R
rbowman
Guest
On 08/19/2022 11:04 AM, Don Y wrote:
You mean like China is acquiring US real estate?
You mean like China is acquiring US real estate?
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Ukraine- The Underappreciated Risks of Catastrophic Escalation...
F
Fred Bloggs
Guest
On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 2:54:06 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
Well of course the U.S. would use them in retaliation for a Russian strike against the U.S. or its allies. So that\'s the point. This mad M.A.D. thing.
On 8/19/2022 10:58 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 1:44:11 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 10:22 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 1:04:53 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 6:45 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 3:02:43 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 8/17/2022 10:00 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
U.S. already has a solid track record of defeat, so it won\'t
surprise anyone if they bow out. The cold facts are that Ukraine is
of no value to the west, and it\'s certainly not worth the cost of a
nuclear war.
Exactly *what* would be worth the cost of a nuclear war -- so I\'m
ready when that situation arises?
Putin doesn\'t like the idea of the western powers setting up a border
state with a lot of military armament and surveillance capability that
could threaten their autonomy. He\'s very willing to nuke Europe and
possibly the U.S. over it. It\'s not what we think that\'s important, it\'s
what they think.
You didn\'t answer my question.
You\'ve just told me what you think he wants us to think.
Of course that\'s what he wants to think, that\'s why he said it.
And you STILL haven\'t answered my question.
I.e., under what circumstances do you \"call an implied nuclear bluff\"?
I have no idea since that circumstance is as remote as being able to sprout wings and fly...
Then what\'s your point?
Perhaps we should discard the weapons if we\'re not willing to use them?
Well of course the U.S. would use them in retaliation for a Russian strike against the U.S. or its allies. So that\'s the point. This mad M.A.D. thing.
F
Fred Bloggs
Guest
On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 2:17:54 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
Those Russian numbers are total bs. Unauthorized reports from Russian military are 30,000 KIA minimum.
On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 10:58:18 AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
...
That\'s how Russia fights wars. They don\'t care about losses. They lost about as many people just taking Grozny as they have in Ukraine so far.
Unlikely, perhaps 1/10 of what they suffer in Ukraine.
\"Military casualties are unknown, but are estimated to run into the thousands of killed and wounded on both sides. The officially released figures on the Russian losses were 1,376 killed in action and 408 missing in action, yet the actual figure could be higher.\"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Grozny_(1994%E2%80%931995)
Those Russian numbers are total bs. Unauthorized reports from Russian military are 30,000 KIA minimum.
D
Don Y
Guest
On 8/19/2022 6:46 PM, rbowman wrote:
No, they\'re *paying* for it. I suspect Russia will find
itself having to gift bits of real estate to their uber-lords.
On 08/19/2022 11:04 AM, Don Y wrote:
Gotta wonder when China decides his credit isn\'t any good and opts
for something more tangible -- like RUSSIAN REAL ESTATE - to pay his dues.
You mean like China is acquiring US real estate?
No, they\'re *paying* for it. I suspect Russia will find
itself having to gift bits of real estate to their uber-lords.
F
Fred Bloggs
Guest
On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 6:06:42 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
U.S. has to be careful about the kind of systems they give Ukraine because there\'s a good chance they\'ll eventually be captured, and then reverse engineered.
On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 11:17:54 AM UTC-7, Ed Lee wrote:
On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 10:58:18 AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
...
That\'s how Russia fights wars. They don\'t care about losses. They lost about as many people just taking Grozny as they have in Ukraine so far.
Unlikely, perhaps 1/10 of what they suffer in Ukraine.
\"Military casualties are unknown, but are estimated to run into the thousands of killed and wounded on both sides. The officially released figures on the Russian losses were 1,376 killed in action and 408 missing in action, yet the actual figure could be higher.\"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Grozny_(1994%E2%80%931995)
And US worry about Russia losing too fast, rather than winning.
\"It seems like while Ukraine would like to end the war quickly and decisively defeat Russian forces and drive them out of their country, U.S. policy almost seems designed to prolong the conflict hoping to bring about the collapse of Russia itself, both militarily and economically,\" Spoonts said.
https://www.newsweek.com/sean-spoonts-us-russia-ukraine-war-policy-goals-1735019
U.S. has to be careful about the kind of systems they give Ukraine because there\'s a good chance they\'ll eventually be captured, and then reverse engineered.
A
Anthony William Sloman
Guest
On Saturday, August 20, 2022 at 3:22:49 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
<snip>
> Don\'t believe the western press and their bs about China being a military powerhouse- they\'re not. There\'s a LOT more to military capability than sheer numbers. A recent modern example is ww2 Germany, which in many cases was greatly outmanned and even outgunned, but their tactics and their execution of those tactics were so excellent, they sliced their opponents to shreds.
Just nowhere near enough of them. As you posted earlier, fighting a defensive battle is a lot cheaper that mounting an offensive. Don\'t confuse that basic advantage with \"tactical excellence\".
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 1:04:53 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 6:45 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 3:02:43 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 8/17/2022 10:00 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
<snip>
> Don\'t believe the western press and their bs about China being a military powerhouse- they\'re not. There\'s a LOT more to military capability than sheer numbers. A recent modern example is ww2 Germany, which in many cases was greatly outmanned and even outgunned, but their tactics and their execution of those tactics were so excellent, they sliced their opponents to shreds.
Just nowhere near enough of them. As you posted earlier, fighting a defensive battle is a lot cheaper that mounting an offensive. Don\'t confuse that basic advantage with \"tactical excellence\".
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
A
Anthony William Sloman
Guest
On Saturday, August 20, 2022 at 3:58:18 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
<snip.
> That\'s how Russia fights wars. They don\'t care about losses. They lost about as many people just taking Grozny as they have in Ukraine so far.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grozny
They ended up having to take Grozny twice. Not a Russian triumph that they will celebrate.
\"In August 1996, a raiding force of 1,500 to 3,000 militants recaptured the city in a surprise attack. They surrounded and routed its entire garrison of 10,000 MVD troops, while fighting off the Russian Army units from the Khankala base. The battle ended with a final ceasefire and Grozny was once again in the hands of Chechen separatists.\"
Chechnya is quite a bit smaller than the Ukraine - 1.4 million people as opposed to 44 million.
At some point everybody cares about losses. When you are close to not having an army any more, losing the last few soldiers that you have left isn\'t a good idea.
Putin is going to get pushback from the parents of the dead conscripts a lot earlier than that. He will try to ride roughshod over it, but there are limits to that too.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 1:44:11 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 10:22 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 1:04:53 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 6:45 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 3:02:43 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 8/17/2022 10:00 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
<snip.
> That\'s how Russia fights wars. They don\'t care about losses. They lost about as many people just taking Grozny as they have in Ukraine so far.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grozny
They ended up having to take Grozny twice. Not a Russian triumph that they will celebrate.
\"In August 1996, a raiding force of 1,500 to 3,000 militants recaptured the city in a surprise attack. They surrounded and routed its entire garrison of 10,000 MVD troops, while fighting off the Russian Army units from the Khankala base. The battle ended with a final ceasefire and Grozny was once again in the hands of Chechen separatists.\"
Chechnya is quite a bit smaller than the Ukraine - 1.4 million people as opposed to 44 million.
At some point everybody cares about losses. When you are close to not having an army any more, losing the last few soldiers that you have left isn\'t a good idea.
Putin is going to get pushback from the parents of the dead conscripts a lot earlier than that. He will try to ride roughshod over it, but there are limits to that too.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
R
rbowman
Guest
On 08/19/2022 08:06 PM, Don Y wrote:
Doubtful. I don\'t think you appreciate that the times they are a\'changin\'
On 8/19/2022 6:46 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 08/19/2022 11:04 AM, Don Y wrote:
Gotta wonder when China decides his credit isn\'t any good and opts
for something more tangible -- like RUSSIAN REAL ESTATE - to pay his
dues.
You mean like China is acquiring US real estate?
No, they\'re *paying* for it. I suspect Russia will find
itself having to gift bits of real estate to their uber-lords.
Doubtful. I don\'t think you appreciate that the times they are a\'changin\'
D
Don Y
Guest
On 8/19/2022 11:26 PM, rbowman wrote:
If we buy stuffed animals (etc) from china and china decides to
use those monies to buy real estate here, so be it. They could
equally opt to buy something else from somewhere else.
But, if China is the sole (significant) supporter of Russia,
then everything Russia needs comes from (or through) China.
China expects to be compensated just like any other sale.
Russia is a tiny economy. What are they going to have to offer
to China, in the long run?
On 08/19/2022 08:06 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 6:46 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 08/19/2022 11:04 AM, Don Y wrote:
Gotta wonder when China decides his credit isn\'t any good and opts
for something more tangible -- like RUSSIAN REAL ESTATE - to pay his
dues.
You mean like China is acquiring US real estate?
No, they\'re *paying* for it. I suspect Russia will find
itself having to gift bits of real estate to their uber-lords.
Doubtful. I don\'t think you appreciate that the times they are a\'changin\'
If we buy stuffed animals (etc) from china and china decides to
use those monies to buy real estate here, so be it. They could
equally opt to buy something else from somewhere else.
But, if China is the sole (significant) supporter of Russia,
then everything Russia needs comes from (or through) China.
China expects to be compensated just like any other sale.
Russia is a tiny economy. What are they going to have to offer
to China, in the long run?
F
Fred Bloggs
Guest
On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 11:03:54 PM UTC-4, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
True, but the terrain is hell and the Chechens are insane. Every bit of the figures of losses published by Russia is a lie. They were slaughtered.
Apparently fighting Russia is not enough for them, they\'re compelled to send Jihadists to a bunch of other conflicts.
> Putin is going to get pushback from the parents of the dead conscripts a lot earlier than that. He will try to ride roughshod over it, but there are limits to that too.
I take issue with that idea. Russians don\'t give a damn about human life. Anything you\'ve read about grieving relatives is a fabrication to deceive people of western, mostly Christian, culture. The modern day products of at least four generations of communist atheism have a completely different mindset.
From what I\'ve read the Russian army is all volunteer, they haven\'t started conscription yet.
On Saturday, August 20, 2022 at 3:58:18 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 1:44:11 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 10:22 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 1:04:53 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 6:45 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 3:02:43 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 8/17/2022 10:00 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
snip.
That\'s how Russia fights wars. They don\'t care about losses. They lost about as many people just taking Grozny as they have in Ukraine so far.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grozny
They ended up having to take Grozny twice. Not a Russian triumph that they will celebrate.
\"In August 1996, a raiding force of 1,500 to 3,000 militants recaptured the city in a surprise attack. They surrounded and routed its entire garrison of 10,000 MVD troops, while fighting off the Russian Army units from the Khankala base. The battle ended with a final ceasefire and Grozny was once again in the hands of Chechen separatists.\"
Chechnya is quite a bit smaller than the Ukraine - 1.4 million people as opposed to 44 million.
True, but the terrain is hell and the Chechens are insane. Every bit of the figures of losses published by Russia is a lie. They were slaughtered.
At some point everybody cares about losses. When you are close to not having an army any more, losing the last few soldiers that you have left isn\'t a good idea.
Apparently fighting Russia is not enough for them, they\'re compelled to send Jihadists to a bunch of other conflicts.
> Putin is going to get pushback from the parents of the dead conscripts a lot earlier than that. He will try to ride roughshod over it, but there are limits to that too.
I take issue with that idea. Russians don\'t give a damn about human life. Anything you\'ve read about grieving relatives is a fabrication to deceive people of western, mostly Christian, culture. The modern day products of at least four generations of communist atheism have a completely different mindset.
From what I\'ve read the Russian army is all volunteer, they haven\'t started conscription yet.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
A
Anthony William Sloman
Guest
On Saturday, August 20, 2022 at 10:48:46 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
Jihadists are nuts. There aren\'t all that mnay of them, and they aren\'t relevant to this discussion.
The ones I\'ve known have been pretty normal in that respect..
> Anything you\'ve read about grieving relatives is a fabrication to deceive people of western, mostly Christian, culture.
You think that the Russians aren\'t Christian? The Russian Orthodox Church would disagree, and the only professor of theology of my acquaintance - a Methodist - definitely includes the Russian Orthodox Church in the groups he is ecumenical with.
> The modern day products of at least four generations of communist atheism have a completely different mindset.
The communist party was always a small proportion of the population, and very few of them were enthusiastic atheists. The Communist Party didn\'t want the churches competing in the business of installing irrational ideas into the minds of the population, but after the downfall of the party in Russia in 1990, their opinion didn\'t matter. Putin goes to the trouble of looking like an adherent of the Orthodox Church from time to time, not that he\'s representative of the mindset of the population.
> From what I\'ve read the Russian army is all volunteer, they haven\'t started conscription yet.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_in_Russia
You seem to need to find better sources to read. And the relatives of volunteers aren\'t any happier when they end up dead.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 11:03:54 PM UTC-4, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, August 20, 2022 at 3:58:18 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 1:44:11 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 10:22 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 1:04:53 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 6:45 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 3:02:43 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 8/17/2022 10:00 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
snip.
That\'s how Russia fights wars. They don\'t care about losses. They lost about as many people just taking Grozny as they have in Ukraine so far.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grozny
They ended up having to take Grozny twice. Not a Russian triumph that they will celebrate.
\"In August 1996, a raiding force of 1,500 to 3,000 militants recaptured the city in a surprise attack. They surrounded and routed its entire garrison of 10,000 MVD troops, while fighting off the Russian Army units from the Khankala base. The battle ended with a final ceasefire and Grozny was once again in the hands of Chechen separatists.\"
Chechnya is quite a bit smaller than the Ukraine - 1.4 million people as opposed to 44 million.
True, but the terrain is hell and the Chechens are insane. Every bit of the figures of losses published by Russia is a lie. They were slaughtered.
At some point everybody cares about losses. When you are close to not having an army any more, losing the last few soldiers that you have left isn\'t a good idea.
Apparently fighting Russia is not enough for them, they\'re compelled to send Jihadists to a bunch of other conflicts.
Jihadists are nuts. There aren\'t all that mnay of them, and they aren\'t relevant to this discussion.
Putin is going to get pushback from the parents of the dead conscripts a lot earlier than that. He will try to ride roughshod over it, but there are limits to that too.
I take issue with that idea. Russians don\'t give a damn about human life.
The ones I\'ve known have been pretty normal in that respect..
> Anything you\'ve read about grieving relatives is a fabrication to deceive people of western, mostly Christian, culture.
You think that the Russians aren\'t Christian? The Russian Orthodox Church would disagree, and the only professor of theology of my acquaintance - a Methodist - definitely includes the Russian Orthodox Church in the groups he is ecumenical with.
> The modern day products of at least four generations of communist atheism have a completely different mindset.
The communist party was always a small proportion of the population, and very few of them were enthusiastic atheists. The Communist Party didn\'t want the churches competing in the business of installing irrational ideas into the minds of the population, but after the downfall of the party in Russia in 1990, their opinion didn\'t matter. Putin goes to the trouble of looking like an adherent of the Orthodox Church from time to time, not that he\'s representative of the mindset of the population.
> From what I\'ve read the Russian army is all volunteer, they haven\'t started conscription yet.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_in_Russia
You seem to need to find better sources to read. And the relatives of volunteers aren\'t any happier when they end up dead.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
R
rbowman
Guest
On 08/20/2022 12:42 AM, Don Y wrote:
You really need to pay attention:
https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/20/energy/china-russia-oil-imports-record/index.html
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-29/russian-gas-pivot-toward-china-will-ease-europe-s-energy-crunch
That \'tiny economy\' seems to have Europe by the balls at the moment.
On 8/19/2022 11:26 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 08/19/2022 08:06 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 6:46 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 08/19/2022 11:04 AM, Don Y wrote:
Gotta wonder when China decides his credit isn\'t any good and opts
for something more tangible -- like RUSSIAN REAL ESTATE - to pay his
dues.
You mean like China is acquiring US real estate?
No, they\'re *paying* for it. I suspect Russia will find
itself having to gift bits of real estate to their uber-lords.
Doubtful. I don\'t think you appreciate that the times they are a\'changin\'
If we buy stuffed animals (etc) from china and china decides to
use those monies to buy real estate here, so be it. They could
equally opt to buy something else from somewhere else.
But, if China is the sole (significant) supporter of Russia,
then everything Russia needs comes from (or through) China.
China expects to be compensated just like any other sale.
Russia is a tiny economy. What are they going to have to offer
to China, in the long run?
You really need to pay attention:
https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/20/energy/china-russia-oil-imports-record/index.html
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-29/russian-gas-pivot-toward-china-will-ease-europe-s-energy-crunch
That \'tiny economy\' seems to have Europe by the balls at the moment.
F
Fred Bloggs
Guest
On Saturday, August 20, 2022 at 9:45:07 AM UTC-4, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
I\'m not at all onboard with that church after the way they kowtowed to the Romanov\'s.
If you admitted to any religious beliefs on a college admissions application, you were immediately rejected as being a mentally unstable type.
Your problem is you\'re completely lacking the slightest iota of critical thinking skills. Not going waste my time reading that dumb article, but right off it says \"Conscripts are generally prohibited from being deployed abroad.\" I would assume Ukraine is abroad to them, but you never know. The news summaries by reputable organizations with reporters who really understand these places, say there is no conscription for Ukraine.
They don\'t give a damn.
On Saturday, August 20, 2022 at 10:48:46 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 11:03:54 PM UTC-4, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, August 20, 2022 at 3:58:18 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 1:44:11 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 10:22 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 1:04:53 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 6:45 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 3:02:43 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 8/17/2022 10:00 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
snip.
That\'s how Russia fights wars. They don\'t care about losses. They lost about as many people just taking Grozny as they have in Ukraine so far.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grozny
They ended up having to take Grozny twice. Not a Russian triumph that they will celebrate.
\"In August 1996, a raiding force of 1,500 to 3,000 militants recaptured the city in a surprise attack. They surrounded and routed its entire garrison of 10,000 MVD troops, while fighting off the Russian Army units from the Khankala base. The battle ended with a final ceasefire and Grozny was once again in the hands of Chechen separatists.\"
Chechnya is quite a bit smaller than the Ukraine - 1.4 million people as opposed to 44 million.
True, but the terrain is hell and the Chechens are insane. Every bit of the figures of losses published by Russia is a lie. They were slaughtered.
At some point everybody cares about losses. When you are close to not having an army any more, losing the last few soldiers that you have left isn\'t a good idea.
Apparently fighting Russia is not enough for them, they\'re compelled to send Jihadists to a bunch of other conflicts.
Jihadists are nuts. There aren\'t all that mnay of them, and they aren\'t relevant to this discussion.
Putin is going to get pushback from the parents of the dead conscripts a lot earlier than that. He will try to ride roughshod over it, but there are limits to that too.
I take issue with that idea. Russians don\'t give a damn about human life.
The ones I\'ve known have been pretty normal in that respect..
Anything you\'ve read about grieving relatives is a fabrication to deceive people of western, mostly Christian, culture.
You think that the Russians aren\'t Christian? The Russian Orthodox Church would disagree, and the only professor of theology of my acquaintance - a Methodist - definitely includes the Russian Orthodox Church in the groups he is ecumenical with.
I\'m not at all onboard with that church after the way they kowtowed to the Romanov\'s.
The modern day products of at least four generations of communist atheism have a completely different mindset.
The communist party was always a small proportion of the population, and very few of them were enthusiastic atheists. The Communist Party didn\'t want the churches competing in the business of installing irrational ideas into the minds of the population, but after the downfall of the party in Russia in 1990, their opinion didn\'t matter. Putin goes to the trouble of looking like an adherent of the Orthodox Church from time to time, not that he\'s representative of the mindset of the population.
If you admitted to any religious beliefs on a college admissions application, you were immediately rejected as being a mentally unstable type.
From what I\'ve read the Russian army is all volunteer, they haven\'t started conscription yet.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_in_Russia
Your problem is you\'re completely lacking the slightest iota of critical thinking skills. Not going waste my time reading that dumb article, but right off it says \"Conscripts are generally prohibited from being deployed abroad.\" I would assume Ukraine is abroad to them, but you never know. The news summaries by reputable organizations with reporters who really understand these places, say there is no conscription for Ukraine.
You seem to need to find better sources to read. And the relatives of volunteers aren\'t any happier when they end up dead.
They don\'t give a damn.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
D
Don Y
Guest
On 8/20/2022 9:47 AM, rbowman wrote:
Oil is an obsolescent product. There have been similar situations
(with other products) throughout recent history. They are transitory.
We waited in LONG lines in the 70\'s \"oil embargo\". \"By the balls\".
When was the last time you had more than two cars ahead of you at
the gas station?
We\'ve had \"chip shortages\" in the past. \"On allocation\". Then,
we didn\'t.
Because things change. Societies and businesses adapt.
For products like oil, once folks move away from it, it\'s unlikely
that the demand will rematerialize. It\'s not the sort of decision
you can revisit on a weekly basis (like whether or not you want to
start eating Iranian pistachios, again)
On 08/20/2022 12:42 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 11:26 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 08/19/2022 08:06 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 6:46 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 08/19/2022 11:04 AM, Don Y wrote:
Gotta wonder when China decides his credit isn\'t any good and opts
for something more tangible -- like RUSSIAN REAL ESTATE - to pay his
dues.
You mean like China is acquiring US real estate?
No, they\'re *paying* for it. I suspect Russia will find
itself having to gift bits of real estate to their uber-lords.
Doubtful. I don\'t think you appreciate that the times they are a\'changin\'
If we buy stuffed animals (etc) from china and china decides to
use those monies to buy real estate here, so be it. They could
equally opt to buy something else from somewhere else.
But, if China is the sole (significant) supporter of Russia,
then everything Russia needs comes from (or through) China.
China expects to be compensated just like any other sale.
Russia is a tiny economy. What are they going to have to offer
to China, in the long run?
You really need to pay attention:
https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/20/energy/china-russia-oil-imports-record/index.html
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-29/russian-gas-pivot-toward-china-will-ease-europe-s-energy-crunch
That \'tiny economy\' seems to have Europe by the balls at the moment.
Oil is an obsolescent product. There have been similar situations
(with other products) throughout recent history. They are transitory.
We waited in LONG lines in the 70\'s \"oil embargo\". \"By the balls\".
When was the last time you had more than two cars ahead of you at
the gas station?
We\'ve had \"chip shortages\" in the past. \"On allocation\". Then,
we didn\'t.
Because things change. Societies and businesses adapt.
For products like oil, once folks move away from it, it\'s unlikely
that the demand will rematerialize. It\'s not the sort of decision
you can revisit on a weekly basis (like whether or not you want to
start eating Iranian pistachios, again)
F
Fred Bloggs
Guest
On Saturday, August 20, 2022 at 2:13:29 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
Not really. Oil is vitally essential. Oil is great as long as you don\'t burn it. Here\'s a bunch of products made using oil:
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/11/f68/Products%20Made%20From%20Oil%20and%20Natural%20Gas%20Infographic.pdf
They\'re really not emphasizing some really big stuff like synthetic textiles and paints and coatings. Those are huge markets and the properties of those products are not easily replaced. Manufacturing polyester responsibly is far less damaging to the environment than growing cotton. Polyester doesn\'t require draining lakes and rivers and laying down the fertilizer and pesticide contamination like cotton does. You\'re going to be hard pressed to find alternatives to petroleum lubricants. There\'re plant based products but you go large scale on those and you end up with a disaster.
On 8/20/2022 9:47 AM, rbowman wrote:
On 08/20/2022 12:42 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 11:26 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 08/19/2022 08:06 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 6:46 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 08/19/2022 11:04 AM, Don Y wrote:
Gotta wonder when China decides his credit isn\'t any good and opts
for something more tangible -- like RUSSIAN REAL ESTATE - to pay his
dues.
You mean like China is acquiring US real estate?
No, they\'re *paying* for it. I suspect Russia will find
itself having to gift bits of real estate to their uber-lords.
Doubtful. I don\'t think you appreciate that the times they are a\'changin\'
If we buy stuffed animals (etc) from china and china decides to
use those monies to buy real estate here, so be it. They could
equally opt to buy something else from somewhere else.
But, if China is the sole (significant) supporter of Russia,
then everything Russia needs comes from (or through) China.
China expects to be compensated just like any other sale.
Russia is a tiny economy. What are they going to have to offer
to China, in the long run?
You really need to pay attention:
https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/20/energy/china-russia-oil-imports-record/index.html
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-29/russian-gas-pivot-toward-china-will-ease-europe-s-energy-crunch
That \'tiny economy\' seems to have Europe by the balls at the moment.
Oil is an obsolescent product. There have been similar situations
(with other products) throughout recent history. They are transitory.
Not really. Oil is vitally essential. Oil is great as long as you don\'t burn it. Here\'s a bunch of products made using oil:
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/11/f68/Products%20Made%20From%20Oil%20and%20Natural%20Gas%20Infographic.pdf
They\'re really not emphasizing some really big stuff like synthetic textiles and paints and coatings. Those are huge markets and the properties of those products are not easily replaced. Manufacturing polyester responsibly is far less damaging to the environment than growing cotton. Polyester doesn\'t require draining lakes and rivers and laying down the fertilizer and pesticide contamination like cotton does. You\'re going to be hard pressed to find alternatives to petroleum lubricants. There\'re plant based products but you go large scale on those and you end up with a disaster.
We waited in LONG lines in the 70\'s \"oil embargo\". \"By the balls\".
When was the last time you had more than two cars ahead of you at
the gas station?
We\'ve had \"chip shortages\" in the past. \"On allocation\". Then,
we didn\'t.
Because things change. Societies and businesses adapt.
For products like oil, once folks move away from it, it\'s unlikely
that the demand will rematerialize. It\'s not the sort of decision
you can revisit on a weekly basis (like whether or not you want to
start eating Iranian pistachios, again)
D
Don Y
Guest
On 8/20/2022 1:03 PM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
~45% of oil production goes into making gasoline. I\'m going to take
away 45% of your market -- how happy will you be?
~30% goes to distillates like diesel and heating oil. How happy would you
be to lose that market as well?
Another ~8% goes to jet fuel -- likely not to be replaced anytime soon.
About 15% goes to the \"other products\" that you\'ve mentioned.
What happens to market prices when there is 7 times the market\'s needs
available in the supply?
> They\'re really not emphasizing some really big stuff like synthetic textiles and paints and coatings. Those are huge markets and the properties of those products are not easily replaced. Manufacturing polyester responsibly is far less damaging to the environment than growing cotton. Polyester doesn\'t require draining lakes and rivers and laying down the fertilizer and pesticide contamination like cotton does. You\'re going to be hard pressed to find alternatives to petroleum lubricants. There\'re plant based products but you go large scale on those and you end up with a disaster.
On Saturday, August 20, 2022 at 2:13:29 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 8/20/2022 9:47 AM, rbowman wrote:
On 08/20/2022 12:42 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 11:26 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 08/19/2022 08:06 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 6:46 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 08/19/2022 11:04 AM, Don Y wrote:
Gotta wonder when China decides his credit isn\'t any good and opts
for something more tangible -- like RUSSIAN REAL ESTATE - to pay his
dues.
You mean like China is acquiring US real estate?
No, they\'re *paying* for it. I suspect Russia will find
itself having to gift bits of real estate to their uber-lords.
Doubtful. I don\'t think you appreciate that the times they are a\'changin\'
If we buy stuffed animals (etc) from china and china decides to
use those monies to buy real estate here, so be it. They could
equally opt to buy something else from somewhere else.
But, if China is the sole (significant) supporter of Russia,
then everything Russia needs comes from (or through) China.
China expects to be compensated just like any other sale.
Russia is a tiny economy. What are they going to have to offer
to China, in the long run?
You really need to pay attention:
https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/20/energy/china-russia-oil-imports-record/index.html
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-29/russian-gas-pivot-toward-china-will-ease-europe-s-energy-crunch
That \'tiny economy\' seems to have Europe by the balls at the moment.
Oil is an obsolescent product. There have been similar situations
(with other products) throughout recent history. They are transitory.
Not really. Oil is vitally essential. Oil is great as long as you don\'t burn it. Here\'s a bunch of products made using oil:
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/11/f68/Products%20Made%20From%20Oil%20and%20Natural%20Gas%20Infographic.pdf
~45% of oil production goes into making gasoline. I\'m going to take
away 45% of your market -- how happy will you be?
~30% goes to distillates like diesel and heating oil. How happy would you
be to lose that market as well?
Another ~8% goes to jet fuel -- likely not to be replaced anytime soon.
About 15% goes to the \"other products\" that you\'ve mentioned.
What happens to market prices when there is 7 times the market\'s needs
available in the supply?
> They\'re really not emphasizing some really big stuff like synthetic textiles and paints and coatings. Those are huge markets and the properties of those products are not easily replaced. Manufacturing polyester responsibly is far less damaging to the environment than growing cotton. Polyester doesn\'t require draining lakes and rivers and laying down the fertilizer and pesticide contamination like cotton does. You\'re going to be hard pressed to find alternatives to petroleum lubricants. There\'re plant based products but you go large scale on those and you end up with a disaster.
F
Flyguy
Guest
On Wednesday, August 17, 2022 at 9:07:46 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
Hey Bozo, I have already posted about the nuclear chain of command in Russia - you would do well to read and UNDERSTAND IT. Bottom line: Putin CAN\'T unilaterally trigger a nuclear attack.
On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 1:41:29 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, August 17, 2022 at 10:00:12 AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
U.S. already has a solid track record of defeat, so it won\'t surprise anyone if they bow out. The cold facts are that Ukraine is of no value to the west, and it\'s certainly not worth the cost of a nuclear war.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/playing-fire-ukraine
Ukraine is Ground Zero for the new Cold War - regardless of how important or unimportant Ukraine is the U.S. this is a seminal moment in history.
It\'s most likely the point where Putin\'s incompetence has became obvious enough to get him thrown out.
It may be a while before this happens. If he did try to start a nuclear exchange he\'d most likely get slung out immediately.
Flyguy exhibits incompetence, but doesn\'t comprehend it.
Hey Bozo, I have already posted about the nuclear chain of command in Russia - you would do well to read and UNDERSTAND IT. Bottom line: Putin CAN\'T unilaterally trigger a nuclear attack.
F
Flyguy
Guest
On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 10:04:53 AM UTC-7, Don Y wrote:
LOL! Do you REALLY expect Lyin\' Biden to \"beat his chest?\" He would most likely have a heart attack if he did. This is why he is wearing aviator sunglasses - so people won\'t see how sunken his eyeballs are.
That would be Lyin\' Biden.
So is Lyin\' Biden.
No, China will just take oil and minerals for payment.
On 8/19/2022 6:45 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 3:02:43 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 8/17/2022 10:00 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
U.S. already has a solid track record of defeat, so it won\'t surprise
anyone if they bow out. The cold facts are that Ukraine is of no value
to the west, and it\'s certainly not worth the cost of a nuclear war.
Exactly *what* would be worth the cost of a nuclear war -- so I\'m ready
when that situation arises?
Putin doesn\'t like the idea of the western powers setting up a border state
with a lot of military armament and surveillance capability that could
threaten their autonomy. He\'s very willing to nuke Europe and possibly the
U.S. over it. It\'s not what we think that\'s important, it\'s what they
think.
You didn\'t answer my question.
You\'ve just told me what you think he wants us to think.
Maybe we should beat our chest as well -- send military transports
into UKRAINIAN airspace and tell Putin, \"You\'d better not interfere
with them as we\'ve got the bomber fleet on full alert -- and have
notified our NATO allies of our readiness to counterattack
with overwhelming force...\"
LOL! Do you REALLY expect Lyin\' Biden to \"beat his chest?\" He would most likely have a heart attack if he did. This is why he is wearing aviator sunglasses - so people won\'t see how sunken his eyeballs are.
Then, see who blinks.
That would be Lyin\' Biden.
I\'m sure he\'d realize that any archives of his country that survive
likely wouldn\'t remember him as a \"hero\" but, rather, the person who
was responsible for their apocalyptic living conditions.
[Unless, of course, he thinks he can defeat all of NATO with his
current record of \"progress\" against Ukraine?]
One thing we know for sure, now, is Putin is Xi\'s lap dog and
likely to remain so till his death -- going to China, hat-in-hand
for foodstuffs, military supplies, etc.
So is Lyin\' Biden.
Gotta wonder when China decides his credit isn\'t any good and opts
for something more tangible -- like RUSSIAN REAL ESTATE - to pay his dues.
No, China will just take oil and minerals for payment.
F
Flyguy
Guest
On Saturday, August 20, 2022 at 11:13:29 AM UTC-7, Don Y wrote:
You are as much of a wishful thinker as Bozo Bill - we will NEVER get away from oil. How far do you think an electric 737 is going to get you?
That would be every day at Costco if you go anytime but very early or very late.
\"Allocation\" means rationing; in Russia food is \"allocated.\"
Tell me, WHAT are you going to replace plastics with???
On 8/20/2022 9:47 AM, rbowman wrote:
On 08/20/2022 12:42 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 11:26 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 08/19/2022 08:06 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 6:46 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 08/19/2022 11:04 AM, Don Y wrote:
Gotta wonder when China decides his credit isn\'t any good and opts
for something more tangible -- like RUSSIAN REAL ESTATE - to pay his
dues.
You mean like China is acquiring US real estate?
No, they\'re *paying* for it. I suspect Russia will find
itself having to gift bits of real estate to their uber-lords.
Doubtful. I don\'t think you appreciate that the times they are a\'changin\'
If we buy stuffed animals (etc) from china and china decides to
use those monies to buy real estate here, so be it. They could
equally opt to buy something else from somewhere else.
But, if China is the sole (significant) supporter of Russia,
then everything Russia needs comes from (or through) China.
China expects to be compensated just like any other sale.
Russia is a tiny economy. What are they going to have to offer
to China, in the long run?
You really need to pay attention:
https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/20/energy/china-russia-oil-imports-record/index.html
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-29/russian-gas-pivot-toward-china-will-ease-europe-s-energy-crunch
That \'tiny economy\' seems to have Europe by the balls at the moment.
Oil is an obsolescent product. There have been similar situations
(with other products) throughout recent history. They are transitory.
You are as much of a wishful thinker as Bozo Bill - we will NEVER get away from oil. How far do you think an electric 737 is going to get you?
We waited in LONG lines in the 70\'s \"oil embargo\". \"By the balls\".
When was the last time you had more than two cars ahead of you at
the gas station?
That would be every day at Costco if you go anytime but very early or very late.
We\'ve had \"chip shortages\" in the past. \"On allocation\". Then,
we didn\'t.
\"Allocation\" means rationing; in Russia food is \"allocated.\"
Because things change. Societies and businesses adapt.
For products like oil, once folks move away from it, it\'s unlikely
that the demand will rematerialize. It\'s not the sort of decision
you can revisit on a weekly basis (like whether or not you want to
start eating Iranian pistachios, again)
Tell me, WHAT are you going to replace plastics with???
R
rbowman
Guest
On 08/20/2022 12:13 PM, Don Y wrote:
Dream on.
To reiterate: \'have Europe by the balls\'. Germany decided shutting down
that last nuke wasn\'t a good idea and are bringing coal fired plants
back on line. Suck it up, Greens.
On 8/20/2022 9:47 AM, rbowman wrote:
On 08/20/2022 12:42 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 11:26 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 08/19/2022 08:06 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/19/2022 6:46 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 08/19/2022 11:04 AM, Don Y wrote:
Gotta wonder when China decides his credit isn\'t any good and opts
for something more tangible -- like RUSSIAN REAL ESTATE - to pay his
dues.
You mean like China is acquiring US real estate?
No, they\'re *paying* for it. I suspect Russia will find
itself having to gift bits of real estate to their uber-lords.
Doubtful. I don\'t think you appreciate that the times they are
a\'changin\'
If we buy stuffed animals (etc) from china and china decides to
use those monies to buy real estate here, so be it. They could
equally opt to buy something else from somewhere else.
But, if China is the sole (significant) supporter of Russia,
then everything Russia needs comes from (or through) China.
China expects to be compensated just like any other sale.
Russia is a tiny economy. What are they going to have to offer
to China, in the long run?
You really need to pay attention:
https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/20/energy/china-russia-oil-imports-record/index.html
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-29/russian-gas-pivot-toward-china-will-ease-europe-s-energy-crunch
That \'tiny economy\' seems to have Europe by the balls at the moment.
Oil is an obsolescent product. There have been similar situations
(with other products) throughout recent history. They are transitory.
Dream on.
We waited in LONG lines in the 70\'s \"oil embargo\". \"By the balls\".
When was the last time you had more than two cars ahead of you at
the gas station?
To reiterate: \'have Europe by the balls\'. Germany decided shutting down
that last nuke wasn\'t a good idea and are bringing coal fired plants
back on line. Suck it up, Greens.