New Russia Sanctions Coming... in an Iran Sanctions bill!

[Mormolyce]

Skroe, skroe, skroe...

Are you still butthurt that Putin messed up with your elections (basically spit in your face) and you didn't do jack about it? Isn't funny how this goes against your usuall rhetoric, about how powerfull is the USA and how weak is Russia? I am still waitting for the US response, but my gut feeling says that it will never come.

As i've been saying since the MH17 thread. Putin is one of the best politicians / strategists currently alive. And spare us the rhetoric of how he ruined Russia. He didn't; he clashed with the west and he is still up and running, slowly but steadily improving his country military and economy. Very few nations in this plannet are able to say "Fuck You" to the US and not only survive an economical war that was waged against them, but also make sure their economy recovers, modernise their military and be able to hold in risk not only world's biggest super power, but the rest of the NATO combined.

I seem to recall him pissing his pants during the Syrian missile strike. And that was a big pile of nothing.

He's all hot air and propaganda. Russia is crime-ridden, poor, corrupt and largely beyond his control, his entire career has been about maintaining an illusion of power and nothing else.

Lucky for him the world's full of suckers willing to buy his bullshit.

[Nadiru]

Germany came out against this bill. Because of course they would. Can't have anyone messing with their precious gas imports now can we?

Positioning the US diplomatically against Russia when it's already in decline is poor strategy. People like Skroe, who push for the dissolution of the Russian state (this is the outcome he desires, whether he admits it or not) are being short-sighted because if that decline is played poorly, it will turn into the largest act of nuclear proliferation to non-state actors in world history. It'll be the collapse of the Soviet Union except this time the fears about Soviet missile silos will come true.

[Deleted]

What a bullshit.

It isn't.
And i linked you why.

German emissions increased in 2016 for a second year in a row as a result of the country closing one of its nuclear plants and replacing it with coal and natural gas, a new Environmental Progress analysis finds.

Because uranium once again is a limited resource. Lets use renewable energy sources.

A shortage of "rare earth" metals, used in everything from electric car batteries to solar panels to wind turbines, is hampering the growth of renewable energy technologies. Researchers are now working to find alternatives to these critical elements or better ways to recycle them.
We cant - There is also no problem in building both Nuclear and Renwables at the same time and closing down all the coal and gas plants.

Wind energy and solar energy are infact stable enough already, it just needs individual effort from everyone to utilized these methods. Surey, solar needs to be improved, but actually it already produces a considerable amount of germanys power resources.

Germany added a whopping 10 percent more wind turbine capacity and 2.5 percent more solar panel capacity between 2015 and 2016, but generated less than one percent more electricity from wind and generated one percent less electricity from solar.

The reason is because Germany had significantly less sunshine and wind in 2016 than 2015.

As such, 2016 is a dramatic illustration of the limits of energy sources that depend on the weather. Their output varies dramatically not just hour-to-hour but also year-to-year.

Anti-nuclear advocates have long insisted that this radical intermittency can be solved through more transmission and storage. But there's a problem: neither more transmission lines nor more storage would have made Germany any sunnier, or windier, in 2016.

No, It's not stable enough, cant be made stable enough actually.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Watch_Group

Quote:

The Energy Watch Group has calculated that, even with steep uranium prices, uranium production will have reached its peak by 2035 and that it will only be possible to satisfy the fuel demand of nuclear plants until then.[147]

Is not included in page linked, You should have just linked the PDF directly, also i suspect the quote does not originate from the wikipedia page by the artefact [147]
Regardless, its a crock of shit anyway:
How long will global uranium deposits fuel the world's nuclear reactors at present consumption rates?
Steve Fetter, dean of the University of Maryland's School of Public Policy, supplies an answer:
If the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) has accurately estimated the planet's economically accessible uranium resources, reactors could run more than 200 years at current rates of consumption.

You obviously dont, as you wont call caring for the environment "ideology"

Yes, yes we can:
an adherent of an ideology, especially one who is uncompromising and dogmatic.

Actually, that happens thruout all political spectrums nowdays. Well, if we exclude nationalist populism.. they just hate everything that is "green".

Yeah caring for the environment is something that one can do outside of an ideology of caring for the environment.

I hope you dont get money for your lousy job on this forum.

Yeah, because everyone who disagrees with you must be a Russian troll.

All? Oh yeah, i am sure the plants in North Korea are really very safe.

You are getting more and more ridiculous.

Yes, yes, I'm the one getting ridiculous.


- - - Updated - - -

Positioning the US diplomatically against Russia when it's already in decline is poor strategy. People like Skroe, who push for the dissolution of the Russian state (this is the outcome he desires, whether he admits it or not) are being short-sighted because if that decline is played poorly, it will turn into the largest act of nuclear proliferation to non-state actors in world history. It'll be the collapse of the Soviet Union except this time the fears about Soviet missile silos will come true.

Given what the EU deals with in the Balkans, where they are essentially propping up several states that otherwise would collapse, they are not going to be keen for a repeat.

[Nadiru]

Given what the EU deals with in the Balkans, where they are essentially propping up several states that otherwise would collapse, they are not going to be keen for a repeat.

Especially given that the EU will probably bear the brunt of that proliferation. The US has the insulating quality of being an ocean away, but the EU is both right there and an ally to the US in the minds of extreme terrorist nutjobs by dint of being "the West"

[Deleted]

Given what the EU deals with in the Balkans, where they are essentially propping up several states that otherwise would collapse, they are not going to be keen for a repeat.

Well, most of the Balkan states joined the EU when they got most of their shit relatively sorted. Even Greece is a bit better these days, so they wouldn't collapse, they'd just stop growing at their current states.

As for nuclear power, I'm pretty sure France would be very against going all renewable. It's one of the largest energy exporters, due to its nuclear power. They've just refurbished and are building a new power plant in Scotland. Nuclear is very efficient and clean, except when its not. And as was said, there's nothing preventing us for going for both.

[Deleted]

In the end, Germany will be forced to import most of their energy from France, especially if they stop importing Russian gas. All this does is raising energy costs into astronomic proportions for the innocent citizens.

[Crispin]

People killed by maidanites are still people killed by maidanites.

Keep fantasizing. And how am I "obsessed"? I don't bring him up in every single post, you do.

On topic of nuclear reactors: how come everything's bad in Russia when it's Fukushima that fucks up in modern, advanced, NATO Japan?

[Haven]

Oh?

Are we past denying Russia's involvement in the elections, and moved straight to laughing how the clever Dear Leader did such a fine job in executing the attack?

Because it sure does sound like it.

If reasoning against Washington's dogma is pointless, why not play along with it, especially when it makes American establishment and intelligence community look weak and incompetent. They're saying it themselves: Putin decides who becomes POTUS, not America. Mwa-ha-haa!

[Deleted]

Ehm . . . yes? Why would they let anyone fuck up their energy independence?

Because German tax payers should be tolerant in regards to American values such as punishing Russia. They need to understand that paying more money from their own pocket is okay, as long as the long term goal is aiding someone from the other side of the world uphold their own culture. You see, the humanitarian gains by allowing American foreign policy to negatively affect Germany's energy independance is worth it, for cultural reasons.

I guess you can't see that because you're a vile nationalistic capitalist, thinking only for your own energy independence and economy, and you don't think even for a moment how much poor American Senate members feel about Russia. You clearly can't see how a multi-cultured Russia-free world is better.

/s

[Deleted]

It isn't.
And i linked you why.

Yes, it is bullshit, as you said it kills people. No, it doesnt. You take a fact, and add your biased comment. That is called propaganda, kid. Learn to discuss properly.

A shortage of "rare earth" metals, used in everything from electric car batteries to solar panels to wind turbines, is hampering the growth of renewable energy technologies. Researchers are now working to find alternatives to these critical elements or better ways to recycle them.

You miss the point that we have 2017 and not 2013, and that materials which replace metals already have been found, glass accumulators in special.

We cant - There is also no problem in building both Nuclear and Renwables at the same time and closing down all the coal and gas plants.

There just is no need if we invest more into renewable energies. Also we prevent the environmental consequences from nuclear fission i already talked about a lot you are just simply ignoring, as usual.

Yeah caring for the environment is something that one can do outside of an ideology of caring for the environment.

There is no ideology about environmental care. Green politics are part of every mainstream party program nowadays. Well, as i said, except the right wing populist liars. But fortunately, they are just a small minority. And they are getting smaller and smaller.

Yeah, because everyone who disagrees with you must be a Russian troll.

I never said you are a troll. Still you obviously are a fan of that tyrant. Or you wont defend his violent acts in almost every thread.

[Deleted]

Yes, it is bullshit, as you said it kills people. No, it doesnt.

Coal dust kills people - Fact.
Germany shutting down nuclear plants meant more coal power - Fact.
Conclusion, Germany shutting down nuclear kills people -

You miss the point that we have 2017 and not 2013, and that materials which replace metals already have been found, glass accumulators in special.

Interesting, because a google search for 'glass accumulators' yields nothing useful whatsoever.

There just is no need if we invest more into renewable energies. Also we prevent the environmental consequences from nuclear fission i already talked about a lot you are just simply ignoring, as usual.

You do know that Renewable cannot be the only energy source?
We simply cannot feasibly build the required storage facilities to deal with the variations over Years.
we can barely do it over a day and night cycle, but over yearly cycles where some years simply have less sunshine and wind, its fucking impossible.

Also we prevent the environmental consequences from nuclear fission i already talked about a lot you are just simply ignoring, as usual.

I didn't ignore it, I linked to you, that's wildly overblown, and an eminently solvable problem.

There is no ideology about environmental care.

Green politics (also known as ecopolitics[1]) is a political ideology that aims to create an ecologically sustainable society rooted in environmentalism, nonviolence, social justice, and grassroots democracy.[2] It began taking shape in the western world in the 1970s; since then Green parties have developed and established themselves in many countries around the globe, and have achieved some electoral success.

Green politics are part of every mainstream party program nowadays.

Again, you can care for the environment while neither being affiliated with the ideology, or more aptly for this conversation, against nuclear power.

I never said you are a troll.

Yes you did:
"I hope you dont get money for your lousy job on this forum."

Still you obviously are a fan of that tyrant.

I'm not, as i have repeatedly stated here - I'm a fan of nuclear power.

Or you wont defend his violent acts in almost every thread.

Please point me to a single instance of me defending Putin.

[Shalcker]

Interesting, because a google search for 'glass accumulators' yields nothing useful whatsoever.

It's easy if you add "molten" (because obviously normal glass doesn't accumulate anything).

Though, note here:
Critical Need:
There is a critical need to find efficient, cost-effective thermal energy storage solutions to maximize the use of domestic solar and nuclear energy resources. Most utility-scale solar power plants only run at about 25% of their capacity because they can't generate power at night--thermal energy storage makes it possible to increase this capacity to up to 60-75%. Similarly, nuclear power plants produce a constant output of power--thermal energy storage could help increase this output during times of critical peak demand.

It isn't solar-exclusive; it can be useful for nuclear (or, i guess, any thermal that gets temperature high enough) too.

It is also far from being "silver bullet" - it only seems somewhat useful for solar concentrator plants, not the rooftop variety, and those fry birds even more then wind turbines chop them...

[Skroe]

Positioning the US diplomatically against Russia when it's already in decline is poor strategy. People like Skroe, who push for the dissolution of the Russian state (this is the outcome he desires, whether he admits it or not) are being short-sighted because if that decline is played poorly, it will turn into the largest act of nuclear proliferation to non-state actors in world history. It'll be the collapse of the Soviet Union except this time the fears about Soviet missile silos will come true.

Oh no I freely admit it. I want Russia to do the full-break-up-of-Yugoslavia routine.

As for the nuclear thing you're describing... yes... huge risk. But you know what?

Worth it. We're scarcely safer with Putin there.

The only way the United States to be truly safe from Russian military aggression is to disarm Russia by any means. Economics is one of those means and that's been highly successful.

- - - Updated - - -

You didn't read it fully either:
While most sanctions in the Senate bill are mandatory, one important measure is discretionary: sanctions on investment in the construction of Russian energy export pipelines.
Hopefully because they realize said sanctions would very negatively impact relations with the EU.

The EU would get over it. They'd comply. Not saying it'd be easy, but there is nothing to indicate that "this time it's different". It's just be yet another object of wrangling between the US and EU that gets worked out, like the other two dozen.

And chances are they wouldn't be that discretionary either on our part. America and Russia are enemies. And we're not exactly pulling punches in that assessment anymore.

[Shalcker]

Oh no I freely admit it. I want Russia to do the full-break-up-of-Yugoslavia routine.
As for the nuclear thing you're describing... yes... huge risk. But you know what?
Worth it. We're scarcely safer with Putin there.

Risk of US civil war is also quite high, but probably worth it. World will be much safer when US will be busy with their own problems.

Keep up your divisive politics Skroe! Give your opponents no quarter!

[Skroe]

Risk of US civil war is also quite high, but probably worth it.
Keep up your divisive politics Skroe! Give your opponents no quarter!

Yeah good one, Russian. This shit again, eh? Don't be absurd. I'll remind you the US was actually undergoing enormous civil disruption in the 1960s and the 1970s. This after your country conquered large portions of Eurasia in the 1950s. And what happened in the latter portion of the 1970s and 1980s? Oh that's right. You collapsed.

Americans have a long and happy history of kicking our own ass over politics yet still stomping Russians.

Still, I'm not surprised a willing and happy slave in an authoritarian regime like yourself mistakes a political fight in a democracy for civil war though. That's exactly what your masters want you to think: that democracy, rule of law and an active political scene equals chaos, so trust master to keep you safe and the land stable.

I'd rather spend an eternity wrestling like hell with my fellow Americans over the future direction of the country then spend one hour being a Russian citizen under the dominion of Vladmir Putin and his mafia regime.

[Stormspellz]

Just remember socialism works. Look at venezuala.

Thats like say capitalism is a failure because of 08

[Deleted]

Green politics (also known as ecopolitics[1]) is a political ideology that aims to create an ecologically sustainable society rooted in environmentalism, nonviolence, social justice, and grassroots democracy.[2] It began taking shape in the western world in the 1970s; since then Green parties have developed and established themselves in many countries around the globe, and have achieved some electoral success.

It is no stand alone ideology, no matter what wikipedia says about it. Actually, you have a mix out of conservatives, social democracy up to left wing and a ecological focus. Sorry, but you are wrong here. Ideology (from Greek ιδεολογία) is a comprehensive set of normative beliefs, and ecology is no belief system, but just simply the idea to add awareness for the environment as a fundamental part for every kind of politics, be it conservative or progressive. The Christian Democratic Union in germany is as focusing on ecology as the green party nowadays, which just shows ecology is an inter-ideological topic.

Again, you can care for the environment while neither being affiliated with the ideology, or more aptly for this conversation, against nuclear power.

We are not talking about ideology in this thread, it is literally about renewable energies versus nuclear fission, where i at least know that nuclear fission will not be the future, based on the fact uranium is limited and will become rare by 2035 (which you havent debunked at all, your links do not contradict the link i posted), based on the truth about its catastrophic consequences for the environment and based on the fact that nowadays nuclear reactors arent save at all, as Greepeace experienced in investigation in rosatom facilities.

Yes you did:
"I hope you dont get money for your lousy job on this forum."

Which doesnt mean i called you a Troll. Learn to use the correct terms.

- - - Updated - - -

Please point me to a single instance of me defending Putin.

http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...1#post45304916

"Schrödingers Russia".

[Noradin]

We're not as dependent on Russian gas as Germany, and it would honestly be stupid to put a country in a situation so Russia can begin their "..or we'll turn off the gas" games.

Better allow the USA to do that?

[Deleted]

It is no stand alone ideology,

There being numerous Green parties in the western world sort of completely and totally undercuts your non-point.

Ideology (from Greek ιδεολογία) is a comprehensive set of normative beliefs

Green politics (also known as ecopolitics[1]) is a political ideology that aims to create an ecologically sustainable society rooted in environmentalism, nonviolence, social justice, and grassroots democracy.[2] It began taking shape in the western world in the 1970s; since then Green parties have developed and established themselves in many countries around the globe, and have achieved some electoral success.

We are not talking about ideology in this thread

Greenpeace are a bunch of ideologues - Their statements of fact, are in actual reality merely an expression of their warped opinions.
They carry as much intellectual weight as Infowars.

based on the fact uranium is limited and will become rare by 2035

Again, Nope, and even more importantly, there are nuclear plants that run on other materials, you do know that right?

(which you havent debunked at all, your links do not contradict the link i posted)

How long will global uranium deposits fuel the world's nuclear reactors at present consumption rates?
Steve Fetter, dean of the University of Maryland's School of Public Policy, supplies an answer:
If the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) has accurately estimated the planet's economically accessible uranium resources, reactors could run more than 200 years at current rates of consumption.
200 years is 182 years longer than the 18 years you posit.
It could practically not be more categorically contradicting you.

based on the truth about its catastrophic consequences for the environment

Again, Chernobyl is the worst case scenario - Which is not a terribly bad scenario.
You are just paranoid, besides its not like there is no enormous impact of coal mining - And again, It is impossible to replace all current energy with renewable's in any sort of reasonable time-frame (if at all).

that nowadays nuclear reactors arent save at all

A true modern nuclear reactor literally cannot have a meltdown - Its as physically impossible as pigs flying.

as Greepeace experienced in investigation in rosatom facilities.

https://www.infowars.com/exclusive-a...e-controversy/

Which doesnt mean i called you a Troll. Learn to use the correct terms.

Yes it did.
The web brigades (Russian: Веб-бригады), also known in English media as Russia's troll army,[1] are state-sponsored anonymous Internet political commentators and trolls linked to the Russian government. Participants report that they are organized into teams and groups of commentators that participate in Russian and international political blogs and Internet forums using sockpuppets and large-scale orchestrated trolling and disinformation campaigns to promote pro-Putin and pro-Russian propaganda.[2][3][4][5] It has also been found that Wikipedia articles were targeted by Russian internet propaganda activities.

"Schrödingers Russia".

Schrödinger's cat is a thought experiment, sometimes described as a paradox, devised by Austrian physicist Erwin Schrödinger in 1935.[1] It illustrates what he saw as the problem of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics applied to everyday objects. The scenario presents a cat that may be simultaneously both alive and dead,[2][3][4][5][6][7][8] a state known as a quantum superposition, as a result of being linked to a random subatomic event that may or may not occur. The thought experiment is also often featured in theoretical discussions of the interpretations of quantum mechanics. Schrödinger coined the term Verschränkung (entanglement) in the course of developing the thought experiment.

That isnt what makes a superpower. Ability to influence the world economically, politically, and militarily in multiple way is. Russia can only do all of that regionally, hence it is a regional power.

It's Schrodinger's Russia.
On the one hand capable of projecting power all over the world, (which is the definition) including the US and on the other hand a 'gas station with nukes'.

Hate to break it to you - Me pointing out that If they intervened in the elections, its a sign of them being a superpower, and not just a regional power, is not me defending Putin in any way.
Oh btw, you are again ignoring this:

Coal dust kills people - Fact.
Germany shutting down nuclear plants meant more coal power - Fact.
Conclusion, Germany shutting down nuclear kills people -

Feel free to respond.

[Deleted]

I think i will stop the discussion here. GoblinP repeats his propaganda prayer wheel, and wants to pretend i called him troll, which i never did.

Time to leave the discussion. Go and get better arguments.