‘Our land’: Russia tells US that Crimea won’t be ‘given back’ to Ukraine

[Skroe]

We all know this is not how they fight wars.
In all likelihood they would just fund some terrorists and watch them attack Russia. US bravery at its best.

We should absolutely be arming and supporting secessionist insurgencies inside of Russia.

This is something I keep saying: Democrats will NEVER forget or forgive Russia's interference in the 2016 Election. The Republican Establishment is as hostile to Russia as ever, feeling similarly hijacked. The National Security Establishment, has been warning about Russia for years.

Trump will do whatever he wants, but beyond him, the United States hasn't even begun in the manner and magnitude t which it is going to torture the entire of Russia.

And not a moment too soon in my opinion. The world's not big enough for the both of us.

[Slant]

You'll be shooting YOURSELF in the foot again. Because you'll be unable to pay for Russian gas, and alternatives cannot be arranged fast enough, while Russia already has arranged alternatives with other countries and within Russia itself.

If you started to prepare for it in 2014 you would still not be ready - and you didn't.

What? Jesus... you're all over the place. Here's a fun picture, showing the development of production of primary energy. Basically, it shows how Europe is betting everything on renewables while we are trying to get rid of oil and gas:



We have started to prepare for it since 2004. Now what? How long do you think Russia can hold their natural resources over our heads and behave like a bully? :P

Just so you know how much we actually use oil and gas, another pic:



Another pic showing the development of primary energy imports:



In short... we're way ahead of you, buddy. And when your train crashes, nobody in the world will shed a tear. Except... the UK for some reason never got the agenda and started increasing energy imports from .2 in 2004 to 1.3 in 2014... haha, they'll be out of the EU so I don't care, but it's funny. You can still blackmail them, then. Not sure the EU gives much of a toss, though. Poor England.

- - - Updated - - -

Noone but Russia itself is going to protect Russian sovereignty, prestige or not.

You're seriously overestimating how much "prestige" from hypocritical Western nations is worth. You aren't going to protect us in this theoretical situation no matter what, so why should we care?

There is no upside to having this prestige anymore.

"Look at us, we're important! Really! No, I mean it! Look, we grab Crimea now you have to pay attention to us! Turn around! Look at me!" - Putin, basically always.

- - - Updated - - -

Dude, my point of view is correct. If Russia does nothing next thing you know they will be completely surrounded. And its not Russia that is pushing world into oblivion. Its USA/UK, like always.

At this point, it's probalby best if someoen surrounds Russia and its satelite states. Lest they continue to get lost and annex more territories by accident.

- - - Updated - - -

There is nothing to be done. Attacking isn't an option, it will start world war. Yes, it is NATO that is pushing world into oblivion, not Russia, but there is nothing for Russia to do except for either starting WW3 (which is bad for everyone) or hoping western people would get tired of lies and propaganda and fix things.

"Fix" what exactly? Despite all Russia's whinging, when exactly did NATO start attacking countries? I get it, you guys are having a really hard time distinguishin between the US doing something stupid and NATO doing something stupid. But try to concentrate and tell me when NATO was ever used to just randomly attack Russia?

[Slant]

Their whole nation is battle forged. They've fought battles with unimaginable unfavorable odds and won. If a Russian soldier ever meets an American soldier in the battle field, he will own him just like the rabbit did to the knights in the Monty python movie. (with same style and charisma)

Who, Russia? The last battle they fought that wasn't outragously in their favour ended 70 years ago.

And in that war, even IF they had hugely favourable numbers, they got their ass kicked by Finland. Russia's a joke. Battle hardened? More like undisciplined...

- - - Updated - - -

We should absolutely be arming and supporting secessionist insurgencies inside of Russia.

No, we should not. The US has to learn the lesson that you do not give matches to pyromaniacs. You do not give weapons out to anyone who isn't in your army. Because that's just all kinds of stupid.

[Skroe]

And then they'll hit back.

Oh of course they would.

You cannot even defend your country from a dozen terrorists, what do you expect to happen?

There has been no major terrorists attack in the United States since 9/11. That was 16 years ago. We got it covered.

You can't even defend your elections, it's why you ended up with this retard even though you are being warned by the NSE for years.

We could. It's that our political leadership didn't. Obama was warned. Obama knew. Obama chose to do nothing. We won't make the same mistake twice.

Sure, I'd love to see you try. Wouldn't mind seeing the US destroyed from within.
Wait; I am already watching that

Yeah no. Fall apart due to poor leadership is what happens in Europe.

You're not the first person to express such a silly thought. You're not going to be the last to be disappointed either. Even under Trump, our future looks far brighter than most other countries in the world. The strength of America is not it's political leadership. It's its people.

- - - Updated - - -

No, we should not. The US has to learn the lesson that you do not give matches to pyromaniacs. You do not give weapons out to anyone who isn't in your army. Because that's just all kinds of stupid.

I disagree. It's more the kind of thing where the successes go unremarked but the failures are pretty big failures.

The point of failure is usually the follow through. Witness Syria. Obama and the CIA spent a good two years setting that place up to be a remarkably effective asymetric war against lots of people we don't like, including Russia... and then navel gazed and moralized when the time came to give them anti-air weaponry they needed to ground Russian and Syrian air power.

The lesson of those kinds of conflicts is "if you aren't prepared to go all the way, don't bother".

[Slant]

I disagree. It's more the kind of thing where the successes go unremarked but the failures are pretty big failures.

The point of failure is usually the follow through. Witness Syria. Obama and the CIA spent a good two years setting that place up to be a remarkably effective asymetric war against lots of people we don't like, including Russia... and then navel gazed and moralized when the time came to give them anti-air weaponry they needed to ground Russian and Syrian air power.

The lesson of those kinds of conflicts is "if you aren't prepared to go all the way, don't bother".

Well, yes. That goes for everything the US does, though. How about you stop doing that? The middle east needs a cleansing process. That has to come from within. It'll mean a few bloody civil wars here and there, but essentially, it's their perogative to be as dumb as they want. The longer you keep denying them that, the longer it'll take for enlightenment to take hold in that region and turn them into actually valuable members of the global community.

Stop meddling unless it's absolutely necessary. Ignore Russia, they're hardly a threat in the middle east.

[Shalcker]

"Look at us, we're important! Really! No, I mean it! Look, we grab Crimea now you have to pay attention to us! Turn around! Look at me!" - Putin, basically always.

"Look at us! Our respect is important! Why you don't respect our whining?! You'll suffer because we don't respect you! Do as you're told and maybe we will... haha, just kidding, no, we'll never anyway" - that seems to be refrain of EU people here :P

[Skroe]

Well, yes. That goes for everything the US does, though. How about you stop doing that? The middle east needs a cleansing process. That has to come from within. It'll mean a few bloody civil wars here and there, but essentially, it's their perogative to be as dumb as they want. The longer you keep denying them that, the longer it'll take for enlightenment to take hold in that region and turn them into actually valuable members of the global community.

Stop meddling unless it's absolutely necessary. Ignore Russia, they're hardly a threat in the middle east.

I don't particularly care about the Middle East, or Islamic Terrorism. The former was the most important strategic region on Earth... 15 years ago. Today, it's a distance fifth. The latter is a chronic skin rash that some Americans want to pretend is Ebola, for mostly racist reasons. The most important strategic concerns in the world are Europe (Russia) and Asia-Pacific (China).

So as far as a Middle East "cleansing process"... meh. I hope they have a blast. The US should be involved in breaking Russia's arms and legs wherever we can, and keeping China fenced in. And we should do it for American and European (and in the latter case, our Asian ally) security.

Reactive defense doesn't work. Consistently, the best defense posture is a proactive one. Make our enemies fight on battlefields we design for them, not us fight on ones they design for us.

If I were President, a key corner stone of my grand strategy would be to engineer the carving up of Russia like a Christmas roast.

- - - Updated - - -

Vice President Pence a few minutes ago.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/18/politi...icy/index.html

Munich, Germany (CNN)Seeking to assuage European fears about refreshed Washington-Moscow ties, Vice President Mike Pence told leaders Saturday that the United States would hold Russia accountable for its actions even as it works to locate new areas for cooperation.

"Know this: the United States will continue to hold Russia accountable, even as we search for new common group, which as you know, President Trump believes can be found," Pence said during remarks at the Munich Security Conference, the first major foreign policy address of the Trump administration.

Pence's speech, which was closely watched in foreign policy circles for its signals about US strategy moving forward, sought to ease concerns on the continent about President Donald Trump, who has offered brash dismissals of long-established transatlantic institutions but few specifics about his intentions.

He arrived at a moment of uncertainty for the White House national security apparatus, which is without a clear leader since Trump fired Gen. Michael T. Flynn after he misled Pence about his conversations with the Russian ambassador. The incident dismayed the vice president while also raising questions about his stature within the administration.

Pence did not offer any detailed policy proposals during his remarks, expressing in broad terms US commitment to fighting radical Islamic terrorism and to the NATO alliance, which Trump lambasted as "obsolete" during last year's presidential campaign.

"Today, on behalf of President Trump, I bring you this assurance," Pence said. "The United States of America strongly supports NATO and will be unwavering in our commitment to our transatlantic alliance."

He sought to underscore shared histories and conflicts, and said Trump would maintain deep ties to Europe while also significantly increasing military spending in the United States.

"As you keep faith with us, under President Trump we will always keep faith with you," Pence said. "The fates of the United States and Europe are intertwined. Your struggles are our struggles. Your success is our success. And ultimately, we walk into the future together."

Keep in mind, good chance he'll be President before too long.

[Shalcker]

In short... we're way ahead of you, buddy. And when your train crashes, nobody in the world will shed a tear. Except... the UK for some reason never got the agenda and started increasing energy imports from .2 in 2004 to 1.3 in 2014... haha, they'll be out of the EU so I don't care, but it's funny. You can still blackmail them, then. Not sure the EU gives much of a toss, though. Poor England.

How fun:

http://energypost.eu/europe-increasi...mports-russia/

Europe increasingly dependent on oil imports, above all from Russia

July 15, 2016 by Energy Post

European dependence on oil imports has grown from 76% in 2000 to over 88% in 2014. The EU spends some €215 bn on oil imports, over 5 times as much as gas imports (€40 bn). Russia is the biggest supplier: dependence on Russia has grown from 22% in 2001 to 30% in 2015. These are some of the main conclusions of a study from Cambridge Econometrics made for the Brussels-based NGO Transport & Environment (T&E).

According to “A Study on oil dependency in the EU”, published on 11 July, since 2000, there has been a gradual decline in total final consumption of oil and petroleum products in the EU (on average a 1.1% reduction per annum). As a Briefing based on the study notes, this decline is due to “a reduction of oil demand outside the transport sector, improvements in vehicle efficiency, the blending of biofuels and, in more recent years, reduced demand following the recent global economic downturn.”

Despite this decline, the EU has become increasingly dependent on crude oil imports, which now amount to 88% of the region’s total consumption. Diesel imports doubled between 2001 and 2014 to €35 bn in 2014. In 2015 (when the oil price was exceptionally low), total spending on crude oil imports in the EU was €187 bn, making a total of around €215 bn, €425 per capita. According to T&E, the EU should not just be talking about gas imports when it comes to energy security, but also about its dependence on oil and diesel imports.



As in the gas sector, Russia is by far the largest suppier in oil. Russia accounted for one third of EU imports (around €50 bn). The report also assesses what companies instead of countries benefit from the EU’s oil imports. Over 80% of the imported crude oil in 2014 was supplied by non-European companies. Rosneft – the state-owned oil company with close ties to President Putin – is the biggest supplier of oil to Europe.



The T&E Briefing notes that “Whilst the current discussions of EU energy security as part of the Energy Union package focus mainly on gas, there is also a security of supply risk for some [Eastern European] countries when it comes to oil imports.”

The current risk of security of supply for crude oil is the highest in the ‘Visegrad’ countries (Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, and the Czech Republic) and Greece: “These countries are highly exposed to the risk of supply disruption for their oil imports because of high dependence on oil supplied by pipeline from one single supplier (Russia). Greece is also exposed to a relatively high security of supply risk, due to heavy reliance on oil imports from geopolitically unstable regions (in 2014, Greece imported almost 40% of its oil from Iraq).”

Western European countries such as France or the Netherlands “are not exposed to a high risk because their oil suppliers are more diverse, and they have large import terminals that enable them to switch more easily to alternative sources of supply. To address concerns around security of supply, the EU has adopted the Oil Stocks Directive that requires EU Member States to hold oil stocks to address potential supply shortages. However, the EU will need to reduce its overall use of oil if it wants to reduce the economy’s exposure to oil supply risks, especially in high risk countries.”

T&E notes that “The transport sector is the biggest driver of oil demand at EU level – two-thirds of final demand for oil comes from transport” and “Transport is also the biggest emitter of CO2 and greenhouse gases in Europe.” So, “Reducing the EU’s energy dependency and decarbonising transport are two sides of the same coin. The EU needs to reduce its demand for crude oil and petroleum products in the transport sector if it wants to reduce its energy bill and its reliance on geopolitically and environmentally risky oil imports.”

According to T&E, the European Commission “is preparing a strategy for decarbonising transport, expected later this summer.” It recommends that this study includes:

New CO2 standards for new cars, vans and trucks for 2025:

an integrated strategy to accelerate the electrification of transport that embraces mobility needs
a strategy to increase the potential of emobility balancing smart, renewable grids
an industrial policy that supports the shift to electric vehicles
committing to go beyond global action in tackling CO2 emissions and oil use of aviation and shipping

T&E notes that “improved transport efficiency would also deliver substantial economic and environmental benefits. For instance, the take-up of electric vehicles and 2025 standards for cars is estimated to lead to a 1% increase in EU GDP, up to 2 million additional jobs and a 93% reduction in GHG emissions from cars and vans, by 2050.”

More information here on the T&E website.

Sure, go on, try to blackmail Russia with SWIFT, let's see how it will work out :P

You're still decades away from not being dependent on Russia, and as time goes it only gets worse.

[Crispin]

http://www.ecfr.eu/article/commentar...sian_gas311666

To sum up, Europe’s goal of significantly diversifying away from Russian gas is challenging but not impossible in the short to medium term (through 2020-2025).

Bulgaria’s reliance on Russian gas almost over

Gazprom of Russia, which is the sole exporter of gas to Bulgaria, supplies more than 90 per cent of the Balkan nation’s annual gas consumption.

Mr Vassilev says Bulgaria’s annual gas consumption could rise to 4bn cubic metres in 2020 from roughly 3bn cubic metres today, partly because of growing demand from chemical and fertiliser companies. Yet by 2020 Gazprom will probably supply only about half of Bulgaria’s gas, he estimates.

Your conclusion is wrong, but that's not surprising when you're basing it on a comparison of 2001-2014.

[Shalcker]

http://www.ecfr.eu/article/commentar...sian_gas311666



Bulgaria’s reliance on Russian gas almost over

Your conclusion is wrong, but that's not surprising when you're basing it on a comparison of 2001-2014.

You're talking about gas. Article talks about oil.

Oil is our biggest export, gas is distant second.

[Pannonian]

Just to get this straight: you think NATO securing their border is worse than russia invading foreign countries? But of course its just because the population wants it... thats why Russia gave independence to Chechenya, right?

[Shalcker]

Just to get this straight: you think NATO securing their border is worse than russia invading foreign countries? But of course its just because the population wants it... thats why Russia gave independence to Chechenya, right?

As it happened, we actually did give independence to Chechnya. They used it to launch raids on their neighbours.

[Pannonian]

As it happened, we actually did give independence to Chechnya. They used it to launch raids on their neighbours.

Now we have 2 different versions of history. To my knowledge chechenya dclared independence, Russia didn't accept it but withdrew it troops until the supported a coup in 94 and then invaded.

So to my knowledge they were never ok if the population of THEIR territory wanted to be free, its only a nice execuse to carve up foreign nations.

[Slant]

"Look at us! Our respect is important! Why you don't respect our whining?! You'll suffer because we don't respect you! Do as you're told and maybe we will... haha, just kidding, no, we'll never anyway" - that seems to be refrain of EU people here :P

Perhaps you haven't paid attention, but we're not whinging. We're just planting defensive military infrastructure in NATO countries. If Russia shut up about it, nobody would bat an eyelid over this whole topic. But noooo, instead of taking it like the bitch they are, we have to read the nonsense you guys are spitting out here... :P

[Kasierith]

Listen, i don't say this is not a logical thing to say, but the matter of the fact is that you don't go in if your are not in advantage, thus this is making me very skeptical of what would happen if you fight an opponent that can fight back using the same sized stick.

- - - Updated - - -




Their whole nation is battle forged. They've fought battles with unimaginable unfavorable odds and won. If a Russian soldier ever meets an American soldier in the battle field, he will own him just like the rabbit did to the knights in the Monty python movie. (with same style and charisma)

I'm completely confused as to what blithering propaganda you've been cluing in on, but the Russian military is at it has always been. A massive body of poorly trained, poorly equipped conscripts with minimal actual experience backed by a core of highly competent professional assets, such as the paratroopers. The majority of the well trained assets are located in defensive positions, particularly across from China both on the Russian border and in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. This presents a large problem, since the unfortunate problem of, say, the special forces paratroopers is that utilizing them without catastrophic losses depends on air superiority, and technology wise the US outstrips them in nearly every demographic (the exception being fighter on fighter dogfights).

[Slant]

You're still decades away from not being dependent on Russia, and as time goes it only gets worse.

A green marketing company scaring people into renewable energy... how the fuck do you think we got to be world leaders in renewable energy technology? Cute source, though. Much more credit than Eurostat.

[Shalcker]

Now we have 2 different versions of history. To my knowledge chechenya dclared independence, Russia didn't accept it but withdrew it troops until the supported a coup in 94 and then invaded.

Between first and second Chechen wars they had their independence and no military interference for a while. They didn't use it well.

So to my knowledge they were never ok if the population of THEIR territory wanted to be free, its only a nice execuse to carve up foreign nations.

Well, you carve "foreign" nations, we carve our own, that's the difference.

[Slant]

You're talking about gas. Article talks about oil.

Oil is our biggest export, gas is distant second.

Here's the thing you seem to be missing... Assume blows come to blows... we cut you off from money, you cut us off from your oil. Two things will happen. Europe will look for alternatives and either buy more oil from the middle east, or we'll bite the bullet and buy oil from the US. It's not like Russia is the only one having oil on the planet.

And the next thing that'll happen is that Russia realises they are without money. So your only option is to turn to China. And while the door to Europe slams shut for good, Russia is becoming the bitch of another pimp.

Relying on natural resources for leverage is a really bad move. Look at the middle east. They have relied on natural resources and they absolutely have no technology worth the sand in their deserts. They are weak. Their only power is in oil. And Europe and the US are moving away from oil at an increasing rate. Give it 100 years and the need for oil in our regions is minimal and reduced to production facilities only. What then? Just imagine a world where the little oil we drill up in the North Sea or the Americans find in their own soil could be enough to sustain our production lines? What would happen to Saudi Arabia?

There's a reason UAE is building hotels and luxury resorts like mad, they have smart people and know their time is limited. They're trying to reposition themselves as a luxury vacation resort. And it's really the only option they have. They're smart. Russia? They'll still try to outleverage us in 100 years going "But our oil!"

Silliness... :P

[Shalcker]

Perhaps you haven't paid attention, but we're not whinging. We're just planting defensive military infrastructure in NATO countries.

And whine every time Russia says it considers those actions and installations hostile.

As well as whine when we put our troops on NATO border.

If Russia shut up about it, nobody would bat an eyelid over this whole topic.

Same thing would happened if you did.

[Slant]

And whine every time Russia says it considers those actions and installations hostile.

As well as whine when we put our troops on NATO border.

Same thing would happened if you did.

I'm not even mad at this point. That is how children argue. I tried to educate you, but alas it's wasted. Putinistas win once more and their propaganda dream lives on to be dreamt another day. :P