Well it's better doing it that way than direct from Russia. But the ban comes in in January, so it'll stop then. Which probably explains Russia's sudden interest in a deal again.
USSR invades Ukraine. (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter Alan Dugdales Moustache
- Start date
Well it's better doing it that way than direct from Russia. But the ban comes in in January, so it'll stop then. Which probably explains Russia's sudden interest in a deal again.
No it doesn't.
And I've said it's shit that Russia still gets money indirectly from the EU, I don't think anyone is happy with that so I'm not really sure what you want me to say.
It was Centrica (British Gas) who closed the most recent storage facility in 2017 by looks of it. Government refused to subsidise it. Part of successive governments solid energy security plans !!
So after Brexit then, naïve.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
“UKRAINE ‘LEADERSHIP’ HAS EXPRESSED ZERO GRATITUDE FOR OUR EFFORTS AND EUROPE CONTINUES TO BUY OIL FROM RUSSIA,” Trump said.
Also Trump...
www.bbc.com
Also Trump...
Trump gives Hungary one-year exemption from Russian energy sanctions
The opt-out comes despite the US increasing pressure on allies to sever economic ties with Russia.
www.bbc.com
mmttww
Well-Known Member
Royal Navy intercepts two Russian ships in English Channel
HMS Severn headed off the warship and a tanker as they sailed west through the Dover Strait, the Ministry of Defence said.
www.bbc.co.uk
and Tan Man wonders why no one will just blindly support his big, giant deal. You love to see it.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Royal Navy intercepts two Russian ships in English Channel
HMS Severn headed off the warship and a tanker as they sailed west through the Dover Strait, the Ministry of Defence said.
and Tan Man wonders why no one will just blindly support his big, giant deal. You love to see it.
If we support his deal isn’t for us the main issue. I don’t love to see us wasting more money propping up a battered country which we have zero interest in and creating more deaths.
mmttww
Well-Known Member
Doing what are now is the third option i.e. not leave Ukraine to get annexed, and not have to put our own troops on the ground via NATO etc.
If you'd rather leave Putin to grab countries as he sees fit, crack on. I'm glad we and others are at least funding and supporting Ukraine like we are.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
You’re talking to someone who genuinely sees no problem with Russia absorbing the biggest country in Europe except for Russia itself. Probably not worth entertaining what he says.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
There is never any requirement regarding NATO - we are funding Ukraine to allow their soldiers to die and are more than happy for it to continue and keep buying as much energy as we need off Russia. History will look very badly on the West regarding this nonsense
eastwoodsdustman
Well-Known Member
If we don't support Ukraine then it won't just be soldiers that die (not that it is anyway with Russia bombing civilians) there, there will be a genocide there the likes of which haven't been seen in Europe since the 1940's and history will look even worse than us sitting on our hands.
Personally, I am not comfortable with Putin's Russia and their renewed aggression towards Ukraine and the rest of Europe and the fact that they are sending ships up and down our coasts is just another form of them trying to intimidate a smaller country.
eastwoodsdustman
Well-Known Member
I would think better than full capitulation followed by thousands of mass graves dotted around.
mmttww
Well-Known Member
more badly than if we'd told Putin to help himself at the outset? What would you have done? What would you do now?
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
Of course. Principled opposition looks like going 'all in' on aid to Ukraine and cutting off all ties with Russia completely, irrespective of the discomfort it would cause us. Europe talks tough but ultimately hasn't put its weight behind Ukraine to give it a realistic chance of winning. Of course France, Germany and indeed the UK is no counterweight to Russia because all of our military spending has been gradually hollowed out to support bloating welfare budgets since the end of the Cold War.
The 'best' outcome for Ukraine is to hold on long enough that there is regime change in Russia. The odds of that happening is remote.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
That's exactly what the USA wants tbqh
1. Russia engaged in ongoing warfare
2. Massive new markets to sell liquified gas and whatever else to
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Exactly that was even more obvious under Biden.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
The Ukraine war effort is only actually still there due to US military support
I suggest you read the Wolfowitz Doctrine to understand why they became rather eager to prop up Ukraine enough to allow the conflict to continue indefinitely
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Really there were two choices: allow Putin to annexe Ukraine or arm it sufficiently to produce a stalemate to force him to negotiate. Any arming beyond that has been dismissed as something that would provoke him into using his nuclear arsenal.
While absolutely Russian fossil fuels should have stopped being imported, what else could Western leaders have done in response to something Putin started?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
The US have never wanted this war to end? Why can’t you see this?
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Is that why Trump spent all that time trying to get a deal signed?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
You will never get it.
Trump is really stepping out of line and shoots from the hip but in the end will just carry on with the resistance
Ask yourself this. Why did Biden and the US administration ever get involved at all in a European conflict? Because they believe in the Doctrine - US military policy has seen Russia as a super power threat. So this invasion was perfect. It meant they could prop up a battered country just enough to occupy Russian resources and military troops for years - Ukraine will just carry on fighting and dying but would be kept alive enough to carry on fighting for as long as possible
It’s the American Dream
mmttww
Well-Known Member
Grendel
Well-Known Member
or you could actually venture your own opinion
Er that is my opinion. Why don’t you believe this fits into the Doctrine?
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
I get your position perfectly. Ukraine is irrelevant so we should have let Putin have it.
mmttww
Well-Known Member
Your opinion on what should or shouldn't have been done when Putin invaded and what what should or shouldn't be done now is for the conflict to persist because that benefits the US strategically?
One minute it's 'we (UK, EU) are enabling Ukrainians to be killed', now you're telling people to read something from 1992 and going on about why the war dragging out is all down to the US deep state.
I asked what you think should have happened or what should happen now. Not why you think the US is happy for it to rumble on. I asked, because you seem to think what's been done is wrong or cruel.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
‘Ukraine provoked Russia into invading’
Vladimir Putin
Sergei Lavrov
Donald Trump
Grendel
Vladimir Putin
Sergei Lavrov
Donald Trump
Grendel
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
The Russian economy relies heavily on its gas/oil exports so that would've been a massive step to take. The West as a whole has given Ukraine just enough to sustain its war effort but never enough to win it.
Constant delays in getting equipment to Ukraine and so on whilst buying Russian gas and oil to fund its war in Ukraine.