|back to main board||collapse thread|
|Thoughts on the following parable (14/04/22 18:35:32)||Reply|
Because this is happening in the parking lot in front of the supermarket, I complain to the supermarket. The supermarket then always gives me as much natural gas as was just stolen from me.
At some point it gets too stupid for the supermarket and it puts up a couple of thugs as a security threat. The thief keeps stealing. Aldi then builds a pipeline through the Baltic Sea in order to be able to deliver the natural gas past the thieves.
It all takes forever, not least because I've been standing in the way of the construction of the pipeline for years, even though it's being built for me. It's not my fault, I'll rationalize this to myself. Pretty asshole behavior on my part, isn't it?
Meanwhile, the thief happily keeps stealing natural gas and the supermarket has to give me more.
The supermarket looks at it for a few years and then waves its security bats. They come and kick the front teeth out of the thief's mouth.
The thief comes to me now (!!), howling about police brutality, and demanding that I give him a gun so he can defend himself against the security thugs.
As a moral person, I'm of course on the side of Ukraine, because I don't think the reaction of the thugs is appropriate. It wasn't proportionate and I generally reject violence.
So much for my parable. Not enough? Think about it the other way around for a moment. Think about it, that Russia buys from us, let's say VW cars. We deliver the VWs, but our transports are always attacked on the Autobahn in Ukraine and the cars are stolen. Russia complains because only half of the cars arrive. Would we then be so accommodating as to simply build more cars at our expense and send them back to Russia through the Ukraine?
no If we weren't. We would first clarify this diplomatically. Agreement. Contracts. Did the Russians see and do exactly that. Ukraine just always broke the treaties.
The situation was even a bit worse :
Due to Russian subsidies, the gas price in Ukraine has so far been significantly lower than in Russia itself. In many areas, especially in the metal industry, the Ukraine has supplied the Russian market at dumping prices and thus cheated Russian producers.
In our parable, the thief would also force us out of the market by undercutting our prices with the stolen goods.
How long would you put up with that? a week? Two weeks? ten years? Seriously?
I cannot condone Russia's invasion. But to quote an old Chris Rock joke :
Now I ain't saying he shoulda killed her… but I understand
Of course, the invasion doesn't just have to do with the gas theft. It's about imperialism, access to the Crimea, the Donbass and its natural resources, maybe it's also about geostrategic things. Who knows what the Russians were actually after. But to pretend that Ukraine is the innocence of the country, that simply does not correspond to the facts.
Imagine for a moment that the Russians had simply negotiated the contracts in such a way that the theft was not their problem but ours. Would you still be as pro-Ukraine as everyone seems to be right now?
I still have a detail from the Wikipedia article:
Ukraine sold part of the gas it bought for $50 to Romania for $260.
N / A? Is Ukraine still the blameless hero? Then how about this:
The south-eastern European countries in particular suffered from the gas blockade for which Ukraine was responsible. Most affected were Slovakia, Bulgaria, Serbia and Moldova. Their dependence on the gas flowing through Ukraine is very high, while their storage capabilities are relatively small. Numerous schools had to be closed in Bulgaria, and firewood and coal were in short supply due to the flood of demand. Bulgaria demanded compensation from Gazprom for the loss of 124 million cubic meters of natural gas.
... from Gazprom. Not from Ukraine. From Gazprom.
Update : I think this is the right opportunity to commemorate Horst Köhler .
Update : The parable triggered quite a few comments, as you can imagine. I found one of them particularly interesting. He said: I don't mind being robbed, I'm even working together with the thief against Aldi, because I don't like big capitalists anyway and it doesn't cost me anything. It is indeed an interesting idea that the West has been delaying Nord Stream 2 all this time, so that Ukraine can continue to dig into the pockets of the Russians. Then Ukraine would even owe us one for it!
Another says: Well, you buy cars at the local dealership, and if the goods are lost between VW and the dealership, that is indeed the problem of VW / the dealership, not the buyer. VW then has an insurance policy and adds the premium to the purchase price. That would indeed be an interesting question, whether Russia has added that to the purchase price.
Another reader said that Ukraine made a lot of money regardless of the theft. According to him, the network of companies between Russia and German consumers served, among other things, to buy pro-Russian politicians in Ukraine or to make politicians pro-Russian, which worked well up to the Euromaidan. From this reader's point of view, the war is Putin's reaction to the fact that he was no longer able to control politics in Ukraine with gas corruption.
|a weak point imo (15/04/22 08:52:19)||Reply|
september, 2014: "If I wanted, Russian troops could be not only in Kiev, but also Riga, Vilnius, Tallinn, Warsaw and Bucharest in two days,” Russian President Putin allegedly told Poroshenko, according to the German daily Sueddeutsche Zeitung." [it has since been confirmed to be true. putin likes to post his speeches on youtube, look for them]
president at that time - PetroL Oleksiyovych Poroshenko - armiia, mova, vira (English: military, language, faith) - 7 June 2014
just an example.
see this list https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_presidents_of_Ukraine
ask yourself, is the person on the list a nationalist or the kremlins man, then see how many years he stayed in power.
but here is the catch, putin has been caught red handed plenty of times supporting extreme nationalism across the world and especially in europe.
why? that is painfully obvious... and as an added bonus, he can later de-natzify them...
i think the thief is already caught...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diana_Iovanovici_%C8%98o%C8%99oac%C4%83 [lets kill the gays]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raed_Arafat [reforms in healthcare long overdue]
what party each of there represent and who finances them and why? not so obvious as it seems(!)
like e said, some are corrupt and others are just useful idiots. all of them are eventually puppets on someones string.
having said all that, ukraine is not without blame, nor the "west" is.
but if push comes to shove, ill take my chances and swallow the alternate weak narrative...
before i forget...
ill post on this later when i can find the time and the right words and tone...
its passover today and a very annoying dinner with wifes family.
26 people... god help me...
i need a single malt! quickly!
|note to self - the moldova affair (n/t) (15/04/22 08:59:57)||Reply|
|Golden handcuffs (15/04/22 15:18:27)||Reply|
Feeding Gazprom gas into the Ukraine pipeline was only apparently a clean commercial process, but just as much a method of feeding massive amounts of corruption money into the hands of Ukrainian oligarchs and politicians (Putin puppets). Unexpectedly the unconnected people revolted and got rid of Putin's puppets, so the golden handcuff lost its power to tie down Ukraine, but the cash stream (mainly Euros of German origin) could not be stopped.
So Putin resorts to a method he used successfully before: lies on a massive scale, and genocide.
An elementary part of a corrupt system is having threats that keep up loyalty. So there will always be proof of corruption - but it will not be exposed unnecessarily.
|Genocide (16/04/22 13:23:42)||Reply|
"The Kazakh famine of 1930–1933, also known the Kazakh catastrophe, was a famine where 1.5 million people died in Soviet Kazakhstan, then part of the Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic in the Soviet Union, of whom 1.3 million were ethnic Kazakhs. An estimated 38 to 42 percent of all Kazakhs died, the highest percentage of any ethnic group killed by the Soviet famine of 1930–1933. Other sources state that as many as 2.0 to 2.3 million died.
The famine began in winter 1930, a full year before the other famine in Ukraine, termed the Holodomor, with the height in the years 1931–1933. The famine made Kazakhs a minority in the Kazakh ASSR, caused by the massive amount of people who died or migrated, and it was not until the 1990s, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, that the Kazakhs become the largest ethnicity group in Kazakhstan again. Before the famine, around 60% of the republic's residents were ethnic Kazakhs, a proportion greatly reduced to around 38% of the population after the famine. The famine is seen by some scholars to belong to the wider history of collectivization in the Soviet Union and part of the Soviet famine of 1932–1933.
Some Kazakh historians describe the famine as a genocide of the Kazakhs perpetrated by the Soviet state; however, there is no evidence to support this view. In Kazakhstan, some studies repeated the Soviet explanation of the genocide, terming it as the Goloshchyokin genocide (Kazakh: Голощёкин геноциді, romanized: Goloşekindık genotsid, Kazakh pronunciation: [ɡɐləˌʂʲokʲinˈdək ɡʲinɐˈt͡sɪt]) after Filipp Goloshchyokin, who was the First Secretary of the Communist Party in the Kazakh ASSR and is also known as one of the primary perpetrators of the execution of the Romanov family, to emphasize its supposed man-made nature; however, many Western scholars disagree with this label."
Yes - as always when the crimes of Stalin are described, there are shills or useful idiots who make up excuses.
If there had been any conscience, any regard for the welfare of the people, then Stalin would have provided help instead of death.
So Putin has forbiddel comparison between Russia/Soviet and Nazi Germany. Nice of him to remind me.
|Kazakhstan comment (16/04/22 14:09:48)||Reply|
"History textbooks in Kazakhstan today apportion the blame for the 1930-33 famine to Filipp Isaevich Goloshchekin, who was the republic’s party secretary during the heart of the famine, to Stalin, and to the Soviet system. There is also an anti-Semitic strain that makes repeated reference to Goloshchekin’s Jewishness as a method of explaining the disaster. What is less examined in these textbooks and other historiography, according to Cameron, is the crucial role of local-level violence and the Kazakh cadres who were empowered and entrusted by the regime to carry out acts of violence against other Kazakhs. Their actions made the Soviet regime’s policies worse and helped shape the character and nature of the destruction that the famine wrought.
While there is quite a lot of research in Kazakhstan on the famine, since the mid-1990s discussion of the topic has declined. Cameron examined several possible reasons for this shift, including Kazakhstan’s close relationship with Russia. She noted that Kazakhstan’s leaders may fear further exploration of the history of the famine, as it could possibly exacerbate diplomatic tensions with Russia, or even spark anger from or towards Kazakhstan’s large ethnic Russian population."
|Baltics (16/04/22 16:44:22)||Reply|
|This board has been visited 197690 times||Current time is 27/05/22 06:34:39|