3 ms·

> Perhaps I'm mis-remembering, but I remember US policymakers repeatedly warning Europe, over many decades, about the dangers of depending on Russian energy sou

> Perhaps I'm mis-remembering, but I remember US policymakers repeatedly warning Europe, over many decades, about the dangers of depending on Russian energy sources. The alternative point of view is that Europe is in an energy crisis because it decided to sanction Russia over Ukraine, and Russia responded in kind. The decision to sanction Russia, while morally justifiable, was not strictly necessary and was in part driven by EU's alliance with the US. If the EU had been a really autonomous subject it would have taken in account its own interests first in this crisis.

toss1 4y ago
>> it would have taken in account its own interests first in this crisis. Europe did take account of its own interests The primary interest of Europe is to put a stop to Russian aggression and genocide. The RUS govt itself has said that it will not stop at Ukraine, which it also states has no right to exist, and that Poland and the Baltics are next. Aggressors and autocrats will only stop when they ARE stopped by an outside force. Every other "negotiation" or appeasement is taken as a sign of weakness or permission. Destroy entire cities in Chechnya, Syria, Georgia? No opposition? OK, must be fine. Occupy and annex Crimea & Donbas? A bit of tut-tutting, but no real opposition, must be fine. So, we get the Ukranian war and threats against Poland and the Baltics, and just yesterday against the British isles. Not being killed is the first interest of Europe. Not being subjugated to an authoritarian regime is a close second. Maintaining low energy pricing and high availability is definitely lower than both. Just because the US is showing leadership and many countries agree that genocide is bad and should be sanctioned does not mean that the agreeing party is somehow not independent. Stop carrying Putin's water.
ChildOfChaos 4y ago
How is that an alternative view? It's the same. Cutting Russia off was pretty much the only sensible choice and the problem is entirely because they also rely on such a source for energy, had they not been so needy of Russia there wouldn't be a problem, when Russia is a problem state you shouldn't be giving them power or leverage over you at all and they were always likely to do something that would be problematic, nothing they have done is unexpected, Europe walked right into Russias hands and it was clear to see. It's the same reason why a lot of the world needs to back away from China ASAP or else we will be in this situation again just with a range of other resources/manufacturing in the not to distant future.
glogla 4y ago
Such a great alternative fact you had to create new account to post it.

toss1 4y ago

>> it would have taken in account its own interests first in this crisis. Europe did take account of its own interests The primary interest of Europe is to put a stop to Russian aggression and genocide. The RUS govt itself has said that it will not stop at Ukraine, which it also states has no right to exist, and that Poland and the Baltics are next. Aggressors and autocrats will only stop when they ARE stopped by an outside force. Every other "negotiation" or appeasement is taken as a sign of weakness or permission. Destroy entire cities in Chechnya, Syria, Georgia? No opposition? OK, must be fine. Occupy and annex Crimea & Donbas? A bit of tut-tutting, but no real opposition, must be fine. So, we get the Ukranian war and threats against Poland and the Baltics, and just yesterday against the British isles. Not being killed is the first interest of Europe. Not being subjugated to an authoritarian regime is a close second. Maintaining low energy pricing and high availability is definitely lower than both. Just because the US is showing leadership and many countries agree that genocide is bad and should be sanctioned does not mean that the agreeing party is somehow not independent. Stop carrying Putin's water.

ChildOfChaos 4y ago

How is that an alternative view? It's the same. Cutting Russia off was pretty much the only sensible choice and the problem is entirely because they also rely on such a source for energy, had they not been so needy of Russia there wouldn't be a problem, when Russia is a problem state you shouldn't be giving them power or leverage over you at all and they were always likely to do something that would be problematic, nothing they have done is unexpected, Europe walked right into Russias hands and it was clear to see. It's the same reason why a lot of the world needs to back away from China ASAP or else we will be in this situation again just with a range of other resources/manufacturing in the not to distant future.

glogla 4y ago

Such a great alternative fact you had to create new account to post it.