Posts by steelfox98

Now even the opposition's Anna is claiming Donald Trump is in the lead, and we're right at the finish line of the count.

Raymond Anderson4 said:It’s the classic dictator playbook. They wrap themselves up in the flag, acting like they *are* the state itself. Then, when anyone dares to challenge them, they play the victim card, claiming any move against them is an attack on Turkey.

Except the Americans tried to take him out seven years ago. Back when Biden was Vice President.
Maybe some naive souls actually believe Washington just gave up on toppling disobedient leaders—as if they don't just bomb countries whenever they dislike the guy in charge.
Erdogan isn't a saint, but it's up to the Turkish people to decide what serves their interests, not the interests of the USA.

crimsonwolf26 said:But what kind of data are we actually looking at here? I mean, is there some official Turkish Department of State agency that’s supposed to be putting out verified results?

On another note, I’m still completely floored by that 88% turnout figure. How on earth does anyone even manage to pull off numbers like that?🙏🙏

Saw a news report earlier. They were wheeling some old man to the polling station in an ambulance. Couldn't tell if he was breathing or not—he had an oxygen mask on—but the driver kept going anyway.

George Robinson43 said:It’s much like a game of chicken; they will act this way until the other side calls their bluff. It’s as simple as saying, "Fine, send those 3.5 million people our way, and we'll send 3.5 million Turks back to you." We could easily fill those jobs ourselves—after all, those positions mostly require manual labor rather than complex intellectual input.😉

Exactly. And those other groups have certainly made their mark in Germany. I wonder how many of them have been employed there since 2015?

Anthony Jones15 said:

This whole circus regarding Ukrainian grain—the kind they claim will "save starving Africans"—is a joke. Most of it just ends up sitting in Europe, all while they scramble to block any shipments coming out of Russia. Honestly, I highly doubt those African nations are particularly thrilled by such blatant hypocrisy.

This is a textbook case of twisting the truth and massaging facts to suit the agenda of Terroristan.

It’s as if grain only flows toward Eastern or Western Europe. As if we haven't seen thousands of ships and millions of tons of wheat, corn, or grain being sent to Africa, the Middle East, or any other corner of the globe that actually needed it.

And besides, look at how quickly things change; as soon as the farmers in Poland or Slovakia started protesting, they suddenly found a way to "fix" that problem too.

It’s the same pattern. Just like how we froze without Russian gas or stopped driving because of Russian oil, our agriculture and our farmers are headed for the exact same fate.

How much goes to Africa? That was supposedly the whole reason for the grain deal.
The examples from Poland or Slovakia actually prove my point. Thanks.

analogbear5 said:The British left railways and infrastructure all over their empire—but let’s be real, it wasn't about local growth; it was about exploitation.

True. The Britons were—and are—the worst. Subjugated nations didn't really have a choice back then, unlike today when they willingly choose China. You only have to look at how they built the Pelješac Bridge while we were still struggling with access roads. Not trying to lecture anyone here.

Let’s look at the other side of the coin—how the rest of the world actually views things. Close Western allies, like those Gulf monarchies, are pivoting hard toward China and Russia. Israel is playing dumb, and Mexico is openly pushing back against American policy. South Americans were just waiting for their moment; they haven't forgotten decades of CIA-related terrorism. Even Africa still views itself as a colony of the European Union, while maintaining excellent ties with Russia dating back to the USSR era, where they enjoyed much more equal footing than Western politics ever allowed. It’s hardly surprising that they are shedding European influence so fast; look at how French troops were recently kicked out of several countries. Then there's this whole circus regarding Ukrainian grain, supposedly meant to "save starving Africans," yet it mostly just ends up in Europe while every effort is made to block shipments from Russia. I highly doubt African nations are impressed by such hypocrisy.
After over a year of pressure, not a single non-Western nation has joined the sanctions. In fact, what some people on this forum predicted is actually happening: the rise of the petro-yuan. It doesn't take a genius to see how the petro-dollar serves as America's primary lever of coercion, paired with endless wars and the destruction of any nation that won't fall in line. Immediately following that shift, Argentina negotiated a swap into yuan, Egypt made its announcement, India moved to bilateral exchanges, and Brazil...

It’s no wonder a clueless guy like Kirby only makes matters worse with his idiotic statements:

US national Security Council spokesman John Kirby accused lula of "parroting Russian and Chinese propaganda".

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-65307553

Decades of the Western philosophy "what is permitted to Jupiter is not permitted to the bull" are finally coming due, and the events in Ukraine are the catalyst accelerating everything. This is especially true regarding sanctions, because the rest of the world is rightfully asking, "Are we next?" I recently read somewhere that a third of all countries are currently under some form of sanctions; I'll try to find the link.

Somebody from a developing country said to me, 'what we get from China is an airport. What we get from the United States is a lecture.

https://twitter.com/LHSummers/status...67949297700872

Linda Adams said:Look, if the deficit was just $25 million in the first month—which is 5% of the ANNUAL budget—and that same rate continues every month, then it's 5% x 12 months = 60%. Use some basic math.

Same question. In your book, average means multiplying a variable by a unit of measurement (time, in this case)? What’s the difference between multiplication and an average then?
Since this seems too advanced for you, here's a hint: if the annual deficit is 5%, what would the monthly one be?

Agreed. Elementary school level.

Nathan Thomas12 said:Ever since February 24th, people have been openly saying sanctions have a long-term impact. Which part of that simple sentence is confusing you? :nezna:
I haven't seen anyone throwing around "short-term" figures of 30% anywhere. Maybe you read that on some other forum, because it definitely wasn't here. :nezna:
Here are the facts: Russia had a 5% GDP deficit in the first month. That could potentially hit 60% of GDP by year-end. It took us 30 years to rack up debt like that, and we're a corrupt mess at that.

Is the annual deficit calculated by just multiplying the monthly deficit? I remember my old accountant in Chicago used to roll his eyes whenever someone tried to simplify things that way. It’s never that straightforward. 🤣
Pure brilliance. Absolutely flawless.

They teach you in elementary school that memory is everything. They lied. It’s just a burden.

hollowdriver13 said:https://www.railway.supply/en/russia...e-of-collapse/

Sanctions are starting to really bite into Russia's capacity.

Since they basically can't manufacture their own bearings and are totally reliant on imports from the West, these sanctions are slowly grinding their rail networks to a halt because they just can't get their hands on spare parts.

It claims nicely that Russians have started producing them—or rather, estimates suggest they’ll cover just under 50% of demand. It wouldn't be hard to conclude they'll cover everything by next year.
Eight years ago, people were screaming about a Russian collapse due to the sanctions back then. Instead, they went from net importers to the world's biggest agricultural exporters, stabilized their financial sector, and beefed up industry. Sure, they hit bumps in the road during those first few months, but long-term? This isn't an issue. As I said back in 2014, this topic comes up constantly, yet we see that a collapse is nowhere in sight.

Brenda Murphy3 said:You could measure it across hundreds of generations, but the outcome stays the same.

You want to know when China will actually overtake the USA in any real sense? When it becomes a democracy. The whole Chinese economic and political setup basically makes it impossible for them to ever catch up to the West, and it’s never going to happen. That is, assuming we’re measuring success by actual human standards rather than some weird obsession. I'm talking about an individual's quality of life, their economic status, and their basic freedoms. For some twisted minds, I guess North Korea is "successful" because they built a nuke. But if we start using those kinds of broken metrics, then what's even the point of discussing this?
A one-party state is never, ever going to catch up to the West. It’s just that simple.

Having just been in Abu Dhabi (not my first time), I can tell you this thesis is nonsense. For a capable person, the quality of life here is better than in any European country. That goes for individual economic status; you only need to look at whether Europeans are heading to the UAE or vice versa to see the truth.
More importantly, this desert nation covers all its vital needs, from energy requirements to full food production. I can't think of a single European country that manages that. Except maybe Russia.

I don't value the "freedom" to choose between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party—leftists versus rightists—all that much.
Here, the state functions like a CEO running a private firm, unlike your typical European bureaucrats who seem intent on shooting themselves in the foot. There's a very simple reason why the country works better and why China gets closer to the West every year. You just have to watch how the gap constantly shrinks.

America is one of the safest countries in the world, but compared to this monarchy, it looks like the Wild West.

Charles Ross3 said:Look, this isn't even a quote from your deleted post—and since there’s no link provided, I can't even tell where you're pulling this from—so please, just stop the trolling. If you're wondering, a deleted post isn't coming back, so you might as well just follow the rules here.

Of course it's not word-for-word since you already wiped your post, but the point remains the same. Go ahead, paste it here. Let's see who actually missed the mark.
As for the trolling? I asked a question, and you're clearly dodging it.

My previous posts were aimed at the city administration—specifically how they handle (or fail to handle) waste management. It’s a small distinction, but a vital one. I was targeting their competence and priorities, namely the accountability of the current leadership. That's the core issue here.
Waste management doesn't just fix itself. Everything is interconnected, and my critiques focus on those in charge, not the technical execution. I’ve already posted once or twice regarding waste collection under its own thread. Even Los Angeles FC has its own dedicated space, so depending on the context, mentions of Adams will happen there.
I highly doubt I ever brought up trash bags in the Adams thread; you likely have me confused with someone else, Charles Ross3.

Let's cut to the chase: tell me where you think this post belongs. If you argue the subject is waste management rather than Adams, I'll move it to the waste thread with the appropriate links and details.

Eric Adams is driving us all insane by repeatedly lying about how only a "very small number" of citizens will see an increase in waste collection costs.

What do moderator warnings even matter when my post about Eric Adams lying to the entire public was the actual point? The waste management stuff was just the supporting evidence.
The issue of how we handle trash wasn't even mentioned once.
By that same logic, they won't let me mention Adams when discussing waste management either.

I can't say anything bad about the mods over at the Politics board, but I get the feeling there’s some bias going on in this specific thread. And it's not just about this one instance.

Could someone please look into why my post on the TT thread was removed?
I suspect it was flagged as being about waste management, but my point was actually about Eric Adams—specifically how he’s basically gaslighting us all on public television. I followed the forum rules by backing up my claim with his own quote regarding waste management.
I'd appreciate it if you could restore the post.

Michelle Young50 said:What happens when Russian gas isn't even needed anymore? Suppose that 10% margin disappears entirely—Russian energy firms get hit with sanctions, and suddenly, nobody can touch them. If ExxonMobil ends up under sanctions because of these ties, what then? Maybe they’ll be forced to sell their assets back to the US government. It’s just like how Chinese companies face a choice right now: if they cooperate with Russia by smuggling sanctioned goods, they lose access to the West. And let’s be real about what they'll choose—they aren't going to ditch a Western market that represents fifty times more trade than anything else.

And why on earth would Russian gas coming through a pipeline from Siberia be cheaper than gas from Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, or Algeria—assuming, of course, that all the necessary pipelines actually get built?

You were the one who brought up the 10%. Everything else is just Golden State Warriors level nonsense, barely worth a thread in the SF section. Real serious stuff here. 🤣
Building pipelines takes years. Now, in this critical moment for the European Union, they couldn't even secure a deal with Qatar, who is a much bigger player than the others mentioned.
As for China, the fact that their trade with Russia has spiked is data enough.

Brenda Murphy3 said:Look, nobody is actually claiming that European Union politics is perfect... those are just your own weird insinuations that you end up arguing against yourself later.

Yeah, there’s going to be plenty of drama regarding gas, but a country doesn't run solely on gas, nor does its entire existence depend on it. This kind of policy from Canada is definitely going to bite them in the ass sooner or later... if it hasn't already. Especially since Canada is waiting on checks from the European Union, not the other way around...

After all those lies you just told, now I'm the one claiming European Union politics are "sunshine and rainbows"? Even though in the post you're quoting, I'm saying the exact opposite!
According to the forum rules, go ahead—find my post where I ever said something like that. Let's see it!

Brenda Murphy3 said:And you think Canada is just going to walk away from all that without any fallout? 😁

It doesn't work like that. Even right now, they've already slashed their financial aid package, and even that reduced amount—which is unique since Canada is the only member state in this situation within the EU—hasn't even been approved yet, let alone actually delivered.

Thinking that one guy like Orbán and his inner circle can just run this kind of political game without facing consequences is honestly pretty childish. Sure, Orbán and his buddies will get incredibly rich doing this, just like they always have... I mean, it seems like Orbán's son-in-law became one of the wealthiest people in Canada in just a few years. But if you think this is actually good for the average Canadian citizen or the country as a whole? Yeah, I wouldn't bet on that.

It’s naive to assume everything in European Union politics is sunshine and rainbows. Just like Poles buy "German" gas, the Germans will take "Canadian." Or the French, who are also caught in the middle.
Or maybe the Poles will just swap suppliers entirely. We've watched them for years—they're the loudest critics of Russian gas, yet they're the biggest hypocrites when it comes to using it. Nobody's forgotten how they were the first to scream for sanctions back in 2014, only to turn around and resell Russian gas to Ukrainians at a "reasonable" markup.

The idea that Canada is the only one having its financial aid cut because of ties to Russia is a total lie. This whole "rule of law" dispute has been dragging on forever, and now we see the Poles causing chaos because their funds were cut too.

Morgan Morales4 said:The European Union commission is totally to blame for that third energy package, not to mention all these sanctions messing with the market. They basically tripped over their own feet and caused their own downfall, but honestly, anyone sitting around waiting for them to show some mercy is just plain crazy.

They lit the match, but we’re the ones getting burned. Politicians won't feel a thing, but they'll make sure the rest of us pay the price.

Michelle Young50 said:Canada and Orbán are completely blind—or perhaps they just refuse to look—at the reality of their current situation. I honestly don't get why they keep pushing this specific narrative so aggressively. If their previous policies were actually aimed at the prosperity of Canada, then these recent moves are nothing short of suicidal. You can't claim you aren't looking for sanctions while remaining tethered to Russian gas—all while refusing to seek out alternatives or negotiate new deals. They are losing on every single front with this strategy. It doesn't matter whose side you take; the undeniable fact is that year after year, Europe is becoming less dependent on Russian gas and oil. This is an unstoppable process. In five years, once all the alternatives we see today are fully operational, Russian gas will be nothing more than a niche product for the Russians themselves. Its share in the European market might hit 10% at most, and even then, they’ll have to slash prices just to stay relevant. Once everyone else disconnects, there won't be a market left for them to sell to, even in Canada.

Your statement was a contradiction in itself. There's your answer. The Canadians will still use that 10%, or whatever percentage is left, and they'll enjoy lower prices than the rest of the EU. They'll probably make a killing reselling it, much like what's happening across Europe right now.

Adam Lee13 said:Russian gas exports to the European Union have dropped by 70%. There isn't enough port capacity to move those kinds of massive volumes onto LNG ships just to flip them again, so that whole theory of yours just falls apart. That $3,500 figure is just the spot price for some symbolic, tiny amounts; everything else is tied up in contracts that have a zero at the end compared to that spot price.

Sure, there's plenty of Small-time hustling going on, but that has nothing to do with the Russians—that's just Westerners acting like Westerners within the West.

Gas exports actually dropped by 80%, not 70%. And I never claimed they were exporting the same volume—everyone keeps saying the quantities are lower, just at drastically higher prices. We can guess the final math, but looking at energy costs, it's clearly a massive amount of money. Besides, if the Russians were hurting for cash, they would be pumping more. This supply cut has been going on for nearly three months now.
It's not like they're calling emergency summits like the European Union is doing right now.

Most importantly: the European Union fired off every sanction they could at the start, and the Russians haven't blinked. The gas situation is less about trolling and more about Robert Habeck's failures.
If there were a real gas embargo, the Russians would still have oil, food, fertilizer, minerals, and metals on the table... all the stuff that's impossible to replace, the essentials for industrial manufacturing. And living without some of those things isn't exactly easy either.

Speaking of the Green Party's obstructionism regarding gas, we should mention another "brilliant" idea that's finally coming home to roost. Six months ago, we slapped sanctions on coal, which kicked in a month ago. Now, it looks like coal availability is becoming an issue too.

Adam Lee13 said:They aren't actually raking it in because most EU nations have these long-term gas contracts locked in with ExxonMobil. Their revenue has absolutely cratered since gas exports to the EU for July were down like 70% compared to last year.

They don't have them because a huge chunk of those contracts expired. The nations actually listened to that brilliant recommendation from the Green Party and the European Union back in 2015—don't sign long-term deals, just pivot to spot markets. Or, in plain English, deal with the middlemen.
Because obviously, renewable energy will solve every single problem we face. 🤣
To top it all off, you see Poles buying "German" gas, Swabians buying "Canadian" gas, and everyone else grabbing American gas and oil. Given recent history and how America resells Russian energy, one has to wonder how "American" they really are.
The icing on the cake? Take the Estonians, for instance. They flip petroleum products despite not owning a single refinery.

Russia is exporting smaller volumes, but at drastically higher prices. Old term contracts were around $250; now we're looking at $3,500. It doesn't take a genius to figure out if they're in the black or the red.

In short, Russia is raking it in, the resellers are doing fine, and politicians along with media outlets like Index—who orchestrated this whole mess—are busy patting themselves on the back for their "firm stance." That leaves one small rhetorical question:

Who's going to foot the bill?

steelfox98 said:This is what happens when someone who doesn't follow the news thinks they need to drop their "truth bomb," despite this being covered repeatedly on the forums and in this thread.
The European Union has been pushing this brilliant idea of rejecting long-term contracts for years, opting instead for that lovely spot market filled with exchange speculators. No need to lecture anyone on business fundamentals; even most people get their cell phones through service contracts nowadays.
In short, they refused to sign the deals, and now they're whining about it. It's always easier for a politician to blame the supplier than to take responsibility for their own failures.
We saw this exact same narrative last year, back when both Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel were busy confirming that the Russians were fulfilling every single contractual obligation! We’ve discussed this here before.
Plus, let's not forget how we had a mild gas shortage the winter before last, yet allies like America were still shipping supplies off to Asia where the prices were better. We were already making fun of the European Union's green energy obsession on the forums back then.
It’s clear this isn't a new problem, and we know exactly who caused it.

As further proof, remember how Robert Habeck—the mastermind behind this "modern green policy"—claimed back in March that he’d signed a deal with Qatar to replace Russian gas. That turned out to be a total lie. The Qataris wanted a contract, but Habeck turned them down because he's obsessed with transitioning to a "green economy" tomorrow. Once the scandal broke, it came out that negotiations with the Qataris had also collapsed in 2018 for the exact same reason.
The same guy ignored the turbine issue for two months, then claimed it was irrelevant to the pipeline's operation while simultaneously accusing the key supplier of lying. People can think whatever they want about the players in this conflict, but this was a separate business relationship defined by extreme unprofessionalism toward the one supplier they clearly cannot live without.
https://www.spiegel.de/international...4-2d86cef2b747

Meanwhile:
Gas prices hit $3,200
Electricity in Germany hit €710
Electricity in France hit €801
A year ago, it was around €50-60

German Power Prices Smash Record as Energy Panic Engulfs Europe

That quoted post was from three days ago, and since then:
Gas 3200->3500 $
Germany electricity: 710 € -> 995 €
France electricity is 801 € -> 1100 €

https://www.france24.com/en/economy/...-begin-to-bite

Everyone who spent months warning about this was labeled a "Russophile." Now even the Czechs, holding the current EU presidency, seem to have joined that camp:

Quote : The Czech Republic, which holds the rotating European Union presidency, announced Friday that it would convene an EU Energy crisis summit "at the earliest possible date".

Nathan Thomas12 said:Look, I don't care if you're a welder, a janitor, or whatever—it's not my business. But I've got an economics degree and experience in banking, so when you claim I know nothing, at least have the decency to hit me with a real counter-argument.
Here’s the reality: Russia's GDP dropped 4% monthly when measured in USD. Let's say pre-war it was $10,000 per capita, and now it's sitting at $9,600.
Furthermore, if $1 USD used to be 80 rubles, that puts the GDP at 800,000 rubles. Now, with $1 USD equaling only 60 rubles, that $9,600 translates to just 576,000 rubles.
So, the gap between 800,000 and 576,000 is a 30% drop. Russia's GDP fell by 30% when measured in rubles—and that's even before considering how much more expensive everything has become there.
Call me names all you want, but any sane person will take my side until you can actually dismantle my numbers. Honestly, if someone proves me wrong with actual facts, I'll be the first to admit I messed up.

Nathan Thomas12 said:Look, I underestimated you, and I’m fine admitting my math was off.
But that doesn't change the fact that real GDP just doesn't tell the whole story if there's major deflation happening between the start and end dates.
Still, that doesn't mean a 4% drop in GDP calculations isn't plausible.
The real issue is claiming a 4% drop, because mathematically, that's impossible. If 1,000 foreign companies walked out of Russia—companies that made up 40% of the GDP—plus gas production tanks, oil production dips, exports crater, and car manufacturing drops by 97%... etc.—then a 4% figure sounds like pure propaganda to anyone with half a brain. Real GDP should be dropping in double digits.

I’m no economist, but even I wouldn't write out such blatant nonsense, let alone some self-proclaimed financial "expert." That second post just proves their lack of economic knowledge.

rustywalker82 said:Look, we could totally be using nuclear fuel right now—and I don't mean we have to rely on anything coming out of Russia to do it. If we made that shift, we'd finally start cutting down on that massive coal consumption we're seeing across the US. Honestly, the only real headache is the timing. It’s just not the best moment to pull the trigger.

So, I’m seeing all this noise today about Gazprom opening up the gas valves for the Canadians—which, by the way, actually helps drive down those spot prices for gas and electricity across Europe—and everyone is spinning it as some kind of disaster. Honestly? It feels like nothing more than pure British spite directed at the rest of the continent.
Is this all just a massive play to clear the way for an anti-establishment right wing to take over the whole continent? Like, if they can just isolate everyone, maybe there won't be anyone left to support the EU, and then Ukraine's fate is basically sealed. Or... honestly, maybe we're all just dealing with a bunch of idiots. I can't tell which one it is anymore.

Impossible. Nuclear fuel is specific. Even Americans import Russian supply without a shred of shame. Sanctions that cause problems for Americans? They aren't even considered. That’s an exclusive privilege of the European Union—shooting themselves in the foot.🎉
Even the Japanese recently stated that energy sanctions are off the table. In fact, they accepted all the new Russian terms regarding Sakhalin 2, despite being far less dependent on them (importing about 10% from Russia) than the European Union is.
By the way, on Sakhalin, the Russians played the Western playbook. They nationalized existing companies and imposed their own rules.

rustywalker82 said:Once the people who were against smart sanctions on Russian energy—you know, things like price caps combined with supply agreements if needed—got outvoted right at the start, the folks backing the current model, like Mario Draghi for example, who wanted to make sure Putin earned less cash, just kind of went quiet.
The noise coming from "the other side" is way too loud right now. Once the people who were basically handing money to the Russians go silent, I expect we'll see a lot more posts about this, and I'll drop links when I find them.
Usually, the real experts talk a lot less and stay quieter.

Btw, the people pushing this current sanction setup claimed that with price caps on Russian gas, ExxonMobil would just shut off the valves (and intentionally tank Putin's revenue to like 1/10th of what he's getting now).

We all know it now. These sanctions have come back to bite us like a boomerang. The very same people who pushed them are now suddenly against these "smart" sanctions—mostly because they’ve realized just how insane the whole idea was to begin with.
Russia should probably stop selling energy at cost to enemies who have already made their move. And what kind of dollar are we even talking about for profit anymore?
What happens if these geniuses actually push through those sanctions? The Russians will just say "no thanks," and prices will go absolutely haywire on day one. What does the world look like after just a week? The Russians have plenty of reserves anyway, and they’ll just keep trading with everyone else. Meanwhile, we'll be facing a total collapse here at home.
It’s just a game of chicken to see who blinks first. And honestly? We already know how this ends.

rustywalker82 said:I'm in the dark too regarding how much cheaper their bids are compared to the West. All I know is I've read experts saying that all those strict certification requirements are exactly what made nuclear power so uncompetitive in the first place. If you look at energy consumption trends by source, it’s clear nobody has been building them lately. I saw some news saying the Canadians managed to get the green light from the European Commission back in the day (since their existing reactors there were Russian anyway). Now, it looks like the Finns and Bulgarians backed out of their deals, so I guess Russia is just sitting on a bunch of leftover parts.

Honestly, it's all the same story when it comes to energy. You kick Russian gas, uranium, and oil out of the equation, and what happens? You end up with slightly lower supply and then prices skyrocket—not by a few percent, but by tens of percent across the entire market. Then inflation hits, and the Russians still walk away with the same amount of cash.

And check this out:

2022.

In a resolution passed Thursday with 513 votes in favor, 22 against, and 19 abstentions, representatives called for additional punitive measures, including an "urgent imposition of a total embargo on the import of Russian oil, coal, nuclear fuel, and gas as soon as possible," according to the press release.

https://www.consilium.europa.eu/hr/p...sia-explained/
Which goods are prohibited from being exported from the EU to Russia?
The list of sanctioned products includes, among others:
...
- equipment, technology, and services within the energy industry
...

What does the ban on accessing the SWIFT system mean for Russian banks?
Theoretically, banks could still carry out international transactions without SWIFT, but it’s an incredibly expensive and complicated process that relies heavily on mutual trust between financial institutions.

It's hard to tell who really wants the gas valves turned off in Europe—is it Putin or the EU?
Either way, how is anyone supposed to sue Gazprom now for failing to meet delivery contracts?

Rosatom dominates the global nuclear scene because the Russians hold the edge on advanced tech—all while undercutting everyone else on price. It’s not just the Canadians picking up contracts from within the European Union; even Finland was on board until they backed out for purely political reasons. Typical.

A ovo:

It’s anyone's guess who actually wants to turn off the gas valves in Europe. Is it Vladimir Putin, or is it the European Union itself? Hard to say.
Anyway, how is anyone even supposed to sue ExxonMobil now for failing to meet their delivery obligations?

That’s a question for Habeck and the Germans who failed to fix those turbines. Should I remind everyone how that guy spent a month acting like a complete idiot, stubbornly ignoring the turbine while blaming Russia? Then he had the nerve to claim the turbine wasn't even important. It's childish nonsense—blaming Russians over customs paperwork when the Germans are clearly the ones at fault.
That same guy was all over the news six months ago, bragging about how he’d locked in gas deliveries with Qatar. Just another lie.

He stirred the pot and spent the whole time pointing fingers at the main supplier. Now he’s acting shocked because they're finally giving him a taste of his own medicine? Typical.

Politicians and the mainstream media spent all of December claiming that Russia wasn't delivering gas through the pipeline. Then someone actually asked them a real question: who placed the orders? Who rerouted the flow toward Poland? Who was busy flipping the gas for profit while our own energy prices were skyrocketing? After that, the whole lot just went silent. Typical.

Adam Lee13 said:Honestly, this is just pure market manipulation, and for some reason, the European Union refuses to step in and slap a price cap on it... I mean, come on, electricity prices spiked ten times over. Especially those folks in France, they’ve got plenty of "excuses" to jack up the rates, haha... And in Germany, renewables supposedly cover 50% of the load, but two-thirds of those renewable setups are locked into fixed-price contracts...

The whole thing feels like a massive shell game played on the common folk, basically forcing households and big industry to scramble for solar installs and obsess over energy efficiency. The European Union actually has the tools to cap prices for electricity and gas, so why allow this kind of shady market gambling and exchange trading to run wild during a crisis and a war? It makes zero sense.

Do you really think OPEC is just going to sit there and watch this unfold calmly? With how Russia is messing with their short-term goals by wrecking the future of fossil fuels. For the major oil and gas exporters, these sky-high prices aren't exactly helping their bottom line—they definitely don't want to accelerate the transition to other energy sources, but this situation is pushing that shift incredibly hard... from what I can gather, converting gas plants to run on fuel oil or something similar is actually pretty straightforward...

Besides, China is paying about $148 for 1,000 cubic meters of Russian gas—it’s basically a take-it-or-leave-it deal. So, if China can do it, why can't the European Union dictate terms to Russia? They could, but they won't... it seems like they're actually benefiting from this mess. I refuse to believe our leaders are just total idiots.

And all this nonsense with central heating and gas warming throughout the European Union needs to stop. In the winter, you close the windows. Your apartment doesn't need to be 75 degrees just so you can walk around in a t-shirt in early March, and nobody should be blasting the heat from 11 PM to 6 AM.

Joe Biden was just in the States a month ago and took a massive hit for it. To set the record straight, he wasted his breath claiming OPEC will bump up production by a million barrels over the next five years—which, let’s be real, won't even keep pace with how fast consumption is climbing. Typical. 🤣
So these are our "democratic allies." It’s not exactly rocket science to see how the other major oil players reacted—the ones who aren't quite as eager to play ball with us.
Look at Venezuela. For years, Americans have been trying to topple the leadership there. They call it "democracy," but let's be real—it’s just a series of terror tactics and shady attempts to install their own puppets. Typical.
Since the European Union pulled their support for Guaido, they ended up landing two tankers. Typical. 🍿
Iran—is there even any point in getting involved?
Libya—we could certainly use their oil right about now. But then again, who exactly turned that place into a living hell just eleven years ago?

Adam Lee13 said:The thing is, we actually *do* have gas and power... it’s just a mess. These crazy prices? That’s on the idiots who refused to build out LNG terminals because they were clearly acting like Russian mercenaries, much like Merkel did back in the day. And let's not forget, the biggest gas consumers are all over the European Union.

But honestly, I think governments should be stepping in to cap gas and electricity prices rather than letting these middlemen play games. When a crisis hits, everyone needs to shoulder the burden—including those energy traders. There shouldn't be any room for massive profit margins during a crisis, let alone those insane extra windfalls they're pulling right now.

There’s plenty of oil and gas out there—it just isn't in the European Union.

urbanotter said:And you're just out here spinning fairy tales, too.

I honestly don't think ExxonMobil ever had any intention of actually turning off the valves or using gas supplies as a way to hold Europe hostage. If anything, the reality was quite the opposite; they were pouring massive amounts of capital into building out Nord Stream 2, a project that was designed to fully secure a steady flow of gas for decades to come.
If Europe actually had a steady, reliable flow of natural gas, market prices wouldn't have any real reason to spike like they have been. The whole issue is that demand isn't necessarily skyrocketing because people need more energy than ever before; it's just that we aren't getting enough from our existing sources to meet what we already use. I remember sitting around my kitchen table a few years ago, watching the news during a different energy crunch, and thinking how much simpler things would be if we just had the supply lines working the way they were designed to. If the supply was consistent and sufficient, there wouldn't be this artificial pressure driving everything up. It really comes down to simple availability rather than an actual surge in consumption.
Look, even though that pipeline is essentially finished and sitting there at 80% capacity, it’s just staying dormant because of a political decision. It feels like this was driven largely by pressure from the US, which basically sold Europe on this whole narrative about being dangerously over-reliant on Russian gas. In reality, they aren't turning it on because if they did, it would completely undermine the need for all those other gas supply routes we've been working to establish.
The whole conversation surrounding "green energy" and the push to swap out natural gas for alternative power sources feels like it’s perpetually stuck in the planning stages. It isn't just a matter of flipping a switch; transitioning our entire infrastructure requires an astronomical amount of capital and decades of dedicated development to ensure these new sources can actually meet our massive energy demands. I remember sitting through a town hall meeting back in my hometown in Ohio a few years ago where they discussed similar shifts, and the sheer scale of the logistical nightmare became very clear. Beyond the cost, we have to face the reality that in several current industrial technologies, natural gas remains absolutely indispensable. We can't just wish away a resource that serves as the backbone for so much of our modern production.
I've been sitting here wondering about the actual mechanics of how we transition to a green grid while keeping our food supply secure. It really makes me think about the logistical leap we’re trying to make. Specifically, I'm curious about how we intend to produce synthetic fertilizers using only solar and wind power. We know that modern agriculture relies heavily on those fertilizers to maintain high yields and keep grocery prices from spiraling out of control for the average family. If we move away from traditional energy sources, how exactly do we scale up the production of these essential nutrients through renewables? It feels like a massive technical puzzle that we haven't quite solved yet if we want to ensure food remains both abundant and affordable.
I’ve been thinking quite a bit about our energy landscape lately, and honestly, it feels like we're facing an uphill battle that won't be solved by trendy tech alone. When you look at the reality of the situation, the United States—much like much of Europe—is fundamentally short on the raw materials and energy density required to sustain a massive industrial economy. We are essentially tethered to global imports, and that dependency isn't something that just disappears overnight. I remember reading an analysis a few years back about how supply chains can shift almost instantly, leaving entire regions vulnerable, and it really stuck with me. While everyone loves talking about the potential of solar panels and wind turbines, I find myself feeling a bit skeptical about the idea that they can carry the entire load. No matter how much we invest in renewables, we can't simply wish away our need for consistent, high-output power sources. Without addressing the fundamental lack of domestic resources, we'll always be reliant on someone else's terms, and all the wind farms in the world might not be enough to break that cycle.
We’re certainly moving away from that heavy reliance on Russian gas, which feels like a necessary step, but I can't help but feel we're just trading one problem for another. The reality is that we're shifting our dependency toward Liquefied Natural Gas, yet we simply don't have the infrastructure in place to handle it. We lack the necessary capacity for both the liquefaction process and the massive scale of transport required to make this work reliably. It's one of those situations where the solution looks great on paper, but when you look at the actual logistics, it feels like we might be heading straight into another kind of energy bottleneck.
I’ve been thinking quite a bit about the current shift toward regasified LNG, and honestly, it feels like we might be walking into a bit of a trap. When you look at the math, buying liquefied gas is consistently more expensive than relying on traditional pipeline transport. As we lean more heavily into this pricier fuel, our domestic manufacturers are forced to bake those soaring energy costs directly into the price of everything they produce. It creates this worrying trend where our businesses start losing their edge, becoming increasingly uncompetitive compared to economies that still have access to massive, steady supplies of cheaper gas. It makes me wonder if we're trading long-term industrial stability for short-term energy shifts.
It isn’t just the cost of heating and fuel that's climbing; we’re seeing grocery prices skyrocket too, which honestly hits families much harder on a day-to-day basis. I remember talking to a neighbor last week who was staring at her receipt in total disbelief—it’s one thing to pay more at the pump, but when the basic stuff you need to feed your kids starts costing twice as much, that’s when the real pressure sets in for most Americans.
I’ve noticed that some specific products shot up in price by as much as 100% just on the mere rumor of a shortage, even though we never actually faced a real scarcity. It reminds me of that time back when my local grocery store in Chicago started hiking prices on certain pantry staples just because people were whispering about supply chain hiccups, despite the shelves remaining fully stocked. It feels like we saw these massive price spikes driven entirely by anticipation rather than any actual lack of inventory.
It feels like we’re watching a massive geopolitical pivot happen in real-time. Russia isn't just looking toward the East anymore; they are doubling down on that direction with everything they have. It’s not just about those massive pipeline projects stretching out toward China, either. They are aggressively building up their own LNG regasification capacities to make sure they can ship energy wherever the demand shifts. It’s a calculated, long-term move to reshape their entire economic landscape.
Japan just finalized an agreement to purchase liquefied natural gas from Sakhalin, and at the same time, China is moving full steam ahead with expanding its pipeline network to feed the southern regions. It looks like they are really leaning into making cheaper gas more accessible across the country, which should significantly boost their overall consumption. I remember reading a similar analysis about energy shifts in the Pacific years ago, and seeing how quickly these massive infrastructure projects come together always strikes me as a testament to how much the global energy landscape is shifting right under our feet.
Once the second phase of the Power of Siberia pipeline is finally completed, China will have a much steadier supply of natural gas right at its doorstep. This shift means they won't have to rely nearly as much on importing expensive liquefied natural gas, which is going to give their domestic economy a serious competitive edge on the global stage. I remember reading a few years back about how much energy volatility can cripple manufacturing sectors, and seeing this kind of infrastructure move really makes you realize how much they are positioning themselves for long-term stability.

The tension between China and the US seems to be reaching a boiling point lately, and I can't help but worry about where this is all heading. If things really boil over there, we could see China and Russia pulling even closer together, leaving the West and Europe essentially stranded. It wouldn't just be an energy crisis—though losing access to gas would be devastating enough—it would be a total technological blackout. We are talking about a massive shortage of semiconductors sourced from Taiwan, China, and South Korea. When you consider that roughly 70% of the world's advanced chips come from those specific regions, the realization hits home: without them, the sophisticated tech we rely on every single day simply ceases to exist. It’s a precarious position to be in, and frankly, it feels like we're walking a very thin line.
It all boils down to one thing: ensuring America maintains its global hegemony, where Western corporations hold the ultimate authority and make every critical decision that matters.

Yet, whenever we try to have a serious discussion focused strictly on economic realities, we’re immediately branded as "Russia-lovers"—it's become this convenient little label used to shut down any meaningful debate.

👍
Great post, though it wasn't just Americans working against NS2. The German Greens played a key role—the same ones in power now—pushing us toward "green" heating methods like coal and wood.
There’s an excellent thread on this topic on the forum.

Christian Barnes said:I mean, how is it that the Canadians, who are supposedly allies of Russia, have such low gas storage levels?

Here's an example for you:
Poland boasts about ditching Russian gas by importing "German" gas. We all know that doesn't exist; it isn't hard to figure out where that supply actually comes from.
It's the same story with the other loud moralists publicly attacking the Canadians while secretly cutting deals with them behind closed doors. In reality, the Canadians are the ones saving them.
Now is a good time to remember what Orban was saying about sanctions just a few months ago.