Support NeoGAF

[Coriolanus]

What's your point? That there should never be sanctions?

They seemed to work pretty well with Irans nuclear program...

You have Rouhani to thank for that. Ahmadinejad didnt give a flying fuck about them. If you want to see how effective economic sanctions are at stopping nuclear powers, oh hey, look at NK over there.

Sanctions should be used if there is a specific goal in mind and genuine reason to believe that they'll be effective at achieving that goal. With Russia, you've already tried that. Try something else now.

Or keep doing the same thing over and over again, just bigger and louder. Is bound to work aaaany day now.

 

[Muffin1611]

I'm sorry but this argument is incredible. Sanctions cause economic pain, that isn't even a question. So Germany will suffer economic pain for this. It is not the US's fault that it is addicted to Russian gas. They were told.

Your argument is basic appeasement of Russia.

I'm sorry that you don't seem to grasp the reality that stopping dependence on Russia for gas takes time.

Give me an example for a huge economic power like the EU stopping dependence on getting much of a certain resource from another certain country in the span of a few years. Please.

A resource that is as vital as gas is.

How the fuck is COORDINATING SANCTIONS "appeasement"?

 

[jakonovski]

America is the guy who demands everything from their friends but nothing from themselves.

 

[Doikor]

Telling an ally with extremely important economic and defense ties to shove off in favor of Russia does not contribute to the safety and prosperity of Europeans.

Yes, let's favor the country that literally invades and annexes neighboring countries, supports dictators that use chemical weapons on civilians, runs hacking operations and fake news propaganda programs to influence elections in the US and Europe, uses state-run media to control its own citizens, secretly murders diplomats and people seen as "opponents" to the kremlin, and is populated by a very large majority of people who think being gay is a crime.

Great fucking idea.

So what is your alternative if Putin decides to counter by not selling oil/gas once winter sets in? Freeze to death?

 

[Prophaniti]

Telling an ally with extremely important economic and defense ties to shove off in favor of Russia does not contribute to the safety and prosperity of Europeans.

Yes, let's favor the country that literally invades and annexes neighboring countries, supports dictators that use chemical weapons on civilians, runs hacking operations and fake news propaganda programs to influence elections in the US and Europe, uses state-run media to control its own citizens, secretly murders diplomats and people seen as "opponents" to the kremlin, and is populated by a very large majority of people who think being gay is a crime.

Great fucking idea.

This.

Also most presidents in history would have considered what happened a declaration of war. I feel like that's important to point out.

 

[Wereroku]

Going ahead with sanctions that hurt your allies in order to hurt a common enemy without even trying to coordinate sanctions together and coincidentally force your allies to buy from US clients doesn't look bad for the US?

If you're willfully ignorant, maybe.

Well I mean how would sanctions work if a majority of their income is coming from oil and gas and the EU says those can't be touched. You may as well have no sanctions for the good it will do.

They're not telling the US to shove off in favor of Russia. They're telling them to shove off in favor of devising sanctions together.

Well I mean the EU will never agree to sanction Oil and Gas so they are telling them to shove off.

 

[Muffin1611]

Telling an ally with extremely important economic and defense ties to shove off in favor of Russia does not contribute to the safety and prosperity of Europeans.

They're not telling the US to shove off in favor of Russia. They're telling them to shove off in favor of devising sanctions together.

Well I mean how would sanctions work if a majority of their income is coming from oil and gas and the EU says those can't be touched. You may as well have no sanctions for the good it will do.

If only there were people who are elected and paid to devise solutions to problems like this.

 

[superdeluxe]

Sounds fair to me. Europe is on the same continent as Russia, and both have to cooperate for the prosperity and safety of their people.

For the people!

 

[Piggus]

So what is your alternative if Putin decides to counter by not selling oil/gas once winter sets in? Freeze to death?

I wasn't aware that we were living in the 1800s. Energy prices would go up a bit as you'd have to get more oil from less continent sources, but saying people would freeze to death is pretty sensational given the current state of the oil market.

 

[Boney]

I would tend to believe the NSA over ANSSI. Admiral Rogers confirmed they have evidence that the Macron Leaks were done by Russian hackers in a Senate hearing under oath:

"We had become aware of Russian activity," he told the senate committee. "We had talked to our French counterparts and gave them a heads-up – 'Look, we're watching the Russians. We're seeing them penetrate some of your infrastructure. Here's what we've seen. What can we do to try to assist?'"

Also, you are misrepresenting what ANSSI said. If I had to guess, your source is Russia Today, which sort of interpreted their comments that way. What ANSSI actually said was that the hack was very simple, and many people could have perpetrated including an individual or a government. And they said they couldn't find any evidence On the systems of who the group or person was.

Not being able to confirm that it was Russia is not the same thing as saying it was definitely not Russia.

That said there is kind of an MO for stealing emails, mixing in fake emails, and tweeting them out on bot nets.

James Clapper had no problem committing perjury on a Senate hearing by denying mass surveillance before the Snowden revelations. They have zero credibility.
The document that Winner leaked also shows that they're resting on assumptions and inferences regarding what organization was behind the hacks.

If the FBI/CIA/NSA show actual proof I'll be right behind them for sanctions. Putin is a mobster tyrant that steps over any number of human rights, so weakening him is good in my book. But launching a new Cold War based on Crowd Strike totally saying it was the Russians is not good for anybody, except the war industry.

ANSSI saying there's no evidence is the same as Russia didn't do it for all intents and purposes. Accusing a foreign government of actively tampering is huge and without solid proof that's a big no no. If they say they have evidence but don't want to share it just yet, fine. Just don't impose sanctions without them.

 

[KingV]

You have Rouhani to thank for that. Ahmadinejad didnt give a flying fuck about them. If you want to see how effective economic sanctions are at stopping nuclear powers, oh hey, look at NK over there.

Sanctions should be used if there is a specific goal in mind and genuine reason to believe that they'll be effective at achieving that goal. With Russia, you've already tried that. Try something else now.

Or keep doing the same thing over and over again, just bigger and louder. Is bound to work aaaany day now.

There is no counter factual reality without sanctions, so you can't really be sure if they are or are not effective because we don't know what NK would do without them nor what Putin would have done without the Magnitsky Act.

I also can't really respect the opinion of somebody who has no solutions only problems. It's easy to find places where things are not working as intended, but if you can't offer an alternative you are just making noise with no purpose.

 

[Wereroku]

If only there were people who are elected and paid to devise solutions to problems like this.

What other solutions are there. If most of their income is from oil and gas and those are untouchable you will never be able to do any damage to them.

 

[Frankfurter]

As much as I agree that Putin is an idiot and that Russia needs to be sanctioned, this is really not about that at all. The US wants to sell its own gas, to Europe. So what easier way would there be than to make Russia unable to sell gas to Europe?
The EU has warned the US several times that they need to coordinate their efforts in terms of Russia, but apparently the US didn't care enough. Now people claim that the EU goes soft on Russia. But actually the EU implemented meaningful sanctions against Russia because the EU actually does a lot of trade with Russia (the US not so much, to say the least).
It's also very easy to say that the EU just needs to find some other source for its gas. People saying that may wanna do a little bit of research. You don't just get another source for 30% of your gas demand, when you are among the largest economies in the world.

Also people need to stop claiming stuff if they have no clue what they are talking about. Germany did NOT get more dependend on Russian gas in the last couple of years. In 2008 89.1 TWh of energy were produced in Germany using natural gas. 2016 stood at 80.5! There is zero correlation between the reduced generation of nuclear power plants in Germany and natural gas energy production (well, actually one might argue that there is a positive correlation, i.e. less nuclear -> less natural gas).

Nuclear 2010*: 140.6 TWh, nuclear 2016: 84.6 TWh
Natural gas 2010: 89.3 TWh, natural gas 2016: 80.5 TWh


* 2011 was Fukushima and the major dropoff in Germany to 108.0 TWh

 

[Muffin1611]

What other solutions are there. If most of their income is from oil and gas and those are untouchable you will never be able to do any damage to them.

Well, if we with our laymans perspective say that, there must be no other options.

It's their literal job, man. Coordinated partial sanctions on the Russian gas sector surely aren't impossible, neither is making agreements on ramping those up gradually as the EU tries to get more independent from Russian gas.

 

[Thelonelykoopa]

They're not telling the US to shove off in favor of Russia. They're telling them to shove off in favor of devising sanctions together.



If only there were people who are elected and paid to devise solutions to problems like this.

Can we even do this though? from what I gathered from this thread our congress can't communicate and work with the EU as that is the responsibility of the president which is currently a Russian puppet.

 

[Shiggy]

Only Germany moved away from nuclear. Finland is building a plant and France has a lot of nuclear plants.

France just announced they want to shut down 17 reactors (of 58) by 2025. They are ageing and new reactors are prohibitively expensive compared to renewables.

 

[antonz]

So what is your alternative if Putin decides to counter by not selling oil/gas once winter sets in? Freeze to death?

That's exactly why you need to be lessening dependence not increasing it because Putin has and will continue to use oil/gas as a weapon when it suits him.

Well, if we with our laymans perspective say that, there must be no other options.

It's their literal job, man. Coordinated partial sanctions on the Russian gas sector surely aren't impossible, neither is making agreements on ramping those up gradually as the EU tries to get more independent from Russian gas.

The whole reason the EU is upset is because this could impact a pipeline from Russia increasing reliance not decreasing. Germany has been bought and paid for when it comes to Gazprom and German energy policy is dictating EU policy. I mean Germany just delivered multiple Power plant turbines to Crimea even while under sanctions because "Russia promised not to send them to Crimea" and what do you know Russia sent them to Crimea.

 

[Dopus]

Telling an ally with extremely important economic and defense ties to shove off in favor of Russia does not contribute to the safety and prosperity of Europeans.

Yes, let's favor the country that literally invades and annexes neighboring countries, supports dictators that use chemical weapons on civilians, runs hacking operations and fake news propaganda programs to influence elections in the US and Europe, uses state-run media to control its own citizens, secretly murders diplomats and people seen as "opponents" to the kremlin, and is populated by a very large majority of people who think being gay is a crime.

Great fucking idea.

So instead of taking a more nuanced stance, you're in favor of ham-fisted politics. Let's not forget that these sanctions seem to be pushing the European market into buying US natural gas. Is it really about more sanctions for Russia or is that just the consequence of more US hegemony inside of Europe?

But no, let's favour the United States. The beacon of hope, prosperity, truth, and justice. Let's just forget about all the awful crime and punishment that country has caused.

 

[Lesath]

Can someone explain to me why the US Congress is now the boss of the EU and why the EU must auto agree to new sanctions?

Pulling from the NYT since the Reuters article was a bit unclear to me too.

But the new sanctions have important implications for Europe because they target any company that contributes to the development, maintenance or modernization of Russia’s energy export pipelines.

As I understand it, the legislation allows for sanctions by the United States against European companies and interests involved in Russian energy export, as opposed to a joint US-EU effort in designing such economic sanctions.

So it's not so much about forcing the EU to do as we say, it's moreso about their dismay at our willingness to throw them under the bus to spite Russia (at least that's how I'm reading it). And of course, the EU is prepared to retaliate with its own measures against its trade with the US.

Some take it further and say it's more about the US projecting our energy interests to the EU, and I'm not at all qualified to speculate on the extent to which that is true.

From my perspective, it's more of a desperate attempt to curb the influence of the interests of the POTUS and Russia in the United States.

 

[Wereroku]

Well, if we with our laymans perspective say that, there must be no other options.

It's their literal job, man. Coordinated partial sanctions on the Russian gas sector surely aren't impossible, neither is making agreements on ramping those up gradually as the EU tries to get more independent from Russian gas.

Oh I agree we shouldn't go this alone like they are doing now but leaving a massive part of their income untouchable makes other sanctions much less effective. I think the whole thing is a reactionary mess but going after oil and gas is something that will directly effect the oligarchy's pocketbooks.

 

[GodofWine]

So....who do we go to war with now? is there a good three way proxy we can set up?

The whole Israel, Turkey, Syria, Ukraine layout perhaps lets the US, EU, and RUS pick some people to arm.

 

[KingV]

James Clapper had no problem committing perjury on a Senate hearing by denying mass surveillance before the Snowden revelations. They have zero credibility.
The document that Winner leaked also shows that they're resting on assumptions and inferences regarding what organization was behind the hacks.

If the FBI/CIA/NSA show actual proof I'll be right behind them for sanctions. Putin is a mobster tyrant that steps over any number of human rights, so weakening him is good in my book. But launching a new Cold War based on Crowd Strike totally saying it was the Russians is not good for anybody, except the war industry.

James Clapper and Admiral rogers are not the same person.

Heck they never even worked for the same President (in their current roles).

There was a time I would have agreed that Snowden and Wikileaks were doing Gods work... I no longer hold that view because of real world events.

But here you go: actual evidence for France and American Election hacks leaked to Russia and not coming from government sources.

https://arstechnica.com/security/20...behind-hack-of-french-presidential-candidate/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstec...-behind-claims-russia-hacked-for-trump/?amp=1

I'm sure it's just a coincidence that the leaks were edited using a Russian version of Word.

 

[Hari Seldon]

Pulling from the NYT since the Reuters article was a bit unclear to me too.



As I understand it, the legislation allows for sanctions by the United States against European companies and interests involved in Russian energy export, as opposed to a joint US-EU effort in designing such economic sanctions.

So it's not so much about forcing the EU to do as we say, it's moreso about their dismay at our willingness to throw them under the bus to spite Russia (at least that's how I'm reading it). And of course, the EU is prepared to retaliate with its own measures against its trade with the US.

Some take it further and say it's more about the US projecting our energy interests to the EU, and I'm not at all qualified to speculate on the extent to which that is true.

From my perspective, it's more of a desperate attempt to curb the influence of the interests of the POTUS and Russia in the United States.

So basically the US sanctions say that the US can't do business with companies that help Russia's energy industry, some of which are Euro companies. So Euro companies are going to have to choose if they want to do business with Russia or the US. I don't see the problem. This is all just about corporate profits, who gives a fuck. I only care about punishing Russia.

 

[KingV]

Can we even do this though? from what I gathered from this thread our congress can't communicate and work with the EU as that is the responsibility of the president which is currently a Russian puppet.

It's probably not 100% impossible, but it would certainly be unusual, and I'm not sure how it would be coordinated.

 

[Prophaniti]

So instead of taking a more nuanced stance, you're in favor of ham-fisted politics. Let's not forget that these sanctions seem to be pushing the European market into buying US natural gas. Is it really about more sanctions for Russia or is that just the consequence of more US hegemony inside of Europe?

But no, let's favour the United States. The beacon of hope, prosperity, truth, and justice. Let's just forget about all the awful crime and punishment that country has caused.

Let's not turn this into another America bashing thread where Europeans pretend America has done no good.

Nuanced stance with a man who would put radioactive material in your fucking coffee. Europe made a deal with the devil. The devil made a mistake and started a fight with the U.S. Why do you need to turn this into a conspiracy theory?

 

[Dopus]

Let's not turn this into another America bashing thread where Europeans pretend America has done no good.

Nuanced stance with a man who would put radioactive material in your fucking coffee. Europe made a deal with the devil. The devil made a mistake and started a fight with the U.S. Why do you need to turn this into a conspiracy theory?

Europe is moving away from dependence on Russia. It's just not something that's going to happen overnight. More money is being put into renewables with EU targets being set along with a number of new Nuclear facilities being built despite the anti-nuclear stance. These sanctions certainly won't help Europeans. That's the whole point.

That devil is reliant on EU money. Russia is planning on selling more to China as Europe moves away from natural gas and oil provided to them from the east. It's not a conspiracy theory - http://www.euractiv.com/section/ene...he-eu-but-new-us-sanctions-will-do-more-harm/

Read Funky Papa's post. and the ones preceding this. Captain Radioactive is a piece of shit, but one that can't be flushed right now as much as you want it.

 

[Frankfurter]

The whole reason the EU is upset is because this could impact a pipeline from Russia increasing reliance not decreasing. Germany has been bought and paid for when it comes to Gazprom and German energy policy is dictating EU policy. I mean Germany just delivered multiple Power plant turbines to Crimea even while under sanctions because "Russia promised not to send them to Crimea" and what do you know Russia sent them to Crimea.

That's simplifying things to a certain extent. Siemens delivered those turbines, because they weren't planned to be delivered to Crimea. Just like every other company sells tons of stuff to Russia... Just btw. "multiple" means two in this case
I don't see how Germany dictates EU energy policy either. Germany is strictly anti-nuclear. The EU isn't. So much for dictating.

 

[Lesath]

So basically the US sanctions say that the US can't do business with companies that help Russia's energy industry, some of which are Euro companies. So Euro companies are going to have to choose if they want to do business with Russia or the US. I don't see the problem. This is all just about corporate profits, who gives a fuck. I only care about punishing Russia.

Well, I'm treading dangerous ground with how much I understand about sanctions here, since it kind of is a head-scratcher to me the extent that the United States can truly interfere with businesses whose interest lie outside of it, but I think they can also apply to financial transactions to which US entities (such as banks) are a part of.

And as angry as I am about Trump, I realize that we might be putting the Europeans in a difficult situation here. Thing is, I'm at a loss as to what our current legislative branch would otherwise have to offer, particularly because the arbitrators of international relations and foreign policy fall more or less under the purview of the executive branch.

 

[boingball]

As Obama said about the general principle of foreign policy: "Don't do dumb shit." You should consult your allies before you go off and implement a foreign policy. Which Trump of course doesn't do but now Congress is following in his footsteps.

Oh fuck off, EU.

Hopefully we ignore this completely. Nobody should be protecting Russia right now.

Oh, a Putin supporter in our midst. Putin is laughing all the way to the bank. Trump on one side and Congress on the other side are driving Europe away from America.

 

[BasicMath]

This is it, Trump. You got this. Veto this and explain to the American people how sanctions are not the way to go. How even our NATO allies will suffer and are against further sanctioning Russia. How we may even take a hit for it.

And if it still passes and the bottom line of working class Americans takes a hit, you blame the Dems, you blame the DNC, you blame the second red scare and such. There's plenty of blame to go around. Nobody's without fault except you on this.

This one's an easy win.

 

[Doikor]

That's exactly why you need to be lessening dependence not increasing it because Putin has and will continue to use oil/gas as a weapon when it suits him.



The whole reason the EU is upset is because this could impact a pipeline from Russia increasing reliance not decreasing. Germany has been bought and paid for when it comes to Gazprom and German energy policy is dictating EU policy. I mean Germany just delivered multiple Power plant turbines to Crimea even while under sanctions because "Russia promised not to send them to Crimea" and what do you know Russia sent them to Crimea.

That is what most of Europe is actually doing though. With all the renewable energy being built and a one (Finland. Is there more?) countries expanding into more (non Russian design) nuclear power.

I wasn't aware that we were living in the 1800s. Energy prices would go up a bit as you'd have to get more oil from less continent sources, but saying people would freeze to death is pretty sensational given the current state of the oil market.

If there is an actual cold week or two and no gas coming from Russia people in the old east block EU countries will literally freeze to death. No amount of increasing the prizes will fix that if the buildings are heated by gas or oil and it just isn't available. There is no infrastructure to get the gas there in the required quantities any other way then the pipeline from Russia.

 

[Muffin1611]

This is it, Trump. You got this. Veto this and explain to the American people how sanctions are not the way to go. How even our NATO allies will suffer and are against further sanctioning Russia. How we may even take a hit for it.

And if it still passes and the bottom line of working class Americans takes a hit, you blame the Dems, you blame the DNC, you blame the second red scare and such. There's plenty of blame to go around. Nobody's without fault except you on this.

This one's an easy win.

This is the worst post

 

[AlexFlame116]

Sigh....this is all so confusing.

 

[Irminsul]

I always love people telling you that dealing with your shifty neighbour who's also selling you necessary supplies cannot be that hard and the worst he'll do is not selling you said supplies anymore while sitting in the comfort of their home a couple of thousand kilometres away, with no way said neighbour could actually influence them.

Also, aren't additional sanctions usually implemented when the situation worsens? What situation between Russia and NATO / "the West" worsened that doesn't include American domestic politics?

 

[BasicMath]

Also, aren't additional sanctions usually implemented when the situation worsens? What situation between Russia and NATO / "the West" worsened that doesn't include American domestic politics?

Russia is helping Syria with the US Backed Rebels.
And Russia still hasn't given back Crimea to Ukraine.

The longer those two things continue, the harder it'll be for the West to deal with. So it's getting worse.

 

[t0va]

Are you really suprised europe isn't willing to take a hit after your leadership tries to sabotage the EU, is about to declare a tradewar with them, fucks them over in climate and europe generally is getting pictured as freeloaders after being at war for 10 years for the US?

No offense but there isn't much goodwill for the US at the moment

US citizen here. Please use whatever respect you have left for us to continue driving this point. A large portion of our population looks up to EU and the many ways its independent countries operate, but I can see said population taking offense to this as we tend to suffer from short term memory loss, as was the case with the surge of immigrants to the EU after years of destabilization from US intervention and occupation.

Then Europe shouldn't have expanded the EU ever eastward without taking on the explicit commitment to protect places like Ukraine and other former Societ bloc nations. Increased sanctions have been on the table since the election took place in November and it's not like they couldn't assign a liaison to Congress in order to find out EXACTLY what they were going to pass.

This is a chickenshit move for a continent that's busy tooting its own horn about banning petrol vehicles.

Hindsight bias. Lecturing Europe on its energy dependence with Russia on the basis that they should have predicted and planned against Russian transgressions while the US utterly failed to predict and protect its elections and institutions from these same transgressions is the height of hypocrisy. What of the our relationship with Saudi Arabia?

Expecting them to suffer sudden economic consequences when they for decades already done so by bending over backwards for a relationship that has largely given the US the better end of the deal. This would be seen as selfish and counter-productive to an alliance that shares a common enemy during this pivotal moment in time. Democracy's legitimacy is being tested and we both stand to win or lose everything. There are other ways to proceed together in unity and strength; to preserve the progress this system has made while correcting its imbalances so that even better models are procured.

Expressing interest in and taking the initial steps that are required in transitioning to a new form of energy consumption is a process that will take delicate consideration and planning over a long period of time which cannot be rushed without causing serious and immediate repercussions. To expect them to suddenly cease or alter the way they import and consume energy without planned transition or replacement is akin to the "Repeal first, then eventually replace" solution Republicans have pushed in regards to the ACA here in the US.

People don't seen to realize that asking our EU allies to yet again shoot themselves in the foot for us further wedges the growing rift between us, which will hurt collaboration on things like trade and security. This would be a self-inflicted shotgun blast to the foot for the US, as diminishing relations in trade, security and other areas would not be isolated to Europe. EU can probably work out more lucrative deals elsewhere. I think that China would happily extend a hand. But I guess this is what Trump supporters want..

 

[Xe4]

I sympathize with the EU, but there's no way to make meaningful sanctions against Russia is by cutting at their flow of oil and natural gas, as it makes up a vastly disproportionate section of its economy. As long as the EU is over reliant on Russian oil and gas they have to toe the line to an authoritarian dickhead like Putin. So the solution is to become less reliant on Russian oil and gas. It's not an easy task but a very important one. Otherwise, Putin is going to continue to fuck with EU member states and continually try to expand his influence.

It sucks that we can't work with the EU at the moment, but congress is kind of on it's own on this one. If we had a president who wasn't a Russian puppet, it would be much easier to coordinate with the EU to sanction them.

 

[HotHamBoy]

Just the excuse Trump needs to veto the sanctions bill without too much backlash.

Yup.

This is it, Trump. You got this. Veto this and explain to the American people how sanctions are not the way to go. How even our NATO allies will suffer and are against further sanctioning Russia. How we may even take a hit for it.

And if it still passes and the bottom line of working class Americans takes a hit, you blame the Dems, you blame the DNC, you blame the second red scare and such. There's plenty of blame to go around. Nobody's without fault except you on this.

This one's an easy win.

 

[KingV]

US citizen here. Please use whatever respect you have left for us to continue driving this point. A large portion of our population looks up to EU and the many ways its independent countries operate, but I can see said population taking offense to this as we tend to suffer from short term memory loss, as was the case with the surge of immigrants to the EU after years of destabilization from US intervention and occupation.



Hindsight bias. Lecturing Europe on its energy dependence with Russia on the basis that they should have predicted and planned against Russian transgressions while the US utterly failed to predict and protect its elections and institutions from these same transgressions is the height of hypocrisy. What of the our relationship with Saudi Arabia?

Expecting them to suffer sudden economic consequences when they for decades already done so by bending over backwards for a relationship that has largely given the US the better end of the deal. This would be seen as selfish and counter-productive to an alliance that shares a common enemy during this pivotal moment in time. Democracy's legitimacy is being tested and we both stand to win or lose everything. There are other ways to proceed together in unity and strength; to preserve the progress this system has made while correcting its imbalances so that even better models are procured.

Expressing interest in and taking the initial steps that are required in transitioning to a new form of energy consumption is a process that will take delicate consideration and planning over a long period of time which cannot be rushed without causing serious and immediate repercussions. To expect them to suddenly cease or alter the way they import and consume energy without planned transition or replacement is akin to the "Repeal first, then eventually replace" solution Republicans have pushed in regards to the ACA here in the US.

I would agree with this if the American President wasnt Russia's stooge.

There is no way to "work together" to combat Russian aggression because the piece of the American Government that usually coordinates diplomacy would rather be allied with Russia than the EU.

Thinking the Russian sanction bill is about the EU at all is not accurate. It's really about sending a message to Putin that fucking with our elections will only make things worse for him, and not better. It's why it passed both chambers of Congress with like 95+% of the vote. It is why I have been faxing my senators and representative every day for two months telling them to get this bill passed into law.

It's unfortunate that Merkel wants to be a modern day Neville Chamberlain, and appease Russia instead of standing up to them, but the world will survive and so will Europe. There are other places to buy oil and gas and if they want to put tariffs on US LNG or only buy from Canada, then I would still support these sanctions, because maintaining Western democracy is more important than marginally cheaper electricity.

Europe has a storied history of not dealing with totalitarians in its own backyard, and is doing a bang up job living up to the past, here and is seemingly only willing to condemn Putin up until to the point where it affects their bottom lines.

For those Europeans that say sanctions don't work, I urge them to look closely at their own history and compare modern American sanctions strategy in NK, Iran, and Russia to the European appeasement strategy in the 30's and report back which was a bigger failure.

 

[Dingens]

Judging from this thread, the cold war never ended for Americans. It's incredible how easily people can get riled up with just a few key words. But while the US spent the last 20 years being on cold-war-stand-by, the Europeans actually managed to built something like a somewhat serviceable relation with their neighbouring country. This shows a clear difference in world perception. Americans live in a Neorealist world, where balance of power is key. Europeans live in a Neoliberal world, where interdependencies and institutions rule. These theories are pretty much contradictory and the discussion in this thread clearly shows that.
But I'm sure the US side is right, just as always. Cowboy diplomacy worked great the last 20 years.

[...]
This may be more about America trying to prop up its gas exports through sanctions than about punishing Putin. Buy from us/our clients or be sanctioned.

of course it is. The US has a long history of opportunistic and mercantilist behaviour. Just look at how serious their companies took the first round of sanctions

http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/soziales/russland-sanktionen-helfen-us-firmen-europa-verliert-a-1036204.html

go figure

 

[TheLaughingStock]

I would agree with this if the American President wasnt Russia's stooge.

There is no way to "work together" to combat Russian aggression because the piece of the American Government that usually coordinates diplomacy would rather be allied with Russia than the EU.

Thinking the Russian sanction bill is about the EU at all is not accurate. It's really about sending a message to Putin that fucking with our elections will only make things worse for him, and not better. It's why it passed both chambers of Congress with like 95+% of the vote. It is why I have been faxing my senators and representative every day for two months telling them to get this bill passed into law.

It's unfortunate that Merkel wants to be a modern day Neville Chamberlain, and appease Russia instead of standing up to them, but the world will survive and so will Europe. There are other places to buy oil and gas and if they want to put tariffs on US LNG or only buy from Canada, then I would still support these sanctions, because maintaining Western democracy is more important than marginally cheaper electricity.

Europe has a storied history of not dealing with totalitarians in its own backyard, and is doing a bang up job living up to the past, here and is seemingly only willing to condemn Putin up until to the point where it affects their bottom lines.

For those Europeans that say sanctions don't work, I urge them to look closely at their own history and compare modern American sanctions strategy in NK, Iran, and Russia to the European appeasement strategy in the 30's and report back which was a bigger failure.

Why do people believe the US gov't would allow a wealthy American citizen (who has been in the public eye for decades) to become a Russian agent and go on to become President of the United States? And maintain that position for 6+ months now? If that were the case, then the US would be compromised in virtually every regard.

 

[SolarPowered]

EU: Hey, this stuff is complicated. We already sacrificed a sizeable amount of our exports and we are dependant on Russian energy. We need to devise a careful plan for the next round of sanctions if we want to hurt Putin without accidentally damaging ourselves. We really shouldn't rush things. Let's coordinate.

America: LEEEEEROY JENKINS!!!

EU: fuck

Random American Gaffer: Man, those europeans are such a bunch of pussies.

Succinct

 

[avaya]

I'm sorry that you don't seem to grasp the reality that stopping dependence on Russia for gas takes time.

Give me an example for a huge economic power like the EU stopping dependence on getting much of a certain resource from another certain country in the span of a few years. Please.

A resource that is as vital as gas is.

How the fuck is COORDINATING SANCTIONS "appeasement"?

It is appeasement because you are ruling out targeting the most vulnerable portion of the Russian economy and the part that is dearest to Putin's heart.

Now, I didn't say it wouldn't take time. Of course it would take time but Germany's disgraceful energy policy has not helped in the slightest here and continues to leave them heavily dependent on this. Not withstanding the devastating impact of Germany power companies being crippled by the Nuclear shutdown (NPV of long dated liabilities in decommissioning are suddenly bullet redemptions in the medium term) and the fall in investment across the continent as a result. RWE as an example.

As for the example you required, that one is easy. It's Japan. It shut down a lot of the Nuclear base load and replaced it with gas in a very very short time period. Germany and Europe can do this (not necessarily over such a short time period) but they refuse to because they are addicted to cheap Russian gas. This isn't new. This was well known from the early 2000s. This is a serious moral conflict and a criminal failing of the German government.

Nevertheless we aren't headed for some cliff edge moment on the supply of gas. It will become incrementally harder to buy Russian gas.

Also people need to stop claiming stuff if they have no clue what they are talking about. Germany did NOT get more dependend on Russian gas in the last couple of years. In 2008 89.1 TWh of energy were produced in Germany using natural gas. 2016 stood at 80.5! There is zero correlation between the reduced generation of nuclear power plants in Germany and natural gas energy production (well, actually one might argue that there is a positive correlation, i.e. less nuclear -> less natural gas).

Nuclear 2010*: 140.6 TWh, nuclear 2016: 84.6 TWh
Natural gas 2010: 89.3 TWh, natural gas 2016: 80.5 TWh


* 2011 was Fukushima and the major dropoff in Germany to 108.0 TWh

I am confused by this post.....I don't think it shows what you meant. I mean it provides pretty clear evidence that Germany is more dependent on natural gas than it ever was in 2010, since it needs it for base load.

NG fell by 9.3TWh from 2010 to 2016. The cut in nuclear is 60TWh and Germany is planning to turn that entire remaining 85TWh off completely. That leaves you more heavily dependent on base load sources like your remaining Natural gas was has fallen by just 10% since 2016.

 

[michaelius]

Well perhaps EU should have listened to Eastern Europe when we warned about Russians using energy as weapon instead of building Nordstream II to make us even more dependent on Russian gas (with bonus points for ability to terrorize Eastern Europe without cutting supply to Germany and France).

 

[darkinstinct]

spineless fucks. who knew, phasing out nuclear would mean the energy has to come from somewhere. German government is dumb as fuck. Or maybe they like being in bed with Putin.

We don't heat with nuclear energy, we heat with oil or gas.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

Judging from this thread, the cold war never ended for Americans. It's incredible how easily people can get riled up with just a few key words. But while the US spent the last 20 years being on cold-war-stand-by, the Europeans actually managed to built something like a somewhat serviceable relation with their neighbouring country. This shows a clear difference in world perception. Americans live in a Neorealist world, where balance of power is key. Europeans live in a Neoliberal world, where interdependencies and institutions rule. These theories are pretty much contradictory and the discussion in this thread clearly shows that.
But I'm sure the US side is right, just as always. Cowboy diplomacy worked great the last 20 years.

Sanctions ARE neoliberal. What is more neoliberal than getting countries to change their behaviour using your economic leverage? Yes, we have tried appeasement over the last 20 years. You can tell us how well that's working out for Eastern Europe.

There is no co-operation. Russia does not wish to co-operate with the West. I'm not sure how throwing money at Russia's faces and rewarding them for their behaviour will change their minds. There is no proof that appeasement works.

We don't heat with nuclear energy, we heat with oil or gas.

There is electric heating as well.

 

[Com Truise]

As posted earlier in this thread:

Because the sanctions measure also declares support for “the export of United States energy resources in order to create American jobs,” alarm bells have sounded in Europe that the bill is targeting Nord Stream simply so that U.S. industry can prosper. The Obama administration also fought the pipeline and opened U.S. natural gas for export, but it did so as part of a more cooperative approach with Europe.

The U.S. is literally advertising these sanctions as a great opportunity to prop up their energy industry. It doesn't get any more shameless than this.

 

[Madness]

Energy is king. Sad to see.

I thought this was evident when Germany never sanctioned Putin, Gazprom after the Crimean annexation. In the end, everyone cares about their own self-interests.

 

[CTLance]

I don't feel quite as proud as European today, let's put it that way.

Being *that* dependant on a single country, and Russia of all places in particular, is not a good look.

Hope we can wean ourselves off Russia's tit eventually. Time to tap Africa and the Middle East and most importantly redouble our efforts in renewables.

 

[Frankfurter]

I am confused by this post.....I don't think it shows what you meant. I mean it provides pretty clear evidence that Germany is more dependent on natural gas than it ever was in 2010, since it needs it for base load.

NG fell by 9.3TWh from 2010 to 2016. The cut in nuclear is 60TWh and Germany is planning to turn that entire remaining 85TWh off completely. That leaves you more heavily dependent on base load sources like your remaining Natural gas was has fallen by just 10% since 2016.

If Germany is more dependent on natural gas, why does it use less than it used to? Baseload is a nice myth by mostly the nuclear and the coal industry.* Plus natural gas is not used to provide base load by a significant amount in Germany anyway (it's ~13% of total electricity production right now). Renewable energies have replaced all of that nuclear power, some coal power and a little bit of natural gas (+ a lot of exports, to e.g. France in the summer when the nuclear power plants have trouble with their cooling). There is no sign - no sign at all - that Germany will in the future be more dependent on natural gas.


* According to those same experts, Germany was supposed to have tons of blackouts from 2011 on. But whoopsy daisy, there were none.