Posts by slyfox43

Nancy Gomez26 said:The cost of the LNG technological process. At the end of the day, everything boils down to money. Look, I’ve always been an advocate for diversifying supply channels for all raw materials and fuels—that’s just sound policy. You can't afford to be in a position where you depend on a single supplier; if you do, you're finished, regardless of who that supplier happens to be. Sure, gas from Russia is likely the cheapest option, but only if you have a backup plan tucked away somewhere—like a minimum number of functioning LNG terminals. Once a Rus (or anyone else) realizes they can hold you hostage through supply, you've already lost. The Russians are decent partners, in a sense; they start squeezing you the moment they spot your dependency. Others might let you drift too far out before pulling the plug, making it impossible to return, but not them. They make sure to remind you, quite conscientiously and right on schedule, that relying on them isn't worth the price. Some would call them impatient or greedy. I simply say they are diligent when pointing out your own weaknesses.

If you had written this, say, six months ago, it might have carried some weight. Honestly, even then it would have been a stretch, but at least you'd be in good company with those assessments.

Since then, the Russians have... how should I put it?... diversified their methods of extortion.

So... calculating the true "price of cheap" requires a bit more time and depth than this. This is really just one dimension of a much larger problem.

Nancy Gomez26 said:The logic behind sanctions is to inflict more damage on the target than on the entity imposing them. But looking at the big picture, sanctions tend to hurt everyone involved. Generally speaking, these measures only carry weight when implemented by an economically superior power. In this instance, it isn't really about whether 'only' 35 nations are participating; it’s about the actual economic muscle behind those specific countries. Once you weigh their combined financial power, you get a much clearer idea of who is actually pulling the strings and how far their reach extends.

I mean, I get it. It’s just pretty amusing to watch a colleague—who wasn't exactly a huge fan of Bolsonaro a while back—suddenly trying to find "fundamental differences" with his new moral compass, Maduro.

Nancy Gomez26 said:Everything you just laid out implies that, for investors, this is precisely the moment to pick up stakes in Nord Stream 2 (assuming, of course, the price is right and fits one's tolerance for the very real risk and uncertainty involved). My view is that gas from the Russian Federation remains—technologically speaking—the most cost-effective energy source for the foreseeable future. Since the only way to deliver it without losing its primary advantage is via pipeline, now is the window to invest. You buy when it's cheap and sell when it's expensive. While many see today's situation as a living hell due to the war, others may see it as a compelling investment opportunity. It simply requires capital, vision, and a certain level of nerve. Who dares, wins.

If that were always the case, there would be a lot more of them standing among the brave.

Sometimes, however, the lawyers just end up taking a bullet instead.

It isn't entirely out of the question that, perhaps in a few decades, buying gas from the Russian regime might become back on the table for Europe. One of the most frequent—and arguably valid—critiques leveled against Western capitalism is that we tend to prioritize immediate gains while offloading the long-term consequences onto the next generation. It makes one wonder if they have finally opened their eyes to the true cost of "cheap Russian gas."

I don't want to sound like I'm lecturing anyone on heroism, though. There was another user here who used to scoop up various Russian "blue chips" at massive discounts, acting quite grateful toward us "war hawks." I haven't seen him around lately to ask how his portfolio is holding up. I just hope he still has enough left over to pay his internet bill.

steelfox98 said:The Brazilian Foreign Minister just dropped this statement on their Senate website:
Quincey:

Brazil doesn't buy into these unilateral, selective sanctions. Beyond being illegal under international law, they specifically serve the immediate interests of certain nations, like ensuring the European Union stays fueled up with oil and gas. Meanwhile, they target goods essential for survival for much of the global population. There's a massive risk here; the way these sanctions are being rolled out means the mid-term fallout will crush developing nations far harder than it hits Russia, essentially shielding the West from the worst of its own mess.

In short, he sees them as illegal and rigged—designed to minimize damage to the EU and the USA while bullying everyone else.
When you consider that only about 35 out of over 200 countries have actually implemented or backed these sanctions, it’s pretty obvious how the rest of the world feels. We're talking about 80% of the planet here.

https://www12.senado.leg.br/noticias...sabastecimento

If they don't agree, they shouldn't join in.

Unilateral? By what metric are they unilateral? You just said they involve about 35 nations.

Selective? They aren't exactly going to be indiscriminate; the whole point of a sanction is that it targets specific things.

At the end of the day—who cares about fascist Bolsonaro?

This strategy seems entirely counterproductive, as they’ll just end up trying to offload those rubles, and the only entity left willing to touch them is likely the Russian central bank.

So, what’s the endgame here? Do they let the ruble tank just so they can scoop it up for fewer dollars—essentially buying bonds at a discount while the currency itself loses value? Or do they actually buy more rubles? (If they did, why were they using rubles to buy things in the first place?) It feels less like a move and more like pouring water from one empty bucket into another.

Anthony Hill5 said: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.

Dapace, it isn't just that they're trampling everything in sight; they're actively blocking everyone else from stepping foot on their soil by littering the fields with rocket mine systems that—I am not even kidding—are being called "agriculture."

Carl Lee27 said:In that thread where we’re all busy tallying up the sanctions, I can't believe some guy with zero brain cells is actually sitting there being dead serious, claiming that money is the only thing that matters

Please read quotes with a bit of comprehension.

To Americans, money seems to be the only metric that carries weight.

To Russians, it isn't even a factor.

.
.
.
🤣

Adam Lee13 said:Germany just sent over 2,650 Matadors to help out the Ukrainians.

It’s essentially an upgrade to the Armbrust systems used back during the Gulf War—assuming they could actually get their hands on them at the time.

Exactly. Sanctions will take a toll on both sides, much like how the massive buildup during the Cold War drained everyone involved—and we all know who ultimately came out on top in that era.

War is expensive, regardless of the methods used to fight it. While the West didn't start this conflict, they will be the ones to see it through to the end. In what looks like yet another classic case of catastrophic miscalculation, Putin and his inner circle—along with their various supporters—convinced themselves that the West lacks both a coherent vision for victory and the actual stomach for war, and therefore would inevitably lose. As it turns out, they don't have a single logical idea of what winning actually looks like; now, it’s just a matter of how deep a hole they’ll dig for themselves with these desperate, frantic attempts at damage control.

wiredseal7 said:Olaf Scholz is doing great—Merkel never would've let things get this messy. To start with, the Americans wouldn't have even bought into the idea that just tightening the screws with sanctions would make the Russians back off from the invasion. Now he can just bang his head against the wall realizing how much damage he's actually done.
Besides, those green energy types don't care anyway—they think we can just run everything on wind and sunshine.

I feel for you. Just try to convince yourself that we're talking about sanctions as a deterrent here. The actual deterrent was the threat of sanctions, whereas now we're moving toward much heavier lifting. But it doesn't really matter—Russians aren't exactly driven by material comfort or luxury like we are in the West. It's all just soy milk and good intentions to them.

It’s a heavy burden to carry the rank of Grand Admiral when you're watching so many high-ranking Russian officers fall in the line of duty. I think a little empathy goes a long way here.

Adam Lee13 said:I mean, we could probably just hand over some C-RAM units to help them protect their bases, government buildings, power plants, or those high-end restaurants and whatnot.

They aren't exactly using up all that C-RAM inventory back in Afghanistan anymore anyway.

The way I see it, they were already stationed there and ended up either incapacitated or completely wiped out.

While C-RAM is certainly a handy bit of tech, its inherent limitations suggest that even the US military doesn't rely on them as a primary shield for its own domestic bases.

wiredseal7 said:Removing a leader isn't a guaranteed fix; it can just trigger a civil war. Look at what happened in Syria.
I wouldn't be surprised if that’s one of the preferred scenarios floating around the mob in Washington.

CERN tightened sanctions on Russia:
https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wi...ussia-83674864

They're also looking at a total cutoff by June, once they figure out what kind of mess that would cause.
Seems like the organization is feeling the heat from its member states—mostly those over in Europe.

You see, I don't find it hard to imagine that the most idealistic scenario would be the Russian people abandoning imperialism and militarism altogether, though I suppose that belongs more to the realm of fantasy.

The actual strategy currently in play seems to be neutralizing specific expressions of that imperialism and militarism in Ukraine, driving toward a state of total international isolation for Russia to prevent them from executing broader aggressive plans. As for how the Russian people choose to react to those consequences, that is entirely their business; as a true believer in sovereignty, I support them bearing the weight of their own decisions, and I am certain you would agree.

Furthermore, as any true sovereignist should, I support the Ukrainian people's struggle to defend the system they have chosen and the freedom they fought for—including through various "color revolutions"—rather than seeing the Russian people submit to those who enslave, imprison, kill, and lead them to ruin. I trust we are of one mind on this.

It seems my colleague missed the fact that the Syrians—with help from Russia and Iran—never actually managed to unseat Assad, making it a bit silly to lecture us on how easy it was once he was gone.

With Putin and his ilk, Russia is essentially driving itself into a ditch, perhaps just enough to leave Russians walking on eggshells while they struggle for the "freedom" to have no say over their own leadership or their own lives.

Adam Lee13 said:I mean, looking at the gap between a Stinger and a Patriot US system, there isn't really much in the middle for Americans to work with... so if they're hinting at something "more serious," what on earth are we actually talking about here???😁

There is this.

The deployment of advanced cruise missiles in modern conflict zones is much like trying to play chess while the board itself is constantly shifting under your feet. It’s a relentless game of technological cat-and-mouse where one side's breakthrough is immediately met by the other's desperate attempt to neutralize it.

It isn't even a requirement that we stick to an American system.

The Iron Dome isn't really designed to intercept ballistic missiles. It can handle mortar fire and certain types of IFVs, though the real issue is that Russian IFV batteries can often outfire what this system is capable of shooting down. While it might be effective against subsonic cruise missiles, those can come at you from any direction, and you certainly can't surround a city like Kyiv with these batteries.

Besides... the Israelis have shown themselves to be nothing more than puppets acting in their own narrow self-interest, terrified of making anyone angry.

Anthony Hill5 said:Delta Airlines is reportedly slashing its aircraft fleet by a staggering 40%. The plan involves stripping these planes down for spare parts just to keep the remaining fleet operational.

https://theins.ru/news/249664

If you're looking for deep dives into civil aviation, Mentour is an excellent YouTube channel. He actually has a great breakdown of what’s happening with the Russian airlines right now and the limited paths they have left to navigate.

De-dollarization: you were all cheering for it when it was happening in Russia, but now look at what’s unfolding in China! 🤣

Michael Ortiz68 said:We heard all this same rhetoric back when everyone was obsessing over those 20-20-20 climate targets, and look how that turned out—they actually met them. So, my real question is: how much longer until Europe finally hits the wall? 🍿?

That hasn't happened yet, though we'll likely see a total banking collapse and civil unrest in the US first.🤣

Nathan Evans78 said:Look, XI's brother donated a literal gazillion doses too, so what? Neither he nor Berlin's little friend offered any real solution to the demands from South Africa regarding IP waivers so they could actually start local production. It’s not like South Africa is some tiny backwater village without basic infrastructure; they have plenty of people, including many who look just like us.☕

The nations that actually possess the industrial capacity for such manufacturing likely also have the capital to pay for a license or negotiate a formal contract.

I view the donations of Chinese vaccines as a very positive and responsible way to expand geopolitical influence. As for that comment about skin color, it just seems like another one of those typical trolling provocations you're fond of.