93EXCivic said:In reply to Mr_Asa :
Don't forget this is the third ruble though. The Soviet Ruble went to a new ruble (RUR 1992-1998) then another new ruble (RUB 1998 to now).
That's what's kept me from pulling the trigger so far. I've watched Venezuela and Zimbabwe fail hard enough that they've needed new currency, that I can remember. Given Russia's history, it wouldn't surprise me if it happened again.
02Pilot said:Couple of notable aircraft movements recently. Right now, there are at least three Indian C-17s inbound or outbound from the NATO countries bordering Ukraine. I'm guessing this is strictly non-lethal aid, but I've heard nothing about India providing relief supplies - something that usually gets played up in the media - so the question remains open. Second, there were a number of flights of Turkish cargo aircraft into Poland yesterday that were similarly unexplained; at least one report today the Ukraine is receiving more TB-2s, which would very much explain those flights. The TB-2s have been very effective thus far, and relieve many of the logistical stresses that would exist with the rumored resupply of fighters. That long Russian column north of Kyiv may be in for an interesting time.
Edit: Two Turkish C-130s and a KC-135 are just up and looking to rendezvous. Assuming those C-130s are heading to Poland, the only reason they should need to fuel before heading north is if they're loaded.
India hasn't condemned the invasion, so you aren't going to see much positive about them right now on western media. But they are sending humanitarian aid.
This is the first Indian Air Force's C-17 transport aircraft going to Romania and sending material to Ukraine. from ukraine
Inside Russia this is being labeled not as war or invasion but,
... the Kremlin will only term as a “special operation”.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/2/amid-war-an-independent-russian-radio-station-goes-silent
7,000 Russians arrested for speech violations and high schoolers being taught "the correct version."
More talks today. I am glad that talks are continuing.
I am hoping that they lead somewhere.
wae said:QuasiMofo (John Brown) said:Mr_Asa said:So, remember the concern that Russia had sent their C or D squad into Ukraine and the A squad was coming along in that convoy?
I don't think that's an issue.
The irony of a major gas exporters army running out of fuel en route to war is not lost on me.
I hadn't thought of that, but that's some funny E36 M3 right there.
This has me confused.
They export natural gas, right? That's not the same as refined petroleum that's used to power internal combustion engines.
In reply to z31maniac :
They also have the worlds sixth largest oil reserves, and are a major exporter of petroleum products (crude and refined) as well.
In reply to z31maniac :
It's both. As far as I can tell, we're still buying tens of thousands of barrels of crude from them per day. Like right now. I haven't heard anything that says we're stopping that, but I hope I'm wrong about that. If I remember correctly, they might even be the second largest producer.
eastsideTim said:I suspect we'd need to go back to the 90's and the alter the west's policy of benign neglect toward post-Soviet Russia to have any reasonable chance of preventing something like this from happening. Of course, it should have been obvious after the 2005 Super Bowl ring incident that Putin was not someone who could be negotiated with in good faith, if it wasn't obvious beforehand.
This is a good point. Russia never really got welcomed into the rest of the word- now, as you say, Russia bears responsibility for this as well, its not just the West's fault. Obviously this is all second guessing and irrelevant at this point. However, it can be instructive, going forward.
We can't fight the last war, and the next war is going to be different. We've seen the protests in Russia- this wouldn't have happened 15 or 20 years ago. Russia then would have controlled the narrative too well.
Going really hard on a dictator is, in some ways, like trying to win an argument on the internet. You supply facts and supporting evidence, and go all-in on the subject, thinking you're really awesome, and you get likes and thumbs up from all your friends and people who already agree with you. But not only do you never actually change anyone's mind, you actually cause them to retrench and go harder on their original position. It actually alienates them, and makes future conversations harder.
In reply to volvoclearinghouse :
Regarding the current war, the problem is that any alternative to what we are doing now could likely result in an even worse result. We are not in a win-lose situation. We are in a lose-the-least situation.
In reply to wae :
I've also heard that Gazprom- the Russian oil & gas collective - and China, have funded NGO's to push "green" energy initiatives, particularly in Europe. I use "green" in quotation marks, as these policies were more about increasing reliance on Russia fossil fuels.
eastsideTim said:In reply to volvoclearinghouse :
Regarding the current war, the problem is that any alternative to what we are doing now could likely result in an even worse result. We are not in a win-lose situation. We are in a lose-the-least situation.
I think Russia is too, though that's small consolation. I heard a quip that Putin and Zelensky are essentially "racing for pinks", to use an analogy that most of us here understand.
A younger co-worker texted me yesterday concerned about the U.S. booting up the draft again for WWIII. I don't see that happening, as we already have a pretty good sized military made up of voluntary members. But, I also didn't think Putin would actually invade Ukraine. I also thought that no leader of any country would ever even consider using nuclear weapons, even tactical ones, and yet here we are worried about just that.
There are an amazing number of opinions on this flying around the net.
The spectrum runs from Putin is Hitler all the way to Putin is a victim of US hegemony.
That Ukraine is a victim of Russian hegemony all the way to Ukraine is a corrupt puppet state controlled by the US.
I guess it all boils down to "the first casualty when war comes is the truth". (attributed to Hiram Johnson, a US Senator in the 1920's)
Or, even before, by 2500 years, Aeschylus "In War Truth is the first Casualty".
...and here I am thinking, "elections have consequences..."
not just in Ukraine or the US, but all over.
93EXCivic said:
God it is depressing how much large parts of this sounds like the current war in Ukraine especially the start of the first war...
In the last couple minutes of the Transnistria video I linked, he points out several "breakaway" micronations/contested areas that Russia either props up or created, specifically so that the country involved cannot join NATO.
In reply to volvoclearinghouse :
We don't know he is considering using them. It could be purely a scare tactic. The KGB often preyed upon on people's worst fears and nuclear destruction is certainly up there among worst fears.
He wants to recreate a Russian empire not turn it to a nuclear wasteland.
wae said:In reply to z31maniac :
It's both. As far as I can tell, we're still buying tens of thousands of barrels of crude from them per day. Like right now. I haven't heard anything that says we're stopping that, but I hope I'm wrong about that. If I remember correctly, they might even be the second largest producer.
The US buying crude oil from the Russians and exporting natural gas to Europe still, at least to me, doesn't really have anything to do with them getting refined petroleum products through the supply line to their tanks/vehicles though.
Or am I missing something. I know this is a bit of a small tangent, I just didn't see the irony. Much like Alanis Morrisette doesn't understand irony vs an unfortunate circumstance.
wae said:In reply to z31maniac :
It's both. As far as I can tell, we're still buying tens of thousands of barrels of crude from them per day. Like right now. I haven't heard anything that says we're stopping that, but I hope I'm wrong about that. If I remember correctly, they might even be the second largest producer.
I do want to look into this. Could it be that buying crude benefits some people who have spoken out?
The whole idea, after all, is not to put pressure on Russia in general, but targeted pressure on Putin's supporters.
Pete. (l33t FS) said:wae said:In reply to z31maniac :
It's both. As far as I can tell, we're still buying tens of thousands of barrels of crude from them per day. Like right now. I haven't heard anything that says we're stopping that, but I hope I'm wrong about that. If I remember correctly, they might even be the second largest producer.
I do want to look into this. Could it be that buying crude benefits some people who have spoken out?
The whole idea, after all, is not to put pressure on Russia in general, but targeted pressure on Putin's supporters.
Gazprom is state-owned, right? Which means it's likely just making the elite money.
"About 8% of U.S. imports of oil and refined products, or about 672,000 barrels a day, came from Russia last year, said Andy Lipow, president of Lipow Oil Associates LLC in Houston, citing figures from the Energy Information Administration. Of that, Russia’s crude made up roughly 3% of the nation’s imports, about 200,000 barrels a day."
I'm also confused by this paragraph. Can someone parse this out for me? I don't get how almost 700k becomes 200k.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-does-the-u-s-still-buy-russian-oil-11646151935
In reply to z31maniac :
The other 500k is refined product.
TurnerX19 said:In reply to z31maniac :
The other 500k is refined product.
Derp, that's so obvious now. Thanks for pointing that out to me.
In reply to z31maniac :
It's along the lines of water, water everywhere but not a drop to drink, no? Russia has all this oil (which could be refined into fuel), but here they are trying to go war and the tanks and trucks ran out of fuel.
Well it was just said that the US would not cut off oil imports from Russia cause you know once again oil matters more then anything else...
In reply to 93EXCivic :
Because OMG Gaz prices!!! 111!!
Well, we couldn't we keeping taking the oil and then use the old 'check' is in the mail" response to the bill.
Sonic said:In reply to 93EXCivic :
Because OMG Gaz prices!!! 111!!
I was about to be snarky about driving my EV, but I decided to do a bit more research.
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-has-not-sanctioned-russian-oil-traders-are-avoiding-it-2022-03-01/
It appears it's a bit fuzzy. I wondered how we could buy it anyway, with exchange rates being crazy and banking systems not functioning. Perhaps it's a de facto sanction, and something we can yet hang over their heads?
You'll need to log in to post.
