• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Germany and Russia gas links: Trump is not only one to ask questions

Westphalian said:
A really poor attempt at debating, which was I thought the point of the forum?


If one believes in free speech, then they should welcome reasonably and politely addressed views instead of behaving like the forum equivalent of a spoilt child who isn't getting an ice cream.
Click to expand...

touche
 
Westphalian said:
If one believes in free speech....
Click to expand...

Lol. Says the apologist for a Putin regime that has all but stamped out free speech.

What happened to Anna Politkovskaya? Stanislav Markelov? Dmitry Popkov? Sergei Magnitsky? Natalia Estemirova? Sergei Yushenkov? Stanislav Markelov and Anastasia Baburova? Boris Nemtsov?

The journalist/activist murdered list is almost endless.

999d30204892ceda7aebb06f62e7a52f--kiev-ukraine-vladimir-putin.jpg

Russian Putin critic Denis Voronenkov who sought asylum in Ukraine is assassinated in Kyiv on March 23, 2017.
 
Godric1970 said:
touche
Click to expand...
polite equates to reasonable as little as politely equates to reasonably. And presenting propaganda to argue over does not represent debate.

Which, if you examine the exchange more closely, you may come to realize.

Just saying.
 
Rogue Valley said:
Lol. Says the apologist for a Putin regime .....................~
Click to expand...
Активные мероприятия was a form of political warfare conducted by the KGB and included media manipulations, disinformation, propaganda, and forgery of official documents.

It wasn't discontinued with the reform of the KGB but merely outsourced. The "out" being somewhat euphemistic, anyone familiar with the operation knows who is behind it.

And arguing with any of its distributors merely serves further distribution.
 
PeteEU said:
1) Russia wants to sell it's natural resources.

2) Europe needs as does the rest of the world.

3) Ukraine is unstable (even before the Crimea thing) and is untrustworthy.

It's only logical to have as much pipeline around the untrustworthy and unstable areas.

This is a non issue. Pipelines like this have always been geo-political. Remember the pipelines planned in the middle east and Cacuses? All were planned and built to guarantee supply as much as possible.



Sendt fra min SM-N9005 med Tapatalk
Click to expand...

No issue? Are you kidding? That much dependence on Russia for energy will come back to haunt Germany just as dependence on OPEC oil has.
 
Felis Leo said:
Yes, I agree with you that the United States should not be buying oil from Saudi Arabia. However, my criticism remains salient and it is not Donald Trump who is wholly destabilizing NATO. Germany is destabilizing NATO by undercutting the very purpose of the alliance. Germany is leaving its energy security in the hands of its adversary Russia, AND paying them for the pleasure of giving Russia the knife with which to cut their throats. What is the point of having NATO if its members makes dependent upon and give money to the adversary which the Treaty Organization was originally created to defend against? As far as I am concerned, Germany is behaving like the eagle from Aesop's Fables.
Click to expand...

All other NATO nations should give Germany the choice of going through with their energy deal with the Russians or remaining in NATO.
 
Felis Leo said:
And you know what? That is fine. We can dissolve NATO and let the EU and other Western European nations deal with Russia on their own terms as they see fit. But they cannot and should not try to double-deal and play both sides against one another and get the benefits of being defended by the United States at the same time as receiving the benefits of cheap fossil fuel from their ostensible adversary Russia. Germany already pulled us in on the side of their favorite puppet state Croatia during the abortion known as the Yugoslav wars. As far as I am concerned they can handle their own affairs from hereon out if they so wish.
Click to expand...

Yes....let the EU build and fund it's own military force, including logistics. The USA has been carrying them since WW2.
 
ObamacareFail said:
No issue? Are you kidding? That much dependence on Russia for energy will come back to haunt Germany just as dependence on OPEC oil has.
Click to expand...

But then need it if they are to get rid of nuclear and use as much wind and solar as they want to.

Everything is a trade off in life.
 
Godric1970 said:
1st Germany and the EU is not here to bank role America most western Europeans don't want America forces in Western Europe,
2nd you have a damn cheek after imposing trade tariffs on the EU
3rd Germany or the EU replaces Russian gas with US LNG would make our economies uncompetitive America would just love that
4th Russia is not our enemy it is a long term trading partner

... you can jump up and down like a spoilt brat all you want you are unreliable, threaten us with sanctions over the Iran Deal and more tariffs .... i have two words for America "Get Lost"
Click to expand...

What about the tariffs the EU has been imposing on us all of these years. To hear you libruls, one would think tariffs did not exist before Trump was elected.
 
SheWolf said:
If Trump keeps pressing NATO, some allies might say, fine, no more US bases in this nation. Trump doesn't understand how NATO serves and benefits America. If we lost the ability to move around our military all over the world, our military strength would fall into decline
Click to expand...

What you apparently do not get is that those nations want US bases in their nation more then we need or want them there. I would be delighted if we pulled our troops out of Germany/
 
PeteEU said:
1) Russia wants to sell it's natural resources.

2) Europe needs as does the rest of the world.

3) Ukraine is unstable (even before the Crimea thing) and is untrustworthy.

It's only logical to have as much pipeline around the untrustworthy and unstable areas.

This is a non issue. Pipelines like this have always been geo-political. Remember the pipelines planned in the middle east and Cacuses? All were planned and built to guarantee supply as much as possible.



Sendt fra min SM-N9005 med Tapatalk
Click to expand...

So much for sanctions.:lamo
 
ObamacareFail said:
What about the tariffs the EU has been imposing on us all of these years. To hear you libruls, one would think tariffs did not exist before Trump was elected.
Click to expand...

do you think it's all one way Trump doesn't mention the 25% tariffs on our pick up trucks, SUVs , vans and trucks compare that to the 10% on US made cars
 
ObamacareFail said:
What you apparently do not get is that those nations want US bases in their nation more then we need or want them there. I would be delighted if we pulled our troops out of Germany/
Click to expand...
I reckon GWB would have disagreed with you in his time.

What with the airbase at Ramstein having been (and perhaps still being) the largest US Air Force facility outside America and soldiers having been airlifted from there to Absurdistan and the base as such having been an enormous hub for the Iraq war.

While still being at least a telecommunications relay station for US drone missions in the M.E., Afghanistan and Africa and employing around 1500 US personnel for those tasks alone.

Since Rhein -Main air base (Frankfurt) was handed back to Germany in 2005 I won't go into its significance today, just to say that still sizeable transport operations were transferred to Ramstein (two thirds) and Spangdahlem (one third).

It also needs pointing out that Germany heavily opposed the Iraq invasion and thus did not participate but nevertheless took over the task of providing security for US bases in Germany, thus freeing US personnel.

Which would (at least for those times) lead to the interesting question of who needed whom more.
 
Westphalian said:
There was no invasion of Ukraine.
Click to expand...

Yes, there was.

Westphalian said:
The most you can say is that Russia sent forces into a small part of Ukraine to help defend some Ukrainians in a civil war against other Ukrainians.
Click to expand...

In other words. An invasion.

Westphalian said:
Repetition of distortions does not make them any less distortions.
Click to expand...

We agree. So stop with the "There was no invasion of Ukraine." It isn't merely a distortion. It is a blatant lie.
 
ObamacareFail said:
No issue? Are you kidding? That much dependence on Russia for energy will come back to haunt Germany just as dependence on OPEC oil has.
Click to expand...
And what would "that much" dependence constitute in your mind?

Hint: If you believe the currently articulated figures of Germany being dependant on Russia for 70 pct of its energy, some research would be in order.

Not to be misunderstood here, I'm no fan of North Stream 2 either and there's been considerable controversy over it in both the German and the EU parliaments. I personally hold it to run contrary to EU energy objectives and that appears, at least to me, more of a problem than Putin cutting off supplies to cut off his own nose in the process.

All of which isn't going to further sales of any US shale gas, whichever way the dice rolls.
 
Westphalian said:
In which case we're agreed that US forces have 'invaded' Syria, and that the US is equally if not more guilty of breaking international law.

And before you say it .......... context and the behaviour of other states do matter. One can't righteously sit in a glass house, throw stones at others, and expect no reciprocal response.
Click to expand...

Syria has what to do with the invasion of Ukraine and the illegal annexation of Crimea?

Nothing.
 
Felis Leo said:
I have said it before on other threads, but I will say it again here: Saudi Arabia is tied with Iran as being the most actively malevolent forces in the Middle East in terms of spreading its wicked Salafist-Wahhabi religious ideology worldwide. It is the reason we have groups like al Qaeda and ISIS and their affiliates running around the Middle East, Africa, Europe and Asia murdering people to this day. The blame is almost squarely on their shoulders. You will not see me acting as their partisan in this thread or any others. We should not be spending a penny of our money on their oil, not now, not ever.

I would sooner we buy our money from the dirty Chavista Scots.
Click to expand...

I understand your opinion, but it would be a lot different if Merkle talked to Trump in such a way for buying Saudi oil and seemed hostile to the US alliance. Trump's behavior is ridiculous and opportunistic, because it just shows how easily he can pick a fight with any ally for any reason. He will not pick a fight with Putin, however, but there are many many Russian policies that he could attack Putin over.
 
Felis Leo said:
Are she and her government are somehow powerless to reverse the policies of prior governments with regard to this energy pipeline? Is it your contention that Angela Merkel bears no responsibility whatsoever?



I really do not see how Merkel's feelings have any relevance with regard to that dependence on Russian gas unless she and her government plan on ending that dependence. Which, by any indication, does not appear to be in the cards. Just to be clear, I do not care too much about the thoughts or feelings of political figures. I care about what they actually do with the power that they have.



Seeing that such a statement is fairly accurate, and that I despise the Saudi regime as I do the Iranian regime, I personally would welcome it.
Click to expand...

I am not saying she is powerless. I am simply pointing out that the decision to buy Russian oil was made by leaders prior to her leadership. She is not entirely in control of situation, but she is not powerless either. Her feelings in saying that Germany is too reliant on Russian oil, especially after the invasion of Crimea, does matter, because it suggests she is not comfortable with the situation herself.

It will take time for Germany to restructure their energy supply, which is something Merkle has suggested should be done.

Again, this entire issue makes Trump and America look like a bunch of jerks looking for a petty excuse to push an ally around. The issue is really up to Germany, and Germany alone to fix. It's not a simple solution. Russian oil was always an obvious and cheap option because of geographic location to Germany. Going to the Saudis may not accomplish a desirable goal either, so what does that, leave North America?

This isn't a simple decision.
 
SheWolf said:
I am not saying she is powerless. I am simply pointing out that the decision to buy Russian oil was made by leaders prior to her leadership. She is not entirely in control of situation, but she is not powerless either. Her feelings in saying that Germany is too reliant on Russian oil, especially after the invasion of Crimea, does matter, because it suggests she is not comfortable with the situation herself.

It will take time for Germany to restructure their energy supply, which is something Merkle has suggested should be done.

Again, this entire issue makes Trump and America look like a bunch of jerks looking for a petty excuse to push an ally around. The issue is really up to Germany, and Germany alone to fix. It's not a simple solution. Russian oil was always an obvious and cheap option because of geographic location to Germany. Going to the Saudis may not accomplish a desirable goal either, so what does that, leave North America?

This isn't a simple decision.
Click to expand...
Heck, Russia has been trading with the whole world for centuries, even in times of the Soviet Union. Maybe nobody remembers the glee of American farmers in the 60s at being able to export their considerable wheat surpluses to the Reds, but I do.

And does anybody really think that today there are no trade relations of the US with Russia?
 
SheWolf said:
I am not saying she is powerless. I am simply pointing out that the decision to buy Russian oil was made by leaders prior to her leadership.
Click to expand...

Nord Stream-2 is entirely a Merkel decision.
 
Rogue Valley said:
It made zero sense to invade Ukraine also ... until it didn't.

Just this week 7 severely wounded Ukrainian soldiers arrived at the Bundeswher military hospital in Berlin.

And yet, Germany is [indirectly] helping to fund the Russian war machine.

You're acting two-faced and hypocritical.
Click to expand...

No.

Germany gets just 9% of it's energy from Russia, and plans on reducing that number.

Germany sees Russia as a manageable problem, which it is. Putin wants to put the USSR back together, but he is hamstrung by a lack of money. He just had to cut the military budget. That's not something you do if you're planning on war.
 
late said:
He just had to cut the military budget. That's not something you do if you're planning on war.
Click to expand...

He has to cut the budget to feed the people. Russia needs oil @ ~$100 a barrel to afford its budget.

With the current price of oil and Western sanctions, Putin has to make involuntary choices. He's taking hell right now for upping the retirement age to 65 for men (male life expectancy in Russia is 63).

Putin hasn't suddenly become a pacifist. He's biding his time. Europe is putting its neck on the chopping block depending on Russian altruism for its energy needs.

We've seen what Moscow thinks of international norms via Georgia, Crimea, and eastern Ukraine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom