So now it’s “We’ll maybe next year it will be really bad”. “Europe has more natural gas than it knows what to do with. So much, in fact, that spot prices briefly went negative earlier this week. For months, officials have warned of an energy crisis this winter as Russia — once the region’s biggest supplier of natural gas — slashed supplies in retaliation for sanctions Europe imposed over its invasion of Ukraine. Now, EU gas storage facilities are close to full, tankers carrying liquefied natural gas (LNG) are lining up at ports, unable to unload their cargoes, and prices are tumbling. The price of benchmark European natural gas futures has dropped 20% since last Thursday, and by more than 70% since hitting a record high in late August.” Europe now has so much natural gas that prices just dipped below zero | CNN Business
And the surrender or negotiated end needs to look to the future. The End of WWI almost seeds the conditions for WW2. And WW2 had to end the way it did. There was no choice but to obliterate Naziism and to eliminate the deification of the Japanese Emperor. Then again, things went where the did in Europe in WW2 because of the reluctance to engage earlier. One really has to question if this is where we are now. The debate is really the same one we had until Pearl Harbor.
Sam Harris | #301 - The Politics of Unreality: Ukraine and Nuclear Risk This was an excellent episode. The guest is Timothy Snyder Timothy D. Snyder - Wikipedia He’s a historian and has spent decades studying and visiting Eastern European history and politics. I think I heard that he speaks Ukrainian. He pretty much lays waste to many of the claims and assertions of the Russian/Putin apologists and their arguments. Various points I can remember - I’m sure I don’t do them Justice. - A big point he makes is one that should be obvious. Ukraine is an independent country. It’s current borders were negotiated with the current version of Russia in 1991. Any notion that somehow Russia has some rightful claim or stake in that territory is nonsense. Borders are borders. If we are going to entertain that borders are permanently negotiable then there would be no world order. - discussing Crimea and kruchevs supposed “mistake” of giving it up, the reason it was given to the Ukraine republic, both within the Soviet Union, was a benign practical one given water access and other geographic logistics out of convenience. Kruchev dressed it up to make it into this big gesture towards Ukraine but in reality it was just a run of the mill logistical decision. - as mentioned, for all the rumblings about Crimea being heavily Russian, that is because the Soviet Union pulled out all of the existing Crimean residents and replaced them with Russians in the early mid 20th century. To a lesser degree this has happened in a lot of Ukraine over centuries - Russians being forcibly implanted there, and now Ukrainians being extracted and forcibly moved to Russia, which is a form of Genocide. - He stated that something around 90% of Ukrainians support Ukrainian independence, including a majority of even supposed “pro Russian” eastern areas. - for all the handwringing about the destruction and the tragedy of war and how we should force a negotiated settlement to stop it, the Ukrainians are the ones most directly affected by this, and suffering the consequences, so as an independent country we should look to them as to when enough is enough. - All wars are fought by countries that have lots of weapons from other countries and third parties. NATO supplying Ukraine isn’t really any different in that respect. - The advancement and expansion of NATO was not some form of western colonialism. It was these former Soviet bloc countries coming to NATO or the EU, asking to be a part, and voluntarily undertaking political and economic changes. It isn’t something the west pushed on them. It is what they wanted. At the time of Soviet breakup, it was actually US policy via GHWB to try to hold the Soviet Union together (I’m assuming because fear of chaos, but I don’t think that was discussed). It was the Russian Republic, what we now call Russia, that blew it up. The notion that Russia fears NATO invasion is nonsense, and that is a motivation for Ukraine invasion is non sense. (I didn’t hear him say this but Anne Applebaum has said similar and she said what Russia fears is western economics and freedoms and don’t want that to spillover, which has been exactly what has been happening in Ukraine for over a decade. ) The notion that we need to give into to Putin because of nukes is problematic on multiple levels. Those threats are an indication he is losing, and to the extent we unilaterally surrender to nuclear threats only increases the probability that such threats will be made and increases the probability of nuclear war. That’s all I can think of. I am sure there are other points of view but given this guys direct involvement in Ukraine and Eastern Europe he is perhaps the most credible source I have heard on the subject.
People are getting killed every day that is a fact on both sides of the aisle. How many is questionable which is my point. Concerning withdrawal why do think Putin made it publicly known that people need to evacuate? Putin has given people ample warning and has not acted as of yet. How much longer Putin will remain patient is anyone's guess. What do you think comes next?
We are darn near a year into this war and many have claimed Russia short on supplies from the very beginning of this war. As for the energy crisis Europe is hanging by a thread. The US continues to draw down the SPR and OPEC has said screw you all. As for the devil we know and a potential devil we don't know. I highly doubt Russia will do a 180 turning the spigot back on.
Russia has evacuated citizens from Kherson City. Not troops. And Ukraine has acknowledged that their counter-offensive has stalled. My guess is that Biden is pushing for a last-gasp push in advance of the midterms. Basically, Ukraine is getting weaker and weaker as Russia gets stronger and stronger.
Russia has opened a second front line - to kill deserters. LOL Russia Now Has a Second Frontline Set Up Just to Kill Its Deserters: Intel
This cant be true. I have read right here that Europe was crumbling and mumbling with energy shortages forcing industries to shutter and people burning furniture to stay warm after their cold showers and frozen nights
I explained NATO's role and intervention in Ukraine Ukraine is not their role. Now if Putin steps into a NATO nation that's a different story. To be blunt all nations do whatever they feel like whether we like it or not. As for the UN they are useless at this point. I find it difficult to take you seriously concerning your last paragraph. Russian settlers into what is now Ukraine began in the late 1600's. What is now considered the official language of Ukraine (Ukrainian) did not come to pass until the adoption of a constitution in 1996. Today then the regions remained divided in the language spoken. Sort of like Quebec adopting the French language.
do you just choose to ignore facts you don't like? have you looked a tnat gas prices in the EU lately or their storage. here is the link from a few posts up. Europe now has so much natural gas that prices just dipped below zero | CNN Business
It is not a maybe if things continue down this path. It is a foregone conclusion. How long do thing those ships are going to linger off shore? The headline may sound great but believe me no one is offloading LNG or giving away natural gas for free. While storage facilities may be full now they will not be after winter and you still have the industrial sector that is staving for natural gas. Despite the recent slump, at around €100 ($100) per megawatt hour European natural gas futures are still 126% above where they were last October, when economies started to reopen from their pandemic lockdowns and demand spiked. Prices could rise sharply again in December and January as the weather turns colder, providing an incentive for some of those tankers to wait offshore a while longer before coming into port to unload, said Booth.
Note how it’s always the “Ukrainian people” against “Putin” – there are no Russian people. Putin, of course, is not an actual person either – he’s a monster. Buttons are easily pushed.
I think it was Kasparov who asked what is the effective difference between Ukraine and other NATO members. The reason we don’t do more against Putin in Ukraine is because of his Nukes. If he invaded an Eastern European NATO country he still has nukes. All the arguments would be the same. The situation would be the same. My guess is you and your buddies would be arguing it isn’t in our best interests to defend these countries, because of nukes, energy shortages and inflation and you’d be saying they never should have been a part of NATO. Hell Trump was hostile to the whole concept of NATO. So either we stand up to Putin and his threats and bluffs, or we just let him do what he wants wherever he wants, and then the same would apply to China re Taiwan or everywhere else. maybe, maybe not, but forgive me if I don’t give your assessments merit when you thought it was strange that Russia as a member of the security council didn’t vote to go to war with itself. So you are making the argument since Ukraine had Russians transplanted there consistently over centuries, including the 20th, even though they were controlled by Russia via the Soviet Union and previously Russian empire, that they are essentially Russian because they waited 5 years after the fall of the Soviet Union to make Ukrainian their language? That’s an odd argument.
Watch "enemy at the gates" to see how comisars treated comrades attacking at the front. Hollywood - yes Reality at Stalingrad - yes
this makes me wonder if Putin is the one calling the shots anymore. Her father was Putin's mentor/patron and apparently she was very close to Putin. It would seem that her transgression was to let it be known that she could not share her honest thoughts about the war. she had connections deep enough to know to get the heck out of Russia and do it now. will the oligarchs with assets in Russia all follow the company line now or will this force the fissure between the hard liners and the oligarchs? to me, this wreaks of a power grab by the leader of the Wagner Group making it clear that there is a new sheriff in town and he is it. there were a lot more low hanging fruit (less connected to Putin) who have said much more so this feels like a message being sent that nobody is untouchable more than anything else 'Putin's goddaughter' flees Russia hours before agents swoop to arrest her (msn.com) A glamorous Russian socialite whose father was Vladimir Putin's mentor reportedly fled the country on Wednesday morning, just hours before police raided her luxury mansion after she mildly criticised the Ukraine war. Former It-girl Ksenia Sobchak, 40, is an extremely close family friend of Putin - he attended her baptism and was long rumoured to be his goddaughter. But her targeting is a signal that Moscow is further tightening its limits on anti-war sentiment. Agents were also dispatched to a VIP airport terminal to arrest her, according to several Russian state-owned news agencies quoting unnamed officials. But the 40-year-old socialite managed to board a flight to Lithuania via Belarus before the agents could get there.“She left Moscow overnight after she bought tickets online for Dubai yesterday and Turkey today - she did that to fool the agents,” an unnamed official told the Tass news agency. .......................... Sergei Markov, a pro-Kremlin political analyst, argued that the raid has sent a signal to members of the Russian elite that all bets are off. "If they can arrest the daughter of Putin's patron... it means there are no untouchables," Mr Markov wrote in a commentary. "For some members of the elites, an arrest warrant for Sobchak is a blazing sign in the skies."
One other thing hat was interesting - he pushed back on the narrative that Putin’s “back is against the wall” and that “he needs an off-ramp”. No to both. He can easily retreat. He has an easy way out. As to needing an off-ramp, he can retreat, essentially lose the war, and claim he didn’t lose. With all the ridiculous claims and lies what is stopping him from lying about that. Countries lose wars. The US has lost wars. The Soviet Union lost wars. Typically they just deny they lost it and move on. There is nothing stopping a retreat. They have already retreated from Kiev and are now retreating other areas.
Nukes have nothing to do with this and I believe I made that clear with regards to NATO and what the US obligation is. I know you've read my argument throughout this this thread and I made clear under what circumstances the US should get involved with boots on the ground. I see no need to rehash all of that as I have done it multiple times in this thread now. As for super powers what makes a nation a super power? A nation has to have a dominate position characterized by its extensive ability to exert influence or project power on a global scale. This is done through the combined means of economic, military, technological and cultural strength as well as diplomatic and soft power influence. Traditionally, superpowers are preeminent among the great powers.” The only nations that can put up a fight at the moment are the US (although hobbled as we are), Russia and China. Followed by the UK, Germany and France (who cannot afford a fight at this point), Japan has there own issues as does Israel. Saudi Arabia and UAE are now drifting away from US hegemony. Here is a 20 minute podcast you might find interesting. With everything going on at the moment we cannot get Europe to coalesce in a cohesive manner. What's behind the France-Germany tensions? The longstanding relationship between France and Germany is in crisis.Their leaders are meeting in Paris following disagreements on defence and energy policies, and the war on Ukraine. So, what sort of fallout could there be if the EU's two biggest economies can't find common ground? Bottom line we are not in a position of unadulterated strength nor do we have the support on a global scale to initiate such actions. When backed into a corner we will fight of that there is no doubt. We are by no means backed into a corner and it's time for Europe and the US to get our houses in order. As for transplantation it's not an argument it is a fact. Did we not transplant the entire population of the US over centuries?
