What is so Strawman about "Let the People decide"? Isn't that the democratic mantra, or did I miss something?
Printable View
What is so Strawman about "Let the People decide"? Isn't that the democratic mantra, or did I miss something?
You did . . . the relevance and the obsequiousness you blatantly show . . . let's add disingenuity to that. :smile:Quote:
Originally Posted by sabang
The vote should be based on the wishes of the whole country of Ukraine not some russian migrant enclave.
i still think making yourself dependant upon Russia for energy supply was a singular act of madness on the Germans part
Biden warns Putin of 'strong measures' amid Ukraine invasion fears
The US says it is preparing "robust responses" over fears of a Russian invasion of Ukraine, after President Biden's rare talks with Vladimir Putin.
In a video link, Mr Biden voiced deep concerns over Russian troop build-ups and threatened "strong economic and other measures", Washington said.
Russia says it will not attack Ukraine.
Mr Putin accused Kyiv of provocation, and sought guarantees against eastward Nato expansion and deployment of offensive weapons close to Russia.
The talks began at 10:07 US Eastern time (15:07 GMT; 18:07 Moscow time), the White House said.
They were held on a secure video link set up under previous administrations but never used before, Russian news agency Tass said.
Video footage of the opening moments showed friendly greetings between the US and Russian leaders. The talks then continued behind closed doors, lasting about two hours.
Mr Putin held the talks from his residence in the southern resort of Sochi, according to Tass.
After Tuesday's video call, US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan told journalists Washington was preparing specific robust responses in the weeks ahead if they were required.
"Things we did not do in 2014 we are prepared to do now," he said, referring to Western responses to Russia's annexation of Crimea.
"There was a lot of give and take, there was no finger-wagging, but the president was crystal clear where the United States stands on all of these issues," he added.
The measures included economic sanctions and other actions such as additional troop deployments to Nato allies in the region and defence materiel for Ukraine.
Mr Biden was accompanied by top officials for the call. He refused to be drawn on what the economic measures might be, saying the US would prefer to communicate them directly to the Russians.
But he said that Nord Stream 2, a new pipeline to Germany which is not yet in operation, provided "leverage" for the US and its allies.
"If Vladimir Putin wants to see gas flow through that pipeline, he may not want to take the risk of invading Ukraine," he said.
Earlier reports said US officials had reached agreement with Germany to shut down the pipeline in the event of an invasion.
Other possible measures include restrictions on Russia's banks converting roubles into foreign currencies, or even disconnecting Russia from the Swift global financial payment system, reports say.
The Biden administration had hoped to keep relations with Russia on an even keel while it focused on China. But the US has taken the lead in confronting the Kremlin about its potential threat to Europe.
President Biden's video call with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin was built on the back of a sustained diplomatic campaign with European governments. In the weeks leading up to the meeting, administration officials shared intelligence reports with Western allies showing Moscow's extensive military build-up on Ukraine's border - apparently convincing them that severe sanctions were needed to deter another invasion.
That was the united front Mr Biden wanted to present to Mr Putin, to convince the Russian leader that the price of military action would be steeper than anything he'd faced in the past. And he reinforced it with calls to European leaders before and after the meeting.
The Americans are still co-ordinating closely with the Europeans to finalise an unprecedented package of sanctions, ready to be triggered should Mr Putin decide to ignore that message.
Meanwhile, a Kremlin statement (in Russian) said Mr Putin had stressed that Russia should not be held responsible for tensions because Nato was making "dangerous attempts to take over Ukrainian territory and increasing its military potential" on Russia's borders.
"Therefore Russia is seriously interested in getting reliable guarantees fixed in law to rule out the eastward expansion of Nato and the location in countries neighbouring Russia of offensive weapons systems," the statement added.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said that, while the talks brought "no sensations", he was grateful for Mr Biden's "unwavering support".
Mr Biden and Mr Putin last met in person in Switzerland in June, but made little progress other than to agree to send their ambassadors back and begin a dialogue on nuclear arms control.
In a conference call on Monday night, the White House said the leaders of the US, UK, France, Germany and Italy had formed a joint strategy "to impose significant and severe harm on the Russian economy" should Russia launch an invasion.
Mr Biden spoke to the four European leaders again after his talks with Mr Putin.
Russian troop build-up: View from Ukraine front line. More than 90,000 Russian troops are believed to be massed near Ukraine's borders.
A large part of the recent Russian military build-up is in Crimea, which Russia seized from Ukraine and then annexed in 2014.
Troops are also gathering near Ukraine's eastern Donbas region, the name for parts of Luhansk and Donetsk regions which are under the control of Russian-backed separatists.
Ukrainian officials have said Moscow could be planning a military offensive at the end of January.
More than 14,000 people have lost their lives in seven years of conflict since Russian-backed forces seized large areas of Ukraine's east.
more here https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-59567377
^^ Interesting theory. Well that's the end of Taiwan then! And Northern Ireland for that matter.
Moscow gave away more territory in the history of the universe in 1991. There was conditions for this give away. It was not Russia that reneged on these conditions. It was the US.Quote:
Originally Posted by malmomike77
Does an independent country like Cuba have the sovereign right to host Russian strategic nuclear weapons like submarines and bombers ? Yes. Will the US allow it ? Never.
The same goes for Russia. Does Ukraine have the sovereign right to host US nuclear weapons on its territory ? Yes. But Russia will never allow it. And would go to war to prevent it. Which it did in 2014.
Ukraine has its own weapons. The US would not place theirs there. Do you get your info from Sci_fi comics?Quote:
Originally Posted by Backspin
This shows you haven't been thinking nor reading, how is Germany 'dependent' on Russia for 'energy supply'?Quote:
Originally Posted by malmomike77
If anything Russia is dependent o Germany for income derived from energy sales.
^two sides same coin
^ Except that it isn't.
You are right, only c35% or so is not dependant but is that figure right? since Germany’s Federal Office for Economic Affairs and Export Control (BAFA) stopped publishing import volumes in 2016 because of privacy regulations. In other words they don't want to expose their exposure:smileylaughing:
Again, you are full of shit . . . try again. Why are you such a disingenuous and halfwitted cretin?Quote:
Originally Posted by malmomike77
Prove your assertion, easy.
The following example has relevance:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh Cow
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
here you go (there are many) and i don't imagine the numbers have improved in that last few yearsQuote:
Originally Posted by panama hat
https://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/international-issues/germanys-dependence-on-fossil-fuels-and-russian-gas/
-are you asserting that Germany doesn't get a significant proportion of its Oil and Gas from Russia? a proportion large enough to reflect dependence.
In reality your heritage is making you touchy on a subject in which Germany and the EU has clearly made itself a Russian political pawn - Russia can exist easily without German funds but i think as it presently stands Germany is dependent upon Russian fossil fuels - Gazprom even owns Germany's largest gas storage facility :)
I don't see how a mutual co-dependence based on trade is a bad thing. Nations that trade for mutual benefit have little or no reason to go to war. So why let an argy bargy nation based on the other side of the Atlantic constantly stir up trouble, because they want to sell more arms, and get you to pay more for their oil? Sure beats me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by panama hat
You fucking idiot . . . it's like you and your inbred mates whining about how the UK counts covid deaths differently, hence the higher number. What an utter fuckwit.Quote:
Originally Posted by malmomike77
Again, prove dependance, fucking idiot.
It's not dependance . . . it's trade. Neither Russia nor Germany are dependent on each other for survival . . . they both benefit from this trade, just like they can both get other suppliers/clients if necessary, more difficult for Russia if they decide to 'cut off' supplies as other clients will change their source . . . leaving Russia economically crippled.Quote:
Originally Posted by sabang
It is in neither party's interest to do something stupid.
Its not a bad thing but when one side uses it as political leverage as Russia has done with tweaking supplies then it is hardly mutually beneficial is it; its fairly easy for Germany and the EU to be held hostage until it negates reliance on Russia.Quote:
Originally Posted by sabang
The UK is too reliant on energy imports and the sooner we limit exposure to other nations the better - energy security should be a priority for most countries.
Anyway this was all about Russia using its energy supply to influence Europe. The real question remains just how far Putin will push things in the Ukraine. I don't think he'll invade but he loves to pull the US and NATOs strings and what better time than when the US is preoccupied in the South China seas.
That's the thing, innit? Nobody is talking about a monopolisation of trade here.Quote:
they both benefit from this trade
So why do we allow ourselves to get so diverted by stupid, greedy old men pushing for conflict all the time.Quote:
“War is only a cowardly escape from the problems of peace.” – Thomas Mann
“We should keep on going along the path of globalization. Globalization is good… when trade stops, war comes.” – Jack Ma
great debating skills there, all the info you need to answer your question is in that linked article.Quote:
Originally Posted by panama hat
If a country derives a significant proportion of its energy needs from one source, and it would be crippled if the supply were to cease. i'd say that proves dependence - or are you suggesting that is not the case?
Cutting off money won't cause instant chaos, you stupid boy.Quote:
Originally Posted by sabang
Anyway, hopefully Russia's antics will have given everyone pause and the opportunity to hedge against Russia cutting off gas supplies out of spite.
Everyone knows Russia uses this is a political weapon, despite Putin's lies.
More cretinous whataboutism.Quote:
Originally Posted by sabang
Putin is the only one I know of lining 100,000 troops on the border of a country in which he has been fomenting conflict for years.
Except that your 'saying so' proves that you're a fuckwit . . . even chico would have changed the subject by now. Is there something in the drinking water that you share to turn you into a fucking idiot?Quote:
Originally Posted by malmomike77
strglshit/malmö/NPT thinks it's one and the same. Buy 1 - monopoly. Buy 10 - monopoly.Quote:
Originally Posted by sabang
Maybe using another example would help:
Australia/USA sells a lot of coal/soya to China. Australia/USA breaks agreements and cuts off coal/soya supplies to China. China gets pissed and sources coal/soya elsewhere - still has 30 days supply of each. Australia/US seek new customers for its coal/soya but no-one wants to enter into agreements because . . . well, Australia and the US can't be trusted.
chico would understand.
You do realise that's fairly well standard procedure, backup/redundancy.Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
^ you seem to have anger issues. Look you don't reside in the Reich so it doesn't affect you, calm down
^^^ The problem is 'arry, nobody listens to excitable little boys like you. Absolutely nobody. So talk up shit and conflict all you want, but meanwhile the adults are doing things like constructing pipelines, and organising trade deals for mutual benefit. But don't let me interrupt you. Don't forget Ahmed's coffee now.
Hedging is usually to counteract unanticipated prices rises, not a complete loss of supply.Quote:
Originally Posted by panama hat