[HN Gopher] Nord Stream 2 declares bankruptcy
___________________________________________________________________
Nord Stream 2 declares bankruptcy
Author : ushakov
Score : 177 points
Date : 2022-03-01 21:00 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.wsj.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.wsj.com)
| bitcharmer wrote:
| Also Visa and MasterCard services are absent in Russia as of
| today
| ejstronge wrote:
| > Also Visa and MasterCard services are absent in Russia as of
| today
|
| I'm not sure if this is quite the case - can anyone confirm?
| Their statement seems to muddy the issue but I believe they
| have only stopped working with sanctioned banks.
| ushakov wrote:
| yep, habr.com is making a list of services currently not
| working
|
| https://habr.com/ru/news/t/653761/
| ushakov wrote:
| if you can see behind the paywall, here's a WSJ article:
|
| https://www.wsj.com/articles/nord-stream-2-gas-pipeline-lays...
| dang wrote:
| Thanks. I've changed the URL to that from
| https://www.srf.ch/news/schweiz/konkurs-angemeldet-nord-
| stre..., which is not in English. We have deep respect for
| other languages, but HN is an English-language site.
| smoe wrote:
| Makes sense. Also because the original article is not really
| about the Nord Stream 2 bankruptcy but a short interview with
| a regional politician about rights the 106 employees that
| where let go have and tax losses for the canton/state (it is
| kind of the Delaware of Switzerland) with many of the
| companies with ties to russia expected to have a similar
| future.
| mischa_u wrote:
| https://archive.is/Fp97N
| nikanj wrote:
| Money is flowing from Europe to Ukraine to support that side of
| the war. Unfortunately way more money is flowing from Europe to
| Russia, to support the other side of said war.
| lawn wrote:
| If the war so far has shown anything, it's that Russia hasn't
| been converting money to military efficiently.
|
| And so far there's been a very large inflow of critical
| military equipment to Ukraine, while Russia has been hit with
| giant economic sanctions.
| dmitriid wrote:
| Whether we like it or not, the world is global (and has been so
| since at least the 19th century).
|
| Politicians and populists can huff and puff all they want, but
| Europe needs gas, and it gets that gas from Russia.
| indigochill wrote:
| > Europe needs gas, and it gets that gas from Russia.
|
| As an American living in Europe, I've just learned this fact
| last week, but I'm curious if the US gets its gas from the
| middle east, why hasn't Europe been doing the same? Ever
| since the fall of the USSR, it's not like western Europe
| welcomed Russia back into Europe with open arms (to my
| understanding, Russia is the entire reason NATO still
| exists). By comparison, Europe barely seems to register the
| middle east's existence (aside from when refugees start
| crossing the border in large numbers or when supporting US
| invasions). So politically it seems like they'd be a much
| better economic partner (especially since western Europe and
| the US are on generally good terms and the US has been
| heavily involved in making sure their oil interests in the
| middle east remain "secure").
|
| Is it that Russian gas is actually cheaper but the US
| wouldn't buy from Russia?
| [deleted]
| nikanj wrote:
| The US does not get their gas from the middle east. Out of
| 252,610 total units, 250,890 came from Canada. Everything
| else is a rounding error. [
| https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_move_impc_s1_m.htm ]
| tapas73 wrote:
| idea was that if europe trades with russia, russia can be
| influenced to act in a civil manner. (at least partially)
|
| there is also fact that german ex cancelor (schroeder) is
| at russian gas and oil companies now (i.e. russia made good
| friends to make right decisions)
| [deleted]
| tapas73 wrote:
| If world is global, which it is, gas can be bought from some
| where else.
| chasd00 wrote:
| i guess the question is who can lost longer, Europe with
| their energy crisis or Russia with their war. iirc the
| transactions involving energy between Germany and Russia have
| been excluded from the SWIFT sanctions, or it was at least on
| the table, which is probably what got Germany on board. If
| the energy crisis deepens i bet more and more exceptions will
| be made to the sanctions to keep the gas pipelines flowing
| and flowing cheaply.
|
| "But, out of a sense of political self-preservation, they
| stopped short of barring energy transactions with Russia. The
| result is that Germany, Italy and other European nations will
| continue purchasing and paying for natural gas that flows
| through pipelines from Russia -- through Ukrainian territory
| that is suddenly a war zone."
| https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/26/us/politics/eu-us-
| swift-r...
|
| edit: in the US, oil hit $106/bbl which is a 7 year high
| baq wrote:
| As someone living on the eastern NATO border this has been a most
| interesting week. In the Chinese proverb way.
|
| Ghosts of 1939, about which I've heard stories from my
| grandfather and was taught in history lessons, suddenly came to
| life just around the corner. The only consolation is that the
| west finally saw the Kremlin for what it always has been - a
| treacherous, lying dictatorship that seeks to enrich itself
| through any means and cannot be trusted.
|
| Putin managed to do in a single week what multiple US presidents
| couldn't in years - remilitarization of Germany. Also, he managed
| to get Scandinavia to join NATO and dismissed any ideas some
| countries might have had about leaving EU for decades.
|
| Europe will pay a price which is unknown, but it is certain it
| will be huge. You just don't quit drugs (cheap energy) in a week.
| There will be massive projects undertaken to public dismay.
|
| Ukraine, unfortunately, cannot win - it already lost, even if
| Russian forces withdraw this instant. The question which remains
| is can Putin still win. He must be given an option, otherwise
| this ends really, really ugly.
| topspin wrote:
| "Ukraine, unfortunately, cannot win - it already lost, even if
| Russian forces withdraw this instant."
|
| Ukraine can win, they just can't meet the bulk of Russia's
| forces head on. They can, however, defeat Russia in time, and
| with the support of allies that time can be short. If Ukraine
| comes out of this an EU member then they will have profound and
| victory that will benefit Ukraine for generations.
|
| This is an opportunity. Putin has rolled the dice and thrown
| the first punch. Russia needs punishment in the form of
| military humiliation and Putin has given the West a once in a
| century moment to deliver exactly that.
| neverminder wrote:
| Actually, it's Putin who cannot win. Even if he threw
| everything he had and managed to occupy a country of 44 million
| people, second largest in Europe by landmass - he wouldn't be
| able to hold it. That would require the kind of resources he
| doesn't have. Also the minute he withdraws, which is just a
| matter of time, ukrainians will kill his puppet government and
| take their country back. So yeah, Ukraine will suffer major
| losses, but ultimately time is on their side.
| tromp wrote:
| I hope the records of which citizens were given arms, will be
| destroyed before falling into Russian hands, and that people
| manage to hide those arms well.
| filomeno wrote:
| Records? Man, they are just giving firearms to anybody who
| wants one. Then, those same Ukranians will be given visas
| to enter the EU because, oh, poor Ukranians, they have to
| join the EU because Russia attacked them. And, some years
| later, when the crime rate in the EU increases, some
| bureaucrat will ask himself why did that happen.
| DanHulton wrote:
| This weird, anti-Ukraine sentiment sounds like
| propaganda.
| simonh wrote:
| No records, they're simply handing out weapons, armour and
| munitions to any Ukrainian who wants them. Not just
| Ukrainians either.
| ivan_gammel wrote:
| > dismissed any ideas some countries might have had about
| leaving EU for decades
|
| Let's not steal the credit from Boris Johnson and Theresa May
| for that.
| onei wrote:
| I'm not sure Theresa May gets any real credit for Brexit as a
| concept. She didn't campaign for it; she was just daft enough
| to think anyone could negotiate something that satisfied the
| multitude of unworkable or contrasting promises.
| ivan_gammel wrote:
| She decided that her country should actually proceed with
| Brexit and has chosen the process for it.
| drumhead wrote:
| The electorate decided that with the result of the
| referendum. Boris Johnson won the election with a
| landslide on the promise that he'd leave.
| netsharc wrote:
| I'm a bit annoyed that people say 52% is "the electorate
| said...", and the referendum was non-binding, the
| government could've said "OK, but here are the effects of
| Brexit and why we're not going to proceed...".
| jimmydorry wrote:
| Which is what the general election was for. Boris got
| into power on the back of promising to deliver...
| Veen wrote:
| Wouldn't have changed anything, except perhaps May would
| have been removed sooner and Johnson would have been made
| leader to fight and win the 2017 GE. There's no way the
| Tories could have ignored the referendum results.
| philjohn wrote:
| She also laid out the notorious "red lines" that made any
| sensible deal impossible.
| layer8 wrote:
| At this point, Putin will likely achieve his goals regarding
| Ukraine (which I can't imagine he'll ever be willing to give
| up) in the near term, at huge human and economic cost, unless
| (a) NATO decides to step in after all (unlikely), in which case
| all bets are off, or (b) China decides to join the West in
| opposing Russia (quite unlikely, they don't have much reason
| to), or (c) Putin is overturned from within Russia (also
| unlikely it seems to me). The situation is pretty much doomed
| to get uglier and to remain ugly for quite some time.
| ignoramous wrote:
| The diplomatic channels are still open. Let's see if a
| miracle comes off it. I'm optimistic since there's not much
| left for Putin to prove. Europe is terrified and has wisely
| chosen to not engage with the Russian military.
|
| The absolute worst would be the continued escalation of
| economy warfare forcing China's hand in the conflict.
| layer8 wrote:
| Putin wants Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine (Great Russia,
| White Russia, and Little Russia) unified, to restore the
| Russian empire and to reunify the Russian people. This is
| not about proving something, it's to restore historic
| justice and to undo the humiliation and tragedy of Russia's
| breakup over 30 years ago, in the eyes of Putin. His legacy
| depends on it, and also he believes that if it doesn't
| happen soon, then it will become impossible, because of the
| cultural contagion of the West. That possibility is
| something Putin can't stomach, and preventing it is worth a
| lot of Russian hardship to him.
|
| EDIT: Just to be clear, I believe Putin is delusional. Just
| trying to explain what appears to be his world view, based
| on his speeches and published articles.
| wewtyflakes wrote:
| Why not leave it to Ukrainians to decide if they want to
| be reunited or not? Why does Putin believe it is right
| for him to make that choice for them? The fact that his
| army is actively bombing them makes this argument
| ridiculous.
| throwaway_4ever wrote:
| No, comrade, it is NATO's fault. How dare they prevent
| the other Eastern European countries from being invaded.
| throwaway5848 wrote:
| Their point is that the invation is for a reason. Whether
| you agree or not, a lame snarky sacarastic comment
| doesn't change that.
| wewtyflakes wrote:
| Yes, and it seems to be "ego", which seems like a poor
| justification.
| rchaud wrote:
| Is it really just those 3 that 2022 Putin wants back? The
| USSR had a number of republics bordering China that are
| now independent. Are those in his crosshairs as well?
| layer8 wrote:
| I don't think so, at least not necessarily, because they
| are not part of Russia's historical core. He surely would
| like to have them back in Russia's sphere of influence,
| but I don't think they are essential to restoring Russias
| greatness. Ukraine is in another category.
| heikkilevanto wrote:
| As far as I know, no Scandinavian country has joined NATO
| recently. Yes, there are discussions in Sweden, and even more
| in Finland, but that is not the same as actually applying for a
| membership. Such things take time.
|
| And I am not quite so sure about Ukraine being already lost.
| baq wrote:
| I understand that and you're of course right. This has been
| perhaps unwarranted hyperbole on my part. The fact is though,
| this topic was basically inexistent in any public discourse
| anywhere and as good as unthinkable. It isn't anymore and
| that in itself is a tectonic shift.
| phire wrote:
| Sweden and Finland essentially have a pact, that they will
| both join or not join NATO together.
| morpheos137 wrote:
| NATO achieves several things:
|
| Promotes American domination of the EU.
|
| Causes Europeans to be bombed.
|
| Causes North Africans and Middle Easterners to be bombed
|
| Which results in Muslim migrants eroding whatever is left
| of European culture.
|
| Provides a market for US military hardware.
|
| 70 years is long enough for Europe to get up and grow up
| after World War II.
|
| Aliens observing Earth must see the collective societal
| suicide of Europe, formerly the centre of technology and
| industrialisation, as most perplexing!
| m348e912 wrote:
| Sorry that you're being downvoted for an unpopular take.
|
| Here is an interesting article from an economic
| forecaster, Martin Armstrong, that underlines some of the
| dirty dealings that lead us to where we are with this
| conflict.
|
| https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-
| news/russia...
| celticninja wrote:
| Sweden and Finland are on approved list to join, they
| literally just have to put in the paperwork.
| darrennix wrote:
| During the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in the 1980s, the
| Mujahideen had a phrase, "You have the watches, we have the
| time."
| BitwiseFool wrote:
| In your assessment, who has the time in this scenario?
| Russia? Europe? Ukraine?
| squarefoot wrote:
| Ukraine has the time, in the sense that each day that the
| Russian army is delayed there are more chances that someone
| in Russia will decide to get rid of Putin. This is roughly
| what happens to every dictator that doesn't know when to
| stop, and usually dictators are so much self confident that
| they soon lose any contact with reality. Putin has gone too
| far and now he can't withdraw because that would be his
| political death, and can't drag things for too long because
| of the above reason, therefore he hopes to bring Ukrainians
| to their knees as quick as possible, but that can't be
| achieved without hitting indiscriminately lots of
| civilians, therefore no matter how it ends, he's already
| fucked. Also, he presumably knows all skeletons in the
| closet kept by the oligarchs, so it's very likely that if
| an international arrest warrant is issued, he'll rather be
| executed in Russia than surrendered.
| tarboreus wrote:
| Russia has the watches. Ukraine has the time. Not sure if I
| agree in this circumstance, but traditionally insurgency is
| something of a waiting game.
| BitwiseFool wrote:
| I feel the same way. I wasn't sure if Russia had some
| long-game tactical advantage I was hitherto unaware of
| and wanted to ask.
| apples_oranges wrote:
| how certain you are..
| rchaud wrote:
| In the post WW2 era, the Allies pulled together to institute
| the Marshall Plan which rebuilt Europe's infrastructure and led
| to diplomatic alliances to deter expansion of the Iron Curtain.
|
| That didn't happen overnight, and neither will energy
| independence.
|
| What kind of big projects do you think will create public
| dismay? Infrastructure projects create jobs, which increases
| economic activity and boosts stock market indices. Why would
| this be a problem for the public?
| Ygg2 wrote:
| > That didn't happen overnight, and neither will energy
| independence.
|
| Thing is, if energy independence doesn't happen overnight,
| climate change might renderer Europe and US uninhabitable.
|
| The only countries that profit from that is those that have
| access to artic circle.
| pedalpete wrote:
| Along with others here, I'm questioning your "Ukraine...cannot
| win" comment.
|
| As I see it, they have already won, and will continue to win
| for a long long time.
|
| What I mean by this is that western countries didn't support
| them in the way (I feel) they should have, probably because
| they believed that Russia would easily walk over Ukraine,
| similar to how it had caused such confusion and prevented a
| defense in Crimea (I'm not a historian, this is my naive view
| of those events).
|
| Ukraine stood up to the bully, and showed us (the west) that we
| were wrong to not believe in them. It isn't over, and it can't
| be claimed as a victory yet, but they convinced the west that
| they had enough of a chance that we should come to their aid.
| They showed us what the Ukrainian spirit is. They have given
| hope to other regions and countries that may come under threat
| in the future.
|
| I wonder if they have given China extra pause in their stance
| toward Taiwan.
|
| If Putin loses in Ukraine, could that also mean the end of his
| regime in Russia? The Russian people are standing up to him. He
| has proven that he is not only fallible. Will this also be
| taken as a sign of weakness to Russians?
|
| You're absolutely right about cheap energy, and it's why I
| thought this was a strange time for Russia to invade Ukraine.
| Europe will be coming out of winter in a few weeks. This gives
| the summer to shore up reserves and build out alternative
| energy sources. Remember, Tesla built the Adelaide, Australia
| power plant in less than 100 days[1].
|
| What happens when Europe faced with the threat of a lack of
| energy going into next winter?
|
| [1] https://news.sky.com/story/elon-musk-wins-50m-bet-with-
| giant...
| itake wrote:
| > probably because they believed that Russia would easily
| walk over Ukraine
|
| Sorry to be brass, but why would NATO support Ukraine? Its
| not a strategy ally. There aren't any special resources
| there. I don't know why the US was tempting Ukraine to join
| NATO in the first place.
| sidibe wrote:
| With neighbors like Ukraine has article 5 is the obvious
| temptation, USA didn't have to do anything. Believe it or
| not Ukrainians can have their own opinions and not
| everything they do is because of they are pawns
| itake wrote:
| There are several guilty parties. US/NATO are not fully
| responsible.
| rblatz wrote:
| In what ways was the US tempting Ukraine to join NATO?
| Because NATO expansionism is the core of Russia's
| propaganda, along with other non-sense like clearing the
| country of Jewish Nazism.
| itake wrote:
| Bucharest Summit Declaration 2008
|
| > NATO welcomes Ukraine's and Georgia's Euro-Atlantic
| aspirations for membership in NATO.
|
| https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_8443.
| htm
| pedalpete wrote:
| I didn't say NATO, I said "the west", but you're right, I
| probably should have said "the world" or something else.
|
| A major superpower decided to invade a sovereign country
| with absolutely no provocation with the goal of extending
| their borders. This isn't the first time this has happened,
| and it won't be the last. It shouldn't be allowed.
|
| Let's be clear here as well. Russia is not the only country
| to have done this. Western countries have been just as
| guilty in the past.
| itake wrote:
| > with absolutely no provocation
|
| This is false. NATO in 2008 invited Ukraine to join. This
| is the equivalent of Cuba inviting Russia to setup a
| military base on US borders. The US's reaction was to
| economically nuke Cuba.
|
| https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_8443.
| htm
| nevermindiguess wrote:
| You are not correct when you say "without provocation".
| The UKR government had been assaulting its own
| ethnically-Russian citizens in Donbass four 8 years.
| Russia went in to stop that. There are many journalistic
| documents that prove those societies.
| baq wrote:
| > If Putin loses in Ukraine, could that also mean the end of
| his regime in Russia? The Russian people are standing up to
| him. He has proven that he is not only fallible. Will this
| also be taken as a sign of weakness to Russians?
|
| I believe that's the play EU and NATO is going for. Putin
| made a mistake so obvious and of such magnitude that the
| western powers decided to go for the jugular. The risk is of
| course that it doesn't work, as it didn't in Belarus. We're
| facing Cold War remastered in that case.
| echelon wrote:
| > I wonder if they have given China extra pause in their
| stance toward Taiwan.
|
| > If Putin loses in Ukraine, could that also mean the end of
| his regime in Russia? The Russian people are standing up to
| him.
|
| If we see a loss of Putin's power in Russia as the world and
| his own population lionizes against him, a botched Taiwanese
| invasion could lead to a similar outcome in China.
|
| Lots of food to chew on for the strategists.
| jorgesborges wrote:
| A key difference is that Chinese citizens, soldiers, and
| leaders won't lionize against the state. Nationalism is
| total. But no doubt China is taking notes.
| echelon wrote:
| Last time I was there (in college during Obama's
| presidency), most of the students I got close to secretly
| told me they disliked their leaders but couldn't do
| anything about it.
|
| I attended lectures taught by incredibly nationalistic
| professors with an almost religiously fervent level of
| support, but most of the young folks either didn't care
| or harbored extreme distrust.
|
| After the earthquake, people really hated on the CCP.
|
| Anecdotal, but it really shaped my opinions.
| whirlaway wrote:
| > I wonder if they have given China extra pause in their
| stance toward Taiwan.
|
| I expect so. But China is a great power, and Russia is only a
| regional power. It's much easier and cheaper to isolate
| Russia.
|
| China's claim on Taiwan is 1000x more valid than the Russian
| claim on Ukraine, and the world would react differently. I
| say this as someone who likes the RoC, and thinks they have a
| right to self-determination.
|
| Ultimately, though, China is trying to win the economic and
| political game. You need a large military to play that game
| as a great power, but you don't have to actually invade
| people to exercise military power. And wars are terribly
| costly when you're trying to modernize infrastructure.
| Decoupling China from the US would be terribly costly to both
| sides, while trade is profitable. So they use that to buy a
| sphere of influence, largely in Africa and South America.
| Putin is the idiot who still thinks he can invade his way to
| a sphere of influence, which hasn't really worked out for
| anyone after the Spanish-American war.
| brockVond2021 wrote:
| > Russia is only a regional power
|
| Which region would that be?
| hdjjhhvvhga wrote:
| > China's claim on Taiwan is 1000x more valid than the
| Russian claim on Ukraine
|
| I think you got it backwards: Taiwan's claim on China is
| more valid - after all, they are the original China
| unspoiled by the demon of communism.
| dirtyid wrote:
| >given hope to other regions and countries that may come
| under threat in the future.
|
| To be determined. I surmise Ukraine will go the way of
| HK/Belarus and demonstrate that shitpost supremacy is not a
| counter to disproportionate military force. That getting
| drunk on propaganda manufactured and reinforced by liberal
| western media is ultimately going to trigger harsher
| reprisals and bloodier escalations. The alternative to
| Putin's quick "special operations" / decapitation strike is
| UKR cities getting shelled to rubble that we witness now. PRC
| will learn not to half measure in the name of cross strait
| "brotherhood", strategy can change but enduring geopolitical
| interests do not. We're now setup for an even bloodier
| resumption of Chinese civil war, and TWers will see the cost
| of porcupine strategy and prolonged insurgency and connect
| the dots of how much more hopeless doing so on an isolated
| island will be.
|
| >What happens when Europe faced with the threat of a lack of
| energy going into next winter?
|
| What's the sociopolitical aftermath of EU embracing migrants?
| People are fickle once policy touch their lives, it's much
| easier to turn on the gas spigot again, waive away sanctions,
| reduced promised military expenditures than to kick out
| already settled migrants. There's also Trump 2024.
| rizkeyz wrote:
| My predication, for the record: Putin is mad, old, and he
| certainly would not care to die these days looking outside the
| window into a sea of mushroom clouds. I'm virtually certain
| that he had at least one dream about this in his sleep - maybe
| long time ago, in the '80s.
|
| So he is mad, surrounded by yes-man with a populace that is
| used to being lied to all the time, used to the feeling that
| they know more than what is allowed to say publicly, you can
| read The Master and Margarita, written about hundred years ago,
| that describes this same exact feeling.
|
| Ukrainians, in an act of fatal heroism will fight; all that
| gets bloody. Kiev stands; Russians will try to starve the city
| to death; won't let any humanitarian help into the city; West
| will try to not lose their cool about the atrocities; but then
| something happens; some image that just surpasses the cruel
| picture of war we already have; people in West will demand
| justice; it will be hard to be bystanders when millions of
| lives are at stakes so obviously. That will be on a Friday. On
| Sunday, we defconned our way back to the stone age; world
| population will be back to 500M to 1B within this year.
|
| And a new world will be born.
| drcongo wrote:
| The Master and Margarita is possibly my favourite fiction
| book. It never leaves you.
| imperialdrive wrote:
| Suuuch a great read.
| fredley wrote:
| My pet theory is that Putin has received a diagnosis of some
| kind. One that has made him accelerate the actualisation of
| his dreams of Soviet reunification.
| sitkack wrote:
| Maybe he has the cancer he has used to kill so many others
| with.
| throwaway_4ever wrote:
| Parkinson's
| crate_barre wrote:
| "He must be given an option, otherwise this ends really, really
| ugly."
|
| Assuming we are still in a world where pure madness is not an
| option (nukes), it is possible Putin will commit to a
| protracted occupation of Ukraine (years). The west has a, how
| to put it, a lack of consistent ability to pay attention to a
| drawn out occupation in a land far far away (that shit might as
| well be middle earth to us).
|
| Putin has said in his own words that if Russia is to be left
| out of the world, then why should Russia care what the world
| thinks?
|
| They will occupy Ukraine for years, maintain and build
| relations with Iran, Brazil, China, India. The west will go
| through its own turn over, Trump may run again in 2024. It
| could be years, the EU could turn right wing. Border states
| will have to stop being romantic and start really incorporating
| the half a million Ukrainians (soon to be more, Britain has
| already Brexited because their population will not tolerate
| migration. Watch how awful the reality of the refugee crisis
| will be).
|
| It will be 2032, years later, with new government powers all
| over the world. It'll be a changed world, but perhaps not as
| 'green' as people believe. India and China increase their
| energy demands and Russia is still there to provide it. Like
| the Taliban, the world may tire of them by then and capitulate.
| Now they own Ukraine, and have demonstrated an ability to
| survive isolation.
|
| The game plan may not be shock and awe or nuclear destruction,
| but a true willingness to simply _endure_. We are buying the
| narrative that Putin has lost because the invasion is taking so
| long, but in reality the whole thing is supposed to be a long
| drawn out operation. We'll be tired of hearing about Ukraine in
| month 2, 3, 4 .... we'll be exhausted. Reddit front page will
| be back to mostly cat videos. The window of opportunity is
| really on Ukraine and the west to do something now, not Russia.
|
| The UN can walk out of the chamber in protest, but cannot even
| ratify a modest peace keeping force. Not one country dare even
| send planes to create limited no fly zones over certain places,
| even Chernobyl. Most of us are not watching the poker hands
| carefully here. Just because you have two face cards to start
| with, doesn't mean the flop won't be a bunch of 2s and 7 of
| clubs. The flop is what's going to get Zelinsky either killed
| in a air raid or exiled if he is smart.
|
| The modern world is the slow apartheid state of Palestine, the
| silent destruction of Syria and Yemen, the ignored subjugation
| of Hong Kong, the forfeited Afghanistan to the Taliban, the
| tacit acceptance of Khosgi killing in an embassy. The
| occupation of Ukraine or the valiant liberation of a democratic
| state? Which of those two fits with all the others?
| tapas73 wrote:
| But now, it is much closer to home.
|
| Europe sees a lot of parallels with what happend right before
| ww2 (germany taking a bite here and there; testing responses;
| extending influence and gathering resources)
|
| couple of months of sanctions. Not sure how many russians
| will want to endure. Of course putin will try to turn it into
| some patriotic narative, but truth will spread. Holding
| ukrain will not be simple. People there have tasted freedom.
| It will not be so easy to feed government news to them.
| tlear wrote:
| Who won and lost is not clear. West always writes Russian's off
| too early. They did subjugate Chechnya. In fact they were so
| effective that now their shock troops in Ukraine are Chechens.
|
| On other hand every nation is born in blood and this is
| Ukraine's real birth. Likely the country will be smaller, lots
| of people will die, but this is the time it becomes a real
| nation(well it started in 2014). It is time to prepare for
| insurgency in the west Ukraine. It took Stalin 6 years to
| finish off UPA. But they were surrounded and without any help,
| plus they faced NKVD. Ukranian insurgency in the west with arms
| flowing through Carpathy will make Russian regret they were
| ever born. There will be nothing pretty about it.. but there
| will be no victory for the tsar this time.
| drumhead wrote:
| Any victory Putin has will be entirely phyrric. The west are
| determined to inflict severe economic damage on Russia. Which
| considering they represent about 50% of global GDP they are
| well capable of doing. Putin's reached the point of
| desperation where's he's hinting at using Nuclear weapons.
| That of course will never happen, the generals will put a
| bullet in him before they let him destroy their country.It
| almost feels like the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour, they
| roused a sleeping giant in the form of the USA which went on
| to crush them. This time round the sleeping giant is the EU
| and they're going to flatten Russia economically.
| morpheos137 wrote:
| In the long run present day nominal GDP doesn't matter. For
| example, after world war I Germany had a very bad economic
| situation. Land, natural resources and culture matter.
| Russia is the largest country on Earth. China is the
| largest population and largest economy. India is a close
| second. The fact is Eurasia does not need the North
| Atlantic Empire.
|
| Time will tell but much of the vaunted "Western" prosperity
| is a fading high from the now 70 year old post war era. It
| is not inevitable that America leads forever.
|
| I wouldn't be too cocksure.
|
| Also, things like population trends or nominal GDP are very
| changeable over the course of short decades. What matters
| is resources, land and will and unity of purpose.
| ch4s3 wrote:
| > They did subjugate Chechnya. In fact they were so effective
| that now their shock troops in Ukraine are Chechens
|
| They leveled Chechnya and finally had to cut a deal with
| Ramzan Kadyrov and his father to get him to switch sides in
| exchange for putting him in charge. I don't see a Kadyrov
| like figure popping up in Ukraine.
|
| > this is Ukraine's real birth
|
| Nestor Makhno would have probably disagreed with you.
| teawrecks wrote:
| Care to elaborate on what "Ukraine has already lost" means? Is
| joining the EU the loss? I would assume that if Russia withdrew
| this instant, Ukraine would likely survive this. No?
| david927 wrote:
| It's not joining the EU. Its application has been accepted.
| Bosnia's application was accepted in 2003 and it's most
| certainly not in the EU.
| hraedon wrote:
| Even if the war ended right now, Ukraine has hundreds of
| thousands of refugees to move and shelter, huge amounts of
| destroyed infrastructure to repair and work around, most of
| their army expended, and a lot of civilian losses. They also
| won't get Crimea back, and they probably can't hold onto the
| separatist regions either.
|
| Provided that the world continues to rally around Ukraine and
| gets critical supplies to the population centers they may
| avoid grievous additional losses, but Ukraine is unavoidably
| much worse off than it was pre-invasion.
| bnt wrote:
| If history taught me anything, a retreating army will
| destroy everything around them just to damage their enemy
| and make their life hell. Imagine if Russian troops just
| flood Ukraine with land mines, it would take decades to
| make the country safe again. It's been 30 years and Croatia
| is still riddled with land mines.
| basementcat wrote:
| To an extent, this has already happened.
|
| https://reliefweb.int/report/ukraine/landmines-still-
| pose-th...
| theplumber wrote:
| I think that if Russia pulls back its troops Ukraine has a
| bright future. Even if Crimea and the other two regions are
| lost it will receive more investment than it would have
| received otherwise. Both the EU and the US want Ukraine to
| become a succesful EU country.
|
| The Ukrainian people also seem to have a strong will to
| build/rebuild and defend Ukraine so they are reliable
| partners unlike the cases we've seen in other countries.
| nevermindiguess wrote:
| What makes you think that the US and EU have any real
| interest to see Ukraine succeed? Besides believing their
| platitudes and propaganda, I mean.
| tromp wrote:
| Russia pulling back is more unimaginable now than a
| Russian invasion was in January.
| ignoramous wrote:
| How long can Russia hold such a massive country
| surrounded by NATO allies?
|
| I don't think there's a single scenario where Russia
| wins.
| nine_k wrote:
| With a change of the regime in Kremlin, it's quite
| imaginable.
|
| I suppose that a lot of the Russian elites, locked out of
| their wealth and prospects, would be more than happy to
| see and even effect a serious change of the leadership. I
| hope they have a fair chance.
|
| A huge lot of non-elites would support that, too.
| ivan_gammel wrote:
| They cannot hold this territory. They will have to.
| baq wrote:
| They don't. They'll happily raze everything just so
| Ukrainians can't defend. Then they'll equally happily
| lend money on good interest so they can rebuild.
| danuker wrote:
| > Then they'll equally happily lend money on good
| interest so they can rebuild.
|
| Ukraine agreeing to the loan would mean agreeing to debt
| slavery.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| The US couldn't manage to wipe out the Taliban in
| Afghanistan, nor prop up its replacement for more than a
| couple of weeks after two decades of preparation and $2.3
| trillion in investment. Ukraine's insurgency would be
| supplied by allies with deep pockets and modern tech;
| Russia's occupation would be funded by a sanctioned
| Russia and the same army that's already struggling to
| meet their objectives in the early stages.
|
| Russia leaves Ukraine in defeat in at some point in the
| future. The question is largely how many innocent dead
| are left in the wake.
| baq wrote:
| Oh, it will survive. Chechnya, Georgia, Syria, Iraq, Crimea,
| etc., they all survived. But...
|
| Rebuilding infrastructure lost this week will take billions
| of dollars and years of time. Some displaced people won't
| come back. More of both with every passing week of this
| tragedy. That's completely discounting people who died.
|
| Russian people, the normal citizens, also lost, and lost big.
| The currency and market sanctions have blown up savings and
| businesses basically overnight. Also, don't forget that every
| other Russian family has Ukrainian relatives.
| Daniel_sk wrote:
| Everybody told Germany that it's not a good idea to build this
| pipeline. Well, it was an expensive way of learning it.
| cft wrote:
| Putin financed German green party, that also shut down nuclear
| reactors. He is not stupid.
|
| https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/german-green-group-brande...
| vinni2 wrote:
| This article doesn't say anything about The German Green
| Party or the shutdown of the nuclear power plants.
| Daniel_sk wrote:
| And they also lobbied to get gas into EU taxonomy as
| renewable (and succeeded!).
| tut-urut-utut wrote:
| WTF. German Green Party is more pro USA and pro NATO than
| Biden.
|
| They are literally more interested in USA than German
| interests.
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| > He is not stupid. He's seemingly angered / disgusted the
| entire earth: that's stupid.
| cft wrote:
| China seems to be content for now
| rchaud wrote:
| Why wouldn't they? China and Russia are not natural
| allies and they both have an interest in maintaining
| influence over energy-rich Central Asia.
|
| Russia invading Ukraine gives China license to further
| deepen its relations with its neighbours, without
| worrying too much about Russian blowback.
|
| It's the same situation as when the US invaded
| Afghanistan and Iraq. China got a get out of jail free
| card in terms of ramping up military and establishing
| territorial claims in the South China Sea. No kerfuffle
| with the US, who were simply too deep into a quagmire to
| care.
| kken wrote:
| This is not about the green party, but a separate
| foundatation, which creating a lot of embarrassment now,
| though: (Sorry, is in german)
|
| https://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/umstrittener-einsatz-
| fue...
| morsch wrote:
| The article doesn't talk about the Green party, but rather of
| a (supposedly) environmental group related to the SPD, the
| centrist party of Scholz and Schroder. Though Merkel had
| ample time to stop North Stream 2, and didn't.
|
| The Green party was founded in the 80s, and being anti
| nuclear is part of its founding axioms. It's also a majority
| position in Germany. The Greens were also opposed to NS2 from
| the start.
| ivan_gammel wrote:
| This is false information.
|
| 1. When first decisions were made for exit from nuclear,
| Greens were indeed the partner in the coalition government,
| but back then Putin was just elected as a president of Russia
| and could not possibly influence that decision in any way.
|
| 2. It was Angela Merkel (CDU) in coalition with FDP, who
| signed off the current plan to shut down all nuclear plants
| by 2022. By the moment this comment is written, not all of
| them are completely shut down yet, and Robert Habeck, the
| minister of economic development from Greens, is not
| excluding the possibility of expanding their life time.
|
| 3. Putin has never financed Greens or any other major party
| in Germany, as this is directly forbidden by German law.
| ushakov wrote:
| ex-chancellor of Germany as well as many high-ranking German
| (ex-)politicians are getting sweet spots in Russian oil/gas
| businesses
|
| https://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/ausland/ex-kanzler-
| gerha...
| [deleted]
| mytailorisrich wrote:
| Not "everybody", those who has an interest in doing so, number
| one being the USA (including commercial interests).
|
| Gas is still a hot commodity in the world and Russia will sell
| it, anyway, and maybe still to Germany as they've announced
| they were restoring normal gas flow through Poland to Germany.
|
| Now, the good general point that one would have hoped all
| countries understood by now is: Don't become too dependent on a
| single supplier for anything, especially energy.
| baq wrote:
| Poland in particular knew exactly what would happen. And it
| did. They were disregarded as Russophobes with legacy
| baggage. Turns out they had valid reasons all along, the west
| just thought that they can trade around those issues, but
| they failed to understand that Putin does not think like a
| trader. He thinks like a dictator.
| borg_ wrote:
| to clarify, "thinking like a trader" means Putin ought to
| tolerate continued NATO expansion, with American missiles
| placed on Russia's front porch, just because the west is a
| buyer of Russian gas?
|
| The western politicians and the public acting surprised
| after ignoring all the warning signs all these years is
| truly amazing to watch.
| hdjjhhvvhga wrote:
| I heard many of these arguments along the lines of "NATO
| is responsible for the war in Ukraine because they
| shouldn't expand" - like prof. John Mearsheimer's famous
| video.
|
| The point is, these people may understand geopolitics,
| but don't understand people. These countries don't join
| NATO because the USA pushes them or because "NATO wants"
| to expand. They do it because they're afraid of an
| aggressive state with a history of offensive wars. They
| don't want to became Putin's vassals like Belarussians
| who recently tried to decide about themselves and met
| with violent terror. So yes, in the mind of Putin it's
| the fault of NATO, but it is a very sick point of view.
| baq wrote:
| Russia is literally surrounded by NATO in Kaliningrad and
| I've only seen it mentioned once somewhere on Twitter,
| and not by Russians. This is Russian propaganda to make
| westerners feel guilty and blame their politicians.
| smartties wrote:
| Is halting Nord Stream 1 on the list of incoming sanctions ?
| standardUser wrote:
| Geopolitics aside, I'm always happy to see fewer long-term
| investments in fossil fuels.
| rad_gruchalski wrote:
| Instead of a pipeline, there will be two LNG import terminals.
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| Expensive gas encourages clean alternative deployments. No
| one is leaving fossil fuels unless it's painful to keep using
| them, so it's good for more pain.
| mzs wrote:
| Here's an interview from today with the economics director,
| Silvia Thalmann-Gut councilor for Zug Canton:
|
| >The company had to file for bankruptcy and the entire workforce
| of 106 people is released. 140 people were incorrectly spoken of
| yesterday.
|
| https://www.srf.ch/news/schweiz/konkurs-angemeldet-nord-stre...
| dghlsakjg wrote:
| I'm of the mindset that the west needs to use every tactic to the
| fullest in this economic battle.
|
| Yes it will hurt the west, yes it will hurt innocent civilians,
| but we need to make the real effects hurt Russia faster than
| Putin can make this suffering seem patriotic. We need the
| suffering to start faster than Putin can find his way around the
| sanctions. Far better to have a few weeks of large economic chaos
| than to drag it out for years, or to have to escalate to a war
| involving two nuclear armed parties.
| bavell wrote:
| How is that not escalation that could lead to MAD?
| axiosgunnar wrote:
| My hope is that oligarchs would rather try to suicide Putin
| than have ten yachts but nowhere to go to because it's
| nuclear winter everywhere.
| JacobThreeThree wrote:
| Armchair generals are a dime a dozen on social media.
|
| Analysts from all over the spectrum have been warning about
| the Ukraine red line for decades.
|
| https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1498491107902062592.html
| baq wrote:
| These people were right, but the alternatives they propose
| do not sound realistic. They are aimed at rational actors.
| The fact is, people living in those countries do not want
| to be Russia again and a civil war was always the only way
| this could end, NATO application or not. See Chechnya or
| Georgia.
| chasd00 wrote:
| I believe it can seriously get out of control. With warfare
| you can take your finger off the trigger and it stops but
| with an economy things can get wildly out of control. I feel
| like Putin will launch nukes before giving up his regime and
| if his economy becomes an existential threat then you can
| connect the dots.
| oh_sigh wrote:
| It's not escalation because so far, the sanctions haven't had
| an effect on the ground in the Ukraine. If Putin pulls out of
| the Ukraine and the world keeps ratcheting up sanctions, then
| that would be escalation.
|
| How is _not_ applying more sanctions until they are effective
| anything less than appeasement? Which does not have a great
| historical record...
| dr_awkward wrote:
| This is good for bitcoin?
| shrubble wrote:
| So someone else will buy it up for cheap, right? Then in a year
| or two, or maybe even less, the gas will flow again and the
| buyer(likely someone "connected") will be raking in the cash.
| tapas73 wrote:
| germany is big AND wealthy buyer. Not eveybody can buy so much
| at current price.
|
| also storage of natural gas is problematic.
| keewee7 wrote:
| Meanwhile Nord Stream 1 still flows at full throttle.
|
| Spring has just started, close the Russian pipes.
| Karto wrote:
| It's just about 22h00 here, and -6degC outside the window.
| Spring has not started...
| djxfade wrote:
| Wear a sweater!
| Aldo_MX wrote:
| -6c is like 20f just in case you hadn't realized that it's
| below the freezing point of water
| isatty wrote:
| buzzert wrote:
| Pretty sure it was just a joke...
| baq wrote:
| From the not-quite-funny-even-if-true dept.
| coryrc wrote:
| Yes? Is that unusual? The last frost date is May or June
| where I come from. We could survive cutting our heat use in
| half. Better than going to war.
| Karto wrote:
| Nothing unusual. Just an answer to the previous comment,
| that felt thrown over one's shoulder : a whole continent
| won't switch its energy sources in a couple of days.
| skybrian wrote:
| This might be too abrupt for buyers. Tax them instead?
| baybal2 wrote:
| It's all up to you
| https://www.google.com/maps/place/Anlandestation+Nord+Stream...
| DSingularity wrote:
| mullingitover wrote:
| > Not a peep
|
| The Iraq invasion had at least some small fig leaf of
| multilateralism. Russia has no friends on this misadventure,
| only hostages.
| krastanov wrote:
| I was surprised by the "million Arabs" figure. For others that
| were also curious about it, this seems like a reasonable spot
| to start searching for data
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War
|
| It seems to me rather unreasonable to ascribe all of that to
| the US. On the other hand, there are probably plenty of
| westerners (me included) that think American leadership should
| be treated as war criminals for starting that war, at the very
| least for the false information on which the invasion was
| justified (whether because of malice or incompetence on their
| part). Even then, even if the western sactions are self-
| serving, that does not make this war any less wrong, and
| Ukraine's desire for existence and self-determination any less
| valid.
| vmception wrote:
| There's nobody to do it! We invade with NATO, absolving the
| need to ask US Congress for authorization and implicating all
| of the allies who could ever consider a coordinated sanction as
| they are all now culpable!
|
| I would be content with that if our leaders just said it like
| that. Join the gang by implicating yourself. I too kind of bore
| over the juvenile moral arguments that have too many
| contradictions to count. It's not supposed to sound edgy, I
| could totally roll with "at least they're honest".
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-03-01 23:01 UTC)