Posts by George Robinson43

slyfox43 said:Do you honestly think they were negotiating this a full year after he had already stepped down?

Regardless, that point is moot because all space cooperation with Russia is being severed. It's like trying to run a modern marathon in heavy wooden clogs—without imported tech, they'll be dragged straight back to the 1970s in terms of space capabilities.
That is exactly why Dmitry Rogozin threatened to hold onto Vanda Hei until those technology sanctions are lifted. He knows his window of opportunity is slamming shut! 😉

That's true, but remember that Vanda Hei spent an entire year aboard the ISS.

President of Senegal: Ukraine needs to clear the mines from the port; Putin promised there will be no attack.

Panic is setting in across hungry parts of Africa.
The leader explains:
Sall mentioned that after meeting Vladimir Putin in Russia last week, the Russian President personally assured him that such an attack simply won't happen.

"I even pointed out to him: 'The Ukrainians said you'll strike if we clear the mines.' But he insists it won't happen, giving his word that he will honor this commitment," the Senegalese leader stated.

"Now, the focus must shift to mine clearance, alongside involving the United Nations... so we can finally get that Ukrainian wheat moving again," he added.

🤣 🙏 🙏

urbanotter said:Come on, stop being so critical.

I mean, which river is Baton Rouge on, the Danube or the Sava?

There are three or four oil terminals in Baton Rouge, and it takes about 8 to 12 hours to sail from the mouth of the Mississippi up to Baton Rouge, with a maximum allowable draft of about 12 meters.
For comparison, a vessel of about 200,000 tons usually has a draft of around 16 meters.

And yes, they do perform transfers in open water, sometimes 200 NM away from the coast. These types of transfers are quite frequent in the Gulf of Guinea and Nigeria, where a ship might load about 70% of its cargo and then top off while anchored out on the open ocean.

Loading cargo is standard procedure handled under the supervision of the First Officer, rather than the Captain, who is busy with other responsibilities.
I'm certain the Captain knows how to calculate the draft, too; after all, he had to grind through several years as a First Officer just to earn that rank.

Of course, this isn't done regularly—it’s reserved for special cases out in the Pacific, thousands of miles from shore. There’s simply no reason for it otherwise, as a commercial vessel is meant to transport cargo from point A to point B without playing games.

You don't need to keep lecturing me; my son has actually been a First Officer on a tanker with a capacity just under 200,000 tons and a 16m draft for several years now.
Just two or three months ago, they were performing a ship-to-ship transfer in the open Pacific off the coast of San Francisco because their draft was too deep for the specific terminal they were assigned to.

Besides, you can use AIS to track all vessel positions and see where the concentrations are. In Mali, you'll often see ships anchored full of cargo, just waiting to hear where their destination is once a broker manages to sell the oil they've loaded.

Most of the time, when they load up, they don't even know their exact discharge destination; they're just sent in one direction and given the final coordinates later.

Anyway, so you don't have to struggle with it, here is a link where you can see where the ships are located and what they're up to.
Gulf of Mexico - Mississippi
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais...ry:30.4/zoom:8
Mediterranean
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais...ry:39.8/zoom:5

Gulf of Guinea
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais...ery:1.1/zoom:5

Now you can sleep soundly, knowing that somewhere out there, oil is being transferred from ship to ship in the middle of the open ocean.😁😁

lolol
FYI, supertankers don't enter the Mississippi delta. For them, you're looking at mooring near 9.3 miles Galveston at a mega-terminal, where there are enough pipelines connected to the oil lines to satisfy anyone.
Furthermore, any potential ship-to-ship transfers happen where the terminal's draft limits make it impossible for supertankers to dock. In 90% of cases, those supertankers won't even head there. Why would shipping companies always insist on a vessel leaving port 100% full? Because it’s the most profitable way. Every extra loading, unloading, or transfer is an added expense.
So, my dear friend, what you claim happens frequently is actually quite rare. Every time it does happen, the shipping companies launch an investigation to figure out who messed up and caused these extra costs. If the Captain messed up? They might let him off with a warning and a bill once, but after the third time, he’s losing his job.

Regarding the rest of your argument, I honestly doubt you can distinguish between standard maritime oil transfers and the black-market smuggling scenarios spun by the fantasy world of RIA Novosti and their hydrocarbon-fueled "journalists."
Let me provide a clear example for you. A typical supertanker carries roughly 2 million barrels of oil. At a high-speed terminal, loading happens at about 60,000 to 70,000 barrels per hour; this means a tanker spends an entire day—sometimes two—filling up.
Now, imagine that tanker leaves Saudi Arabia 70% full and meets a Russian vessel out in the open water somewhere between Oman and Somalia to transfer 600,000 to 700,000 barrels.
There is absolutely no way they can perform a ship-to-ship transfer at the lightning speed seen at a land-based terminal. Even with perfect luck and calm seas, they’re looking at at least 24 hours of operation.
What are the odds that nobody notices two massive tankers lashed together in the middle of the ocean for an entire day? You know what it is: zero.
And what are the chances that a legitimate shipping company would risk illegal transfers and essentially commit corporate suicide? Zero.
Furthermore, what is the likelihood of a major oil spill occurring during these uncontrolled, mid-ocean transfers of massive quantities? It is incredibly high.

As for your highlighted comments and your choice of vocabulary: you might be older than me, but please, don't act so provincial.

Nancy Gomez26 said:One has to wonder what the insurance underwriters for these vessels would say about such offshore transfers—assuming they even take place. Are these maneuvers actually covered by existing policies, and where does the liability fall if a catastrophe occurs? Such reckless logic is typical of the Russians, who might just anchor their decommissioned nuclear submarines in some remote cove and walk away, or order their troops to dig trenches next to the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant. In the real world, serious corporations and legitimate shipping firms don't engage in such practices, nor do they even entertain the thought.

Look, I wouldn't be surprised if Russia tried something this shady, but I can't imagine any reputable shipping company ever daring to attempt it.
It certainly sounds flashy when RIA reports: "No problem at all, our ships are out in the Indian Ocean transferring our oil to supertankers from Saudi Arabia."
In reality, if a single tanker left Abdulaziz even 70% full, the news would be everywhere instantly, signaling that something fishy is going on.

urbanotter said:I honestly don't know what they'd say, but whether these transfers are happening ship-to-ship or are fully covered by insurance, people seem to stay quiet about it.

I feel like I have to repeat myself constantly: ship-to-ship transfer in open water is actually a standard industry practice. It happens whenever a vessel's draft is too deep to safely reach an unloading terminal, or when they need to top off their cargo because the receiving terminal has shallow waters that prevent full loading.

We see this quite often when larger vessels enter the Mississippi; the distances to the bottom are significant because silt and sediment buildup isn't always cleared away promptly.

It's unlikely we'll see much "topping off" in terms of blending, mainly because refineries are specifically calibrated to process crude from certain regions; they aren't designed to just swallow any Russian or Arabian crude that comes their way.
India has massive refining capacity at Sika, and it's highly probable that they can process Russian crude alongside the Arabian oil they typically handle.

Once those crude oils are processed into derivatives, I suspect it becomes much more difficult to track exactly which source the distilled products originally came from.
Since India hasn't imposed any sanctions, they are importing and refining Russian oil without facing any repercussions.

Do I really have to keep reminding everyone that the sanctions against Russia were primarily driven by the USA and its allies, which represents only about 20% of the countries in the world?

Are you seriously suggesting that transferring oil from tanker to tanker in the middle of the ocean is common practiceb>????
What kind of roads were you driving on back in the day, urbanotter? Send me the directions!
That type of transfer is usually reserved for refueling military vessels traveling within a fleet.
Whenever ship-to-ship transfers occur, they happen under strictly controlled conditions—certainly not out in the middle of the ocean.
Any Captain who can't accurately calculate a ship's weight and draft isn't going to stay a Captain for long. You know as well as I do that Captains face heavy fines from their shipping companies if it's discovered they could have loaded an extra 100+ tons and still cleared the Suez Canal normally. If they mess that up a couple of times, their career is over.

Everything entering the Mississippi has to be discharged at the northernmost points near Baton Rouge; from there, only low-draft barges head further north. What do you mean "ocean-going vessels" in the Mississippi? Why do you think the largest oil storage facilities in the world are located there? Everything is unloaded there first, and then moved upstream via river barges.

urbanotter said:Honestly, if people actually knew what was going on, they wouldn't be so surprised.

Transferring oil from one ship to another is a common, well-established procedure carried out by professional crews.

It’s standard operating procedure for a first officer, who keeps a constant eye on the cargo levels in the tanks; they are especially meticulous about managing the air composition inside those tanks to prevent any risk of ignition.

Bravo, what a brilliant mind!
Picture this: a massive supertanker docks at the terminal in King Abdul Aziz, and they receive instructions: "Don't fill it to the brim; just hit 70% capacity."
Then the tanker departs, and out in the vast expanse of the Indian Ocean near Oman, it meets another tanker carrying Russian oil to top off.
And since the seas are always calm in these scenarios, everything goes perfectly smoothly.
Nobody has ever bothered to ask why tankers leave King Abdul Aziz only 70% full, nor has anyone noticed this pattern.
It is much easier to trust some "Hydrocarbon" pundit who simply translates a fabricated article from RIA Novosti rather than using common sense to realize there is plenty of Russian oil sitting at global terminals waiting to be obscured and loaded onto different ships.
Instead, this oil is being transferred from supertanker to supertanker in the middle of the ocean, heading straight for the USA! It’s happening right in front of you, in waters patrolled by Western naval vessels guarding the Muscat - Bab el Mandeb convoys.
Just playing the part of an oil industry journalist here. 🙏 🙏

dustyowl29 said:Oil smuggling is absolutely booming right now—it’s basically the modern-day version of bootlegging during Prohibition..

https://www.logicno.com/politika/sad...og-goriva.html

Hydrocarbons. 🙏 🙏
The most absurd part of this fiction from RIA Novosti is the claim that they are loading tankers with Arabic oil at an exact 70-30 ratio.
But here is the kicker—they supposedly approach an Indian vessel that is already carrying Arabic oil and then mix them. Miracles truly do happen out in the Indian Ocean!

urbanotter said:The real issue here is that this established hierarchy is starting to shift slowly but surely.

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid...97.-2207520000..

It would be absolutely absurd to insist on using the dollar within the Eurozone, especially when you have to factor in the extra cost of conversion fees.

I honestly can't see how that graph showing total EU imports by currency from 2016 is relevant here.
It doesn't connect to our discussion at all.
If you're wondering why the UK has such a high share of other currencies, there's a simple explanation—it's mostly due to trade with Australia and Canada, involving the Commonwealth.
Actually, the Canadian dollar ranks as the 6th most used currency, right after the Australian one.

urbanotter As requested:
It’s becoming increasingly common to see local currencies used for direct settlements; for instance, we see Russia paying for Chinese goods in Yuan while China settles its energy bills with Russia using Rubles. It's much like how businesses in the States might swap specialized services to bypass traditional banking hurdles!

There won't be any chaos at all, because you'll simply purchase the specific currency you actually need rather than juggling two or three different global ones!

When I was traveling through Canada, I opted to buy local currency instead of relying on cards, just to avoid getting hit by another conversion fee at a Canadian bank! It’s much like choosing cash over a credit card when you're visiting a small town in the Midwest to sidestep those extra processing charges.
The continuous arguments suggesting that adopting the Dollar is a major advantage really undermine any claims that such a move would lead to chaos. It’s like saying a smooth transition is just a myth when the benefits are so clearly laid out!
If the primary advantage of adopting the Euro is streamlining trade within the common market, I fail to see the downside—provided we aren't forced to settle everything exclusively in USD!

At its core, commerce is simply the exchange of goods, while money serves merely as the lubricant to make that process smoother; whether we use USD for mutual transactions or any other medium is ultimately secondary to the trade itself.

I believe you have a complete misunderstanding of the subject matter; to put it more bluntly, you seem to be writing without any real grasp of the facts.
I can assure you that within the European Union, roughly 90% of transactions are settled in Euros rather than USD.
The US dollar serves as the ultimate anchor currency on the global stage. It truly stands alone as the most stable currency available, boasting remarkably minimal exchange rate fluctuations compared to anything else in the international market.
If you honestly believe someone on a different continent is going to accept US Dollars as a local currency, then you really need to wake up. You are dreaming!

There is a clear hierarchy when it comes to the global market:
The strength of the USD remains truly remarkable! It’s much like a sturdy anchor holding a ship steady amidst a turbulent storm.
The Euro remains a fascinating case study in monetary stability! It’s much like a complex engine that requires perfectly synchronized parts to maintain its momentum.
The Yen is performing quite like a vintage sedan struggling to climb a steep hill in Los Angeles—it just doesn't have the horsepower right now! It’s truly fascinating to watch.
4. Pounds
The Australian dollar is much like a high-performance sports car; its value shifts rapidly depending on the terrain of the global market!

urbanotter said:So, where exactly do you think Russian importers go to get the currency they need if not through the Russian foreign exchange market?
What kind of currency do you think companies use when they have to buy rubles just to secure their supply of gas and oil? How exactly are they paying for it?
Maybe in your world, they’re just handing it over for free based on a friendly smile.

Just because you, as an individual citizen in Russia, can't access certain currencies in countries that have slapped sanctions on Russia, doesn't mean it's impossible to trade for other currencies on the Russian forex market.

Trade between Russia and other nations is increasingly shifting toward local currencies, and honestly, that is precisely what the USA fears most.
The demand for the dollar will continue to erode as more international trade settles using domestic currencies instead.

As a result, these sanctions are becoming less effective at hitting their intended targets; instead, Western importers of Russian gas are actually buying up rubles just to pay for the energy they need.

This entire assault on the established monetary system is going to force nations to find alternative ways to settle payments with one another.
After seeing their foreign exchange reserves frozen and seized by banks all over the world, many countries are being forced to rethink which currencies they should hold to facilitate trade, or if they should simply move toward gold.

When that happens, the global reliance on the dollar diminishes, and eventually, the rest of the world won't have to shoulder the burden of its constant printing anymore.
That hurts the USA far more than any "Glory to Ukraine" sentiment or the tragic loss of thousands of lives this war brings.

Everything the USA and the West are doing is just pushing us closer to a point where some madman, on either side, decides to push the button. At that stage, it won't matter who won or lost; the only question will be whether anyone survives to travel anywhere, or if a few lucky souls will just be waiting in bunkers, hoping life on Earth becomes possible again.

Russia's share of the global GDP sits at about 2.7%, and it’s projected to dip to 2% by 2030.
Their slice of total global trade is roughly the same, and it’s also trending downward.
How on earth do you think a player representing just 2% of the economy could ever threaten the US dollar or American hegemony?

Stop following the propaganda and the paid Russian talking points; go look at the actual statistics yourself.

gentlerider7 said:People moving to Germany is such a waste of time anyway. They should probably just head over to Russia instead.

Actually, even better—they should go to India!
A bot mentioned that the purchasing power in India is actually higher than it is in Europe or the USA. 🤣

rowdymaker17 As stated by:
It truly warms my heart when individuals who lack even a basic grasp of statistics attempt to engage their solitary brain cell just to insult themselves with their own low IQ estimates! I would highly recommend looking up what purchasing power parity actually signifies before you commit to writing another word.Oh, what absolute nonsense from those digital trolls! It’s truly nothing but pure, unadulterated chaos.Here we go! I am more than happy to lend a helping hand to someone of your intellect!:

Think of Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) as a way to level the playing field when comparing economies! It’s essentially a clever economic tool that uses a "basket of goods" to measure what a dollar can actually buy in one country versus another.

I have no doubt you’ve earned a significant portion of a Nobel Prize yourself! What an absolute buffoon! It’s like watching a clown try to perform surgery. foruma.hr.

Look at that Nobel Prize winner! 🙏 🙏
And to top it all off, they're being downright insulting! 🙏

Let’s dive into a little discussion regarding Purchasing Power Parity!
Is GDP per capita based on Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) a valid metric? I find it to be an excellent indicator! It’s much like comparing apples to apples when evaluating standard of living.
The IMF has released their latest projections for 2022!

It is quite remarkable to see Germany reaching that $63,270 mark! It truly serves as a shining example of steady growth.
It is truly remarkable to see such significant figures! Just like a soaring stock on the NYSE, these numbers represent incredible momentum.
It is truly remarkable to observe that Russia has reached the $30,013 mark! It’s much like watching a steady climber scale a steep peak; one can only marvel at such consistent progress.
It is truly remarkable to see that figure! Just like a massive surge in the S&P 500, China’s reach of 21,364 represents an incredible leap forward.
It is truly remarkable to see how India's economy is performing! At $358 per capita, they are showing such incredible momentum.

Allow me to quote you once more:
It is quite fascinating to observe how purchasing power scales! One could argue that the buying power of an average Russian is essentially on par with that of an average German.

It appears we have reached a standstill! Much like a car idling at a red light in downtown Chicago, we are simply waiting for the signal to move forward.

When you look at the numbers, China and India stand out significantly; they possess much higher purchasing power per capita compared to Europe, Asia, or Africa.

Keep it rolling, bot! You’re doing an excellent job.

"It is much like a master chef carefully selecting only the finest ingredients to ensure a perfect meal! Every single detail matters when you are striving for excellence."

rowdymaker17 As stated by: Moving on to our next point, It’s quite fascinating to observe how economic parity works! You could say that the purchasing power of an average Russian is essentially identical to that of an average German.

🙏 🙏
Oh, come on! You won't be able to dodge giving that Russian bot the "Bot of the Year" award in the States!
The Russian consulate in Banja Luka is handing out the awards, and Milorad Dodik is personally hosting the whole ceremony!

I am still waiting! It’s like standing in line at a busy Starbucks only to realize they haven't even turned the espresso machine on yet. China is truly a force to be reckoned with! It's much like a massive engine gaining momentum—once that power starts building, there's simply no stopping it. Japan is truly a fascinating example of resilience! Much like how a well-oiled machine operates with precision, their progress is nothing short of remarkable. India is truly showing incredible potential on the global stage! It’s much like watching a startup transform into a massive Fortune 500 powerhouse right before your eyes. It really comes down to how we measure up against Europe!They certainly have a massive presence across Asia and Africa. It is truly fascinating to observe how purchasing power per capita can vary so wildly! It’s much like comparing a local corner store's inventory to a massive Walmart Supercenter—the scale of opportunity is simply incomparable..

This definitely deserves a Nobel Prize! 🎉

darkdriver said:Erich, seriously, you killed it with this Google search—really, mad respect, no joke
If we’re gonna take the exact same logic people are using for China and apply it to Russia, then I guess this whole Russian military operation is basically just some minor border skirmish or a "border incident," right? Because, like I was saying before, China hasn't actually occupied any of its neighbors except for Tibet—which, let's be real, even the Chinese Republican government didn't recognize sovereignty over anyway—nor have they launched a full-scale invasion, you know, USA style, against any sovereign nation.
So, maybe in the future, you guys won't have any trouble calling this Russia and Ukraine conflict a "border dispute" either?

China actually had a massive plan to steamroll through and occupy Vietnam to rescue their protégé, Pol Pot, in Cambodia.
They launched an assault with at least 500,000 troops... only to get shut down immediately right outside Hanoi. Following that, the entire conflict was downgraded to minor border shelling and a ten-year period of Chinese inability to break through the lines.
So much for your theory that China hasn't attacked anyone except Tibet.

That lesson learned at Hanoi—that they simply couldn't achieve anything through military force in Southeast Asia—is exactly what drove China toward systemic reforms. They realized that money drills much deeper than artillery shells ever could.

darkdriver said:Man, the classic move—dodging the point by putting words in someone else's mouth or accusing them of stuff they never even said or did.
By the way, isn't it funny how in this modern culture of a thousand little brainwashed commissars rambling all over the internet and watching everyone like a hawk to call out anyone who doesn't think exactly like them, that behavior itself isn't called whataboutism?
Because I guess if someone calls out the USA for its history of aggression, suddenly it's "whataboutism," but when you guys point at China or Iran for their aggressive policies—which, btw, haven't even resulted in a single formal invasion of another territory yet (aside from Tibet)—then it's totally fine and definitely not whataboutism?

Is that so? And what about China's aggression against Vietnam, similar to what we see with Russia in Ukraine?
Does that just not count because the Chinese got such a massive reality check afterward that they haven't dared attempt any major military aggressions since then?

urbanotter said:The cost to pull Russian oil out of the ground is roughly $19 per barrel.
Because of that, the Russians have plenty of breathing room to sell at discounted prices and still walk away with a healthy profit.

The Arabs make even more since their extraction costs sit closer to $9 per barrel.

Americans don't have nearly that much cushion, given that the technological process for extracting shale oil carries a cost of about $30 to $40 per barrel, all while depleting the reserves incredibly fast and forcing us to constantly drill for new ones.

On top of that, Fracking causes significant environmental damage, which obviously doesn't sit well with the environmentalists, but let's be honest—who really listens to the greens when there's serious profit on the table?

What you've laid out might just be the net cost of simple extraction in regions where Russians use basic pumpjacks, or where Arabs simply rely on gravity to flow oil from Ghawar.
And hey, that's fine.
However, from roughly October through April, Russians face heavy additional expenses once that oil leaves the Siberian soil. They have to battle paraffin wax. The oil is either stored or piped through environments where temperatures plummet to -20 or -40 degrees. When there's a huge temperature gap between the crude and the pipe walls or storage tanks, paraffinization kicks in. If you don't shell out a fortune for chemical inhibitors, your pipelines will clog, or worse, your entire supply in the reservoirs will solidify. That’s just one extra hurdle. We haven't even touched on how much more expensive it is to maintain all that equipment in -40 degree weather.

swiftjackal11 said:These Russians are absolute amateurs when it comes to business. If everyone is supposedly so dependent on what they're selling, why on earth were they selling it so cheap? 🤷

It’s quite simple, really: India isn't interested in picking up that oil unless they can snag a massive discount!
It would be sheer madness for Indians not to capitalize on this opportunity!

brightheron64 said:I suppose everyone just finds their own way to get by...

India wasn't actually importing much Russian oil back in 2021—only about 2%, which comes out to roughly 12 million barrels for the whole year—while about half of their supply was coming from the Middle East. However, looking at just the second quarter of this year, they’ve already locked in 26 million barrels because Russia is offering them oil at $30 below the market rate (and word on the street is it might even be cheaper than that, though nobody wants to speak up publicly about it)...

The Americans aren't exactly thrilled about the situation, but they aren't making too much noise either, mostly because there's this lingering fear that if they push too hard, India might end up turning toward Iran instead...

That’s all well and good, but do you realize how massive 26 million barrels actually is? That equates to roughly 1 million tons.
India imports about 230-240 million tons annually, with 80% sourced from the Middle East.
The real issue is how much of that Middle Eastern oil India can actually substitute, since the blends aren't identical. Refineries don't operate like a simple "press button" system where you can instantly swap Malaysian, Arabian, Iranian, Russian, American, Canadian, Nigerian, Venezuelan, or Kazakh crude.

gentlerider7 said:Yeah, sure, the rotten West is totally going to collapse overnight... as if anything actually happens...

The end is near. We’re headed straight toward the instability seen in Eritrea, North Korea, or South Sudan...