How can We Blame Trump for Putin Invading Ukraine?

[Guest]

Question / discussion for everyone interested:

If we speculate about Putin's reason to invade and wage war against Ukraine, would it be possible that an important motivation could be to disrupt the transfer to renewable energy sources?

Russia is rich in oil and gas, and therefore the oligarchs who control this - and connected to Putin - stand to lose their future fortunes. It's a huge gamble to take, if this is Russia's aim.
It does seem coherent with Russia's efforts to influence social media in the West, especially around elections, and even former-President Trump's self-proclaimed working relationship with President Putin.

And if it is, in the near future they would have succeeded as in our panic to have enough affordable energy climate-agreements are being suspended.

[ErosWired]

3 hours ago, BareLover666 said:

Question / discussion for everyone interested:

If we speculate about Putin's reason to invade and wage war against Ukraine, would it be possible that an important motivation could be to disrupt the transfer to renewable energy sources?

Russia is rich in oil and gas, and therefore the oligarchs who control this - and connected to Putin - stand to lose their future fortunes. It's a huge gamble to take, if this is Russia's aim.
It does seem coherent with Russia's efforts to influence social media in the West, especially around elections, and even former-President Trump's self-proclaimed working relationship with President Putin.

And if it is, in the near future they would have succeeded as in our panic to have enough affordable energy climate-agreements are being suspended.

A huge gamble indeed, an incredibly short-sighted one if so, and one that has backfired spectacularly. Rather than make the West shy on renewable energy, it’s forced a realization that our national infrastructures, and still yet our national defense cannot be dependent on power that is controlled by a nation who could easily become the enemy. Sanctions now are going beyond Russian oil and gas and starting to include Russian coal. Realizing that we’re going to have to do more with less available fossil fuel (and good fucking riddance) what solution do we have? Renewables, and a really, really, really really good extra incentive to get off the dime and start using them before we cook the planet to death.

And if the oligarchs were pushing such a scheme to preserve their wealth, you have to wonder how that’s working out for them as they contemplate how to extricate their fortunes from frozen foreign accounts and count their worthless rubles somewhere in Moscow instead of in their comfy, confiscated mulitimilliondollar yachts.

But frankly, all the voices out of Russia talking about Putin are saying the same thing - he’s doing it because his butthurt over the collapse of the Soviet Union never went away and he’s now determined to rebuild Soviet glory and power; that is, he’s just a megalomaniacal loon. With, unfortunately, a massive nuclear arsenal at his fingertips. If he didn’t have it, I suspect the rest of Europe plus the US would have made a show of force by now.

[Guest]

On 3/24/2022 at 11:16 PM, NEDenver said:

I chalk this all up to conservatives just being lying liars who lie.  And they don’t just lie to normal people, they lie to themselves and each other in an attempt to maintain this fake bubble world where reality conforms to their feelings.  It would be sad if they were only hurting themselves.

Both of the two major parties in the USA are like this, and politicians both left and right only care about gritting as much $$$ as they can from people, staying elected or in power or in the public eye as though they are celebrities, and keeping the two party system in power when in the USA both of the parties have been the same for many decades now.

[AOFraFuck]

Here in Germany it is the same "game". The difference is only that we have a lot more than the two political parties the US has... 🤐

[hntnhole]

On 4/6/2022 at 8:15 AM, BareLover666 said:

Question / discussion for everyone interested

How would making war upon the Ukraine disrupt Russia's capacity to produce oil / natural gas, and thus disrupt the focus on renewable energy sources?  The chances that the Ukrainian forces could not only defeat the Russian invasion, but then proceed to invade Russia (and thus impact negatively Russia's production capacity) seems most unlikely.  I don't see a connection between Putin's thirst to "restore" the glories of Peter the Great's "Mother Russia" and disrupting the sources of renewable energy in the future.  

If anything, Russia's adventurism in Eastern Europe will only encourage the development of renewable energy sources at an even faster pace.  This would help the planet begin recovering from our dependency on oil, fossil fuels all the sooner, rather than inhibit development of these new, renewable sources of energy.  I'm no expert on topography in that region of the world, but I would imagine that the possibilities of wind and solar development would be gigantic.

On 4/6/2022 at 11:51 AM, ErosWired said:

It does seem coherent with Russia's efforts to influence social media in the West, especially around elections, and even former-President Trump's self-proclaimed working relationship with President Putin

I believe that this ^ fact is more a function of Putin's self aggrandizement than any long-term plan.  His goals are narrowly focused, and diminishing NATO, the EU, other Western Alliances (including - even centered on - the most powerful nation of those) is merely an effort to weaken the West to better enable him to expand the fevered dream of restoring Greater Russia. Being an opportunist, Putin merely seized upon what was for him, a happy event in the divided US.  Mr. Trump, hardy intelligent, but somewhat clever, was merely a lump of putty in Putin's hands, as the dictator of Russia sought to weaken the Western Alliances.  

Thanks for the interesting post.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, hntnhole said:

How would making war upon the Ukraine disrupt Russia's capacity to produce oil / natural gas, and thus disrupt the focus on renewable energy sources?  The chances that the Ukrainian forces could not only defeat the Russian invasion, but then proceed to invade Russia (and thus impact negatively Russia's production capacity) seems most unlikely.  I don't see a connection between Putin's thirst to "restore" the glories of Peter the Great's "Mother Russia" and disrupting the sources of renewable energy in the future.  

I jnoticed, that in the short term the transfer to renewable energy-sources has been put on hold as it's all hands on deck to keep our cars running, houses warmed etc. I also noticed that for now we can't stop using Russian gas, otherwise we don't have the energy our societies are relying on. 

That's got me wondering, because the transfer would be a financial threat to the oligarchs that support Putin, and therefor his positing in power. As it's inevitable we have this transfer, these guys face losing their future fortunes whatever was going to happen.

I have no idea what the Russians are thinking, that's why I posted this. Their politicians seem down to earth in how they perceive power and gas or oil you can own and use to further their own agenda. Energy from the sun and wind depend only on knowledge, which is a lot harder to 'own', control etc. so I would guess the guys presently in power over there (like less-then-scrupulus business-people in the US and Europe) would not be huge fans of those renewable energy sources.

2 hours ago, hntnhole said:

Thanks for the interesting post.

Thank you for the thoughtful reply. 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, hntnhole said:

Putin

I think there must be others in power in Russia beside him. It's just to big a country for one man to rule alone. And I think there are or must be other aims besides restoring the USSR / Russian empire. At least it seems by their and China's actions abroad on other continents that both have a desire to become a stronger world-power (again).

What do you think?

It could be that like Trump, Putin as well has an incredibly small dick and/or suffers from impotence and the invasion of Ukraine is just a very childish way to prove his (so-called) manhood. 

 

2 hours ago, hntnhole said:

the Ukraine

Ukrainers prefer 'Ukraine' without the adjective as 'the Ukraine' refers to a region and not a nation or country (as is one of Putin's / Russia's views on Ukraine.

[BootmanLA]

19 hours ago, TotalTop said:

Both of the two major parties in the USA are like this, and politicians both left and right only care about gritting as much $$$ as they can from people, staying elected or in power or in the public eye as though they are celebrities, and keeping the two party system in power when in the USA both of the parties have been the same for many decades now.

I call BS on this too. Not that Democrats are paragons of honesty and virtue, but they at least live within the realm of the actual, not the mythological universe in which most Republicans seem to live, where millions of fraudulent votes somehow got past massive election security to cheat their hero, the Mango Mussolini, out of his second term. (Not one of those assholes ever manage to explain how the vote forgers only cast votes against Trump, but not against all the GOP senators and representatives who were almost to a person returned to office.)

That's above and beyond the very, very real differences in policy between the two.  Anyone who thinks "the parties are the same" is an idiot.

[BootmanLA]

On 4/5/2022 at 3:27 PM, ErosWired said:

We’re not in the habit of seizing other people’s countries for our own. (Donald Trump’s attempt to buy Greenland from the Danes doesn’t count. The entire world collectively rolled its eyes at that one.)

Not any more, at least. But historically speaking, we've taken as much as we've legitimately acquired. The latter group would include the Louisiana Purchase and the Gadsen Purchase, as well as the purchase of Alaska. We accepted Texas after encouraging that territory to rebel against Mexico and declare independence; we "allowed" cessions from Spain (East and West Florida, southwest Louisiana), Great Britain (parts of Minnesota and North Dakota) and Mexico (most of the southwest, including California, Nevada, Utah, and most of Arizona and New Mexico); we essentially stole Hawaii; and we laid claim to much of the eastern "midwest" after the Revolutionary War because Great Britain just was largely fed up with North America.

And those are just the parts that make up the actual 50 United States. We took innumerable islands in the Pacific (and fewer in the Caribbean), some in trumped-up wars with failing states like Spain at the end of the 19th century.

And of course, that excludes the fact that we essentially seized most of the territory of the original United States from the native people who were there when we arrived, and when they objected, we either slaughtered them or relocated them by force.

[PozBearWI]

5 minutes ago, BootmanLA said:

I call BS on this too. Not that Democrats are paragons of honesty and virtue, but they at least live within the realm of the actual, not the mythological universe in which most Republicans seem to live, where millions of fraudulent votes somehow got past massive election security to cheat their hero, the Mango Mussolini, out of his second term. (Not one of those assholes ever manage to explain how the vote forgers only cast votes against Trump, but not against all the GOP senators and representatives who were almost to a person returned to office.)

That's above and beyond the very, very real differences in policy between the two.  Anyone who thinks "the parties are the same" is an idiot.

I agree.  The right wing has become the party of Putin and insane Q anon BS.  I miss the classic Republicans.  

I have a problem with extremism, trending strongly centrist myself.  And I am tired of being PC.  Agree we shouldn't be intentionally insulting, but our neighbors would do well to develop a thicker skin.  

[ErosWired]

41 minutes ago, BootmanLA said:

Not any more, at least.

I spoke in the present tense. You would be hard-pressed to name any nation that at one time or other had notions of empire that did not do terrible things to the original inhabitants. British, Dutch, French, Spanish…but go farther back. How ‘bout them Romans? Or Genghis Khan? Human history is replete with atrocity. The point is that we are at least trying to be better than that; Russia is not.

[hntnhole]

6 hours ago, BareLover666 said:

like less-then-scrupulus business-people in the US

On that point, we are in complete agreement.

 

5 hours ago, BareLover666 said:

I think there must be others in power in Russia beside him

There are surely others that hold some measure of power, within their own spheres of government or social structures.  It would be akin to when nobles ruled the various principalities of Europe:  A king, who held absolute power, and then his family, who held some power in designated arenas of national concern.  But only one holds absolute power, and in Russia today, that is Putin, which he retains through fear of retribution towards those who, under him, wield some power, and at his pleasure only.

5 hours ago, BareLover666 said:

Ukrainers prefer 'Ukraine' without the adjective as 'the Ukraine' refers to a region and not a nation or country (as is one of Putin's / Russia's views on Ukraine.

Thanks for the clarification:  I didn't know that.  I assume that the present nation of Ukraine would be included in the area, but what other areas there would be - added to the current nation - comprising "the" Ukraine?  

[hntnhole]

On 4/6/2022 at 11:51 AM, ErosWired said:

he’s just a megalomaniacal loon

That may be closer to the truth.  Dictators are seldom very bright men (or women - gotta be inclusive, right?).  What they lack in mental capacity they make up for with making others fear them.  While Royal Families often suffer from what we would call "inbreeding" - for example, the House of Yamato has occupied the Chrysanthemum Throne for over a thousand years now, so it's likely the gene-pool is a little bit depleted.  The dictator of Russia does not possess that excuse: he's nothing more than a cunning, clever, but rather dull manipulator who managed to grab power. ( sound familiar?)  It's that talent for instilling fear, without the necessary intelligence backing it up that is so dangerous.  I do think, however, that if he contemplates using either nuclear or biological weapons, his lackeys would prevent it - knowing full well that their nation would be totally destroyed if he does.  Not that the West should rely on that supposition, of course not.  

[hntnhole]

21 hours ago, TotalTop said:

Both of the two major parties in the USA are like this, and politicians both left and right only care about gritting as much $$$ as they can from people, staying elected or in power or in the public eye as though they are celebrities, and keeping the two party system in power when in the USA both of the parties have been the same for many decades now.

I beg your pardon.  Last phrase first:

No, this has not been the case for many decades.  It has been the case with one of the traditional political parties for a handful of years - but the root cause has indeed been institutionalized in the US since before it's founding.  

I agree that "lobbying" has been out of control for some long time now, and the ones who could restrict it are the same ones pocketing the dough.  I know that one political party is more egregious than the other, but both participate.  So, how about the voting citizenry demand term limits for elected officials?  That would be a start, at least.  I'm assuming you meant "grifting", and while it's regrettable, it's hardly the greatest problem we're facing as citizens.  

Yes, there is indeed one political party infused with characters our of a comedic tragi-drama.  I am not claiming that there are no idiots in the other of the two parties; I am, however, claiming that of the two, the liberal party has markedly fewer deadbeats, fools, craven lusters after power, and - wait for it - inveterate racists.  Which depravity was so richly demonstrated merely a few short hours ago this very day, by the conservative party members in Congress.  

I would encourage you to educate yourself in a bit more depth before asking us to read such nonsense. 

Thank you.

[hntnhole]

1 hour ago, BootmanLA said:

And of course, that excludes the fact that we essentially seized most of the territory of the original United States from the native people who were there when we arrived, and when they objected, we either slaughtered them or relocated them by force.

Whew .... we had to wait until the very end for it !!!  The mark of a first-class wordsmith, I suppose ....