- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: While Putin doubles down in Ukraine, his gas gambit is failing
Posted on 10/10/22 at 5:10 pm to Indefatigable
Posted on 10/10/22 at 5:10 pm to Indefatigable
quote:You need to do a bit more reading on the topic. With all due respect, you really have no clue as to what you're talking about.
It wasn’t their line in 1999, or 2004, when every single “concern” they pretend to have now were also present.
quote:What is the range of a cruise missile? A stealth cruise missile? A nuclear armed hypersonic cruise missile (about 6 min to Moscow)?
Nothing in Ukraine impacts anything at all about NATO’s nuclear capabilities.
1
Posted on 10/10/22 at 5:10 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
It's a matter of history. The last land invasion of Russia cost them 27 million lives. That was Germany. A nineteenth century invasion of Russia was equally devastating. That was France. Both of those assaults initiated from Central Europe. Had either initiated from Eastern Ukraine, Russia would have fallen. Now, there is a military alliance comprised of both France and Germany. The alliance is angling for access to Ukraine. Yet, ignoring history, you say such access would "gain nothing". How very quaint.
Wait, so you actually are still pretending that Russia is concerned that the French and Germans are coming across the steppe?
quote:
Of course it does beg the question, if Russia says NATO in Ukraine is a destabilizing threat, if Russia says NATO in Ukraine would force Russia to move against Ukraine, and if NATO feels Ukraine adds nothing to the alliance, why the hell is NATO playing patti-cake with Ukraine?
Because no one anywhere believes either of the following: (1) that Russia actually views NATO as a threat to invade militarily or (2)that Ukraine will join NATO
quote:
As an American, you really feel the Monroe Doctrine is bad policy? How so? Many would argue spheres of influence are actually stabilizing.
It’s absolutely bad policy. The US has no inherent right or responsibility to meddle in anything anywhere, or to draw imaginary lines on the earth and pretend to be gatekeeper. But that’s a different conversation entirely.
This post was edited on 10/10/22 at 5:19 pm
Posted on 10/10/22 at 5:12 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
You need to do a bit more reading on the topic. With all due respect, you really have no clue as to what you're talking about.
Oh because a war in 2022 will be waged exactly like it was in 1941, and Russia thinks NATO’s next move is 2 million soldiers and 10,000 tanks rolling across eastern Ukraine?
Let’s not forget the reasoning for your belief: because Russia says that’s what the reason for the invasion is. Let’s just forget or ignore that Russia/the USSR perfected the art of obfuscation and outright obstinance in the interest of crafting domestic political narratives. No! no! Russia is rightfully concerned that Guderian is still alive in the Slovakian army, just waiting to use France and Germany’s combined <1,000 operational armored vehicles to rumble towards Moscow.
quote:
What is the range of a cruise missile? A stealth cruise missile? A nuclear armed hypersonic cruise missile (about 6 min to Moscow)?
Eastern Latvia and Estonia are much closer to St Petersburg, Moscow, and (most importantly) the majority of Russia’s known nuclear assets than Ukraine.
Tl:dr: You believe Russia’s stated justification and find it credible. I find it laughable. That’s the difference here. I agree that the US shouldn’t be involved, and that bad US diplomacy enabled Russia to invade Ukraine.
This post was edited on 10/10/22 at 5:36 pm
Posted on 10/10/22 at 5:13 pm to SlowFlowPro
Sounds like propaganda meant to coax Europeans into not rioting over high gas prices.
Kinda like the propaganda we've seen that tells us we're not in an inflation and everything is better than ever.
Kinda like the propaganda we've seen that tells us we're not in an inflation and everything is better than ever.
This post was edited on 10/10/22 at 5:14 pm
Posted on 10/10/22 at 5:14 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:Bingo. I agree. Help build a China equivalent infrastructure. Tap the labor pool. Everyone wins.
Trade is peace. Trade is development.
Posted on 10/10/22 at 5:36 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
You're making assumptions that the EU will lift sanctions relatively easily, which they have not shown to be willing to do.
How long do you think Europe’s economy will survive these gas prices? When the manufacturing base collapses, do you think they’re going to be able to continue to thumb their nose to cheap Russian gas?
Posted on 10/10/22 at 5:39 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
why would the US, Poland, EU, etc. destroy the pipeline?
Because Biden literally said he would.
Posted on 10/10/22 at 5:40 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Assuming this is true, why would the US, Poland, EU, etc. destroy the pipeline?
Why are we assuming that gas is a buyer's market in Europe?
Has it really gone from scarcity to glut in a matter of a few weeks?
Posted on 10/10/22 at 5:44 pm to SlowFlowPro
I don't know about a lot of things. But an unintended consequence that Russia is enjoying is this war is going to have lasting impacts on the U.S. Economy.
Posted on 10/10/22 at 5:50 pm to Plx1776
Another take.
The EU is in bad shape on fuel/gas for the upcoming winter. Germany has went so green they will be freezing this winter. The take is US thinks Germany will go begging Russia for fuel and that would destroy NATO if they did. So US took measures to take that option away by taking out the pipeline so this option never comes to fruition.
Freezing people can get riotous pretty fast. Any arricle claiming its a buyers market is just flat propaganda. There are real shortages over there and we’re shippimg a lot of LNG. Look at LNG shipping rates and availability for proof. Rates skyrocked and no spare capacity right now (LNG ships).
The EU is in bad shape on fuel/gas for the upcoming winter. Germany has went so green they will be freezing this winter. The take is US thinks Germany will go begging Russia for fuel and that would destroy NATO if they did. So US took measures to take that option away by taking out the pipeline so this option never comes to fruition.
Freezing people can get riotous pretty fast. Any arricle claiming its a buyers market is just flat propaganda. There are real shortages over there and we’re shippimg a lot of LNG. Look at LNG shipping rates and availability for proof. Rates skyrocked and no spare capacity right now (LNG ships).
Posted on 10/10/22 at 5:51 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
Has it really gone from scarcity to glut in a matter of a few weeks?
I think their supply is full but it was costly.
Like I've said over and over, these are the costs I'm talking about from Russia invading Ukraine. The whole world is going to suffer hundreds of billions (possibly trillions) because of this invasion.
That's why I argued $40B to end it more quickly could be a wise investment.
Posted on 10/10/22 at 5:55 pm to SlowFlowPro
Best bang for the buck military spending in my lifetime.
Posted on 10/10/22 at 5:55 pm to TeaParty
This is the $64,000,000,000 question.
When Europe is on it's knees starving and cold, will NATO help heat their homes and supply them food, or send more weapons somewhere else where "Democracy" is under attack? Like here in the US?
quote:
Of course it does beg the question,
1-if Russia says NATO in Ukraine is a destabilizing threat,
2-if Russia says NATO in Ukraine would force Russia to move against Ukraine,
3-and if NATO feels Ukraine adds nothing to the alliance,
why the hell is NATO playing patti-cake with Ukraine?
When Europe is on it's knees starving and cold, will NATO help heat their homes and supply them food, or send more weapons somewhere else where "Democracy" is under attack? Like here in the US?
Posted on 10/10/22 at 5:57 pm to Snazzmeister
quote:
How long do you think Europe’s economy will survive these gas prices?
I'm not sure. The other question is who would help them, if it came to that.
If the EU gives up, the EU is done. NATO is done. The entire international community may have to reset. You want chaos? THAT will be chaos.
The US would have some tough choices to make prior to letting the world burn.
Posted on 10/10/22 at 5:57 pm to Indefatigable
quote:No, but you said conventional war. I was responding to your post. Aircraft, anti-aircraft capabilities would assume geographic importance as well.
Oh because a war in 2022 will be waged exactly like it was in 1941, and Russia thinks NATO’s next move is 2 million soldiers and 10,000 tanks rolling across eastern Ukraine?
quote:You're treading on thin ice here. I have far less concern about a NATO first attack than Russia apparently does. However, I do empathize with a country worried about location of stealth and/or hypersonic nuke launch sites located closer to them then many locations in two adjacent states would be to me.
Let’s not forget the reasoning for your belief:
I do understand that if a first strike was capable of decapitation, and hypersonic cruise missiles were located along Russia's entire western border, Russia would have reason for concern.
quote:You may want to pull out a map
Eastern Latvia and Estonia are much closer to ... Moscow
.... and here are Russia's ICBM bases
Posted on 10/10/22 at 5:58 pm to SlowFlowPro
#MuhRussia
Posted on 10/10/22 at 5:58 pm to OU Guy
quote:
The EU is in bad shape on fuel/gas for the upcoming winter. Germany has went so green they will be freezing this winter. The take is US thinks Germany will go begging Russia for fuel and that would destroy NATO if they did. So US took measures to take that option away by taking out the pipeline so this option never comes to fruition.
The US risking it's entire relationship with the EU over Russia would be something.
Posted on 10/10/22 at 5:59 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
While Russia needs to sell the EU its natural gas
true
quote:
Europe no longer needs these supplies
Laughably false
quote:
Gas is becoming a buyer’s market
Laughably false
Posted on 10/10/22 at 6:05 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
He's not re-entering that market anytime soon and this gives him lots of options. He can use disinfo networks to blame the West. He can claim victim status. He can claim this is an aggressive permitting him to escalate (his M.O.). Etc.
Last week, you said it was because it would make Putin not be viewed a "the bad guy". Are you changing your reasoning?
Posted on 10/10/22 at 6:05 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
does. However, I do empathize with a country worried about location of stealth and/or hypersonic nuke launch sites located closer to them then many locations in two adjacent states would be to me.
As does everyone with a brain, if it were true. Which it isn’t of course because NATO hasn’t even deployed such missiles to the Warsaw Pact members. And besides the Baltics/Finland are at best equidistant from the Kola bases and Moscow as Ukraines northeastern extremity.
That perspective also, of course, requires one to believe that Russia considers itself one of those countries that are threatened by a hypothetical
invasion that is not feasible or missiles that have never been deployed. I for one do not consider Russia to be that completely stupid.
But you do, simply because Russia said so.
This post was edited on 10/10/22 at 6:11 pm
Page 7 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News