You still haven’t responded to the original question: In what way did Biden’s alleged goal of keeping Europe hooked on fossil fuels influence Russian war plans?
The RIA was another protectionist attack on strategic partners
I guess you can view the IRA that way. I find that disingenuous, because the main rival in renewable technology is China who control solar and battery production.
In addition, the EU failing to match the IRA is entirely the EU’s fault. This could have been the race toward a positive (if still too materialistic) future. Instead, gonservatives e.g. in my region of Germany watched as the final pieces of credible solar industry left the EU. “Good job, team! We saved 10k coal jobs for another 3 years!” It’s not Biden’s fault that EU gonservatives have been trying to turn us into a bunch of h*cking babana republics.
In fact, without the war in Ukraine, the RIA would have failed spectacularly.
Would it though? Sure, gas/oil production would slowly have reduced but so would costs associated with that activity (health, environment, etc.).
You still haven’t responded to the original question: In what way did Biden’s alleged goal of keeping Europe hooked on fossil fuels influence Russian war plans?
Please share where I wrote this. I look forward to finding the pond from where this red herring sprung.
Would it though?
The fracking industry was gearing towards collapse
The EU didn’t match the IRA because it flies in the face of WTO rules. Some peoples do try to abandon the “rules for thee and not for me”, regardless of how shitty our politicians have become.
Please share where I wrote this. I look forward to finding the pond from where this red herring sprung.
What interpretation do you suggest given your talk about “war objectives regardless of POTUS”, “qui bono” and “otherwise unsellable LNG”?
That was always one of the objectives of this war, regardless of who is the POTUs. Stifle Europe’s energy transition and industrial output before it becomes independent from tyrants selling hydrocarbons.
If you do a “qui bono” someone shows up as the main supplier of LNG that would otherwise be near unsellable due to fracking being prohibitively expensive.
The fracking industry was gearing towards collapse
That industry has always been a money pit for the US government.
The EU didn’t match the IRA because it flies in the face of WTO rules.
Not sure if you’re serious given China’s massive subsidies for batteries, wind, and solar tech which was not sanctioned effectively and then US Investment in similar technologies, also not sanctioned. Barely anyone would have batted an eye. The reason why we didn’t even have an attempt at doing anything is gonservative ideology. “Oh, vee must to not influence industry, ze market ohlveys noes best. Vee must to not pick vinners in ze market, vee must stay teknolojee ohpen. Plees uncle Vlad open ze gas tap again, our industries is in vizzdrawel!” The obvious conundrum being that gonservatives are extremely happy about picking winners, as long as it’s some kind of super-wasteful, ideally fossil industry
Upvote because can’t tell if last paragraph is joking or actual dutch, it’s impossible to distinguish dutch from a joke language.
As for the rest, the interference of Bojo and Biden to continue the war is well known and documented. Both the US and Russia wanted to stop the EU transition to renewables and more energy independence. That’s what Qui bono means. You don’t need to invade a country to contribute to the start or escalation of a war.
As for the rest, the interference of Bojo and Biden to continue the war is well known and documented.
I finally read the linked post… So BoJo went and BoJo discouraged Zelensky from signing a peace agreement, alright. But apparently the draft peace agreement made insane concessions to Russia: Not only would Russia likely have kept Crimea, Donezk and Luhansk, Ukraine would have had to limit the size of its army, stay neutral, and stay out of Nato and similar organizations. Russia would even have a veto on any action taken by the five security guarantor nations named in the peace accord.
Signing that thing would have been bonkers. And it would likely have ended in a repeat of actions post-Minsk agreements anyhow.
Both the US and Russia wanted to stop the EU transition to renewables and more energy independence
For Biden’s US, I’d still say [citation needed] here. Biden certainly jumped at the chance to sell LNG, and make some short-term profit. However, both him and Obama before him were trying to build a legacy. For Obama, it was the ACA and withdrawing troops from Iraq/Afghanistan (RIP). Biden’s big project was the IRA, transitioning a fossil superpower, creating well-paid domestic MINT and blue-collar jobs.
Upvote because can’t tell if last paragraph is joking or actual dutch, it’s impossible to distinguish dutch from a joke language.
I was trying to go for a German accent. (Dutch is at least a little cute, too.)
Critically, Ukraine could still be part of the EU and be covered by the collective EU defense agreement. The concessions were object of negotiations. Negotiations don’t kill people.
This war is AUKUS all over again, the yanks and Barries step in to disrupt any kind of peaceful agreement and reinforce enmity and conflict. The initial deal with France was meant to patrol the AU territorial waters, nuclear submarine capabilities is meant to be a provocation to China. Imagine China or Russia equipping Cuba with nuclear capabilities… Oh wait.
While there would have been additional talks, from these earlier demands for concessions, I think it’s clear that Ukraine would have gotten a shit deal. A deal guaranteeing at best a fragile peace of mind. I have no doubt that whatever the contract would have said about EU membership, any such campaign from the Ukrainian side would have been the target of massive propaganda campaigns.
Otoh, Russia, the attacking(!) country, would not have had to limit the size of its army or give up nuclear weapons or give up territory. The only way Putin could have read such a deal is as an encouragement to go attack some more countries and snag some territory.
In addition, during his entire political career, Putin has been a scheming, power-hungry, vile person. He’s someone who has proven incapable of running a country peacefully and largely incapable of creating a modern state or prosperity. Someone who betrayed Ukraine post-2014. Ffs, the man came into power by false-flag bombing apartments and using the fallout for political gain.
Insisting US & UK were trying to keep the war going, just so they coild sell more fossil fuels is imnsho complete nonsense.
We can agree to disagree. We both agree Putin is a vile bastard. I think Bojo and any US candidate allowed to win a presidency are equally vile. You disagree on that point. It’s ok if we agree to disagree.
What matters is now there’s no turning back, the US is a hostile power as is Russia and Europe is finally, after years of exploitation, waking up to that fact.
I think Bojo and any US candidate allowed to win a presidency are equally vile. You disagree on that point. It’s ok if we agree to disagree.
If the draft peace accord from 2022 was shite (and, from all I know, it was), massively disadvantaging Ukraine and resulting in a brittle peace at best, it becomes irrelevant to this discussion how either of us feel about Boris or Biden. The only question is whether there was serious offer from Putin. Or whether the war has dragged on, precisely because there was no serious offer.
You still haven’t responded to the original question: In what way did Biden’s alleged goal of keeping Europe hooked on fossil fuels influence Russian war plans?
I guess you can view the IRA that way. I find that disingenuous, because the main rival in renewable technology is China who control solar and battery production.
In addition, the EU failing to match the IRA is entirely the EU’s fault. This could have been the race toward a positive (if still too materialistic) future. Instead, gonservatives e.g. in my region of Germany watched as the final pieces of credible solar industry left the EU. “Good job, team! We saved 10k coal jobs for another 3 years!” It’s not Biden’s fault that EU gonservatives have been trying to turn us into a bunch of h*cking babana republics.
Would it though? Sure, gas/oil production would slowly have reduced but so would costs associated with that activity (health, environment, etc.).
Please share where I wrote this. I look forward to finding the pond from where this red herring sprung.
The fracking industry was gearing towards collapse
The EU didn’t match the IRA because it flies in the face of WTO rules. Some peoples do try to abandon the “rules for thee and not for me”, regardless of how shitty our politicians have become.
What interpretation do you suggest given your talk about “war objectives regardless of POTUS”, “qui bono” and “otherwise unsellable LNG”?
That industry has always been a money pit for the US government.
Not sure if you’re serious given China’s massive subsidies for batteries, wind, and solar tech which was not sanctioned effectively and then US Investment in similar technologies, also not sanctioned. Barely anyone would have batted an eye. The reason why we didn’t even have an attempt at doing anything is gonservative ideology. “Oh, vee must to not influence industry, ze market ohlveys noes best. Vee must to not pick vinners in ze market, vee must stay teknolojee ohpen. Plees uncle Vlad open ze gas tap again, our industries is in vizzdrawel!” The obvious conundrum being that gonservatives are extremely happy about picking winners, as long as it’s some kind of super-wasteful, ideally fossil industry
Upvote because can’t tell if last paragraph is joking or actual dutch, it’s impossible to distinguish dutch from a joke language.
As for the rest, the interference of Bojo and Biden to continue the war is well known and documented. Both the US and Russia wanted to stop the EU transition to renewables and more energy independence. That’s what Qui bono means. You don’t need to invade a country to contribute to the start or escalation of a war.
I finally read the linked post… So BoJo went and BoJo discouraged Zelensky from signing a peace agreement, alright. But apparently the draft peace agreement made insane concessions to Russia: Not only would Russia likely have kept Crimea, Donezk and Luhansk, Ukraine would have had to limit the size of its army, stay neutral, and stay out of Nato and similar organizations. Russia would even have a veto on any action taken by the five security guarantor nations named in the peace accord.
Signing that thing would have been bonkers. And it would likely have ended in a repeat of actions post-Minsk agreements anyhow.
For Biden’s US, I’d still say [citation needed] here. Biden certainly jumped at the chance to sell LNG, and make some short-term profit. However, both him and Obama before him were trying to build a legacy. For Obama, it was the ACA and withdrawing troops from Iraq/Afghanistan (RIP). Biden’s big project was the IRA, transitioning a fossil superpower, creating well-paid domestic MINT and blue-collar jobs.
I was trying to go for a German accent. (Dutch is at least a little cute, too.)
Critically, Ukraine could still be part of the EU and be covered by the collective EU defense agreement. The concessions were object of negotiations. Negotiations don’t kill people.
This war is AUKUS all over again, the yanks and Barries step in to disrupt any kind of peaceful agreement and reinforce enmity and conflict. The initial deal with France was meant to patrol the AU territorial waters, nuclear submarine capabilities is meant to be a provocation to China. Imagine China or Russia equipping Cuba with nuclear capabilities… Oh wait.
While there would have been additional talks, from these earlier demands for concessions, I think it’s clear that Ukraine would have gotten a shit deal. A deal guaranteeing at best a fragile peace of mind. I have no doubt that whatever the contract would have said about EU membership, any such campaign from the Ukrainian side would have been the target of massive propaganda campaigns.
Otoh, Russia, the attacking(!) country, would not have had to limit the size of its army or give up nuclear weapons or give up territory. The only way Putin could have read such a deal is as an encouragement to go attack some more countries and snag some territory.
In addition, during his entire political career, Putin has been a scheming, power-hungry, vile person. He’s someone who has proven incapable of running a country peacefully and largely incapable of creating a modern state or prosperity. Someone who betrayed Ukraine post-2014. Ffs, the man came into power by false-flag bombing apartments and using the fallout for political gain.
Insisting US & UK were trying to keep the war going, just so they coild sell more fossil fuels is imnsho complete nonsense.
We can agree to disagree. We both agree Putin is a vile bastard. I think Bojo and any US candidate allowed to win a presidency are equally vile. You disagree on that point. It’s ok if we agree to disagree.
What matters is now there’s no turning back, the US is a hostile power as is Russia and Europe is finally, after years of exploitation, waking up to that fact.
If the draft peace accord from 2022 was shite (and, from all I know, it was), massively disadvantaging Ukraine and resulting in a brittle peace at best, it becomes irrelevant to this discussion how either of us feel about Boris or Biden. The only question is whether there was serious offer from Putin. Or whether the war has dragged on, precisely because there was no serious offer.