Posts by Anthony Hill5

Gerald Chavez7 said:Fair enough...

But honestly, the way people exaggerate the role of Germany and the rest of Europe has reached mythic proportions at this point. Sure, the Germans didn't account for the possibility of Russian gas supplies being cut off—that was a bad call, poor projections, and maybe just getting too comfortable with the status quo. It was a mistake (driven by a craving for cheap energy), and now they're paying for it with massive utility bills.

It wasn't just a lack of foresight; rather, they actively told those who attempted to warn them to mind their own business.

Not only did they provide financial backing to Putin's criminal regime, which directly precipitated this war, but they also funneled money into funding Euroskeptic parties and all sorts of other dirty operations aimed at destabilizing the European Union—ranging from Sputnik and RT to various other Russian propaganda outlets used to influence events like Brexit.

The sheer scale of German stupidity and greed far exceeds any "mythical levels" you might suggest.

A mistake driven by a hunger for cheap energy, the consequences of which will now be paid through exorbitant energy prices.

The true cost of their obsession with cheap fuel is being paid by Ukrainians, so what exactly did the Germans offer during the opening days of the war? A few thousand helmets and two Polish hospitals? They are an absolute disgrace to the European Union.

Gerald Chavez7 said:That’s a massive stretch. German policy was clearly a mess (pretty much right up until February 24th), and nobody is out here claiming they were saints. But comparing this to the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact is a reach. It’s vaguely reminiscent of the appeasement seen by the UK and France back in 1938—though, to be fair, we didn't have a Munich situation this time around; the Western powers didn't just roll over.

Should they have built some LNG terminals? Absolutely.
Should they have shuttered their nuclear plants ahead of schedule? Not a chance.

They essentially turned a blind eye to Putin's war in Georgia, the murder of Litvinenko, Politskajev, and the German operative, the poisoning of Skripal, the poisoning and imprisonment of Navalny, the poisoning of Karim Masaud, the daylight assassination of Kangošvili in a park in Berlin, the millions of war crimes and the destruction of hospitals across Syria, the annexation of Crimea, the orchestration and incitement of the war in Donbas, and the downing of MH17 which claimed hundreds of European lives, and so on and so forth.

Forgive me if I say this, but Chamberlain looks like a saint compared to Merkel and her brand of appeasement.

Not only did they prove themselves to be naive fools, but because of NS2, they effectively threw all the Baltic states under the bus—including Poland and several other Eastern European nations, not to mention the USA. In short, they dismantled the cohesion within the EU simply because it served their own interests, all at the behest of criminal Russia.

What has transpired here is a massive disgrace and a slap in the face to German leadership within the EU, one from which they won't recover for the next twenty years—unless they fundamentally shift their policy toward a firmer stance against China, though I suspect they will likely end up being a disruptive force there as well.

Christian Bennett2 said:Treating Germany as if they are the primary culprit is madness. A colleague of mine put it perfectly:

There is some German culpability here, but we need a more realistic perspective. Germany is burdened by historical guilt, which heavily influenced its decision-making. That is partly due to their own actions and partly due to the other Western nations that constantly stoked that sense of guilt. Now we find ourselves in a war in Europe—one of the few instances where Germany isn't directly to blame—yet forces still emerge to try and pin this entire debt of guilt on the Germans. It isn't fair. One must also consider the immense suffering the German people endured following the last war with Russia.
And Trump supporters look at this through the same one-dimensional lens. Trump never proved himself to be a reliable ally to Germany or the EU; instead, he viewed them as rivals. When you examine the relationships Merkel had to manage, what choice did she really have? Pick a fight with Russia? Or stay adrift? The West collectively bears responsibility for this, not just Germany. Had there been any collective will within the West to take decisive measures against Russia, Germany would have followed suit out of sheer inertia, just as they are doing now. Blaming Germany exclusively is simply incorrect.

There is certainly a sense of German culpability at play here, yet we must maintain a more realistic perspective on the matter. Germany remains weighed down by historical guilt, which is precisely why they have reached such decisions.

During WW2, Ukraine was bypassed just as Ribbentrop and Molotov bypassed them with a gas pipeline, so why should anyone feel any sense of historical guilt toward them? Ukrainians aren't even a nation, so there is absolutely no reason for it.

rustywalker82 said:The cheap energy that the European Union and Germany have been sucking up isn't some stroke of human genius; it’s just a gift from nature handed straight to Russia.
On the flip side, the fact that Germany doesn't have its own nuclear weapons is a man-made situation, and honestly, it's a huge reason why Ukraine is bleeding right now. The West was never truly invested in nuclear disarmament deals anyway, which is why you don't see any real pressure being put on a criminal, nuclear-armed Russia to disarm.
We're watching the consequences of that play out on the news every single night.

Even Steinmeier has finally realized the sheer stupidity of his position and offered an apology to everyone, yet you persist in lecturing us about how Germans have nothing to do with this mess.

German President: I misjudged Putin

German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier, who spent years advocating for the West to move closer to Russia, has expressed regret over his stance, admitting that his long-standing support for the Nord Stream 2 pipeline was a massive blunder.

“My commitment to Nord Stream 2 was clearly a mistake,” Steinmeier stated. Many critics have pointed out that the now-defunct Nord Stream 2 will only serve to weaken Ukraine by cutting them out of the energy business.

“We clung to a connection that even Russia no longer believed in, despite our other partners warning us against it,” he added.

When Steinmeier organized a “solidarity concert” for Ukraine, Melnik took to Twitter to sarcastically remark that it seemed the Russians were the only soloists performing.

“That’s an insult. Sorry, but I’m not coming,” Melnik wrote.

Furthermore, Steinmeier is the architect behind the "Steinmeier formula" intended to facilitate a peace process in Ukraine just so Nord Stream could flow toward Germany as quickly as possible, ensuring poor Germany wouldn't suffer too much. Given your last five or six posts where you've been busy blaming Ukrainians, I can only hope you share Steinmeier's sentiment. ☕

Douglas Sanchez5 said:Now, look, mature political elites actually know what’s best for their nation—they can think long-term and run a proper cost-benefit analysis. Take the Finns, for example—they were willing to accept losing some territory and let the Soviets dictate their foreign policy during the Cold War, all to build up their nation for the long haul.

I don't think anyone in their right mind would argue that ending this war immediately—with all the extra deaths, crimes, and total destruction it would bring—is any better than waiting 15 years for Russia's energy leverage to crumble and for Putin to finally kick the bucket. Not just because of the direct leverage on the EU, but because the whole economic system based on raw material exports might collapse, potentially leading to a democratized Russia. Honestly, when personalized regimes face structural economic shifts, it’s actually the perfect recipe and opportunity to overhaul the entire system!
They knew Putin was personally obsessed with Ukraine. So, a slightly later entry into the EU or a bit slower economic growth? That's definitely a better trade-off than facing an economic meltdown that takes 15 years to recover from (just to get back to pre-war poverty levels), not to mention the lives lost and the physical and mental trauma inflicted on everyone involved.

If Zelenskyy had been more strategic, he should have just told his people the truth about the terrible choice they were facing regarding Minsk 2. Or, alternatively, he should have prepared them for war—mobilizing and training people from month eleven onward. He needed to send a clear message: it’s either Minsk 2 or it’s war. And he should've explained *why* Minsk 2 was the lesser of two evils. Maybe then the Russians wouldn't have thought they could just swoop in and take Kyiv in three days using shock tactics.

While the intelligence community was screaming about Russian troop buildups, the media coverage in Ukraine was busy obsessing over Eurovision! People were sleeping through it, thinking Putin was just bluffing. That's way too big a risk when you're leading a nation. But hey, now it's all Merkel's fault, while he acts like he's done nothing wrong at all!

Why on earth would you imagine that whoever succeeds Putin would step up and say, "Listen, dear Ukrainians, Putin was insane; we're going to tear up the Minsk protocols, so you're on your own"? Signing the Minsk agreement is a point of no return.

It is akin to expecting some future Russian leader to emerge and declare, "Here, take Crimea back." The chances of that happening are zero, if not impossible.

The Minsk agreement was forced upon the Ukrainians; it wasn't implemented because doing so would run contrary to the interests of the people and the state. Anyone who had attempted to enforce it would have been branded a traitor to the nation, likely triggering civil unrest and revolutions—which Putin would have skillfully exploited, just as he did in 2014. I highly doubt the outcome would have been any different.

By that same logic, anyone in Russia attempting to return Crimea to Ukraine would be labeled a traitor to their people.

The West should have stepped up to help Ukraine eight years ago, rather than playing blind and forcing them into compromises with a criminal regime in the Kremlin that cannot be trusted.

rustywalker82 said:Look, let's be real, the Minsk agreement was basically just a way to hand over territory.
Now they’ve got total freedom to move however they want...🙏

The whole world was begging them to actually follow through on it, but honestly, nobody cared. They weren't even paying attention to the actual logic being discussed over on Reddit. 🙂

Perhaps you should actually educate yourself on what Minsk truly meant for the future of Ukraine before you start lecturing me about what the "entire world" thinks. It is patently obvious that the rest of the world couldn't care less about Ukraine, provided their own comfort and cheap energy supplies remain undisturbed—not that any of them would ever be willing to sacrifice a single thing of their own.

For Ukrainians, Minsk represented the abandonment of their very future and freedom, essentially forcing them to accept a subservient, vassal-like status toward Russia.

Sam Alvarez4 said:Putin is hitting back. 😬

In retaliation for the sanctions, Russia is now restricting visas for citizens from certain "unfriendly" European Union nations, as well as for people from Norway, Switzerland, Denmark, and Iceland.

Russia imposes visa restrictions on citizens of 'unfriendly countries'

Also: following the events in Bucha, Macron is calling for even tougher sanctions against Russia.

French President Emmanuel Macron said on Monday that more sanctions on Russia were needed after Ukraine accused Russian forces of The Killing of civilians in the Ukrainian town of Bucha.

I truly feel for the Scandinavians and the Swiss. They will simply have to settle for vacations on the French Riviera, Miami, Mykonos, San Francisco, or some other trivial destination. The dream of visiting the Soča remains nothing more than a distant fantasy.

rustywalker82 said:Germany helped Ukraine move toward peace by mediating through the Minsk agreement.
But nothing is set in stone. If someone doesn't want peace, they aren't going to get it.

What fools the Ukrainians were. Germany essentially handed them everything on a silver platter by trading away territory to Russia in exchange for mere cubic meters of gas and a fleeting illusion of stability, yet they managed to squander every bit of it.

All hail Germany!!!

The Board of Governors at the World Bank has officially sanctioned a series of aggressive measures against Russia and Belarus, effectively cutting off both nations from any access to their financing and technical expertise.

https://twitter.com/tassagency_en/st...BLVglXiAQ&s=19

rustywalker82 said:Total manipulation here.
It’s pretty obvious that the Germans were actually pushing for Russian strategies regarding the Nord Stream project, all while explicitly demanding that gas transit through Ukraine stay active. Honestly, that transit was always a bit of a gamble because of those constant shutdowns caused by disputes over unpaid bills or accusations of gas being stolen.

Look, the Minsk agreement wasn't some power grab; if anything, it was a compromise meant to restore sovereignty to Ukraine. Back in the day, 83% of people in the Donbas voted for Ukraine to be independent from Russia (the old USSR), only to have 90% vote for autonomy just a few years later—which ended up being totally pointless since decades have already passed. It’s not all black and white when it comes to Russia, either. Sure, Russia politically backed that push for autonomy because they’re a federation themselves. Whether they were just bluffing to hide a much more criminal motive is a whole different story, but that’s got nothing to do with what Germany or France were doing.

Oh, how incredibly considerate they were. Did they bother to ask the Baltic states or the Poles for their opinion regarding Nord Stream? Of course not.

How foolish and naive German policy regarding Nord Stream 2 truly was has become painfully obvious to everyone today. Angela Merkel will be remembered in history as one of the most naive politicians of the modern era, and her policy of appeasement will go down in the annals of history right alongside Chamberlain's.

The Minsk agreement was a compromise that didn't strip Ukraine of its sovereignty, but rather restored it. In the Donbas, 83% voted for Ukrainian independence from Russia (the USSR), only to have 90% vote for autonomy just a few years later—though decades have already passed since then. It isn't all black and white, even regarding Russia; naturally, Russia politically supported the demand for such autonomy because they are themselves a federation (the Russian Federation). How much they were bluffing to achieve their actual criminal objectives is another matter entirely, but that has nothing to do with Germany or France.

The Minsk agreement was no compromise whatsoever; it was forcing Ukraine, under the threat of a Russian gun, to sign Minsk just so Germany and France could continue enjoying the blessings of peace and prosperity.

With that agreement, the Germans and the French essentially handed a handful of Putin's mafia thugs from the Donbas veto power over critical Ukrainian matters, such as joining NATO and the EU. The Minsk agreement effectively signaled the end of Ukrainian sovereignty and independence, which is precisely why it was never actually implemented.

Eight years after Minsk, we find ourselves facing exactly this situation today, thanks again—I repeat—to the misguided, naive, and utterly senseless policy of Germany.

rustywalker82 said:That's just pure hallucination. Germany is actually one of the biggest donors to Ukraine. Not only that, but they’re a massive contributor to those trillions from the European Union funds—money the EEC clearly didn't just dump into decarbonization or cutting down on Russian oil and gas consumption. Instead, they used it to boost standards for personal cars, build highways, and other stuff that basically ends up indirectly funding Russia.

On top of that, Germany has been a huge advocate for Ukrainian sovereignty and was a co-author of the Minsk agreements. For nearly eight years, they kept pushing for those deals to be honored, even right before the full-scale Russian invasion when the German Chancellor traveled to meet Zelenska, urging him to finally implement those key parts of the agreement.

They "helped" them by bypassing them via the North Pole.

And then, after attempting to offer aid in the form of a mere 5,000 helmets—only to be met with ridicule from all of Europe—they were forced to pivot their entire stance.

Furthermore, Germany acts as a powerful advocate for Ukrainian sovereignty and was a co-author of the Minsk agreements. For nearly eight years, they insisted these accords be implemented, even immediately preceding the full-scale Russian invasion, when the German Chancellor traveled to meet Zelenska, urging him to finally honor the key provisions of the deal.

Advocates? Is that what we are calling them now? While Putin Ukraine was busy carving up the nation through the annexation of Crimea and igniting the conflict in Donbas, the Germans were doing their part by forcing them to sign the Minsk agreement—a document designed to strip Ukraine of its sovereignty just so the Germans could continue their "business as usual" with Russia.

The Pentagon details $ 300 million in security assistance for Ukraine.

Pentagon details $ 300 million in security assistance for Ukraine.

The inventory provided encompasses laser-guided rockets, tactical drones capable of both reconnaissance and kamikaze strikes, along with certain “non-standard” weaponry and munitions—a phrase the Department of Defense frequently employs when discussing Soviet-designed weapons such as those used by Ukrainian troops.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/04...ce-for-ukraine

steelfox98 said:👍
This really highlights the root cause. This isn't a problem that started last month; it started twenty years ago. The scheme hasn't changed much, except now they say "The Russians can't say that, only we can."

This hasn't even truly begun. If Russia shuts off the gas, a huge chunk of industry stands still. Honestly, I'm not sure what would even be left standing, given how interconnected everything is. They say 95% of chemical production depends directly on energy.
Agriculture—the European Union is a top global producer, but they consume 90% of what they grow, leaving little surplus. What happens without fertilizers—which the Americans declared a strategic interest and pulled out of sanctions—combined with skyrocketing fuel prices?

Russia has food and energy; Germans have Ford and Chevrolet. Who is actually more practical in a crisis, and who is used to hardship?

It isn't a lack of resources, but rather a lack of expertise.

As Prices rise in Supermarkets, Russian families Suffer
Prices on food and produce have risen up to 210%.

FinExpertiza, a financial consulting agency, once used internationally accepted methodology to calculate income levels. Their experts found that 24.6 % of the Russian population, or 36 million people, had an income below 60% of the median income. The median income last year was 27,000 rubles (about $300) per month. That means that a quarter of the population lives on the brink of poverty with an income of 16,000 rubles — about $150 — a month.

At the same time price increases are — in the euphemistic words of patriotic Russians — “unparalleled." If it was just the price of sugar, that would be one thing. But in the City of Kurgan, for example, the price of onions has gone up 160%. Compared with March of Last year, in Russia as compared with March of Last year, in Russia as a whole cabbage prices have increased the most among the major essential foodstuffs: they have risen 209.45% — more than threefold. The price of sugar went up by half (56%). Buckwheat is up 37.7%, flour —20.61%, pasta — 21.22%, and almost all fruits and vegetables — onions, tomatoes, carrots and potatoes — went up by more than 20%. Meat and poultry — beef, lamb, pork and chicken — rose in price by 12-19%.

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/...-suffer-a77173

wiredseal7 said:It’s not just the bombs, either—they're running from those aggressive sanctions, too.

Russian revenue fluctuations pretty much track gas prices.
https://adamtooze.substack.com/p/cha...0m-per-day?s=r

If I remember right, a lot of the buyer countries used to insist on spot market rates instead of fixed ones. But that was back when gas was cheap...

Why on earth would anyone flee from sanctions? Is it not possible that such measures serve only to fortify them and drive them toward total self-sufficiency? Look at Russia. Since those sanctions were first slapped on them back in 2014, in what single aspect have they not managed to advance? They produce everything themselves now, evolving into one of the most formidable military and economic powers on the planet.

wiredseal7 said:Sure, and Europe can just pay for their gas in rubles while they're at it.

They certainly could, but they won't. Is anyone actually naive enough to believe they'll just bow down to these demands?

Germany says Putin agreed to keep payments for gas in euros

https://www.dw.com/en/germany-says-p...ros/a-61310461

wiredseal7 said:Russia blinked first. But even with that little bluff, they managed to hike up gas prices over the last week—just another way to pad their pockets.
The threat hasn't gone away, either; they’re just moving the goalposts 😁

It probably scared off those sanction supporters who were pushing for escrow accounts to handle gas payments. If that doesn't work, then the whole thing about paying in rubles will likely actually happen.

I told you all from the start that those sanctions against Russia would only serve to strengthen their hand and pad their pockets even further.

Richard Wilson4 said:Honestly, what did you guys expect?

Did you really think the Russia-lovers would finally admit that Russia’s economy is basically a joke, about the size of Spain's?

Or that they're totally dependent on selling energy to the West just to stay afloat?

Or that their military is actually a paper tiger that can't even crack Ukraine, instead of being this unstoppable force that's supposedly gonna hit the Atlantic Ocean in two days?

They would have reached the Atlantic in twenty-four hours if they weren't so preoccupied with protecting their wheat and buckwheat supplies just to ensure we Americans don't starve to death.

wiredseal7 said:I don't know about some parallel universe, but over here—it looks like they skipped right over the opening act (and by that, I mean the snipers).
So, what actually went down before the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014? And since you’re asking about Crimea—what was the deal with the new administration's plan to sign that 50-year lease for the port in Sevastopol?

They weren't exactly in a position to dictate terms back then—it was humiliating, sure, but it kept things from going south completely. If they had just stuck to the part about ending the conflict and getting life back to normal in those areas, we wouldn't be here. Instead, they went and doubled down by mobilizing over a thousand soldiers for an offensive on two separate occasions.
Vladimir Putin probably wants this whole thing wrapped up just so he can bury the hatchet with the European Union—get those remaining sanctions lifted and keep the cash flowing into his pockets.
They didn't really want to greenlight something like that—the Brits were pretty much on the same page—but the European Union should have stepped up, been more assertive, and forced the Ukrainians to just wrap things up over there.

Now instead we’re stuck watching this massive slaughter and the total devastation of eastern Ukraine—honestly, you decide which is better.

It is precisely that parallel universe I am referring to—that alternate reality where the Ukrainian opposition supposedly committed suicide via sniper fire, a reality where the Azov regiment was bombing civilians in theaters, and yet another reality where Syrians were apparently poisoning themselves with chemical weapons.

Prior to the 2014 annexation of Crimea, there was a popular revolution that ousted a criminal, a villain, and a traitor; this was followed by democratic elections in which that very same criminal could have participated had he not slaughtered hundreds of people before fleeing to Russia. Furthermore, I fail to see how any of that provides a shred of justification for what Putin subsequently did through the annexation of Crimea and the occupation of Donbas.

And what ever happened to that Sevastopol port agreement?

but the EU should have been stronger and forced the Ukrainians to just wrap things up over there.

Now, instead, we are left with this massive slaughter and the devastation of eastern Ukraine. Which, if you ask me, is somehow better.

How fascinating that suddenly, meddling in the internal affairs of other nations becomes justifiable and even desirable, provided it aligns with Putin's interests.

So, according to this logic, the blame for the war lies with Europe for failing to force Ukraine to get its act together, rather than with Putin's imperialistic agenda.

You are truly living in deep denial.

wiredseal7 said:It's just the American playbook—they've clearly been mapping this out since 2014, if not earlier. Back in 2016, I actually thought Hillary Clinton winning would be a disaster because it would trigger a war with Russia. Now, that same crowd is back in power—just looking a bit more senile—and they've proven 😁
theory right pretty quickly.
The rest of Europe didn't have these plans. Take the French, for example—they might act tough in public, but believe me, they aren't thrilled when some idiot starts dragging General Motors through the mud in a speech before their parliament (especially when it's a state-backed attempt to save a massive investment in Russia). If Europe shouldn't have stepped in there in the first place, then you'll just see players from Korea, Japan, and China moving in.

If Europeans had been smarter earlier and just pushed the Ukrainians to honor the Minsk agreement—which was weirdly backwards since Russia was being sanctioned while the Ukrainians kept sabotaging it—we wouldn't be seeing a war on the continent today.
But that's hard to pull off when certain countries in the EU, especially Poland, seem more loyal to the USA than to the Union itself. That's the biggest hurdle to any real European independence in foreign policy.

Are you suggesting Americans planned the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the full-scale invasion in 2022?

What else is happening in that parallel universe you seem to be broadcasting from?

Those pathetic Putin sympathizers have finally realized they can just pop up out of nowhere with their grandstanding claims, insisting we’re all going to starve just like we did during the pandemic if we don't have Sputnik, or that we'll freeze solid this winter without Russian gas. What kind of absolute buffoons are these? 🤣