Russia invades Ukraine

[FlameOn]

Considering how many false flags operations Putin has ordered himself, ongoing LPR/DPR referenda, or the fact US provided intelligence of a possible attacks on the pipeline to German intelligence back in July. I don't see why people are pushing the "US did it" narrative.

https://www.reuters.com/world/cia-wa...el-2022-09-27/

My money is on Russia using this as domestic motivation to drum up war support. Just a day ago there was suddenly a gunman wearing "Nazi" shirt attack on a Russian school and blowing up a now useless pipeline wouldn't be the top ten worse things Putin has ordered.

[Azure]

A former Polish Defense Minister, Radek Sikorski, has attributed to the United States the sabotage of two pipelines, Nord Stream 1 and 2, which carry natural gas from Russia to Germany. “Thank you, USA,” Sikorski wrote on Twitter. Sikorski was Minister of National Defense from 2005 - 2007 and served as Deputy Minister of National Defense and Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, previously. He is currently an elected member of the European parliament.

But President Joe Biden promised on February 7 to prevent Nord Stream 2 from becoming operational if Russia invaded Ukraine. "If Russia invades,” said Biden, “then there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it."

Reporter: "But how will you do that, exactly, since...the project is in Germany's control?"

Biden: "I promise you, we will be able to do that."

The sabotage of Nord Stream 1 and 2 came the day before Poland and Norway opened a new, 850-kilometer natural gas pipeline, Baltic Pipe, through Denmark. European leaders praised the pipeline as a much-needed alternative to Nord Stream 1 and 2. Norway Energy Minister Terje Aasland called Baltic Pipe “a milestone on the important path towards European independence”.

Baltic Pipe connects Poland to Denmark mainland and then to Norway and allows Poland to consume Norway’s natural gas, as well as to allow Sweden and Denmark to buy natural gas from Poland. “The push to escape reliance on Russian energy was given extra urgency on Tuesday,” noted a journalist, “after mysterious leaks were discovered on two Kremlin-owned pipelines to Germany.” It’s now clear that the “leaks” were caused by sabotage.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michael...h=75f8fb38312e

[Itse]

Found a nice clarifying picture of the gasline situation. Spoilered for size.

Spoiler!

So essentially, now that Nord Stream is (temporarily at least) out, the pipelines go

- Belarus-Poland-Germany (-Netherlands-France-UK)
- Ukraine-Slovakia-Czech-Germany (also -Austria-Italy...)
- Bulgaria-Greece-Albania-Italy-Switzerland-Germany

That southern pipeline gets a lot less headlines so I'm not sure what's been going on with that exactly, but a quick browse through the headlines tells me it has been far from business as usual during this war.

Italy btw just elected a far-right government that's expected to be fairly Putin-friendly (but obviously because it's the Italians they're hard to predict exactly), and Bulgaria's government collapsed during the summer and they'll hold an election in about a week I think. I haven't been following that situation, but from what I can browse the main parties in Bulgaria seem to all be fairly Pro-European instead of Russophiles, so it doesn't look like the situation is about to change dramatically there.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Itse

I haven't been following that situation, but from what I can browse the main parties in Bulgaria seem to all be fairly Pro-European instead of Russophiles, so it doesn't look like the situation is about to change dramatically there.

Some guy running in the Bulgarian election is actually in Ukraine fighting with the foreign legion.

https://www.rferl.org/a/bulgaria-can.../32051314.html

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Itse

I have no empathy for those people.

Well good for you.

Those men have a choice, they could fight for their freedom in Russia. There's hundreds of thousands of them, and there's millions more with aligning interest. There's no reason to think it would be more dangerous for them to refuse en masse than it is to go to Ukraine, in fact it would likely be less dangerous, as the casualty rates for Russians in Ukraine are just horrendous. 300.000 men is plenty to take on Kremlin, now that the bulk of the military AND much of their internal security forces are tied up in Ukraine.

These men will rather risk their lives taking part in a genocide in Ukraine than fighting for freedom in their own country. That's their choice, and they deserve no sympathy for what ever happens to them when they decide to attack another country.

Cowardice is no excuse to take part in murder.

So you thanked a post in this thread by someone confirming they managed to flee rather than risk conscription or fight in this revolution you’re saying those who couldn’t flee need to start(FTR I don’t disagree with someone choosing to flee), but the people who didn’t have the means to do so and also likely didn’t have the means to fight off armed soldiers showing up at their doors with very little notice are cowards? That seems like an extremely hypocritical stance.

There’s probably a large number of conscripts who plan on surrendering as soon as they are out of the country that may die on the way to doing so. I suppose in your view they should have just planned better and are therefore undeserving of any empathy.

I generally agree with a lot of things you post on this forum but IMO this is just a bad and incredibly obtuse take.

[FlameOn]

And there it is. DW reports Russia claims in order to repair Nord Stream 1/2 they would need technology sanctions lifted on Russia.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by FlameOn

And there it is. DW reports Russia claims in order to repair Nord Stream 1/2 they would need technology sanctions lifted on Russia.

Didn't this happen in Danish waters? I can't see them allowing Russia into Danish waters to make the repairs on a pipeline that wasn't being used anyway.

I wouldn't write off it being a false flag by Russia, but it seems like the risk vs. reward trade off for such a thing wouldn't be great. Sneaking into NATO territory to destroy piece of infrastructure that wasn't being used and would benefit them more than anyone if it was allowed to be used doesn't seem to be practical. Not to mention that the ordinary person at the street level isn't going to be motivated or moved too much by it.

They would be better off targeting something on their own territory if they really wanted to rally people for the war.

[Mr.Coffee]

Worth mentioning / stressing, again, that this is what happens to your country when you listen to the "energy transition is coming fast" and greeny guys.

Now Germany is totally ####ed. Huge strategic mistake to "go green!" when they simply weren't ready.

Canada- country wide- needs to reality check and realize this is what happens when your PM is taking cues from Greta. It's a huge ####ing mistake that can cost you massively in the long run. Energy will only become more of a geopolitical bargaining chip than it already is into the future and anybody with any credibility on the subject knows this.

[FlameOn]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Worth mentioning / stressing, again, that this is what happens to your country when you listen to the "energy transition is coming fast" and greeny guys.

Now Germany is totally ####ed. Huge strategic mistake to "go green!" when they simply weren't ready.

Canada- country wide- needs to reality check and realize this is what happens when your PM is taking cues from Greta. It's a huge ####ing mistake that can cost you massively in the long run. Energy will only become more of a geopolitical bargaining chip than it already is into the future and anybody with any credibility on the subject knows this.

This had nothing to do with "going green". Germans shut down their nuclear reactors and exchanged it for Russian natural gas which was kneejerk because of Fukushima.

Going to natural gas is not going green.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Well good for you.



So you thanked a post in this thread by someone confirming they managed to flee rather than risk conscription or fight in this revolution you’re saying those who couldn’t flee need to start(FTR I don’t disagree with someone choosing to flee), but the people who didn’t have the means to do so and also likely didn’t have the means to fight off armed soldiers showing up at their doors with very little notice are cowards? That seems like an extremely hypocritical stance.

There’s probably a large number of conscripts who plan on surrendering as soon as they are out of the country that may die on the way to doing so. I suppose in your view they should have just planned better and are therefore undeserving of any empathy.

I generally agree with a lot of things you post on this forum but IMO this is just a bad and incredibly obtuse take.

Well, you can think whatever you like.

I don't see anything hypocritical about a stance where I think there is no excuse to go take part in a genocide, even passively. (And yes, I also quite consistently s*it on people who don't even make an effort to boycott China. It's really not nearly as hard as people make it out to be.)

No, I have no empathy towards a group of men that by and large are healthy, young enough and quite capable of putting up a fight. Not when the continuation of this war risks a nuclear war, it risks me and mine and everyone I know dying because a nation of little s*its across the border can't get their act together.

And here's the thing too; thousands of Russians DO fight. Student girls in Moscow do go out and risk get beaten by thugs because Russian men will not stand up for themselves. Mothers and grandmothers have been blocking recruitment cars with their bodies in Siberia, because men are too afraid to do it. In Dagestan, large groups of people ARE protesting, genuinely fighting back. Some people have been burning recruitment offices. (Here's a Russian telegram "joke for you": "You can get 10 years for draft dodging and 7 years from putting up an anti-war poster, but arson is only 5 years. Choose wisely".)

The vast majority of the people who protest don't get hurt, don't get arrested, don't even get caught, because the Russian security forces really aren't anything special, and they're overstretched, and most of them aren't insane thugs.

It's very, very far from impossible to resist. It's just that Russians choose not to, and thus they keep dragging this out. Yes, hundreds could die if the police opened fired on a large public protest... but hundreds are already dying every damned day because there are no protests, so what kind of a choice is that? Tens of thousands of Russians are dead in Ukraine because Russians are too afraid of getting killed in Moscow.

Only Russians can end this, and until they do this, people keep dying, simple as that.

No, I don't want anyone to die, I'm glad that Pointman made it out because I don't generally speaking want anyone to die or get hurt. Pointman didn't pick up a gun and go to the front. He didn't even pretend to go to the front. He chose to run. Yes, that's an option he had because he's better off than many others, and while it's not the best possible choice, it's not an evil choice. I'm okay with people choosing to be not-evil. Even if they do it primarily to save themselves. I don't much care for the motivation, I care about the action.

And yes it's unfair that it's harder for poor people to make that not-evil choice, but just because other's have it easier than you is not an excuse to take part in evil.

There is no non-evil way to participate in the draft. There is no option where nobody dies.

Even if you just participate in being part of the group that gets sent to the front to be slaughtered but hoping to surrender, you're still participating in that group getting sent to slaughter. You're playing along in a charade which will kill tens of thousands of people more. It's not a non-evil choice. You can hope that maybe you will make out of it, maybe you get to surrender, but you're still playing along in the slaughter.

So no, I don't have empathy for the poor men who go out there to with the goal of saving their own ass.

[iggy_oi]

Itse your entire position is predicated on the assumption that everyone conscripted is going to fight. I don’t believe that will be the case.

I have no empathy for those who are going to fight but I do have some for the ones who are caught in the middle trying to figure out how to get themselves out of this mess.

You’re free to disagree with that if you like.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Cheese

You forgot to add this. Putin gets to the USA mid-terms where the Republicans take back the house and hold up any further financing of equipment for Ukraine. That would put Ukraine in a bind and entirely in the hands of Europe to finance the war until 2024 at minimum.

This isn't really a concern - most Republicans will still go hog wild to get after Russia.

Originally Posted by Itse

Well, you can think whatever you like.

I don't see anything hypocritical about a stance where I think there is no excuse to go take part in a genocide, even passively. (And yes, I also quite consistently s*it on people who don't even make an effort to boycott China. It's really not nearly as hard as people make it out to be.)

No, I have no empathy towards a group of men that by and large are healthy, young enough and quite capable of putting up a fight. Not when the continuation of this war risks a nuclear war, it risks me and mine and everyone I know dying because a nation of little s*its across the border can't get their act together.

And here's the thing too; thousands of Russians DO fight. Student girls in Moscow do go out and risk get beaten by thugs because Russian men will not stand up for themselves. Mothers and grandmothers have been blocking recruitment cars with their bodies in Siberia, because men are too afraid to do it. In Dagestan, large groups of people ARE protesting, genuinely fighting back. Some people have been burning recruitment offices. (Here's a Russian telegram "joke for you": "You can get 10 years for draft dodging and 7 years from putting up an anti-war poster, but arson is only 5 years. Choose wisely".)

The vast majority of the people who protest don't get hurt, don't get arrested, don't even get caught, because the Russian security forces really aren't anything special, and they're overstretched, and most of them aren't insane thugs.

It's very, very far from impossible to resist. It's just that Russians choose not to, and thus they keep dragging this out. Yes, hundreds could die if the police opened fired on a large public protest... but hundreds are already dying every damned day because there are no protests, so what kind of a choice is that? Tens of thousands of Russians are dead in Ukraine because Russians are too afraid of getting killed in Moscow.

Only Russians can end this, and until they do this, people keep dying, simple as that.

No, I don't want anyone to die, I'm glad that Pointman made it out because I don't generally speaking want anyone to die or get hurt. Pointman didn't pick up a gun and go to the front. He didn't even pretend to go to the front. He chose to run. Yes, that's an option he had because he's better off than many others, and while it's not the best possible choice, it's not an evil choice. I'm okay with people choosing to be not-evil. Even if they do it primarily to save themselves. I don't much care for the motivation, I care about the action.

And yes it's unfair that it's harder for poor people to make that not-evil choice, but just because other's have it easier than you is not an excuse to take part in evil.

There is no non-evil way to participate in the draft. There is no option where nobody dies.

Even if you just participate in being part of the group that gets sent to the front to be slaughtered but hoping to surrender, you're still participating in that group getting sent to slaughter. You're playing along in a charade which will kill tens of thousands of people more. It's not a non-evil choice. You can hope that maybe you will make out of it, maybe you get to surrender, but you're still playing along in the slaughter.

So no, I don't have empathy for the poor men who go out there to with the goal of saving their own ass.

Suspect there's a bunch of conscripts who would fit this meme:

https://twitter.com/user/status/1572515898833117184

And I'm sure there's a bunch who are just getting screwed over. But I do agree with Itse in that they could have protested when this thing started and tried to end it. But they didn't - so here we are.

I'm not saying I wouldn't have done the same thing they did if I was Russian but I also can't say I feel tremendously bad about it.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Didn't this happen in Danish waters? I can't see them allowing Russia into Danish waters to make the repairs on a pipeline that wasn't being used anyway.

I wouldn't write off it being a false flag by Russia, but it seems like the risk vs. reward trade off for such a thing wouldn't be great. Sneaking into NATO territory to destroy piece of infrastructure that wasn't being used and would benefit them more than anyone if it was allowed to be used doesn't seem to be practical. Not to mention that the ordinary person at the street level isn't going to be motivated or moved too much by it.

They would be better off targeting something on their own territory if they really wanted to rally people for the war.

Putin has a history of doing things everyone knows is him/Russia but has a sort of nod nod wink wink level of deniability, he does this to show the world/his opposition that he isnt a man to be screwed with, the whole point is we all know its Russia while Russia gets to say 'moi??' that is what this was, an attempt to prove he will burn everything to the ground if the west doesnt give in, frankly you are right its an absurd move but he is desperate at this stage

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

This isn't really a concern - most Republicans will still go hog wild to get after Russia.

So many Republicans blindly follow what Trump says, though. When he gets on the campaign trail, there's going to be a lot of pro-Russian rhetoric that I think once 2024 rolls around, it's going to be bad news.

Tucker Carlson is already testing this messaging on a nightly basis and I don't see his ratings cratering.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Worth mentioning / stressing, again, that this is what happens to your country when you listen to the "energy transition is coming fast" and greeny guys.

Now Germany is totally ####ed. Huge strategic mistake to "go green!" when they simply weren't ready.

Canada- country wide- needs to reality check and realize this is what happens when your PM is taking cues from Greta. It's a huge ####ing mistake that can cost you massively in the long run. Energy will only become more of a geopolitical bargaining chip than it already is into the future and anybody with any credibility on the subject knows this.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Worth mentioning / stressing, again, that this is what happens to your country when you listen to the "energy transition is coming fast" and greeny guys.

Now Germany is totally ####ed. Huge strategic mistake to "go green!" when they simply weren't ready.

Canada- country wide- needs to reality check and realize this is what happens when your PM is taking cues from Greta. It's a huge ####ing mistake that can cost you massively in the long run. Energy will only become more of a geopolitical bargaining chip than it already is into the future and anybody with any credibility on the subject knows this.

This is very, very, very silly. The costly thing right now is fossil fuel, but the windmills are the problem. Got it!

[SebC]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Yes, but those who didn’t have the means before likely still don’t have the means to do so. As much as I despise the Russian government for what they’ve done in the Ukraine I’m still empathetic towards their people who are now being forced to try and keep this #### show going. The only real possible positive that can be taken from all of this is that sending in an army of untrained, unequipped and unwilling soldiers in the long run might result in less bloodshed overall if they are defeated quickly, if you can even call that a positive.

We've come a long way if this argument that was previously used to justify letting Ukraine be defeated as quickly as possible is now being used against Russia.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

This is very, very, very silly. The costly thing right now is fossil fuel, but the windmills are the problem. Got it!

Let’s re-visit this topic in February once we get a better look at how Germany manages this.

Ultimately, again, and I read this stuff daily from actual people who are experts in the field, not just naive hopeful ignorant people who still adhere to dogma and can’t admit when they’re (so obviously) wrong, but a heel turn from fossil fuels too quick and you will kill more people than climate change will.

Anyway that’s off topic I would be happy to discuss with you in a different thread it’s just that pretending energy isn’t (maybe the largest?) geopolitical consideration for Germany / Russia here is foolish. Also foolish is Germany moving away from typical energy sources chasing windmills and now are going to risk freezing this winter or prop up Russia. What a sweet choice this is now!

Oh wait, somebody just blew up their gas pipeline. I guess they’ll just use solar to keep warm? Like how is this still lost on people? I guess they’ll use ?????? For fertilizer? For all the liquid byproducts of gas? For… for… for……..,

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by FlameOn

This had nothing to do with "going green". Germans shut down their nuclear reactors and exchanged it for Russian natural gas which was kneejerk because of Fukushima.

Going to natural gas is not going green.

You should read up on Germanys handling of energy over the last 20 years, sounds like you are not educated on it.

Also ya, we agree, natural gas is not going green. Except wait, hydrogen is right? Wait a sec… lol

Energy literacy needs to be taught in grade school. Clearly.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

You should read up on Germanys handling of energy over the last 20 years, sounds like you are not educated on it.

Also ya, we agree, natural gas is not going green. Except wait, hydrogen is right? Wait a sec… lol

Energy literacy needs to be taught in grade school. Clearly.

He's an engineer and very well educated. What are you?

"go do your own research" and "get educated" is the language of far-right conspiracy anger much like your original post "look what happens when you go green!" [yells at cloud]. Provide the information to back up your argument if you care so much about it.

It's undeniable that Germany has been trying to pivot to solar and renewables since I was studying in the EU institutions there in the 2000s. This is was also a play to build up their manufacturing and technology presence in solar cells which would be to their economic benefit and help them leapfrog over other countries. They converted huge amount of empty land to solar and encourage farmers to set up solar from which many now resell energy back to the grid for profit. The German auto industry however, is trying to play catch up as they have so much invested in internal combustion technologies, capital investments, and workforce that many predict it will be difficult for that industry to shift to electric.

But - FlameOn is absolutely correct that their current reliance on natural gas for heating has nothing to do with their renewable energy initiatives but everything to do with getting away from nuclear after the Fukushima disaster in Japan. This was a knee-jerk reaction to a nuclear accident and they pivoted to relying on Russian natural gas for winter heating. Russia was considered a stable economic partner for Europe at the time. I personally feel modern nuclear is a huge part of any successful green energy initiative and kowtowing to the public nuclear energy bogeyman is the real mistake.

Again, nothing at all regarding this incident or Nordstream has anything to do with going green. You just wanted to inject your blind political ideology randomly where it did not belong. Chancellor Scholz wanted to buy Canadian natural gas but it was probably Trudeau that pushed for a hydrogen partnership instead. For what its worth, I think that was dumb. I worked in O&G for years and I'm very pro Canadian Oil. I also happen to think "going green" is not a bogeyman either.