4 ms·

People were saying the same doing soviet days, it seems to be some kind of jingoistic fantasy that have never really played out in the real world i.e. every tim

People were saying the same doing soviet days, it seems to be some kind of jingoistic fantasy that have never really played out in the real world i.e. every time nato/us supplied forces encounter competently operated Russian kit they have had to fight it out based on numbers and logistics rather then depend on the technological inferiority of the opposing forces weapons. The same goes for say French, Swedish or Indian planes who does tend to hold up a lot better in real world conditions then the derision they get from the pentagon propagandist doing procurement suggests. The truth is that the technologies involved is so mature that any largish economy can put out reasonable effective platforms the reason nobody else then the US is making stealth have more to do with the limitations of stealth then the fact that it requires secret knowledge only possessed by the US.

Joker_vD 5y ago
The image of the enemy has to be self-contradictory: it has to be both scary and fearsome ― to justify the defence spending ― but also feeble and laughable ― again, yo justify the defence spending: the intended mindset is "the victory is inevitable", not "let's just surrender immediately". You can see it everywhere, everywhen, it's a universal propaganda tactics since the dawn of mankind, rediscovered independently and I'd say even subconsciously. And it's applicable even in non-military spending: a month ago some US newspaper (Bloomberg? WP? Don't recall exactly) managed, in the same article, accuse Russia both of a) it sells to much gas to Europe too cheap to make it dependent on Russia; b) Russia doesn't sell Europe enough of gas, it should ramp up the sales immediately. Yes, in different paragraphs, but it still kinda funny when you notice it. Or that one time when Biden simultaneously called everyone to double down on transfer to green energy, battling the climate change, and also demanded from OPEC to increase oil output and then even released 50 million barrels of oil from the reserves, because expensive oil is bad for economy, you know.
- drran 5y ago
  > accuse Russia both of a) it sells to much gas to Europe too cheap to make it dependent on Russia; b) Russia doesn't sell Europe enough of gas, it should ramp up the sales immediately a) RF increased its share in EU market for natural gas too much. Everybody worried that RF can decrease supply rapidly to skyrocket price. b) RF decreased supply of natural gas rapidly to skyrocket price.
  - Joker_vD 5y ago
    Well, RF (30% of market share) did not decrease the supply, it was the demand that rose "unexpectedly". Well, why did the US not rescue the EU with additional supplies of LNG, for example? The gas terminals were built several years pretty much for this reason, to be able to buy LNG from the US and Qatar to diversify the supplies. Why did Norway with its 35% market share not increase the supply via its pipelines? Nope, it is Russia that must increase the supply, apparently to the level of having about 50% of market share, but that would be fine this time because... reasons? Also, RF resisted until the very last from switching from the long-term contracts to the spot contracts, it was forced to do so by the court decision in 2019, sued by Poland that argued that the spot market price is fairer (it also got $2 billion refunded to the boot). Two years later, this November, Poland tried to sue again, arguing now that the spot market price is unfair, and Gazprom should only take the previously negotiated price, and refund whatever was overpaid to it (about $5 billion IIRC). I understand that all this is pretty much how haggling looks like when the hagglers are nation-states who have to sell the deals to their population somehow: selective reporting, overstating some circumstances, understating other, selective application of arguments, etc. But the end result is still exorbitant heating/electrical bills and cold houses all over the country but you also get to feel outraged at the other side, as a bonus.
    - MomoXenosaga 5y ago
      I cannot feel outraged that Russia wants to sell its natural resources at the highest price. But according to media propaganda Putin should literally be giving it away for free. Russia is using oil and gas for making € and as a geopolitical tool. As every sovereign country does. It's their gas for crying out loud they can do with it whatever they want!
    - drran 5y ago
      Quote: Pipeline exports of natural gas from Russia’s state-backed monopoly Gazprom to continental Europe have dropped roughly one-fifth in 2021 on pre-pandemic levels despite a sharp rebound in demand and low stockpiles of the important fuel. The imbalance has helped send prices in Europe to the highest levels since 2008, increasing energy costs for homes and businesses. https://www.ft.com/content/c023ba5f-4d78-4749-8485-4851baf9ef3a https://www.ft.com/content/c023ba5f-4d78-4749-8485-4851baf9e...

Joker_vD 5y ago

The image of the enemy has to be self-contradictory: it has to be both scary and fearsome ― to justify the defence spending ― but also feeble and laughable ― again, yo justify the defence spending: the intended mindset is "the victory is inevitable", not "let's just surrender immediately". You can see it everywhere, everywhen, it's a universal propaganda tactics since the dawn of mankind, rediscovered independently and I'd say even subconsciously. And it's applicable even in non-military spending: a month ago some US newspaper (Bloomberg? WP? Don't recall exactly) managed, in the same article, accuse Russia both of a) it sells to much gas to Europe too cheap to make it dependent on Russia; b) Russia doesn't sell Europe enough of gas, it should ramp up the sales immediately. Yes, in different paragraphs, but it still kinda funny when you notice it. Or that one time when Biden simultaneously called everyone to double down on transfer to green energy, battling the climate change, and also demanded from OPEC to increase oil output and then even released 50 million barrels of oil from the reserves, because expensive oil is bad for economy, you know.

drran 5y ago
> accuse Russia both of a) it sells to much gas to Europe too cheap to make it dependent on Russia; b) Russia doesn't sell Europe enough of gas, it should ramp up the sales immediately a) RF increased its share in EU market for natural gas too much. Everybody worried that RF can decrease supply rapidly to skyrocket price. b) RF decreased supply of natural gas rapidly to skyrocket price.
- Joker_vD 5y ago
  Well, RF (30% of market share) did not decrease the supply, it was the demand that rose "unexpectedly". Well, why did the US not rescue the EU with additional supplies of LNG, for example? The gas terminals were built several years pretty much for this reason, to be able to buy LNG from the US and Qatar to diversify the supplies. Why did Norway with its 35% market share not increase the supply via its pipelines? Nope, it is Russia that must increase the supply, apparently to the level of having about 50% of market share, but that would be fine this time because... reasons? Also, RF resisted until the very last from switching from the long-term contracts to the spot contracts, it was forced to do so by the court decision in 2019, sued by Poland that argued that the spot market price is fairer (it also got $2 billion refunded to the boot). Two years later, this November, Poland tried to sue again, arguing now that the spot market price is unfair, and Gazprom should only take the previously negotiated price, and refund whatever was overpaid to it (about $5 billion IIRC). I understand that all this is pretty much how haggling looks like when the hagglers are nation-states who have to sell the deals to their population somehow: selective reporting, overstating some circumstances, understating other, selective application of arguments, etc. But the end result is still exorbitant heating/electrical bills and cold houses all over the country but you also get to feel outraged at the other side, as a bonus.
  - MomoXenosaga 5y ago
    I cannot feel outraged that Russia wants to sell its natural resources at the highest price. But according to media propaganda Putin should literally be giving it away for free. Russia is using oil and gas for making € and as a geopolitical tool. As every sovereign country does. It's their gas for crying out loud they can do with it whatever they want!
  - drran 5y ago
    Quote: Pipeline exports of natural gas from Russia’s state-backed monopoly Gazprom to continental Europe have dropped roughly one-fifth in 2021 on pre-pandemic levels despite a sharp rebound in demand and low stockpiles of the important fuel. The imbalance has helped send prices in Europe to the highest levels since 2008, increasing energy costs for homes and businesses. https://www.ft.com/content/c023ba5f-4d78-4749-8485-4851baf9ef3a https://www.ft.com/content/c023ba5f-4d78-4749-8485-4851baf9e...