|
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. |
On April 11 2022 20:03 Harris1st wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2022 02:06 Ghanburighan wrote:On April 10 2022 19:21 Acrofales wrote:On April 10 2022 17:50 Ghanburighan wrote: The arguments that "cutting Russian energy imports" will a) cause industries to collapse, and b) make people freeze, is unproven at best, but probably worse.
Even in Germany, every study on the effects of going cold turkey shows a small recession in the worst-case scenario. Politicians are hiding behind words like "uncertainty" and "volatility" but I haven't seen a single study that shows a mechanism by which the effects are catastrophic enough to be called a "collapse". Considering that Germany was asking EU nations to take up to 6% recessions so that German pensioners wouldn't lose a part of their savings in the aftermath of 2008, it's perverse at best to say that the "never again" country can't make any concessions to stop Russia from repeating its own history. Especially as it's one of the world's largest economies, with a very low debt to GDP ratio. It could easily subsidize the worst-affected individuals and companies.
And just as a cherry on the cake, wealthy Germany has been undermining EU common energy policy for years, securing much lower gas prices from Russia than other countries in the region. Now, it's unwilling to even come up to parity on those, while much poorer countries are cutting Russian gas entirely (Lithuania, Estonia, etc).
You cannot even say it wouldn't be political suicide as a majority of Germans have been saying that the government isn't doing enough. It's the government and lobbyists who are dragging their feet. I haven't looked into this in detail and just trusted the think tanks and politicians saying it's impossible. The numbers and my (limited) knowledge of how fast replacing infrastructure could be put in place make total collapse sound plausible. If studies point out the opposite, could you please link them? I just assumed oil was relatively easy, but lacked political will because the real issue is gas, which heats and powers over half of northern Europe. Hey, sorry for the delay. Was out hiking. Here's the paper everyone's citing. I saw other studies earlier which came to the same conclusion, but these guys were more thorough. That's a nice paper! Haven't read it fully yet but will do so. Major concern is Germany is not that people will freeze to death but how it will affect the industry. Mainly glas, steel and concrete industries and everything that comes after that are gonna take a huge hit if gas import is cut. Coal (already decided and will take place end of July) and oil seems doable though
Harris, I don't ascribe the following to you, personally, but your response reminds me of two things that I don't think people in Germany, mainly in the government, have yet understood.
First, other countries don't accept the argument that Germany's economy should take zero damage from these sanctions. Germany is isolated in blocking effective sanctions. Germany has systematically strengthened Russia's position and resolve in the last decades: a) Germany made willful decisions to become this dependent on Russian gas and oil (e.g., turned off nuclear power, built Nord Stream), b) Germany sold weapons and trained the Russian army attacking Ukraine (Rheinmetall is the worst case), c) German gas and oil income is a huge part of what's keeping the Russian economy afloat at this point, d) all this despite the fact that eastern members warned of this exact threat since 2008, and tried to build a common EU energy and security policy to counter it, and Germany straight-up bullied them into submission, e) Germany was more than happy to ask other EU countries to go into recession when the financial crisis hit, in the name of solidarity, and f) I probably don't need to mention it, but Germany was supposed to have learned from its own history that genocidal empires are evil and cannot be tolerated. But, apparently, those were all hollow words. Germany hasn't learned its lesson, and that's dangerous in its own way.
Secondly, this will not go away. Not until Russia as it exists now is gone. It's not just Putin, it's not just circumstances, it definitely isn't some nonsense about "Russian security concerns". The Russian people and their governments have major chauvinist imperial ambitions which include half of Europe, because they believe anyone who isn't like them isn't truly human. That's why you have these atrocities. They don't believe Ukrainians are afforded human rights, you can kill, rape, or torture as much as you want for the greater good of the Russian project. And even if there's a diplomatic stop-gap, like a ceasefire, Russians will continue to "russify" and "de-nazify" Ukraine, i.e., murder the men, rape the women, deport the children. Does this sound like genocide? It should. There's a reason why scholars and lawyers working on Srebrenica have been calling for elevated investigations. What's happening in Ukraine is raising all the same red flags. And the scale is infinitely larger. So, anyone calling for peace, or negotiations, or a cease-fire, what they're really asking for is a license for Russians to kill thousands upon thousands of Ukrainians. While giving the Russian military breathing room to rebuild on Western money. And the next conflict might actually involve NATO, with all the world-ending implications that entails. It's crucial they're stopped now.
|
On April 11 2022 21:09 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2022 20:03 Harris1st wrote:On April 11 2022 02:06 Ghanburighan wrote:On April 10 2022 19:21 Acrofales wrote:On April 10 2022 17:50 Ghanburighan wrote: The arguments that "cutting Russian energy imports" will a) cause industries to collapse, and b) make people freeze, is unproven at best, but probably worse.
Even in Germany, every study on the effects of going cold turkey shows a small recession in the worst-case scenario. Politicians are hiding behind words like "uncertainty" and "volatility" but I haven't seen a single study that shows a mechanism by which the effects are catastrophic enough to be called a "collapse". Considering that Germany was asking EU nations to take up to 6% recessions so that German pensioners wouldn't lose a part of their savings in the aftermath of 2008, it's perverse at best to say that the "never again" country can't make any concessions to stop Russia from repeating its own history. Especially as it's one of the world's largest economies, with a very low debt to GDP ratio. It could easily subsidize the worst-affected individuals and companies.
And just as a cherry on the cake, wealthy Germany has been undermining EU common energy policy for years, securing much lower gas prices from Russia than other countries in the region. Now, it's unwilling to even come up to parity on those, while much poorer countries are cutting Russian gas entirely (Lithuania, Estonia, etc).
You cannot even say it wouldn't be political suicide as a majority of Germans have been saying that the government isn't doing enough. It's the government and lobbyists who are dragging their feet. I haven't looked into this in detail and just trusted the think tanks and politicians saying it's impossible. The numbers and my (limited) knowledge of how fast replacing infrastructure could be put in place make total collapse sound plausible. If studies point out the opposite, could you please link them? I just assumed oil was relatively easy, but lacked political will because the real issue is gas, which heats and powers over half of northern Europe. Hey, sorry for the delay. Was out hiking. Here's the paper everyone's citing. I saw other studies earlier which came to the same conclusion, but these guys were more thorough. That's a nice paper! Haven't read it fully yet but will do so. Major concern is Germany is not that people will freeze to death but how it will affect the industry. Mainly glas, steel and concrete industries and everything that comes after that are gonna take a huge hit if gas import is cut. Coal (already decided and will take place end of July) and oil seems doable though Harris, I don't ascribe the following to you, personally, but your response reminds me of two things that I don't think people in Germany, mainly in the government, have yet understood. First, other countries don't accept the argument that Germany's economy should take zero damage from these sanctions. Germany is isolated in blocking effective sanctions. Germany has systematically strengthened Russia's position and resolve in the last decades: a) Germany made willful decisions to become this dependent on Russian gas and oil (e.g., turned off nuclear power, built Nord Stream), b) Germany sold weapons and trained the Russian army attacking Ukraine (Rheinmetall is the worst case), c) German gas and oil income is a huge part of what's keeping the Russian economy afloat at this point, d) all this despite the fact that eastern members warned of this exact threat since 2008, and tried to build a common EU energy and security policy to counter it, and Germany straight-up bullied them into submission, e) Germany was more than happy to ask other EU countries to go into recession when the financial crisis hit, in the name of solidarity, and f) I probably don't need to mention it, but Germany was supposed to have learned from its own history that genocidal empires are evil and cannot be tolerated. But, apparently, those were all hollow words. Germany hasn't learned its lesson, and that's dangerous in its own way. Secondly, this will not go away. Not until Russia as it exists now is gone. It's not just Putin, it's not just circumstances, it definitely isn't some nonsense about "Russian security concerns". The Russian people and their governments have major chauvinist imperial ambitions which include half of Europe, because they believe anyone who isn't like them isn't truly human. That's why you have these atrocities. They don't believe Ukrainians are afforded human rights, you can kill, rape, or torture as much as you want for the greater good of the Russian project. And even if there's a diplomatic stop-gap, like a ceasefire, Russians will continue to "russify" and "de-nazify" Ukraine, i.e., murder the men, rape the women, deport the children. Does this sound like genocide? It should. There's a reason why scholars and lawyers working on Srebrenica have been calling for elevated investigations. What's happening in Ukraine is raising all the same red flags. And the scale is infinitely larger. So, anyone calling for peace, or negotiations, or a cease-fire, what they're really asking for is a license for Russians to kill thousands upon thousands of Ukrainians. While giving the Russian military breathing room to rebuild on Western money. And the next conflict might actually involve NATO, with all the world-ending implications that entails. It's crucial they're stopped now.
I wholeheartedly agree with most if not all your points.I was just stating whats going on here and what the media in Germany is on about. With the money we buy ressources from Russia every day (something between 400 and 600 million Euro. Reports differ) we could have build I don't know how many nuclear power plants/ renewable energy plants already. There is a lot of stuff going awfully wrong here in the last decade, no matter who is in power.
|
On April 10 2022 17:50 Ghanburighan wrote: I probably don't need to mention it, but Germany was supposed to have learned from its own history that genocidal empires are evil and cannot be tolerated. But, apparently, those were all hollow words. Germany hasn't learned its lesson, and that's dangerous in its own way.
Secondly, this will not go away. Not until Russia as it exists now is gone.
I do not know what kind of history you are taught in school, but the notion that there is a unconsolable agressive Empire in the east that has to be eradicated in the east is exactly the kind of rhetoric that germans are uncomfortable with, at least the ones that did not consider the last incursion into eastern Europe as a liberatory effort. Out of curiosity, is this the only act of aggression and mass killing that you are against in this way and happy to equivocate with hitlerism or are there any other countries, lets say NATO members, that have shown (and are currently showing) equal disregard for civilian life in the world?
|
On April 11 2022 22:24 Daigoro wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2022 17:50 Ghanburighan wrote: I probably don't need to mention it, but Germany was supposed to have learned from its own history that genocidal empires are evil and cannot be tolerated. But, apparently, those were all hollow words. Germany hasn't learned its lesson, and that's dangerous in its own way.
Secondly, this will not go away. Not until Russia as it exists now is gone.
I do not know what kind of history you are taught in school, but the notion that there is a unconsolable agressive Empire in the east that has to be eradicated in the east is exactly the kind of rhetoric that germans are uncomfortable with, at least the ones that did not consider the last incursion into eastern Europe as a liberatory effort. Out of curiosity, is this the only act of aggression and mass killing that you are against in this way and happy to equivocate with hitlerism or are there any other countries, lets say NATO members, that have shown (and are currently showing) equal disregard for civilian life in the world?
No amount of whataboutism is going to stop the killing in the east. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable, deal with it, because the consequences don't go away.
|
|
Russia is threatening Sweden, and Finland again.
Russia has warned Finland and Sweden against joining Nato, arguing the move would not bring stability to Europe.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters that "the alliance remains a tool geared towards confrontation".
It comes as US defence officials said Moscow's invasion of Ukraine has been a "massive strategic blunder" which is likely to bring Nato enlargement.
US officials expect the Nordic neighbours to bid for membership of the alliance, potentially as early as June.
Washington is believed to support the move which would see the Western alliance grow to 32 members. US State Department officials said last week that discussions had taken place between Nato leaders and foreign ministers from Helsinki and Stockholm.
Before it launched its invasion, Russia demanded that the alliance agree to halt any future enlargement, but the war has led to the deployment of more Nato troops on its eastern flank and a rise in public support for Swedish and Finnish membership.
Finnish MPs are expected to receive a security report from intelligence officials this week, and Prime Minister Sanna Marin said she expects her government "will end the discussion before midsummer" on whether to make a membership application.
Finland shares a 1,340km (830 miles) long border with Russia and has been rattled by the invasion of Ukraine.
And Sweden's ruling Social Democratic party, which has traditionally opposed Nato membership, said it is rethinking this position in light of Russia's attack on its western neighbour. Party secretary Tobias Baudin told local media that the Nato review should be complete within the next few months.
"When Russia invaded Ukraine, Sweden's security position changed fundamentally," the party said in a statement on Monday.
But Moscow has been clear that it opposes any potential enlargement of the alliance. Mr Peskov warned the bloc "is not that kind of alliance which ensures peace and stability, and its further expansion will not bring additional security to the European continent".
Last week Mr Peskov said that Russia would have to "rebalance the situation" with its own measures were Sweden and Finland to join Nato.
And in February Maria Zakharova, Russia's foreign ministry spokeswoman, warned of "military and political consequences" if the countries joined the bloc.
Nato was formed in 1949 to counter the threat of Soviet expansion, though since the fall of the Berlin wall a number of formerly communist eastern European countries have joined.
Under Article 5 of the bloc's founding charter, member states agree to come to one another's aid in the event of an armed attack against any individual member state.
Despite the threats, both countries have pushed ahead with their bids and stepped up defence spending.
On Monday, army leaders in Helsinki announced a new plan to allocate €14m (£10.88m) to purchase drones for Finland's military.
And last month Swedish officials said they would boost defence spending by three billion kronas ($317m; £243m) in 2022.
Source
|
I really don't think anyone cares about Russia's threats anymore. The paper tiger is revealed for all to see.
|
The best answer to russian threats is making their paranoia valid. Any nuclear threat towards their neightbour should be answered by threat of arming them with nuclear weapons. Every threat of force should be answered by intensifying armaments. Every use of nukes against non-nuclear third party coutries should be answered by instant arming nato countries with tactical nukes. Russia must know patience had its limits and Russia is streaching it.
|
Well, Finland's response was that if they really want it the Russians can join hundreds of thousands of their comrades buried on Finnish soil during WW2. I mean, they fought twice during WW2 and even though Russia was declared the victor both times the casualties were horrendeous on their side (1: 70k Finns vs 320-380k Russians, 2: 84k Finns vs 890-940k Russians) <- those are just casualty numbers.
|
|
According to the S&P Russia has defaulted on its' debts. Should be noted that Russia still has a ban on selling anything market wise, even currency.
London (CNN Business)Russia has defaulted on its foreign debt because it offered bondholders payments in rubles, not dollars, credit ratings agency S&P has said.
Russia attempted to pay in rubles for two dollar-denominated bonds that matured on April 4, S&P said in a note on Friday. The agency said this amounted to a "selective default" because investors are unlikely to be able to convert the rubles into "dollars equivalent to the originally due amounts."
According to S&P, a selective default is declared when an entity has defaulted on a specific obligation but not its entire debt.
Moscow has a grace period of 30 days from April 4 to make the payments of capital and interest, but S&P said it does not expect it will convert them into dollars given Western sanctions that undermine its "willingness and technical abilities to honor the terms and conditions" of its obligations.
A full foreign currency default would be Russia's first in more than a century, when Bolshevik leader Vladimir Lenin repudiated bonds issued by the Tsarist government.
Russia cannot access roughly $315 billion of its foreign currency reserves as a result of Western sanctions imposed following its invasion of Ukraine. Until last week, the United States allowed Russia to use some of its frozen assets to pay back certain investors in dollars. But the US Treasury has since blocked the country from accessing its reserves at American banks, part of its effort to ramp up pressure on Russian President Vladimir Putin and further diminish his war chest.
JPMorgan estimates that Russia had about $40 billion of foreign currency debt at the end of last year, with about half of that held by foreign investors.
Source
|
On April 11 2022 22:24 Daigoro wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2022 17:50 Ghanburighan wrote: I probably don't need to mention it, but Germany was supposed to have learned from its own history that genocidal empires are evil and cannot be tolerated. But, apparently, those were all hollow words. Germany hasn't learned its lesson, and that's dangerous in its own way.
Secondly, this will not go away. Not until Russia as it exists now is gone.
I do not know what kind of history you are taught in school, but the notion that there is a unconsolable agressive Empire in the east that has to be eradicated in the east is exactly the kind of rhetoric that germans are uncomfortable with, at least the ones that did not consider the last incursion into eastern Europe as a liberatory effort. Out of curiosity, is this the only act of aggression and mass killing that you are against in this way and happy to equivocate with hitlerism or are there any other countries, lets say NATO members, that have shown (and are currently showing) equal disregard for civilian life in the world? How is equivocating Putin's Russia with Hitlerism not justified? Russia is openly advocating and perpetrating genocide.
|
|
On April 12 2022 02:40 Artisreal wrote: Scale.
Depends on if you think the different scale is due to motivation or lack of capacity on Russian side. At least that makes a difference in how I interpret that.
|
On April 12 2022 02:40 Artisreal wrote: Scale. It's not like Nazi Germany started building death camps from get-go. Russia has been steadily ramping up the atrocities committed by its troops.
|
On April 12 2022 02:47 maybenexttime wrote:It's not like Nazi Germany started building death camps from get-go. Russia has been steadily ramping up the atrocities committed by its troops.
Exactly. Auschwitz was built in 1940, the extermination camp only started building in 1941, 2 years after the beginning of WW2.
|
Normally I wouldn't consider it adequate to compare Russian crimes to those commited by Germany between 1933 and 1945, but since they started this war with that ridiculous denazification excuse I think it's fine to point out the similarities.
|
On April 10 2022 23:21 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2022 21:24 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On April 10 2022 09:08 Vindicare605 wrote:On April 10 2022 03:57 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:The Czech Republic is Ukraine everything but the kitchen sink it seems. Ukraine has repeatedly called on the West to urgently supply more weapons, especially heavy equipment, as Russian forces regroup in the country’s east for new offensive after withdrawing from the capital Kyiv and other regions.
NATO members are providing a wide range of weapon systems to the country, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said on Thursday.
The Czech Republic has spare equipment that Ukrainian forces are familiar with in storage as well as a defense industry focused on upgrades and trade in such weapons. It has been among the most active EU nations in backing Ukraine.
Defense sources confirmed a shipment of five T-72 tanks and five BVP-1, or BMP-1, infantry fighting vehicles seen on rail cars in photographs on Twitter and video footage this week, but those were not the first shipments of heavy equipment.
“For several weeks, we have been supplying heavy ground equipment – I am saying it generally but by definition it is clear that this includes tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, howitzers, and multiple rocket launchers,” a senior defense official said.
The sources declined to discuss numbers of weapons supplied.
The senior defense official said the Czechs were also supplying a range of anti-aircraft weaponry.
Independent defense analyst Lukas Visingr said short-range air-defense systems Strela-10, or SA-13 Gopher in NATO terminology, have been spotted on a train apparently bound for Ukraine, in line with a report in Czech weekly respekt.cz.
The Czech program to ship weapons includes money raised by public fundraising by the Ukrainian embassy, which has raised $37.45 million, according to the embassy website. Source There is some speculation that this could have some ulterior motives. If they give away all of their upgraded Soviet equipment to Ukraine that will give them room to ask for more modern equipment from the US, France, Britain and Germany. Think they can rule out getting extra weapons from Germany. They're beefing up their own military at a scale not seen since.... well you get the idea. It's a good day to be a weapons manufacturer that's for sure. Czech Republic doesn't have any problems buying more modern equipment from US, France, Britain and Germany, apart from budgetary constraints. It's not like any of these countries will look at Czech Republic, judge that their military has enough equipment and refuse to sell their technology and eqiupment to them on the basis that otherwise Czech Republic will have too much equipment. No country cares how much equipment another country already have if that country is a prospective customer of their systems. That's not how arms procurement between nations work. Pretty sure he wasn't implying people wouldn't sell them weapons, but rather that the cost of buying new stuff is prohibitively expensive if the old stuff you have works well enough. If you strike a deal where you give your old stuff to someone else, in exchange for a discount on new stuff, then suddenly you can afford it! Especially as you don't have to pay for the maintenance or decommissioning of the old stuff anymore either! Perhaps that is what he meant and that does follow a logical line of thought. However, is no indication of discounts and so there is no ulterior motive of hoping to get new equipment for cheaper as Czech Republic will not be getting any new equipment for cheaper. The root problem pf procurement remains the same; Czech Republic procurement of military equipment is entirely budgetary. Giving away equipment doesn't actually ease that problem. It's always better to sell of, or run till it is not worthwhile, which for land vehicles can be a very long time indeed. They already given away the equipment, Who then is now giving discounts on new equipment to Czech Republic? Certainly not any of those supplying countries and if they do, it wouldn't be for that reason alone.
|
Extremely disturbing and sad that nobody will likely be punished unless they are captured. And the officers and leaders that ordered will probably never leave Russia.
Disturbing and NSFW:
+ Show Spoiler +
|
That's not even close to the worse of what the Russians have been doing in the area. But I suppose I may have been seeing too much of that kind of stuff in social media feeds.
|
|
|
|