earners.
If you are spending an amount which rounds to zero on world-class healthcare, all of a sudden rent being even half your post-tax income (which would indicate you are living near the edge of your means, if not beyond) isn't so bad.
80k is 6.6k/month. That’s pre-tax, but for the benefit of the doubt let’s go with this figure instead of the post-tax.
Have you seen the prices of stuff nowadays? Whether energy, cars, technology or rent? 6.6k doesn’t go far at all anymore. Of course the post-tax is even lower.
> which would indicate you are living near the edge of your means
Real-estate being an investment means its price will adjust to extract maximum value. There’s an entire industry there that makes sure you can’t just work around this problem by adjusting your living standard or eating less Starbucks & avocado. Move to a farther away place? Well now you’re spending that rent reduction on transport instead. Move to a lower quality place? Well now you’re spending it on higher energy bills trying to keep the house warm. Willing to sacrifice all your social life and move in the middle of nowhere with ultra-cheap rent? Most roles are “hybrid” to prevent this very scenario, so can’t do that either.
>Have you seen the prices of stuff nowadays? Whether energy, cars, technology or rent? 6.6k doesn’t go far at all anymore. Of course the post-tax is even lower.
You said tax would be "over 50%". I disproved it. Stop moving the goalposts.
absolutely
Article about Russia on HN > green letter brand new throwaway accounts appear instantly in comments
At least on this Materialistic app available on F-Droid, all those comments are flagged and unable to be seen
Its absolutely senseless to take on a position on something when not knowing what's coming from both sides
I'd presume this place to be frequented by those who would also find it similarly foolhardy to be taking a stance on an issue when not all parties are privy to the same objectivity/impartiality (in terms of information and the different sides of the story)
This article doesn't mention Russia at all.
article about russia???
Russia is openly attacking Europe. This is the second time railways have been bombed right at the start of the olympics!
Fuck me, what will it take before we do something?