War? The EU didn't start a war when the US blew up nordstream 2. In fact they spent a lot of time nervously pointing at everyone except the US (who said they would blow it up).
It's a totally abusive and subservient relationship.
But then again the US doesn't allow the EU to have software companies, so they might not care that the data that would go to Teams is being hovered by a different US company instead.
> War? The EU didn't start a war when the US blew up nordstream 2.
As people, who most likely are outside of the intelligence community, we don't know who blew up NS2. Current lead suspect is Ukraine, although speculation ranges from the US to the Russians doing it themselves. Of course, if there's some substancial evidence aside from "Biden said something one time", I'm sure people would be interested. But before such evidence is presented, this conspiracy theory doesn't really hold water.
But let's entertain the idea some. Assuming that CIA or whatever did do it (again, need more evidence), why would they a) do it again, and b) do it for the sake of Microsoft of all things? At least NS2 can easily be seen as a strategic liability. Meanwhile, it'd be pretty nearsighted to do this kind of an op just because Microsoft is being held liable for bundling Teams and abusing its dominant market position with it.
True. Mr. Vladimirovich doesn't want for any regime change that could just go back to selling natgas. I personally don't think it was UA either, although unlike so many other Kremlin claims, this would at least be a bit believable because there would be a motive.
But given that the pipe was already closed when it blew up, it most likely was FSB trying to frame Western powers and/or UA. Wouldn't be the first time FSB blows up Russian stuff to blame others.
It's a totally abusive and subservient relationship.
But then again the US doesn't allow the EU to have software companies, so they might not care that the data that would go to Teams is being hovered by a different US company instead.