European Industry will be exported to China, Nords-Sream 2 has to go online - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in Europe's nation states, the E.U. & Russia.

Moderator: PoFo Europe Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum, so please post in English only.
#15248021

Germany was more reliant than many others in Europe on Russian gas, mostly supplied via the Nord Stream 1 pipeline. Russia halted flows through the pipeline, blaming Western sanctions for hindering operations. European politicians call that a pretext and say Moscow is using energy as a weapon.

The German government has already put Gazprom Germania, a unit of Kremlin-controlled Gazprom, and a subsidiary of Russian oil company Rosneft (ROSN.MM) under trusteeship - a de facto nationalisation. Including Uniper's bailout, the bill amounts to about 40 billion euros.



https://www.reuters.com/business/energy ... 022-09-21/



---


ckaihatsu wrote:
Downright *Orwellian* -- !




Chapter III

Before reading the first chapter, Winston reads the third chapter "War is Peace", which explains that slogan-title's meaning, by reviewing how the global super-states were established: The United States merged with the British Empire (and later Latin America) to form Oceania; the Soviets absorbed mainland Europe to form Eurasia; and Eastasia emerged "after a decade of confused fighting", with China proper's annexation of Japan, Korea and parts of Mongolia and Tibet. In various alliances, they have warred for twenty-five years. Yet the perpetual war is militarily nonsensical, because "it is a warfare of limited aims between combatants who are unable to destroy one another, have no material cause for fighting and are not divided by any genuine ideological difference", since each is a totalitarian state.[13]

Scientific advance is held carefully in check, as the Party does not want to allow for any unaccounted abundance of goods, which could conceivably raise the quality of life beyond bare subsistence for the Proles. The only technological advances permitted are in mind control and genocide, the twin goals of each of the superstates. Once mind control is perfected, the superstates are free to destroy their counterparts in a theoretical single, decisive strike that precludes retaliation. Technological advancement, even in war, can be counterproductive to the goals of the Party; none of the superstates are a true threat to each other, as they all must exist in a state of permanent limited war to survive. By harnessing the hysteria of war and demand for self-sacrifice, each of the nations declare war not on each other but on their own populace, who are kept ignorant, on the brink of starvation, and overworked. Permanent limited war also allows for the Party to divert attention away from domestic concerns and their failures. Instead of promises of an "easy, safe life", Slater writes that Orwell believed that the populace requires heroic nationalism. Thus, war becomes a psychological tool to establish a kind of ironic "peace", a stasis where progress is impossible and nothing ever changes, except for the possibility of eventual global conquest.[14] However, even though Inner Party members have devoted their lives to establishing Oceania as the universal world power, they use doublethink also in connection with the war, knowing that it is necessary for the conflict to go on indefinitely to keep the structure of Oceanic society intact.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Theor ... hapter_III



viewtopic.php?p=15246726#p15246726
#15249439
I doubt the Russian army commits sexual crimes against children. In German prisons the Russians mark pedophiles with broken glass in the face but also traitors (chivatos)...

I have a child in Russia and they hate at most sexual peversion... Perhaps father and son will meat each other on the battlefield in WW3 :-(


In war truth dies first.


Nordstream 1 + 2 are according @Negotiator history, too easy to destroy just with diving suits without submarines... Now all gas has to go over Ukraine and this is good so.
#15250271
Sandzak wrote:
Actually is the European industry exported to USA and Canada due to cheap energy.


I think the USA had this in mind as they offered Ukraine a NATO-membership. In politics there are no friends just mutual interest.



You're making it sound as though it's all 'just-business', and that NATO membership is like a *consumer* *shopper's* membership, like Costco or something -- do you really think that it's so *commercial* only, and that geopolitical politics and *ideology* are not a factor at all -- ? That it's some kind of pure-functionality, and not NATO neoconservative / neoliberal imperialism, as previously over Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Libya?
#15250327
ckaihatsu wrote:You're making it sound as though it's all 'just-business', and that NATO membership is like a *consumer* *shopper's* membership, like Costco or something -- do you really think that it's so *commercial* only, and that geopolitical politics and *ideology* are not a factor at all -- ? That it's some kind of pure-functionality, and not NATO neoconservative / neoliberal imperialism, as previously over Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Libya?


-Afghanistan was necessary

-Iraq was revenge and unnecessary war (there will be further wars, because the Sunnis did not get their region, like the Kurds)

-Syria and Lybia the West did this with best intentions
#15250329
Sandzak wrote:
-Afghanistan was necessary

-Iraq was revenge and unnecessary war (there will be further wars, because the Sunnis did not get their region, like the Kurds)

-Syria and Lybia the West did this with best intentions



Are you saying that U.S. intervention in Afghanistan in 2001 was 'necessary' -- ?

The U.S. was a mercenary for Kuwait, against Iraq, in 1990.

You're *apologizing*-for / defending the West (on Syria and Libya) -- ? Are you anti-Assad?
#15250331
ckaihatsu wrote:Are you saying that U.S. intervention in Afghanistan in 2001 was 'necessary' -- ?

The U.S. was a mercenary for Kuwait, against Iraq, in 1990.

You're *apologizing*-for / defending the West (on Syria and Libya) -- ? Are you anti-Assad?


Yes, Afghanistan gave Osama bin Laden refuge...

Yes, the USA did this also for strategic reasons 75% of world oil production was based in the region. Saddam wanted to controle the oil production..

Yes, Baath-Ideology is Arabic fascism mixed with elements of Stalinism... 1/4 of population were snitches of various secret agencies (more then any other system which ever existed in history)
#15250408
Sandzak wrote:Yes, Afghanistan gave Osama bin Laden refuge...


Wtf ?

In your mind its actually legal to attack a whole country - because you're after a single person ?

By the way the Taliban, back then called the Mujaheddin, even offered bin Laden. The USA didnt actually want him. They just wanted an excuse.

And the USA also didnt get bin Laden, because - surprise, surprise - obviously he fled the country. I mean, duh ? What would YOU do ?
#15250411
Sandzak wrote:
Yes, Afghanistan gave Osama bin Laden refuge...

Yes, the USA did this also for strategic reasons 75% of world oil production was based in the region. Saddam wanted to controle the oil production..

Yes, Baath-Ideology is Arabic fascism mixed with elements of Stalinism... 1/4 of population were snitches of various secret agencies (more then any other system which ever existed in history)



Okay, and here's an update for the first point:



On the eve of the anniversary, US President Joe Biden issued an executive order in response to the demands made in court by thousands of survivors and families of 9/11 victims for the release of information related to the multiple connections of the Saudi monarchy to the attacks, which successive administrations have gone to extraordinary lengths to keep secret. “The American people deserve to have a fuller picture of what their Government knows about those attacks,” Biden stated. While the order calls for a “declassification review”, it allows the Justice Department, the CIA, FBI and other agencies to keep information secret “in the interest of the national security”.

As is well known, 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis, as was Al Qaeda’s leader Osama bin Laden, the former ally of the CIA in its proxy war in Afghanistan in the 1980s. Saudi officials, diplomats and intelligence agents are implicated in financing the hijackers, enrolling them in flight schools and finding them housing, including in the home of the main FBI informant on the Muslim community of San Diego.



https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/0 ... s-s11.html

Really? Well, what questions need to be asked? An[…]

OK so here's an article by the Spectator: Yes, fi[…]

So its been two weeks since I opened this thread. […]

The US isn't going to do this unilaterally, nor s[…]