Nord Stream Pipeline 1 and 2 Explosion


It's indeed that kind of investigation we need!

The last option made me a bit laugh the Dutch came under verdict (because as one of the gas producers).

Basically that is not correct because of the earthquakes from the gaswinning in exactly my region and the stop in winning my region this is not valid.

Besides that Michiel de Ruyter is long gone bicicleur!

:LOL:

 
Last edited:
It's indeed that kind of investigation we need!

The last option made me a bit laugh the Dutch came under verdict (because as one of the gas producers).

Basically that is not correct because of the earthquakes from the gaswinning in exactly my region and the stop in winning my region this is not valid.

Besides that Michiel de Ruyter is long gone bicicleur!

:LOL:


sorry, I don't know much about Dutch history
seems interesting though
 
Biden blowing up nordstream would have made sense in february, today not any more
furthermore if Biden had that intention he would never have mentioned it publicly

the only link between Germany and Russia were the gas supplies
there was never a German-Russian pole

my first guess was Ukraine, but then again, they probably didn't have the means or the occasion to do so
maybe one day they'll be able to destroy the bridge over the Kerch Strait, between Russia and Crimea
that would be the final blow to the prestige of Putin

Why does it not make sense if Biden said he would do it IF Russia invaded Ukraine, which he DID.
 
So they blow it up? $40 billion dollars worth? That's idiotic

The whole invasion is idiotic, it's idiotic like to 'free Ukrainian people form fascist' and then to terrorize them, rape them, torture them, kill them.... So fare the liberation by the brother folk. And we haven't reached the final chapter yet with nudes....

It could be Putin in desperate now, it could be a faction within the Russian army. Nevertheless in this stage, at this moment, there is not a lot that is pointing at NATO, or the US. Let alone the Ukraine because they are no capable of such action.
 
Yes, you know all the facts! I forgot.

No simple fact checking what happened when, like the withdrawal from Germany from Nord Stream on 22. feb.

That makes it to fake news. Tucker's story....with a big thumb.
 
@Malaparte, a German-Russian pole? Don't think this will happen, don't think it will ever function. Russia is the real pariah right now....

For the moment, Germany has chosen its Western identity over gravitating toward Russia. But what exactly does the West stand for anymore? Does it stand for its own historically embodied peoples and their posterity? Or does it stand merely for abstract principles that we already see routinely and casually betrayed?

However, in terms of geographic proximity and complimentary economies, Germany and Russia are natural allies in a global setting (as opposed to the early 20th century theater), and there is no question that Germany was beginning to gravitate toward Russia in the years leading up to the present crisis.

I offer this account, from 2018 == https://warsawinstitute.org/german-russian-rapprochement-gas-common-enemies/

And this account, from 2017 = https://tomluongo.me/2017/10/24/reading-deep-state-lost-germany/

Or consult this Mike Whitney article, originally printed just prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine -- oh so prescient == https://www.globalresearch.ca/crisis-ukraine-not-about-ukraine-about-germany/5770269

“The primordial interest of the United States, over which for centuries we have fought wars– the First, the Second and Cold Wars– has been the relationship between Germany and Russia, because united there, they’re the only force that could threaten us. And to make sure that that doesn’t happen.” George Friedman, STRATFOR CEO at The Chicago Council on Foreign Affairs

The Ukrainian crisis has nothing to do with Ukraine. It’s about Germany and, in particular, a pipeline that connects Germany to Russia called Nord Stream 2. Washington sees the pipeline as a threat to its primacy in Europe and has tried to sabotage the project at every turn. Even so, Nord Stream has pushed ahead and is now fully-operational and ready-to-go. Once German regulators provide the final certification, the gas deliveries will begin. German homeowners and businesses will have a reliable source of clean and inexpensive energy while Russia will see a significant boost to their gas revenues. It’s a win-win situation for both parties.

The US Foreign Policy establishment is not happy about these developments. They don’t want Germany to become more dependent on Russian gas because commerce builds trust and trust leads to the expansion of trade. As relations grow warmer, more trade barriers are lifted, regulations are eased, travel and tourism increase, and a new security architecture evolves. In a world where Germany and Russia are friends and trading partners, there is no need for US military bases, no need for expensive US-made weapons and missile systems, and no need for NATO.

There’s also no need to transact energy deals in US Dollars or to stockpile US Treasuries to balance accounts. Transactions between business partners can be conducted in their own currencies which is bound to precipitate a sharp decline in the value of the dollar and a dramatic shift in economic power. This is why the Biden administration opposes Nord Stream. It’s not just a pipeline, it’s a window into the future; a future in which Europe and Asia are drawn closer together into a massive free trade zone that increases their mutual power and prosperity while leaving the US on the outside looking in.Warmer relations between Germany and Russia signal an end to the “unipolar” world order the US has overseen for the last 75 years. A German-Russo alliance threatens to hasten the decline of the Superpower that is presently inching closer to the abyss.

This is why Washington is determined to do everything it can to sabotage Nord Stream and keep Germany within its orbit. It’s a matter of survival.
That’s where Ukraine comes into the picture. Ukraine is Washington’s ‘weapon of choice’ for torpedoing Nord Stream and putting a wedge between Germany and Russia.
 
For the moment, Germany has chosen its Western identity over gravitating toward Russia. But what exactly does the West stand for anymore? Does it stand for its own historically embodied peoples and their posterity? Or does it stand merely for abstract principles that we already see routinely and casually betrayed?

However, in terms of geographic proximity and complimentary economies, Germany and Russia are natural allies in a global setting (as opposed to the early 20th century theater), and there is no question that Germany was beginning to gravitate toward Russia in the years leading up to the present crisis.

I offer this account, from 2018 == https://warsawinstitute.org/german-russian-rapprochement-gas-common-enemies/

And this account, from 2017 = https://tomluongo.me/2017/10/24/reading-deep-state-lost-germany/

Or consult this Mike Whitney article, originally printed just prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine -- oh so prescient == https://www.globalresearch.ca/crisis-ukraine-not-about-ukraine-about-germany/5770269

You can make it ridicule but the parliamentary democracy, with basic freedoms, with trias politica it is worth the defense. And most of all not the fear to lift someone at night from their bed and put someone-without a fair trial- in jail.

It's not perfect and it will never be. But it's in essential different from what now in Russia and China is the case. Scream in Moskwa the word "war" and you are carried away in a black car to.....? Ask Navalny he nearly survived a poisonous attempt. That is what matters. Abstract not at al very concrete....unto life threatening.

Germany is certainly after 1945 in the West and after the collaps of the SU also the Eastern Germany in the Western hemisphere. Russia has never known a real democracy most people in Czaristic, Stalinistic and now in Putinistic times beneath the collectivistic cnut. I don't think that's for the most of Germans (or Poles, or...) an attractive perspective.

The war in the Ukraine was under a flag of going back to the roots in Kyiv, cradle of Rus, the unification and liberation of a brother folk But obviously without the brother folk self (but who cares....Putin?). Resulting in terror, rape, torture and killing of citizens. So fare the liberation of the brother folk, with great thanks to the Kremlin. And the 'strategic' nuke thing still has to come. So Putins does it's best to be 'the natural ally' of for example Germany? Nope, it's going to be seen as a sinister barbarian pariah.

By the way never seen an 'American' seen so eager pointing at kind of Russian friendly reports.
 
Last edited:
Why does it not make sense if Biden said he would do it IF Russia invaded Ukraine, which he DID.

He didn't say he'd blow up the pipeline, he said he'd make sure it was out of use, which happened before the blow-up.
Furthermore, if he had the intention to blow up the line, it would be stupid to tell this on beforehand.

What doesn't make sense to me is that you insist it certainly was Biden while there is no proof and there are so many other possibilities.
Come on, you are smarter than this, Jovialis.
 
By the way never seen an 'American' seen so eager pointing at kind of Russian friendly reports.

My position is not as simple as you say. I recognize the right of the Ukrainians to their own sovereign destiny (especially in the areas of the country where they are the ethnic majority, largely the western half), to resist Russia's imperial ambitions, and to orient themselves to Western Europe.

However, I think that the political classes in today's West, especially in the USA, are (1) disloyal to their own peoples and (2) clumsy, stupid and transparent in their machinations. Therefore, I criticize rather than support what they do.

And alleged Russophile that I am , I will now go straight to a Russian publication -- January 12, 2020 -- https://en.topwar.ru/166593-plan-morgentau-ssha-dlja-germanii.html

Morgenthau American Plan for Germany

In the ups and downs around Nord Stream 2, two things are striking. Germany’s inexorable will to lay this pipeline along with Russia, despite a serious deterioration in relations with the United States. The US desire to disrupt the construction of this Russian-German gas pipeline at any cost . . . .

The strategic goal of the United States is obvious - to cut off Europe (primarily Germany) from relatively cheap Russian energy sources and put on its more expensive ones. At the same time, America will earn twice: directly by selling its LNG to Europe and indirectly by reducing the competitiveness of German industry. This is disadvantageous for Germany and Europe, but, in principle, they could have come to terms with this, having sacrificed part of their profits in order to preserve the transatlantic partnership . . . .

German fears

Berlin remembers post-war history, namely, that NATO and the EU were created not only to contain the USSR, but also to bind the hands of Germany. To prevent the revival and strengthening of Germany is a long-standing policy of Britain, which was inherited by the United States . . . .

After World War II, the United States adopted the Marshall Plan for Europe and Germany, but there was also an alternative Morgenthau plan for it. This plan provided for the de-industrialization of Germany, the transformation of Germany into a large potato field as insurance against the emergence of its military industry and, accordingly, military potential.

In the forties of the last century, Washington refused the Morgenthau plan, because it was necessary to create an attractive showcase of the West on the border with the USSR, and a large potato field hardly gave a beautiful picture. But today the situation has changed: Russia has appeared instead of the USSR, the economic integration of Russia and Germany will lead to the strengthening of both countries.

Germany fears that the United States is preparing a new version of the Morgenthau plan with its liquefied gas when Germany is cut off from energy supplies from Russia . . . .

Here's former British diplomat Alistair Crooke, writing in February of this year = https://strategic-culture.org/news/...many-down-russia-out-and-instability-ukraine/

NATO was conceived, from the outset, as a means of Anglo-American control over Europe and more precisely for keeping Germany ‘down’, and Russia ‘out’ (in that old axiom of western strategists). Lord Hastings (Lionel Ismay), NATO’s first Secretary General, famously said that NATO was created to “keep the Soviet Union out, the Americans in, and the Germans down”.

This mindset lingers on, but the formula has acquired today a greater import, and a new twist: To keep Germany ‘down and price uncompetitive’ versus U.S. goods; to keep Russia ‘out’ from being Europe’s source of cheap energy; and to keep China ‘fenced out’ from EU–U.S. trade. The aim is to contain Europe firmly within America’s narrowly defined economic orbit and compelled to forgo the benefits of Chinese and Russian technology, finance and trade – thus helping towards achieving the aim of barricading China within its borders.

And here's a telling 2017 article by neo-con apparitchik Victor Davis Hanson = https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/07/nato-russians-out-americans-germans-down-updated-reversed/

Lord Ismay, a favorite of Churchill’s and a military adviser to British governments, had a remarkable sense of history — namely that constants such as historical memory, geography, and national character always transcend the politics of the day.
Russians from the days of the czars have wanted to extend their western influence into Europe. Russia was often a threat, given its large population and territory and rich natural resources — and it was also more autocratic and more volatile than many of its vulnerable European neighbors.

If alive today, Ismay might remind us that were there not a Vladimir Putin posing a threat to NATO’s vulnerable Eastern European members, he might have to be invented. Ismay instinctively sensed that what made the Soviet Union dangerous in the mid 1950s was not just Stalinism and the Communist system per se, or even its possession of nuclear weapons, but rather the resources of Russia and its historical tendency to embrace anti-democratic absolutism, whether left or right.

Constants such as historical memory, geography, and national character always transcend the politics of the day.


With that same insight, Ismay understood that a Europe caught between Germany and Russia would always need a powerful outside ally, one with resources and manpower well beyond those of Great Britain . . . .

Lastly in his triad of advice, Ismay referred generically to “Germany” — without specifying a contemporary friendly and allied West Germany, juxtaposed to the Soviet-inspired, Communist, and hostile East Germany. Again, the East–West German fault line existed in Ismay’s time; yet he reduced all those unique differences of his age into a generic “Germany down.”

Ismay apparently remembered the Franco-Prussian war of 1870–71, and the horrors of the First and Second World Wars. He concluded that the common denominator was Germany’s strong desire to recover from its historical hurt in predictable bouts of aggression and national chauvinism — and backed by considerable skill and power.

In Ismay’s time, such aggression was different from lesser Fascist movements in Italy and Spain, largely because of the central geographic position of a unified young German nation-state, its sizable population, its national wealth, and what we reluctantly in today’s politically correct landscape might call “German character.” That stereotype originates from the time of Caesar and Tacitus: the ability of the German people to create economic, military, and cultural influence well beyond what one might expect from the actual size of even an impressive German population or geography. And such dynamism is often expressed by eyeing neighbors’ spiritual or concrete territory.

Once again, if there were not Angela Merkel’s increasingly defiant Germany, it too would have to be created. Some in the United States weretroubled that Angela Merkel, from a beer hall in Munich no less, recently lashed out at the United States and promised that Germany might just have to navigate between the U.S. and Russia — quite a thought from a Germany once saved largely by the United States from its own carnivorousness and later likely Communist servitude.

Of course, what is disconcerting today about Germany is not the rise of totalitarian or nationalist movements, at least not as we usually use those terms. Indeed, in most respects, post-war Germany has been a model democracy. But there is a common denominator in Germany’s most recent controversies, with disturbing historical roots that might further amplify the logic of Ismay’s prescient “Germany down.” Germany might be pursuing a Eurocentric agenda, it might proudly declare itself an open-borders host for millions of impoverished immigrants, it might be at the vanguard of green energy, but it is doing all that in ways of Lord Ismay’s Germany of old.

The central bank of Germany de facto controls European finances. It uses the euro as a weaker currency than would otherwise be true of the Deutsche Mark to conduct a mercantile export economy, providing credit to weaker European economies to buy Germans goods that they otherwise could ill afford. The impoverished southern Mediterranean economies are essentially in hock now to Germany, and Germany apparently can neither be paid back its original loans nor write off the debts. In other words, German won all the chips of the European Union poker game and it no longer need play with its broke rivals . . . .

Germany saw Brexit as an intolerable affront to its own leadership. Apparently the British voter saw the icreasingly non-democratic trajectory of the European Union as a future challenge to its own independence. If southern Europeans are becoming serfs to Germany, and Eastern Europeans its clients, and Western Europeans anxious subordinates, then the British across the channel thought they had to get out while the getting was good.

Recent Pew international polls reveal that Germany of all the countries of the European Union is by far the most anti-American, with scarcely 52 percent expressing a positive appraisal of the United States — well before Donald Trump ran for office. Media polls show that the German press ran the most negative appraisals of Trump of all global news (98 percent of all coverage was critical). A fair summary of current German views of the United States would be not much different from the stereotypes of the 1930s: undisciplined, prone to wild swings in policy, a bastardized and commercialized culture of poorly informed and highly indebted consumers.

Ismay’s generation welcomed the re-creation of Germany as a positive democratic force both in the soon-to-be-created European Common Market and the nascent NATO alliance. But it did not discard Ismay’s idea of “Germany down.” Instead, there was a wink-and-nod acceptance that a divided Germany was a safe Germany. NATO and the common Soviet threat would encourage ties of solidarity. And just in case they did not, weaker and smaller traditional rivals, France and Great Britain, would possess nuclear weapons — and stronger and far larger Germany would not.

What would Ismay say of his current tripartite formula? He would warn about what happens when NATO withers on the vine: Russian is a bit in, America is somewhat out, and Germany more up than down — as Ismay feared when he helped offer the remedy of NATO at its creation.
 
You don't claim, publicity, that you are going to end the Nord Stream Pipeline and then actual bomb it in less than 8 months and deny that you had anything to do with it. That's silly.
 
My position is not as simple as you say. I recognize the right of the Ukrainians to their own sovereign destiny (especially in the areas of the country where they are the ethnic majority, largely the western half), to resist Russia's imperial ambitions, and to orient themselves to Western Europe.

However, I think that the political classes in today's West, especially in the USA, are (1) disloyal to their own peoples and (2) clumsy, stupid and transparent in their machinations. Therefore, I criticize rather than support what they do.

And alleged Russophile that I am , I will now go straight to a Russian publication -- January 12, 2020 -- https://en.topwar.ru/166593-plan-morgentau-ssha-dlja-germanii.html



Here's former British diplomat Alistair Crooke, writing in February of this year = https://strategic-culture.org/news/...many-down-russia-out-and-instability-ukraine/



And here's a telling 2017 article by neo-con apparitchik Victor Davis Hanson = https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/07/nato-russians-out-americans-germans-down-updated-reversed/


In the seventies an eighties were the "hippies' accused by many of the right wing that it was anti-establishment even into a American self hate....Is this heritage now part of some kind of alt right, or right wing populism. Long time ago I studied populism for the sake of a paper, fascinating kind of thinking, it occilates easily between right and left. Again the horse shoe is also at stake imo:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory

I don't share those monolithic national character that go back to Tacitus, my goodness.....But ok if you want some obervations Germany is in that sense clearly not one country, that was an idee fixe. Most simple are the more protestant North and catholic South. The North Germans are the cradle of the Anglo-Saxons, a seafaring culture. That's differentiated form for example high in the mountains Bavarians. Besides that the German society is really changed since ww2, it's an high educated country, not that industrialized with Preussen Junkers from before WW2. Really! I know there are still some difference for example with the Dutch. A simple example but with may be deeper roots a few years ago I was with my boys in Hamburg. In the Netherlands I'm used to pay everything by debit card, but the Germans want everything in hard cash. Some reminders of the past still survive. Nevertheless NO ONE in Germany fears that the US is going to deindustrialize Germany, they already make the shift to a knowledge society. The US as Germany have no single interest to make it to to a kind of agricultural state, to me this sounds as clear nonsens. Were comes this idea from?

And in some respect I can see that the US wanted indeed to make Germany to a show case, even the federal structure etc resembles in some way the US. Nevertheless in that respect nothing beats the Netherlands, when there are elections in the US this is prime time news, talk show news. Most people know the inner cities from the US through movies and series better than that of the Dutch cities.

You can quote from those older articles but the reality has changed especially since 24/2/22. The German social democrats and especially old hippie greens have turned into a hawk when it comes to the military, they spend recently 100 bil euro's to update the army. And that for greens who were founded in the anti-nuclear movement. And most of all the war has changed the cards, Putin's Russia is getting isolated. And with the blow up of Nord Stream 2 not only the gas supply is blown up also the connections with Russia. Is Russia going to be on the Morgenthau way?
 
Last edited:
In the seventies an eighties were the "hippies' accused by many of the right wing that it was anti-establishment even into a American self hate....Is this heritage now part of some kind of alt right, or right wing populism. Long time ago I studie populism for the sake of a study, fascinating kind of thinking, it occilates easily between right and left.

I don't find the right/left distinction particularly salient. The relevant distinction is national-populist versus global-imperialist.

I don't share those monolithic national character that go back to Tacitus, my goodness.....But ok if you want some obervations Germany is in that sense clearly not one country, that was an idee fixe. Most simple are the more protestant North and catholic South. The North Germans are the cradle of the Anglo-Saxons, a seafaring culture. That's differentiated form for example high in the mountains Bavarians. Besides that the German society is really changed since ww2, it's an high educated country, not that industrialized with Preussen Adel from for WW2. Really! I know there are still some difference for example with the Dutch. A simple example but with may be deeper roots a fe years ago I was with my boys in Hamburg. In the Netherlands I'm used to pay everything by debit card, but the Germans want everything in hard cash. Some reminders of the past still survive.

I guess I didn't make clear that I was citing Victor Davis Hanson *disapprovingly*, as an insight into establishment thinking in the USA, to point to their true objectives with regard to Germany. The neo-con's control the foreign policy elite of both parties, Democrat and Republican alike. Anthony Blinken and Victoria Newland are no less "neo con" than Cheney and Wolfowitz.

Nevertheless NO ONE in Germany fears that the US is going to deindustrialize Germany

When do you think the German people will wake up? Maybe over the winter?

they already make the shift to a knowledge society

Ahhh, yes, the knowledge society!!! The society without practical industrial know-how or capacity, the society without coal or nuclear energy. The society of financial wizardry and the patenting of next-generation pharmaceuticals. This highly advanced society shall outcompete all others! And of course most people will participate in this glorious new knowledge society. Nobody gets left behind, idling his days away on video games, fentanyl and porn. The dignity of the common man will be raised ever higher.

The US as Germany have no single interest to make it to to a kind of agricultural state, to me this sounds as clear nonsens. Were comes this idea from?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgenthau_Plan

You can quit from those older articles but the reality has changed especially since 24/2/22. The German social democrats and especially old hippie greens have turned into a hawk when it comes to the military, they spend recently 100 bil euro's to update the army. And that for greens who were founded in the anti-nuclear movement.

This would be salutary if they were arming to defend their true national interests. Instead, they are the unwitting lackeys of US imperialism, and they will soon see their country impoverished as never before, their vaunted industries decimated by energy costs.

And most of all the war has changed the cards, Putin's Russia is getting isolated.

Putin's Russia is isolated from Europe, but it is strengthening ties with other Eurasian countries and with BRICS. And once the true depth of American perfidy is revealed, the Europeans will seek to abandon the Americans and repair relations with Russia.

And with the blow up of Nord Stream 2 not only the gas supply is blown up also the connections with Russia.

I imagine this was the objective of the US Deep State actors. But again, they are not especially competent in their nefariousness. They are clumsy and transparent. And it's only a matter of time before a critical mass of Europeans realize what has happened.

Is Russian going to be on the Morgenthau way?

Russia will become increasingly self-sufficient economically, and despite currently being pushed toward China and Eurasia, it knows that over the long term, let's say 20 years out, its true interest is in close cooperation with Germany.
 
I don't find the right/left distinction particularly salient. The relevant distinction is national-populist versus global-imperialist.

That's the frame from populist in Europe to the fourth theory of Alexandre Dugin (the Putin whisperer). Imo there is not A folk and An Elite. The representative of the populist are mostly from the elite...


I perhaps didn't make clear that I was citing Victor Davis Hanson *disapprovingly*, as in insight to establishment thinking in the USA, to point to their true objectives with regard to Germany. The neo-con's control the foreign policy elite of both parties, Democrat and Republican alike. Anthony Blinken and Victoria Newland are no less "neo con" than Cheney and Wolfowitz.

-Sorry Jovialis- neo conservative is another hobby of me. Read lots about one of their godfather (besides the known Irving Kristol) namely Sidney Hook (a pragmatist). They all started a socialist or even communist. Neo-conservative was first used in the chisma in the Socialist Party of America. Some socialist became progressive more counter culture like. The hawks, anti counter culture types became to be known as neo conservatives. This became a label picked up by Kristol etc. Nevertheless the SD, USA in which Sydney Hook was long time president, was a kind of deliverer of neoconservatives. The were lines with Scoop Jackson of the Democrats. But they delivered to Democrats and Republicans. I forgot the name of a more or less famous woman in the Reagan administration......catch:

Cold War hardliners, work in Reagan Administration
In the 1970s and 1980s, members of the SDUSA were sometimes derisively referred to as "State Department socialists" for their support of hard-line Cold War policies. Prominent SDUSA members served in the Reagan Administration on the staff of the State Department, Labor Department and on Jeane Kirkpatrick's staff when she was US Ambassador to the United Nations. SDUSA members have long been prominent at the National Endowment for Democracy and Freedom House.


George W. Bush Administration, influence on Neoconservative movement
A number of former members of the SDUSA serve in the current administration of George W. Bush including Paul Wolfowitz.

Although some former members are now neoconservatives, and some current members are widely regarded as linked to neoconservatives (for instance, historian Ronald Radosh), they profess to have many differences with neoconservatism. For instance, they strongly support workers' rights at home and overseas and oppose many of the Bush administration's domestic policies. In the 1980s the SDUSA was perhaps best known for its support of Poland's Solidarity trade union. One of its leading members was the late civil rights hero Bayard Rustin.

Source watch.

Also one of that rare political cross overs in the political spectrum, Wolfowitz began in de SD, USA ;)


When do you think the German people will wake up? Made over the winter?
Europa is guaranteed in this winter. LPG from the USA, the Norwegians deliver also gas (the explosion of the Norrdstream was-coincident or not- exactly when the near connection with Norway was laid.

Ahhh, yes, the knowledge society!!! The society without practical industrial know-how or capacity, the society without coal or nuclear energy. The society of financial wizardry and the patenting of next-generation pharmaceuticals. This highly advanced society shall outcompete all others! And of course most people will participate in this glorious new knowledge society. Nobody gets left behind, idling his days away on video games, fentanyl and porn. The dignity of the common man will be raised ever higher.

Yes my grandfather worked as farmhand and I got a university degree. Doesn't say everything but in general life has become much better in quantity and quality. Unto the ghost of virulent filthy nationalism came awake, with lots of Russian sentiments about the West. Face it: communism imploded. But retrospect the West is the perpetrator....Now we see destructive and desperate behavior from the Kremlin. A hopeless war, and destructive behavior. And boys from fare away -Stan send to the Ukraine totally dissillusionised terrorizing the locals....so with all the respect I prefer the knowledge society above the apparatsjik style of the Kremlin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgenthau_Plan


This would be salutary if they were arming to defend their true national interests. Instead, they are the unwitting lackeys of US imperialism, and they will soon see their country impoverished as never before, their vaunted industries decimated by energy costs.

The West-Europeans will survive no doubts. WW2 was much more devastating...


Putin's Russia is isolated from Europe, but it is strengthening ties with other Eurasian countries and with BRICS. And once the true depth of American perfidy is revealed, the Europeans will seek to abandon the Americans and repair relations with Russia.

Yes away with that "cnut collectivism" hunt it fare beyond the Ural as a vazal state of Xi's China. When they threw a few nukes on the Ukraine- can't stand loosing- then the BRIC is also adios. The gap with Europe will be greater and what Putin wanted to prevent wil happen NATO from Finland to the Ukraine.

I imagine this was the objective of the US Deep State actors. But again, they are not especially competent in their nefariousness. They are clumsy and transparent. And it's only a matter of time before a critical mass of Europeans realize what has happened.

Has the US a deep state? Conspiracy, conspiracy on the wall....who is the deepest of them all. Really hocus pocus for me .....

Russia will become increasingly self-sufficient economically, and despite currently being pushed toward China and Eurasia, it knows that over the long term, let's say 20 years out, its true interest is in close cooperation with Germany.

Yes let your own potatoes grow in the dacha....poor people of Russia they pay the price of the Kremlin policy.
 
That's the frame from populist in Europe to the fourth theory of Alexandre Dugin (the Putin whisperer). Imo there is not A folk and An Elite. The representative of the populist are mostly from the elite...

It's nothing to do with Dugin, and everything to do with Aristotle. The elite can promote the common good of their people, or they can act against the common good. And yes, if true populists come to power in Europe, they will form a new elite. The question is how they will rule.

Europa is guaranteed in this winter. LPG from the USA, the Norwegians deliver also gas (the explosion of the Norrdstream was-coincident or not- exactly when the near connection with Norway was laid.

Can its industries remain in operation and its people kept warm at the same time? We shall see. You put a lot more faith in the ruling class than me.

so with all the respect I prefer the knowledge society above the apparatsjik style of the Kremlin

You misunderstand my point. I don't think that an ever-expanding "knowledge sector" can or should replace productive labor or the harnessing of natural resources. First, labor has its own dignity, and skilled labor is the source of all higher culture. And technological know-how in truth belongs to the people, not to the cooperations that ship manufacturing & component processes abroad. Technologies should have their own AOC protection the same as wine or cheese. So if you're from Sancerre, you have ownership of the technologies of Sancerre. Second, all societies and states should strive toward self-sufficiency, especially continental states like the USA or continental unions like the EU. With the exception of certain rare minerals, Europe should be able to produce all that it requires, and when it runs into limits, it should devise technological solutions. That is how technique advances. And most of its people should be employed as engineers, technicians, farmers, engaged in real processes, not in the so-called "knowledge sector" or service sector or financial sector.

The West-Europeans will survive no doubts. WW2 was much more devastating...

I have to admit, a long winter of chaos and suffering sounds good in theory. Not sure if I would want to live through it myself.

Yes away with that "cnut collectivism" hunt it fare beyond the Ural as a vazal state of Xi's China. When they threw a few nukes on the Ukraine- can't stand loosing- then the BRIC is also adios. The gap with Europe will be greater and what Putin wanted to prevent wil happen NATO from Finland to the Ukraine.

That's why I said Russia's long term interest is with Germany. But in the short term, BRICS is supporting her.

[
Conspiracy, conspiracy on the wall....who is the deepest of them all. Really hocus pocus for me .....

The US makes a helluva lot more sense as the Nordstream culprit than Russia.

However, if you want a more sophisticated theory, with multiple actors and factions, and with Davos as the true culprit, and the US as scapegoat, then read Tom Luongo's take == https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/luongo-curious-whodunit-nordstreams-1-2

But regardless, nobody with any sense thinks that Russia blew up her own pipelines. That was the only non-military leverage she had.
 

This thread has been viewed 13945 times.

Back
Top