The PAC 100% attempted to destroy the Big 12. That is indisputable.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/oklahoma-was-within-30-minutes-of-leaving-for-the-pac-10-in-2010/
So this is a semantics discussion. We all agree that the Pac 10 had discussions with OU and UT. We disagree about how many schools they were trying to poach, how close it was to happening, and whether it's tantamount to "attempting to destroy the Big 12." What I know for a stone cold fact is the source for that Dodd/Fornelli article is unsourced. The only person on record in any of these links is the president of Texas Tech and he said the UPs in the Pac 10 voted against expansion. The "fact" that OU was 30 minutes from leaving seems to be in direct odds with the Pac 10 presidents voting against expansion. We clearly aren't going to agree on this but we've been doing expansion rumors for 13 years. Taking an unsourced rumor from 13 years ago from something that never materialized, seems like confirmation bias, given the literally hundreds of unsourced rumors, that have been reported on, throughout the years that have been complete BS.
The second part of this is whether or not they aimed to destroy the Big 12. Let's assume they actually had a plan to take 6 Big 12 schools, and Larry Scott had the votes. How is that poaching/attempted poaching any different than what the other 9 FBS conferences have done? Why are Pac 12 fans uniquely due for pain when every single conference has poached or attempted to poach from other conferences? I'd be willing to listen that they deserve to be killed off because they have been uniquely terrible at expansion attempts, but I can't except that they deserve to be killed off because they attempted to expand. The reason that I don't want the Pac 12 to ultimately be killed off is if they are the first autonomy conference to go, we'd all be fools to think they will be last. The Big 10 isn't going to put a bullet in the conference they've been partners with for 100 years and then shrug their shoulders when the SEC decides to do the same with the ACC.
This crap has got to stop or we will also face the same ignominious fate.
I don't remember the timing minute-by-minute, but is it possible that the Pac-10 UPs voted after they knew UT wasn't going to accept as a matter of saving face in the optics-driven world we live in?
As it relates to future expansion by the SEC/Big Ten, I agree with the fundamental point on the new Big 12 potentially being in the crosshairs, but also would suggest that, when combining those two leagues, you could argue that there isn't much room for addition that doesn't come with subtraction.
Once you're past that short list - Washington, Oregon, UNC, Clemson, Florida State, Virginia, Miami (and maybe a few others like Va Tech, Pitt, NC State, etc.) - it's become clear that everyone else isn't desired or they would have already been taken. So, what's the motivation for the SEC/Big Ten to go much further than 20 teams each? That's already enough to breakaway and have their own fiefdom (if that's what they want).