no content
AdBlocker active?
It seems you are using software to block advertisements. You could help us if you could switch it off when visiting redzoneaction.org.
The reason is very simple: Advertisements help us running the site, to offer you the game in a good quality for free. So if you like the game, please support us by purchasing a Supporter Account or disabling the AdBlocker on this site.
Thank you very much!
| Main / The Lounge - Smokers welcome / Energy in Europe... Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 4 5 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
| posted: 2022-09-05 12:43:48 (ID: 100169013) Report Abuse | |
|
pete wrote:
What is your solution? If I had solution to that, I would probably be chancellor 
But we should not think that is a small bump in the road. At least for Germany, other European states could be effected less We are unfortunately in a cold war with that fellow and our dependency on his energy is his strongest weapon. It will hurt us, for sure. we will also have to deal with less tax income and less labour in the Industry depending on gas. Infrastructure projects take more than a year to manufacture the components alone, not considering time required for permits and erection/commisioning so we are in this for a while thank god, at least from a US perspective we live in communism and we will probably take the tab as the whole population and not just those who 'chose' the wrong heating energy source |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2022-09-05 12:54:17 (ID: 100169014) Report Abuse | |
|
I believe we need to do whatever it takes to not being part of this "gamers" games. If we allow him to blackmail us, it won't solve anything. So yes, in the current situation I am a fan of putting a limit on gas prices or reducing taxes on gas, as examples.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2022-09-05 21:18:24 (ID: 100169027) Report Abuse | |
|
I totally agree with you, Pete, regarding the blackmailing. In fact, personally I'd strongly support even stronger sanctions than those already in and even the ones only on the table right now.
Of course I do realize that even though energy is right now the primary weapon, it's not the only threat. I am happy I'm not a chancellor, because weighing the chances of the other threat materialising seem to be a pure lottery, facing that particular opponent. Moreover, while it wouldn't be a real challenge to find historical evidence when subduing to political blackmail did not lead to any good, there are examples to the contrary - not subduing led to a catastrophe. My own country's history provides facts to support both. The reason I agree with what Pete says (see above), is I can hardly find any examples in history when seeking peace at any cost would prove to be the right path. Of course by saying "seeking peace at any cost" I do not mean - seeking compromise. I am all for a compromise in this war (not a popular view in my country, mind you). That may be a problem, because one person's compromise might be a white flag in another person's mind. But I can only speak for my own  And my own says - the agressors in this war are obvious. And unfortunately, the agressors haven't shown any signs of looking for a compromise, yet. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2022-09-06 11:23:40 (ID: 100169034) Report Abuse | |
|
I am no fan of a compromise, if this means to give up land by a peace contract. Basically, one should not have success with occupying other territories. This saying "give the Donbus to Russia, leave the Crimea in russian hands, are creating a fatal precedence. In my opinion, a possible way should be:
1.) remove russian troops out of ukrainian territory, once done: 2.) allow the people to vote on their future, under strict ruling of the OSCE 3.) if a majority of a certain territory votes "become russian", there have to be negotiations about how, what to provide in return, and how to handle those people not willing to move - including their future security. We have enough examples why 3 is so important, this includes former Yugoslavia, Poland, Germany and so on. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2022-09-06 20:23:43 (ID: 100169048) Report Abuse | |
|
pete wrote:
I am no fan of a compromise, if this means to give up land by a peace contract. Basically, one should not have success with occupying other territories. This saying "give the Donbus to Russia, leave the Crimea in russian hands, are creating a fatal precedence. In my opinion, a possible way should be: 1.) remove russian troops out of ukrainian territory, once done: 2.) allow the people to vote on their future, under strict ruling of the OSCE 3.) if a majority of a certain territory votes "become russian", there have to be negotiations about how, what to provide in return, and how to handle those people not willing to move - including their future security. We have enough examples why 3 is so important, this includes former Yugoslavia, Poland, Germany and so on. That's exactly what I meant 1 post above yours, when I said sometimes it's a matter of wording. What you see as a possible way with Donbas, is precisely what I'd call a compromise. See, I don't know how it's presented in Germany, but in Poland (and I strongly believe - in Ukraine as well) right now nothing of that kind is an option. At least openly, obviously. But regardless if Ukrainians would be willing to accept that - the other side of the conflict don't leave any doubts they're not interested. And that's the bottom line. Regarding Crimea, in my view the problem is much, much more complex. The 2022 war has obviously had an impact on how things are perceived in Poland, in the rest of Europe. But I strongly believe that any lasting solution should be amended AT LEAST by having at the table three sides, not two. The missing party being people most native to that land - Tatars. I don't claim to be knowledgeable enough to speak authoritatively about it, but from what I had read, the situation of Tatars in Crimea prior to 2014 was not far better than it's been since then. And returning to Donbas, for a second. I do believe that Europe is to blame for the 2022 situation. No, not directly responsible. And no, not for the response to what has been happening since february. THAT response has been nothing short of extraordinary (and hence the surprise for president Putin and his henchmen). Hope it lasts. What I'm talking about is what was going on in Donbas since 2014. How much have you been hearing about it in your media? Some short comments, now and then, may be? Was there anything remotely putting pressure, and not only on Moscow, on Kiyiv as well, to find the solution, not the slogans for media? In Poland, we've heard about some clashes here, some clashes there. About Moscow refusing to admit its obvious involvement. Missing completely the parts less favourable for Ukraine. Absolutely no signs, from either side, of real interest to end that silliness in a civilised way. Not what "Minsk 1" and "Minsk 2" had to offer. And equally absolute ZERO European pressure to end it. And that's what I meant in my, sure, controversial, statement above. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2022-09-06 20:42:42 (ID: 100169052) Report Abuse | |
|
The Donbas was in "the media". The difference at that time: it was an internal thing of the Ukraine, officially. This does not mean I think it is good or bad or whatever.
But occupying Crimea was not internal anymore. I believe, we forget this sometimes. No matter what: one should not be allowed to enter foreign territory with military action. We can surely discuss about who is guilty from a political point of view, but as soon as military gets involved on foreign territory, as soon as things turn into a hot war, the occupier is guilty! If the society could agree on this basic rule, we would make a huge step forward. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2022-09-07 05:27:45 (ID: 100169063) Report Abuse | |
|
pete wrote:(...)
No matter what: one should not be allowed to enter foreign territory with military action. We can surely discuss about who is guilty from a political point of view, but as soon as military gets involved on foreign territory, as soon as things turn into a hot war, the occupier is guilty! If the society could agree on this basic rule, we would make a huge step forward. Amen to that! I strongly believe it's time for a new release of Kellogg-Briand Pact (1928). Only this time with strictly defined, harsh (meaning - serious, not symbolic), automatic (not - depending on who votes how) penalties. Knowing well or at least expecting that it will be broken. Like it was broken nearly the same year it was signed 90 something years ago. Oh, and - regardless who brakes it. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2022-09-07 09:19:08 (ID: 100169069) Edits found: 1 Report Abuse | |
|
Yep. Strange part of history. Signed, broken by the Nazis, and caused the Nurenberg trial to be based on a law that was accepted before by Germany as well. The idea of this contract was not the worst one in human history.
Edit: remarkable was the word I was looking for, not strange ... Last edited on 2022-09-07 09:21:17 by pete |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2022-09-07 17:10:20 (ID: 100169089) Report Abuse | |
|
Mind you, Germany was not the first country to break the Kellogg-Briand Pact they had signed. If I remember, the first was Japan. And a few other nations that signed it in 1928, managed to break it, still before ww2, too.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
c4snipes
|
posted: 2022-09-07 19:09:38 (ID: 100169092) Report Abuse |
|
Many people in the United States don't like nuclear energy or want to spend money. I have always thought that the USA has high enough health regulations and standards monitored throughout the nuclear power plants. However, the USA refuses to build more nuclear power plants. This forum has a lot of people that are from Europe. Europe, generally speaking, has always been more progressive in terms of energy policy. (Western European Countries). Even starting in the process of developing nuclear fusion testing. (I am not going to explain what that is cause t would take me like 30 minutes to type) However, I wanted opinions from people on the ground that live in Europe. Is it safe? Do Nuclear Power Plants cause issues that occur frequently? I know that most energy in France is explicitly Nuclear. Do power outages and leaks happen often? The news doesn't like to talk about nuclear energy in the USA because it isn't viral unless it is negative. What I am asking is if Nuclear Energy is viable.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 4 5 > >| | |
| Main / The Lounge - Smokers welcome / Energy in Europe... | |
