No fuckin' thank you to sending US troops to Ukraine

[Gene]

The Russians are fighting to monopolize energy for Europe. This includes threatening supply of shale gas to Europe from the Yuzivska gas fields. Fields in black.

Russia doesn't have to take the gas, just keep anyone else from getting it out of the ground.

yuzivska.jpg (297.4 KiB) Viewed 822 times

Here is a different map of a larger shale gas field in the east.

Shale-Gas-in-Ukraine-Map.jpg (348.62 KiB) Viewed 807 times

Lease areas off of the coast of Crimea.

Russia-OG-map.jpg (132.92 KiB) Viewed 822 times

This nonsense in Ukraine is a war over fossil fuels. Ukraine is being leashed into the Russian Gazprom system.

[Gene]

Natural gas is how the US makes "renewables" work. We don't have decent batteries yet.

We should be working on mass produced reactors and reprocessing "spent" fuel. So should the EU, but only France is doing it.

The French at La Hague make one fresh MOX fuel element out of four "spent" fuel elements. We Americans are sitting on a huge number of nuke weapon pits. We can burn those too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0UJSlKIy8g&t=240s

Would do a lot more good for Climate Change than hippy dippy Windmills and Solar cells with "natural gas backup".

[nafod]

Natural gas is how the US makes "renewables" work. We don't have decent batteries yet.

We should be working on mass produced reactors and reprocessing "spent" fuel. So should the EU, but only France is doing it.

The French at La Hague make one fresh MOX fuel element out of four "spent" fuel elements. We Americans are sitting on a huge number of nuke weapon pits. We can burn those too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0UJSlKIy8g&t=240s

Would do a lot more good for Climate Change than hippy dippy Windmills and Solar cells with "natural gas backup".

We are working on it…slowly.

Come on, fusion.

Interesting tidbit…

Solar generates about a Megawatt per 10 acres, with the acreage coming down as efficiency goes up. To power the entire US with solar, 100%, with 20% efficient panels, it’d take the land area of Lake Erie. Looking at a map, that’s not too bad for a hypothetical 100%. Use highway medians, rail sidings, building roofs, etc. we are already at the land area of Rhode Island in panels.

https://elements.visualcapitalist.com/h ... -us-solar/

[motherjuggs&speed]

To power the entire US with solar, 100%, with 20% efficient panels, it’d take the land area of Lake Erie.

Utility scale solar isn't done with panels.

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/sol ... plants.php

You say 100%. Does that mean powering everything with electricity? Freight trains, airplanes, trucks . . . everything?

[nafod]

All of it

[Gene]

Come on, fusion.

The US developed fusion reactors in the 1950s. They're called "hydrogen bombs". The problem is scale, they are too big.

The 2022 US research budget for fusion power is about $700,000,000.

The US has shoveled $21,000,000,000 to Ukraine since JR Biden took over. About fifteen times more on war than on prosperity.

You want to know what people value, watch how they spend money.

Interesting tidbit…

The sun does not shine at night.

[motherjuggs&speed]

That's the justification for a global supergrid. Which will be built by stealing from the people, both in taxes and by stealing land. It will also erode national sovereignty and establish more control of, by, and for the oligarchs. But it's green, right?

[nafod]

That's the justification for a global supergrid.

We already have a global supergrid of energy, it just moves really slowly by tankers and pipelines.

[Gene]

That's the justification for a global supergrid. Which will be built by stealing from the people, both in taxes and by stealing land. It will also erode national sovereignty and establish more control of, by, and for the oligarchs. But it's green, right?

I had a conversation with a Green, who claimed that we could "girdle the globe" with solar power, "energy for everyone". I asked him why someone in Mongolia would tolerate Solar Cells that mainly benefited Europe and the US. "What is in it for them?"

I asked how the Mongolian people could compete buying this electricity against citizens of wealthy nations. He got pissy about it. I did not understand the dream. I smelled bullshit and said so.

We need local solutions with energy dense sources, especially the developing world.

Nuclear or bust.

[Gene]

That's the justification for a global supergrid.

We already have a global supergrid of energy, it just moves really slowly by tankers and pipelines.

A grid implies an electrical connection. A global market in fossil fuels is not a grid, it's a trade network.

Nafod, you come here to virtue signal and resonate to Corporate crap. Sometimes you just go too far with your poetry.

[Gene]

The LNG fleet is starting to stack up and post off of the coast of the EU.

https://www.ft.com/content/19ad9f9f-e1c ... 2e533423ab

Price of natural gas since 2021. Europeans are getting sheared.

eugasprices.JPG (46.52 KiB) Viewed 694 times

Just remember.... it's for the pla..... profits.

https://ycharts.com/indicators/europe_natural_gas_price

...but wait, there's still more.... US prices are rising too.

usprices.JPG (49.87 KiB) Viewed 694 times

https://www.macrotrends.net/2478/natura ... ical-chart

[Luke]

The missile hitting NATO Poland was the work of the Ukrainians, or is this the line to avoid escalation?

[motherjuggs&speed]

The enemy of our enemy is not our friend. The US never learns this.

Ukraine is the 60th most corrupt nation in the world, according to the corruption perception index. About as corrupt as Russia. Check out the places that are more corrupt:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruptio ... %80%932021

Ukraine was Russia's largest trade partner until recently. Ukraine continues to make billions annually from allowing Russian gas to flow through its pipeline. Its politics have been, let's say influenced by Russia for a long time. We are, as usual, being sold a false narrative. "The totally not corrupt, not Russia-aligned, pro-Western democracy of Ukraine has been invaded. That means the Russians will invade you next." Who benefits from this narrative? More to the point, who profits?

I'm okay with Russia being pushed back hard. But we're making the usual mistakes. Funding corruption, providing weapons that will end up who knows where, allowing in and supporting unvetted refugees who are little better than the people they're fleeing from, and last but not least, making the poor poorer and the powerful even more so.

[nafod]

Russia basically gave us the means to degrade them at no risk and a pittance of money. Stupider than our invasion of Iraq by orders of magnitude. We’d be nuts not to take the opportunity that they’ve offered.

The Putin apologists have taken the House in Congress, and they are still upset Zelensky didn’t throw Trump a bone in Hunter Biden, so some uncertainty has crept into the future.

[Gene]

Russia basically gave us the means to degrade them at no risk and a pittance of money.

President Biden has committed the US to use nuclear weapons if Russia uses them in Ukraine.

From Foreign Policy, Oct 21 2022.

"Sixty years after the Cuban missile crisis, Russia and the United States are edging toward the greatest nuclear showdown since those 13 days in October 1962.

"Finally, Biden must understand the spillover risk of his threat to Putin in the eyes of other potential adversaries, most notably Iran and China. Both will watch very closely whether Biden sticks to his red line. Any nuclear use and escalation could also collapse the nonproliferation regime, leading nations great and small to either build their own weapons or demand that Washington extend the U.S. nuclear umbrella over them."

https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/10/21/nu ... le-crisis/

The Putin apologists have taken the House in Congress, and they are still upset Zelensky didn’t throw Trump a bone in Hunter Biden, so some uncertainty has crept into the future.

The "putin apologists" are a fringe element in the GOP.

Speaker elect McCarthy has already committed the GOP to continue supply of money to Ukraine. The Military Industrial Complex would expect no less.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/26/politics ... lank-check

[Gene]

I'm okay with Russia being pushed back hard. But we're making the usual mistakes. Funding corruption, providing weapons that will end up who knows where, allowing in and supporting unvetted refugees who are little better than the people they're fleeing from, and last but not least, making the poor poorer and the powerful even more so.

You ever see Eisenhower's farewell speech? Here's a portion, where he talks about the MIC.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyZoUfNsUl8

[nafod]

President Biden has committed the US to use nuclear weapons if Russia uses them in Ukraine.

No he hasn’t, and the article you cited acknowledges it as such, before going on to over-claim what he said.

It’s called strategic ambiguity. Leave your opponent guessing.

[Gene]

President Biden has committed the US to use nuclear weapons if Russia uses them in Ukraine.

No he hasn’t, and the article you cited acknowledges it as such, before going on to over-claim what he said.

It’s called strategic ambiguity. Leave your opponent guessing.

Russia is not our opponent, Nafod. We are not at war with Russia. No declaration of War. The Cold War ended on Dec 26 1991. The KP USSR signed off.

The US has no treaty obligation to defend Ukraina. The Budapest Memorandum were never ratified by the US Senate.

Russia still has the Dead Hand system. Let's hope that it's working.

https://www.wired.com/2009/09/mf-deadhand/

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/ ... back-38492

[Gene]

President Biden has committed the US to use nuclear weapons if Russia uses them in Ukraine.

No he hasn’t, and the article you cited acknowledges it as such, before going on to over-claim what he said.

Foreign Policy Magazine has been around fifty two years. They're owned by the Graham Holdings Company. Establishment press.

Joe Biden is the only person who can launch US nukes. If Biden hints at "Armageddon" it's a serious threat because Joe Biden can deliver on it.

We can read Biden's own words... He mentioned a context, then hinted at "Armageddon", like "the Cuban Missile crisis".

"Biden veered into talk about Ukraine at the end of his standard fundraising remarks, saying that Putin was “not joking when he talks about the use of tactical nuclear weapons or biological or chemical weapons.”

“We have not faced the prospect of Armageddon since Kennedy and the Cuban Missile Crisis,” he added."

https://apnews.com/article/biden-nuclea ... osition_02

We can't limit ourselves to the sentimental meaning of words. Powerful people talk around things.

[motherjuggs&speed]

America's policy of fighting to the last Ukrainian has had more tragic results. The destruction of the Nova Kakhovka dam has killed people, left a hundred thousand people homeless, released massive amounts of crude oil and other chemicals into the Dnipro river, and disrupted 14 million tons of annual shipping on the river. People have been cheerleading for the war, saying that we're degrading Russian capability. What about the costs of the war in the region, as well as globally? Higher energy prices. Higher food prices. And now an environmental and humanitarian disaster on a massive scale.

Russia could have been deterred. More pressure could have been put on Putin to leave Ukraine. Credible, specific consequences for Russia could have been laid out to deter them from blowing the dam. Now that they've done it, what do we hear? Empty words. Oh wait, we'll send some F 16s and maybe more aid, that should fix it.

[nafod]

Russia blows up the dam, and you blame the USA.

This war ends with Russia out and Putin retired. They started it, we help Ukraine finish it. The world will be a better place for it.

Also…hola everybody!

[motherjuggs&speed]

The U.S. is partly to blame for not preventing or deterring it. After Putin is out of power, countless billions of economic damage will still have been done, many people will have been killed, and so forth. Is it worth all that destruction for Putin to be out of power? The world is a worse place than it was before the war for everyone except politicians and profiteers.

I almost forgot war hawks. They benefit as well.

[nafod]

We clearly told Putin not to do it. He did it anyway. 100% on the Russians.

Is it worth all that destruction for Putin to be out of power?

All that destruction is going to happen now, the worst outcome is it happens and Putin remains in power, looking for his next target, and China learns the wrong lesson from the war.

[motherjuggs&speed]

China has already learned the lesson that it can create a global pandemic and face no consequences, in fact they've profited from it and expanded their power.

If the U.S. had been serious about preventing the war, it could have done more. I don't think a serious effort was made. I think it's because the U.S. wanted the war.

As usual, Americans are viewing this though the lens of what's good for us, which would make some sense if we were at all consistent about it. Mostly though, we're simply indifferent to the suffering of the people on the ground in the Ukraine. (or Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Iraq, etc.). More importantly, the M.I.C. either doesn't care about or benefits from higher food and energy prices, lowered standards of living worldwide, another migrant crisis, and the many other poisonous fruits of war. They just want their profits.

[Grandpa's Spells]

Wagner appears to be starting a civil war in Russia.