6 ms·

I think it's more complicated than that, and if we're going to call nations on "invading other countries", or meddling in countries internal affairs, we would n

I think it's more complicated than that, and if we're going to call nations on "invading other countries", or meddling in countries internal affairs, we would not be going for US LNG either. Edit: And I think the EU is capable of putting pressure on Russia by itself, as they/we did. The US pressure is purely self serving and for their own economic wins. Which is fine I guess, I just would like it if we were not so sensitive to it here in the EU. It would save us citizens a lot of money right now. Edit 2: the Russians would like it too: https://www.rt.com/business/476844-eu-russia-us-sanctions/ https://www.rt.com/business/476844-eu-russia-us-sanctions/

farmerstan 5y ago
Exporting natural gas is extremely difficult so the US isn’t profiting from it economically. That’s why natural gas is distributed via pipelines. Sending canisters of natural gas back and forth isn’t efficient.
- teekert 5y ago
  It depends on your goals, maybe the goals are political (and very long term economical), not economic (in the short term). Many wars turned out to not be economic in the short term, but one can argue that the US has benefited from the rubblization of the middle east (like the shenanigans pulled in Iran among others, as described in "confessions of an Economic Hitman.")
- LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
  Hrm. Hr. Hm. Why do they say so differently then? https://www.lngfacts.org/ https://www.lngfacts.org/
throwaway894345 5y ago
Who are the countries which haven’t invaded other countries? As sordid as the Iraq war was, it seems strictly better to to topple an oppressive dictator than to go around annexing territories (or assassinating dissidents in EU countries, or installing dictators in foreign countries, or meddling in foreign elections, or jailing rival politicians in your own country, or so on). I think comparing countries’ sins is pretty fruitless in general, but I hope we can agree that whatever criticism you may have for the US, Putin’s Russia is on another level.
- raxxorrax 5y ago
  The Russians could make the same argument of the US meddling in Ukraine, before Crimea happened. Nato denies it, but from their perspective it can make sense. Perhaps they only perceived it that way when the US got involved in the Maidan protests. That said, wrong perception is sometimes an excuse.
  - throwaway894345 5y ago
    What kind of meddling did the US do that is on the same level as a full-scale invasion? Moreover, while it’s flat-out ridiculous to argue that the US and Russia are in the same ballpark in terms of harm to Europe (or anyone else), we don’t need to fixate on this comparison as though there is a dichotomy.
    - raxxorrax 5y ago
      You don't have to compare the steps they took, you have to think about what the US would do if Russia gets involved in elections in Mexico or Canada.
      - throwaway894345 5y ago
        Why? The US doesn't get involved in European elections (so your hypothetical doesn't even make sense), but that's besides the point. What does the US have to do with whether or not Europe gets its energy from Russia? Europe doesn't have to choose to put its energy supply in the hands of Russia or US, there are other suppliers and diversification is a really good alternative.
        LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
        They don't need to, because they have the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantik-Br%C3%BCcke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantik-Br%C3%BCcke and other similary undemocratic institutions influencing the shit out of anything via side-channel attacks.
onepointsixC 5y ago
Why are you leaving out the context that the principal defense alliance is with America specifically in defense against Russia? Furthermore, it's not just US pressure, much of Eastern Europe has been pushing against the NS2. Claiming that the US is acting purely in self serving motives is wildly disingenuous.
- bumbada 5y ago
  >Why are you leaving out the context that the principal defense alliance is with America specifically in defense against Russia? Specifically against the Soviet Union, a communistic totalitarian regime that does not exist anymore. Specifically it never included Ukraine as member, and specifically the US promised that NATO will never expand to more than the original members. The only countries in Europe that are against the NS2 are those that have already pipelines or interests and are economically harmed by more competence. >Claiming that the US is acting purely in self serving motives is wildly disingenuous. Claiming that the US is acting purely in self serving motives is telling the truth. The US can mind its own business.
  - sergeykish 5y ago
    Specifically Russian Federation has invaded Ukraine. Specifically after signing Budapest Memorandum (Ukraine's nuclear disarming). Specifically after signing Russian–Ukrainian Friendship Treaty. Specifically without even admitting invasion! This totally invalidates all the claims regarding NATO. That's defense alliance, everyone who has missed opportunity to join is a total fool. Russian Federation is autocratic regime, just look at the last "elections". East Europe countries were under USSR occupation for 40 years. Poland is going to switch to LNG to break dependency on RF gas.
    - anticodon 5y ago
      Specifically after Ukraine attempted to join NATO since 1991. Specifically after Ukraine made speaking Russian illegal and started treating Russian speaking population as second class citizens. Specifically after Ukraine made plans to give Crimea to US to build a US military base.
true_religion 5y ago
The US is the ally of most of Western Europe (this is important because when the US invades a country, it does so with the help or at least foreknowledge of its allies)... Russia is a neighbor at best. However, if the US invaded Italy with little warning and took over Florence because it felt it needed warm water port in Europe, or access to a better wine supply then Western Europe would rightly panic and wonder how they can disentangle themselves from US influence. The reason the US is allowed so much influence in the first place is because its stays out of territorial disputes in Europe---heck even if one occurs, it historically drags its feet for years.
- kongin 5y ago
  If the US invaded Panama to secure it's warm water ... Oh wait.
  - tick_tock_tick 5y ago
    .... That's the whole point the USA doesn't invade it's European allies.
    - Ekaros 5y ago
      But it has allied itself with those who did. And then did not fight to liberate them...
    - anticodon 5y ago
      USA invaded Europe during WWII and never left. I still consider Italy and Germany occupied countries. They are not independent, they're occupied for 76 years. Why and how US will invade its colonies? Italy and Germany cannot resist any decision made by US. They have US military bases on their soil and their own army is deliberately made smaller and weaker than personnel of US military bases.
      - true_religion 5y ago
        Germany has the 2nd largest military in Europe, just slight smaller than France.[1] However comparing it to a superpower is nonsensical. The US has the 3rd largest military in the world, beaten only by India and China who have populations in the billions. But just below the US is Russia with the 4h largest military in the world, and the largest (by a huge margin) on the European continent. Now the era of colonialism was only possible due to vast technological differences between the two parties, and the good luck of the Europeans finding empires in turmoil (Songhai, Benin, Aztecs, China, etc.). It’s extremely difficult to subjugate much less rule a far off colony. The US couldn’t even manage it with Afghanistan so I doubt they’d have much luck with Germany. On the other hand, it’s much easier to conquer your neighbor, push them back and simply put your own people in place. Russia did that for about 50 years and ruled half of Europe. I would wager Germans have more to fear from a revived Russia run by an KGB agent who grew up during the time of Empire, than a US who was most recently run by a television reality show host. 1. https://rlist.io/l/largest-militaries-in-europe https://rlist.io/l/largest-militaries-in-europe

farmerstan 5y ago

Exporting natural gas is extremely difficult so the US isn’t profiting from it economically. That’s why natural gas is distributed via pipelines. Sending canisters of natural gas back and forth isn’t efficient.

teekert 5y ago
It depends on your goals, maybe the goals are political (and very long term economical), not economic (in the short term). Many wars turned out to not be economic in the short term, but one can argue that the US has benefited from the rubblization of the middle east (like the shenanigans pulled in Iran among others, as described in "confessions of an Economic Hitman.")
LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
Hrm. Hr. Hm. Why do they say so differently then? https://www.lngfacts.org/ https://www.lngfacts.org/

throwaway894345 5y ago

Who are the countries which haven’t invaded other countries? As sordid as the Iraq war was, it seems strictly better to to topple an oppressive dictator than to go around annexing territories (or assassinating dissidents in EU countries, or installing dictators in foreign countries, or meddling in foreign elections, or jailing rival politicians in your own country, or so on). I think comparing countries’ sins is pretty fruitless in general, but I hope we can agree that whatever criticism you may have for the US, Putin’s Russia is on another level.

raxxorrax 5y ago
The Russians could make the same argument of the US meddling in Ukraine, before Crimea happened. Nato denies it, but from their perspective it can make sense. Perhaps they only perceived it that way when the US got involved in the Maidan protests. That said, wrong perception is sometimes an excuse.
- throwaway894345 5y ago
  What kind of meddling did the US do that is on the same level as a full-scale invasion? Moreover, while it’s flat-out ridiculous to argue that the US and Russia are in the same ballpark in terms of harm to Europe (or anyone else), we don’t need to fixate on this comparison as though there is a dichotomy.
  - raxxorrax 5y ago
    You don't have to compare the steps they took, you have to think about what the US would do if Russia gets involved in elections in Mexico or Canada.
    - throwaway894345 5y ago
      Why? The US doesn't get involved in European elections (so your hypothetical doesn't even make sense), but that's besides the point. What does the US have to do with whether or not Europe gets its energy from Russia? Europe doesn't have to choose to put its energy supply in the hands of Russia or US, there are other suppliers and diversification is a really good alternative.
      - LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
        They don't need to, because they have the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantik-Br%C3%BCcke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantik-Br%C3%BCcke and other similary undemocratic institutions influencing the shit out of anything via side-channel attacks.

onepointsixC 5y ago

Why are you leaving out the context that the principal defense alliance is with America specifically in defense against Russia? Furthermore, it's not just US pressure, much of Eastern Europe has been pushing against the NS2. Claiming that the US is acting purely in self serving motives is wildly disingenuous.

bumbada 5y ago
>Why are you leaving out the context that the principal defense alliance is with America specifically in defense against Russia? Specifically against the Soviet Union, a communistic totalitarian regime that does not exist anymore. Specifically it never included Ukraine as member, and specifically the US promised that NATO will never expand to more than the original members. The only countries in Europe that are against the NS2 are those that have already pipelines or interests and are economically harmed by more competence. >Claiming that the US is acting purely in self serving motives is wildly disingenuous. Claiming that the US is acting purely in self serving motives is telling the truth. The US can mind its own business.
- sergeykish 5y ago
  Specifically Russian Federation has invaded Ukraine. Specifically after signing Budapest Memorandum (Ukraine's nuclear disarming). Specifically after signing Russian–Ukrainian Friendship Treaty. Specifically without even admitting invasion! This totally invalidates all the claims regarding NATO. That's defense alliance, everyone who has missed opportunity to join is a total fool. Russian Federation is autocratic regime, just look at the last "elections". East Europe countries were under USSR occupation for 40 years. Poland is going to switch to LNG to break dependency on RF gas.
  - anticodon 5y ago
    Specifically after Ukraine attempted to join NATO since 1991. Specifically after Ukraine made speaking Russian illegal and started treating Russian speaking population as second class citizens. Specifically after Ukraine made plans to give Crimea to US to build a US military base.

true_religion 5y ago

The US is the ally of most of Western Europe (this is important because when the US invades a country, it does so with the help or at least foreknowledge of its allies)... Russia is a neighbor at best. However, if the US invaded Italy with little warning and took over Florence because it felt it needed warm water port in Europe, or access to a better wine supply then Western Europe would rightly panic and wonder how they can disentangle themselves from US influence. The reason the US is allowed so much influence in the first place is because its stays out of territorial disputes in Europe---heck even if one occurs, it historically drags its feet for years.

kongin 5y ago
If the US invaded Panama to secure it's warm water ... Oh wait.
- tick_tock_tick 5y ago
  .... That's the whole point the USA doesn't invade it's European allies.
  - Ekaros 5y ago
    But it has allied itself with those who did. And then did not fight to liberate them...
  - anticodon 5y ago
    USA invaded Europe during WWII and never left. I still consider Italy and Germany occupied countries. They are not independent, they're occupied for 76 years. Why and how US will invade its colonies? Italy and Germany cannot resist any decision made by US. They have US military bases on their soil and their own army is deliberately made smaller and weaker than personnel of US military bases.
    - true_religion 5y ago
      Germany has the 2nd largest military in Europe, just slight smaller than France.[1] However comparing it to a superpower is nonsensical. The US has the 3rd largest military in the world, beaten only by India and China who have populations in the billions. But just below the US is Russia with the 4h largest military in the world, and the largest (by a huge margin) on the European continent. Now the era of colonialism was only possible due to vast technological differences between the two parties, and the good luck of the Europeans finding empires in turmoil (Songhai, Benin, Aztecs, China, etc.). It’s extremely difficult to subjugate much less rule a far off colony. The US couldn’t even manage it with Afghanistan so I doubt they’d have much luck with Germany. On the other hand, it’s much easier to conquer your neighbor, push them back and simply put your own people in place. Russia did that for about 50 years and ruled half of Europe. I would wager Germans have more to fear from a revived Russia run by an KGB agent who grew up during the time of Empire, than a US who was most recently run by a television reality show host. 1. https://rlist.io/l/largest-militaries-in-europe https://rlist.io/l/largest-militaries-in-europe