placeholder

Are you seriously stating that the price of natural gas is inconsequential to the Europeans? That it doesn't matter to the Europeans how much they pay as long as the gas isn't coming from Russia? I think you need to start at Economics 001.

Of course it's consequential to Russia. The rise in price will put a greater strain on European budgets.

What we do know is that people who aren't reservists, without any military training, are also being drafted. So that 300,000 figure is not to be trusted.

Ancient history. And in the 21st century very few countries have attacked other countries in order to enlarge their nation. And it's not America. But as for Russia and China...

Given that the price of gas shot up in the wake of the leak, it's clear that were such an act believed to be done by the Russians, it could have some intimidating effect. But what's relevant isn't my belief but what would Putin's be. Given how badly the war is going for the Russians, he's clearly desperate.

I used the google translate function on the first 3 sentences in that article 'The secret seventh paragraph of the decree on mobilization allows the Ministry of Defense to call up one million people. About this to Novaya Gazeta. Europe,” a source in the presidential administration said. The day before, a scan of Vladimir Putin's decree on the introduction of "partial mobilization" in Russia was published on the website of the legal information portal. The seventh paragraph of the decree is designated "for official use."'

This is a very sad attempt at deflection. Putin definitely made a threat involving the use of nuclear weapons. As I remarked earlier, his comment can't be construed rationally in any other way.

I did not point out that it's not intimidation. Stop making things up. What I said was I hope Europeans wouldn't be intimidated. That is not at all as saying that they wouldn't be intimidated. An expression of hope is not an assertion. But what's more important, that comment did not address Putin's intent in any way.

Nice try. Putin claimed without offering evidence that western nations were threatening nuclear war. Then he said the weathervane can turn. There is no rational way to construe this other than as a nuclear threat.

I don't know what you think you are agreeing to. I said I would hope so. Not that it would be the case. As for Putin, why wouldn't he try to intimidate the Europeans. His position is desperate. His war in Ukraine is not going well at all.

Biden did not say something similar to what Putin said. Putin unequivocally indicated he was willing to use nuclear weapons. Biden has not.

Well, unlike Putin, I would hope that Europe wouldn't be intimidated by a hostile signal.

Can you show me where Biden specifically indicated he was considering using use nuclear weapons?

Last 40 years of UK GDP https://www.statista.com/statistics/281744/gdp-of-the-united-kingdom/ Now GDP isn't everything, and the UK ranks very low on income equality, but that doesn't mean the 40 years ago things were better.

Putin was not using a metaphor when he said this. It was very plain speaking. But if you require more, there's this: In his most recent comments, Mr Putin explicitly warned the West that Russia would use all available means to defend Russian territory and accused the West of discussing a potential nuclear attack on Russia. "This is not a bluff. And those who try to blackmail us with nuclear weapons should know that the weathervane can turn and point towards them," he said. https://www.straitstimes.com/world/europe/truth-or-bluff-why-russian-leader-putins-nuclear-warnings-have-the-west-worried

Putin said he would use "all available means'. Unless his babushka does not allow him to play with nuclear weapons, it's crystal clear what he means.

I feel like I'm in oppostie land where talk about a new pipeline to compensate for the loss of a present one is not relevanat, whereas a discussion of Eurpean unity is. I'm just going to ignore your misdiagnoses of the state of the EU. You may come up with lots of factoids about the USA, but the fact that you wrote "even Tucker Carlson" says all we need to know about the depth of your knowledge of the USA. POS 2 is planned to be over twice as long as POS1.

First off, I see you have no answers for the fact that this Sino-Russian pipeline is 8 years away. What's the failing Russian economy going to do in the meantime? Actually, the opposite is the case when it comes to the EU and weakness. The US actually needs it to stay strong. Weakness helps the Russians. And that you actually can write "even Tucker Carlson", a rightwing conspiracy addict, betrays a deep and laughable ignorance of American affairs.

Or panic suspended as long as the BOE keeps on engaging in quantitative easing to buy gilts to finance the pound.

Actually, the long term outlook for natural gas is not good. Renewables are already beginning to outcompete natural gas in generating electricity. And member nations of the EU are accelerating their conversion to wind and solar. So demand from that quarter will be fading rapidly.. 25 percent of natural goes goes mostly to making ammonia for fertilizer. There, too, new low energy techniques have been developed that will eliminate natural gas from that market. In addition there will be a lot more natural gas coming on line from the Cyprus, Israel, and Lebanon for the interim. So the prices won't stay at the elevated levels they are now. And of course it's going to take quite a while to get that pipeline to China up and running. About 8 years, in fact. Power of Siberia 2 to divert Europe-bound gas to China The construction of a second gas pipeline linking Russia and China is expected to commence within two years, a megaproject that will put Mongolia in the middle as the pipe is designed to pass through its high-elevation territory. Mongolia’s Prime Minister Oyun-Erdene Luvsannamsrai said the feasibility study of the “Power of Siberia 2” gas pipeline, which will connect Siberian gas fields to China via Mongolia, has been completed and that construction would begin in 2024, according to a Financial Times report. The pipeline, which will deliver Europe-bound gas from western Siberian fields to China for the first time, is expected to go online in 2030, the Moscow Times reported. https://asiatimes.com/2022/07/power-of-siberia-2-to-divert-europe-bound-gas-to-china/

I made the mistake of assuming that you were sticking to the topic, What has any of that got to do with a thread about the Nordstream gas pipeline ruptures?.

Right. The US wants to help the Russians by making it more difficult for Western Europe to oppose the Russians. And you think Poland is opposed to the fight against Russia? And Meloni, who will be heading Italy, is a very strong supporter of the Ukraine cause.

Price of natural gas shot up after pipeline incident. That hurts western Europe

A further observation just occurred to me? Trump to be the "adult in the room"? Realy? That would be a first.

More likely the US govt wants to deal with as few potential hostages as possible.