Live data from Hacker News

European natural gas imports and storage reserves

bruegel.org

291–296 of 296 posts

Re: European natural gas imports and storage reserves

#291
post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That being said, I hope we plan on no longer depending on Qatar either, because their stability doesn't seem a given either.

That would be the smart move. To greatly increase conservation (heat pumps, better insulation, etc. are low hanging fruits that will more than pay for themselves in a few years), reduce car driving in favor of cheaper and better public transport and/or bikes/ebikes, and to increase wind and solar power, both of which are as cheap if not cheaper than most sources of fossil fuels and can be brought online within months…

How will reducing car driving save gas?

Re: European natural gas imports and storage reserves

#292
post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) in the short term Europe is not cutting gas from Russia, it's the other way round 2) in the long term, Europe is trying to get independent from Russian gas so that 1) will not happen again Europe is trying to get away from being dependent from Russian gas for strategic, not humanistic reasons.

>Europe is trying to get away from being dependent from Russian gas for strategic, not humanistic reasons. I think the truth of this statement increases with a slight modification. The US is trying to get Europe away from being dependent from Russian gas for strategic, not humanistic reasons. Western European countries, and Germany especially have had to be pushed into supporting Ukraine.

> Western European countries, and Germany especially have had to be pushed into supporting Ukraine.

Absolutely untrue of "western countries", only of Germany.

The american "push" was welcome as a sign of confidence that we could support Ukraine not merely on our own, but with the backing of the United States. But this is our continent that is under attack. The US wouldn't otherwise care, but taking down Russia is a huge get for them so they care.

Re: European natural gas imports and storage reserves

#293
post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are going in circles: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32829679

You're going in circles. We're not discussing why Russia started CSTO, but why CEE nations felt the need to enter NATO. The fact that Russia was also invaded in its history bears no relevancy in this matter.

And here we go again.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32835337

Re: European natural gas imports and storage reserves

#294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The big problem is that you, western people, especially people from USA, see the whole situation through the tiny keyhole where your media project whatever bias they want. You have no means of access to objective or balanced information. You can't read anything about Russia or Ukraine in the original uncensored form. You can't watch any video from Ukraine or Russia without it being carefully selected by somebody and…

> You have no means of access to objective or balanced information. You can't read anything about Russia or Ukraine in the original uncensored form. Does anyone? I never was under any belief that I did. Excuse my understanding, but is it your assertion that there is unfettered access to uncensored information within Russia??

> there is unfettered access to uncensored information within Russia??

Well, there is. Why do you think I have less possibilities to access information than you? Yes, some websites are blocked. A tiny minority of USA/EU funded propaganda horns like Meduza, that for years translate pretty obvious rusophobic messages. But I can read even them through VPN or through numerous other ways that CIA and NSA provide for free for such propaganda factories.

A huge difference is that I can speak and read three languages. I can (and do) read US and European news in their native languages. I can read and do read from time to time social media like Reddit. I have friends and relatives in various countries of the world.

People in US and EU have less possibilities. Does any significant proportion of population can read Russian? No. You are forced to read only tiny amount of information that is selected by somebody else and translated for you.

Regarding Russia/Ukraine conflict there's even more. There's no separate Ukrainian nation. It's not genes, it's not anything else. Republic of Ukraine was created by Lenin and later was supported by Stalin who promoted "ukrainization" of eastern regions of Russia. We do not yet fully understand why they did it. We only see documents signed by Stalin, for example, "to intensify teaching of Ukranian in schools in universities" in this region. It's an irony, that they vilify and destroy monuments devoted to people that created their state. Also, I'm sure you never read about this and saw these documents translated anywhere in your media, because it would be pretty inconvenient truth.

Anyway, because it was always Russia, there're millions of families split between Russia and Ukraine. We understand each other. Even Ukranian language is easy for us to understand - it's Russian grammar but some words are replaced with Polish equivalents. There was and is perpetual movement of people between Ukraine and Russia. My ancestors were living on Ukraine when there was no such state but it was a part of Russia.

You cannot understand the history and relationship of Ukraine and Russia to the same extent as we do. You can't understand the Nazi propaganda in Russian and Ukranian that is all over the Internet, especially Russian/Ukranian parts.

You're being told a very simple story: "Putin hates democracy and that's why it want to destroy the great democratic state of Ukraine and it's great democratic people!" and you have no other choice but to believe it. There's simply no other source of information for you. Nor would you ever be able to understand what people here feel and think about it, when US based agencies come to Ukraine, for example, and publish books like "Paladins of Hitler" and other rusophobic propaganda, that is either Nazi or entirely confabulated.

Re: European natural gas imports and storage reserves

#295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You have no means of access to objective or balanced information. You can't read anything about Russia or Ukraine in the original uncensored form. Does anyone? I never was under any belief that I did. Excuse my understanding, but is it your assertion that there is unfettered access to uncensored information within Russia??

> there is unfettered access to uncensored information within Russia?? Well, there is. Why do you think I have less possibilities to access information than you? Yes, some websites are blocked. A tiny minority of USA/EU funded propaganda horns like Meduza, that for years translate pretty obvious rusophobic messages. But I can read even them through VPN or through numerous other ways that CIA and NSA provide for free…

> Regarding Russia/Ukraine conflict there's even more. There's no separate Ukrainian nation. It's not genes, it's not anything else

You seem to think that because Ukrainians and Russians have some shared heritage (cultural, linguistic and biological), they cannot be separate nations. But many other pairs of nations also share a significant degree of these things – Germany and Austria (and German-speaking Switzerland too), France and Belgium (Wallonia), Belgium and the Netherlands (Flanders), the US and Canada, the UK and Ireland, Australia and New Zealand. Do you apply the same standards to any of them?

> Republic of Ukraine was created by Lenin and later was supported by Stalin who promoted "ukrainization" of eastern regions of Russia.

Neither Lenin nor Stalin invented the Ukrainian nationalist movement. There were already people within Ukraine who viewed themselves as belonging to a distinct nation from Russia; Lenin and Stalin just decided to ally themselves with some of these people and grant them some of their policy wishes.

> We do not yet fully understand why they did it

Marxism was originally an anti-nationalist movement–hence, it was very natural for the Bolsheviks to oppose Russian nationalism and support the demands of ethnic minorities for autonomy. Then, in the 1930s, Stalin gradually changed his mind about the topic – he began to see ethnic autonomy movements as a potential threat to his rule, and started promoting Russian nationalism and Russification in response.

Re: European natural gas imports and storage reserves

#296
post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quit repeating this crap. There was no agreement for NATO to not expand eastward and even Gorbachev stated there was no such agreement. You are just repeating the bullshit spread by Pozner and Mearsheimer. It is still bullshit propaganda no matter how many people repeat it. I fell for it too, at the start of the war, and then I tried to combat it each time I came across it.

Mearsheimer is way more of an authority on the subject than you are, so if you're going to dismiss his claim as bullshit while claiming you're trying to combat the claim you could at least provide a link. Also even if Mearsheimer is wrong in that claim it doesn't make it propaganda. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2014/11/06/did-nato-... >the former Soviet president criticized NATO enlargement and called it a…

There is a distinction between an explanation and a justification. There are many ways to explain why some thing happened or might happen. They can not be used to justify said action. I believe Mearsheimer and Pozner, for reasons, confound one for the other. Saying that Russia could not help not to attack, that it is the rational choice for Russia, is like saying that advertisers can not help themselves tracking users, it is the rational choice to track users. Again, explanation is not justification. Explanations are not excuses. That is why I call it bullshit propaganda: He is justifying the war. War is not just. War is never just. War is death and tragedy, even if you can write entire books explaining how it happened and why every party had legitimate interest.

RealPolitik, the realist school of thought, evolutionary psychology, etc. only ever provide explanations. And often they may be good explanations. They are useful when trying to understand events or people or groups of people and when trying to predict behavior or create models.

But to derive justification from those explanations means that you ascribe to the belief that determinism (lack of free will) absolves you of responsibility. It does not. Whether you have free will or not you still have to make choices and still bear the responsibility of those choices. If you believe you have free will you are directly responsible and must assume responsibility for any consequence coming your way. If you believe you do not have free will, than any consequence is simply the system correcting itself. There is no escape from making choices.

But what do I known? So since you are claiming he has more authority I will counter with someone of equal or greater authority, Alexander Stubb, past Prime Minister, Minister Of Finance and Minister of Foreign Affairs of Finland and Director and Professor of the School of Transnational Governance at the European University Institute:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlB-pRqdyBg

Post reply on HN