# Is Biden Helping Build Russia-Germany Pipeline After Axing Keystone XL Here at Home?



## tabzer (May 24, 2021)

[A source]

To appeal to the staff of the site, I have decided to resubmit a post on a current political situation.  This time, instead of encouraging having fun with it, I encourage that you bare your salt and treat this thread as if you were rescuing politics for the good of humans.

My opening:  IF this was Trump, the media would be all over him.  If you disagree, I believe it's because you are disingenuous or lack objectivity.


----------



## AmandaRose (May 24, 2021)

A rather misleading story when you actually look at all the facts.

1) When Biden took over in January the pipeline was already 90% complete. So Trump was in charge during 90% of the construction.

2) Biden has said about the pipeline the he was totally against it.

3) In which way is he helping build the pipeline? All has has done is refuse to stop Rusia building it. A move done not to piss off Germany and the rest of Europe. He is making an effort to build bridges that was burnt by the previous administration. What is so wrong with wanting to work more closely with Europe?

As you can also see in the report in the link below it also says that it would be near impossible for Biden to stop the pipeline from being finished because it is already nearly finished.

4. The media weren't all over Trump during the 90% of the construction that he was in charge during so the point you are trying to make with that statement is a non starter.

https://www.reuters.com/business/en...ias-nord-stream-2-pipeline-source-2021-05-19/


----------



## Taleweaver (May 24, 2021)

tabzer said:


> My opening:  IF this was Trump, the media would be all over him.  If you disagree, I believe it's because you are disingenuous or lack objectivity.


Ah, the classic "IF YOU DISAGREE WITH ME YOU ARE A MONSTER!!!" proactive attack statement. So since I'm not a monster (or disingenuous, in this case) and don't have intentions of becoming so, I can only wholeheartedly agree with you.

Thanks for letting me know what my opinion should be. This makes browsing forums and discussing politics much easier. 


EDIT:  okay...now that we've covered the comedy part of your post, let's talk politics. 

The first thing I thought of reading your carefully selected screenshot of the part of the article you want to share was "ey! What the hell is Biden thinking he can call the shots in other countries?".
So mission accomplished: I read the article. And if it was a clickbait attempt, you even double-won, as I literally looked up a translation of "to waive", because the writer of the article (and you, apparently) somehow manages to completely miss the meaning of the word. It's really a synonym for words like "defer, forgo, resign, stay" and so on (all depending on context, of course). So this "to waive sanctions" is basically saying "nope...we're not going to put sanctions in place here".

So this whole "But Biden is helping Russia and a German CEO" is complete bullshit. It's very akin to me saying  something like, I dunno...

@tabzer is helping me jerking off to lesbian sabertooth tigers vomiting over gobelin tapestries

...when all you really did is *not sanction* me to do whatever the fuck I want in the comfort of my own home.


So as to your opening: Trump didn't interfere much (or at all?) in consensual agreements between two foreign countries. I can provide hundreds of photographs of him _not_ sanctioning two foreign countries and the media not giving him flak about it(1), so...what are you after here, exactly?

I'm not sure what to say on @AmandaRose 's statement that 90% of this pipeline was built under Donald's watch, but if true, you'll understand that I have to engage in not only considering your opening not only null and void, but in addition have to make the following remark that'll indicate what I think of your ignorance regarding this topic:


Spoiler












EDIT 2: yup...Amanda's right (thanks for that link, btw  ). Part of the Reuters article:

_A U.S. official conceded that stopping the project would be difficult but that Washington would keep trying. "We inherited a pipeline that was over 90% complete and so stopping it has always been a long shot," the State Department official said._

Soooo...what's this outcry about, really? The westernjournal article's author was already dubious in confusing "waiving sanctions" with "actively helping", and now it turns out the bloody thing's already 95% complete. That really turns the whole thing in an absurd (read: republican propaganda) territory.

I mean...the image thinker in me already sees an incredibly long pipe-line all across Russia and Germany, but just at one end, where workers are about to put the last pipes in place, the article's author is on his knees crying bitter tears and proclaiming something like "it's because of Biden's inaction that the chance this pipeline is complete increases!!!". 


I also thought of something else. I live in East Flanders now. Somewhere almost directly between the large port of Antwerp and the German 'Ruhrgebied'. There were plans of a pipeline here as well between Antwerp and Germany (not gas, though). Because it would cross straight through many acres of nature environment, there was (and I presume still is) plenty of local protest.
You know what WASN'T a factor? Someone thinking Biden should intervene somehow. Because we are Belgium, and Germany is Germany. Neither's a fucking colony of the USA. It may be a problem, but it's a local problem. The last thing we want(2) is our local problems becoming some sort of argument in US politics.

(1): Trump made sure he got flak from all other sorts of shenanigans, but ey...it wasn't about him not interfering in foreign trade deals.
(2): okay, okay: I can think of a few other things we want even less. But you get the point


----------



## dazindude (May 24, 2021)

tabzer said:


> [A source]
> 
> To appeal to the staff of the site, I have decided to resubmit a post on a current political situation.  This time, instead of encouraging having fun with it, I encourage that you bare your salt and treat this thread as if you were rescuing politics for the good of humans.
> 
> My opening:  IF this was Trump, the media would be all over him.  If you disagree, I believe it's because you are disingenuous or lack objectivity.


The western journal which is the website that this story comes from is filled with tons of stories like this that contain partial or completely made up information. There's tons of stuff to criticize Biden on but this ain't it.  Sharing stories like this is exactly why people don't take conservatives seriously.


----------



## tabzer (May 24, 2021)

Time for Amanda logic. 



AmandaRose said:


> 1) When Biden took over in January the pipeline was already 90% complete. So Trump was in charge during 90% of the construction.



This is misleading, because it suggests that sanctions don't mean anything when they are in place during the Trump administration.  It also suggests that 90% of the pipeline was built during the Trump administration, which is not sourced in your rebuttal.



AmandaRose said:


> 2) Biden has said about the pipeline the he was totally against it.



And then he waived sanctions that were previously in place.



AmandaRose said:


> 3) In which way is he helping build the pipeline?



He waived sanctions that were in place, which expedites the process.



AmandaRose said:


> 4. The media weren't all over Trump during the 90% of the construction that he was in charge during so the point you are trying to make with that statement is a non starter.



Because he had sanctions in place over the pipeline.


----------



## AmandaRose (May 24, 2021)

tabzer said:


> This is misleading, because it suggests that sanctions don't mean anything when they are in place during the Trump administration.  It also suggests that 90% of the pipeline was built during the Trump administration, which is not sourced in your rebuttal.
> 
> 
> 
> .


It is sourced because it clearly states in the reuters link I posted in my previous post that when Biden took over in January the pipeline was already 90% Complete.

It also states in the same article that the removal of sanctions is to help boost relationships with Europe something Trump totally destroyed. So again please tell we how Biden working closely with Europe is a not a good thing?


----------



## tabzer (May 24, 2021)

Taleweaver said:


> Ah, the classic "IF YOU DISAGREE WITH ME YOU ARE A MONSTER!!!" proactive attack statement. So since I'm not a monster (or disingenuous, in this case) and don't have intentions of becoming so, I can only wholeheartedly agree with you.



Thank you.



Taleweaver said:


> Thanks for letting me know what my opinion should be. This makes browsing forums and discussing politics much easier.



You're welcome!



Taleweaver said:


> The first thing I thought of reading your carefully selected screenshot of the part of the article you want to share was "ey! What the hell is Biden thinking he can call the shots in other countries?".



I thought that was a default American thing, I was thinking something else.



Taleweaver said:


> And if it was a clickbait attempt, you even double-won, as I literally looked up a translation of "to waive", because the writer of the article (and you, apparently) somehow manages to completely miss the meaning of the word. It's really a synonym for words like "defer, forgo, resign, stay" and so on (all depending on context, of course). So this "to waive sanctions" is basically saying "nope...we're not going to put sanctions in place here".



Well, that's kind of right, but it assumes something factually inaccurate, and it is that sanctions weren't* already there.



Taleweaver said:


> So this whole "But Biden is helping Russia and a German CEO" is complete bullshit. It's very akin to me saying something like, I dunno...



That's certain.



Taleweaver said:


> (1): Trump made sure he got flak from all other sorts of shenanigans, but ey...it wasn't about him not interfering in foreign trade deals.



Umm, tariffs are still a source of contention, but as you indicate, it's besides the point.



dazindude said:


> The western journal which is the website that this story comes from is filled with tons of stories like this that contain partial or completely made up information. There's tons of stuff to criticize Biden on but this ain't it. Sharing stories like this is exactly why people don't take conservatives seriously.



Then enjoy this: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/na...-after-waiving-sanctions-russian-gas-n1267975


----------



## djpannda (May 24, 2021)

Taleweaver said:


> @tabzer is helping me jerking off to lesbian sabertooth tigers vomiting over gobelin tapestries


Now That sounds like a good time


----------



## boomy (May 24, 2021)

lols. i wonder how much this thread will blow up


----------



## tabzer (May 24, 2021)

AmandaRose said:


> It is sourced because it clearly states in the reuters link I posted in my previous post that when Biden took over in January the pipeline was already 90% Complete.



That doesn't say that it all happened during Trump Admin.



AmandaRose said:


> It also states in the same article that the removal of sanctions is to help boost relationships with Europe something Trump totally destroyed. So again please tell we how Biden working closely with Europe is a not a good thing?



That was not my claim.  I would of thought it to be great if Trump could create a good relationship with Russia directly, and even China.  The media, however, is always propagandist.


----------



## AmandaRose (May 24, 2021)

tabzer said:


> That doesn't say that it all happened during Trump Admin.



It clearly does state that. Let me just copy and paste from my link.

A U.S. official conceded that stopping the project would be difficult but that Washington would keep trying. "We inherited a pipeline that was over 90% complete and so stopping it has always been a long shot," the State Department official said


----------



## tabzer (May 24, 2021)

Inherited from what, the course of 5 administrations?  We can't make a conclusion based on your feelings Amanda.


----------



## Taleweaver (May 24, 2021)

Aww...I was too busy with IRL stuff to properly research/post everything I wanted to say. And now that I've edited my last post, it's like it's been on repeat. Sorry about that. :\


----------



## AmandaRose (May 24, 2021)

tabzer said:


> Inherited from what, the course of 5 administrations?  We can't make a conclusion based on your feelings Amanda.


It's not my feelings it's a fact that the current American Government has stated the pipeline was 90% complete when they took over in January. If you want to ignore the facts even when they have been clearly shown to you then that's your problem not mine. But to be honest I'm totally not surprised as you pretty much like to argue just for the sake of it even when you have been proven wrong. 

For the last time let me screenshot the current government saying they inherited a situation that was 90% completed during the previous administration.


----------



## tabzer (May 24, 2021)

AmandaRose said:


> It's not my feelings it's a fact that the current American Government has stated the pipeline was 90% complete when they took over in January



How long ago did they start the pipeline Amanda?  *During the Bush adminstration?*


----------



## p1ngpong (May 24, 2021)

tabzer said:


> To appeal to the staff of the site, I have decided to resubmit a post on a current political situation.  This time, instead of encouraging having fun with it, I encourage that you bare your salt and treat this thread as if you were rescuing politics for the good of humans.
> .


My appeal to you

I beg you don't cry


----------



## tabzer (May 24, 2021)

p1ngpong said:


> My appeal to you
> 
> I beg you don't cry



I won't cry, again.



Taleweaver said:


> Aww...I was too busy with IRL stuff to properly research/post everything I wanted to say. And now that I've edited my last post, it's like it's been on repeat. Sorry about that. :\



Don't worry.  If you disagreed with my opening proposition, being disingenuous or lacking of objectivity doesn't make you a monster.  I do believe there is a hex that will turn you into plastic, though.


----------



## AmandaRose (May 24, 2021)

tabzer said:


> How long ago did they start the pipeline Amanda?  *During the Bush adminstration?*


It has nothing to do who was in charge when the pipeline was started you keep denying the fact that the pipeline was 90% complete when Biden took over. The facts clearly state it was indeed 90% completed when Biden took over and was far too near completion for Biden to stop the damb thing. That is not hard for anyone to understand

The only reason sanctions have been removed is to built bridges with Europe. You know because the pipeline is a really good thing for Europe.

Also the facts show the previous sanctions that Trump imposed were not really effective and that is why the pipeline is nownearly completed.


----------



## tabzer (May 24, 2021)

AmandaRose said:


> It has nothing to do who was in charge when the pipeline was started you keep denying the fact that the pipeline was 90% complete when Biden took over. The facts clearly state it was indeed 90% completed when Biden took over and was far too near completion for Biden to stop the damb thing. That is not hard for anyone to understand



You have not given any indication that the pipeline was not 90% completed when Trump inherited it.  Maybe it stayed 90% completed throughout his entire term, because of the sanctions.  You are only supporting my initial claim.



AmandaRose said:


> You know because the pipeline is a really good thing for Europe.



And the initial claim was that if Trump enabled it, the narrative would have been "is a really good thing for Russia!".

Everybody knows it.


----------



## Taleweaver (May 24, 2021)

tabzer said:


> How long ago did they start the pipeline Amanda?  *During the Bush adminstration?*


Jeez, dude. How about you start with leaving the goal post where it's at. Your main idea was that Biden was at fault. You were proven wrong. Don't pretend as if fishing for details or going personal will somehow change that.

But ey...why not? I've googled it for you. Here's your answer, straight from wikipedia:



> *Nord Stream 2[edit]*
> In 2011, Nord Stream AG started evaluation of an expansion project consisting of two additional lines (later named Nord Stream 2) to increase the overall annual capacity up to 110 billion m3 (3.9 trillion cu ft). In August 2012, Nord Stream AG applied to the Finnish and Estonian governments for route studies in their underwater exclusive economic zones for the third and fourth lines.[49] It was considered to route the additional pipelines to the United Kingdom but this plan was abandoned.[50][51]
> 
> In January 2015, it was announced that the expansion project was put on hold since the existing lines were running at only half capacity due to EU restrictions on Gazprom.[52]
> ...



So...depending on where you want to start counting (as many large projects, the initial planning was indoors), I'd say things really started on January 2018.

It's certainly interesting that, indeed, Trump did impose sanctions. Not really effective ones (again: the work got nearly finished despite it), but I concede he wasn't fumbling around on that one. He was just shy of 2 years too late to impose, that's all.


----------



## AmandaRose (May 24, 2021)

tabzer said:


> You have not given any indication that the pipeline was not 90% completed when Trump inherited it.  Maybe it stayed 90% completed throughout his entire term, because of the sanctions.  You are only supporting my initial claim.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well concidering that the pipeline is now 95% complete a whole 5% more than January are you seriously saying ZERO work was done on the pipeline when Trump was in charge?


----------



## tabzer (May 24, 2021)

@Taleweaver Thanks for real facts.



Taleweaver said:


> How about you start with leaving the goal post where it's at. Your main idea was that Biden was at fault.



My main idea was that the media is propaganda and would have attacked Trump if he was the one who waived sanctions.  Not that Biden is bad, even though it does appear that he is throwing America under the bus.    As for the other thing, Amanda logic is always an interesting diversion.


----------



## Deleted User (May 24, 2021)

... The fact is, if I were 90% finishing and she told me a baby wasn't the best thing for our future, I would still have the ability to pull out of the deal.

The bigger picture is that this is what Politics is all about; Spin and portraying one Faction's Interests as being the Greater Good.

Nothing new to be enraged about.
As a Eurasian, my whole Ancestry was fed this for centuries and, in Popular Gaming Culture, we still have waves of Video Games portraying a glorified Vietnam Campaign that the United States lost. We'll see the same for Afghanistan, too, and wherever else losing and not living to the ideal is too bitter to swallow.

In the pursuit of balance, it's about time we had more of the Japanese and Germans winning.
I'd watch a YouTuber play some Glorious North Korean Game.


----------



## dazindude (May 24, 2021)

tabzer said:


> Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It's almost like a pipeline that goes to Germany (our close geopolitical ally) might be more beneficial than a sanction in this case. Also I didn't really disagree with the criticism more so the premise that the previous news outlet you linked was trying to establish


----------



## tabzer (May 24, 2021)

dazindude said:


> It's almost like a pipeline that goes to Germany (our close geopolitical ally) might be more beneficial than a sanction in this case. Also I didn't really disagree with the criticism more so the premise that the previous news outlet you linked was trying to establish



I think it would be great if Germany AND America can have their pipelines.  It's a personal opinion, but not the point I was trying to make.


----------



## linuxares (May 24, 2021)

tabzer said:


> I think it would be great if Germany AND America can have their pipelines.  It's a personal opinion, but not the point I was trying to make.


Nah, the less gas the better.

Gas is so 18th century. Better to embrace electricity for example cooking food. But sadly the green parties try to shutdown all nuclear power plants.


----------



## tabzer (May 24, 2021)

linuxares said:


> Nah, the less gas the better.
> 
> Gas is so 18th century. Better to embrace electricity for example cooking food. But sadly the green parties try to shutdown all nuclear power plants.



I would love for nuclear power to become refined in its safety, instead of shut down.

I think we could have had a Jetson's lifestyle during the time it was prophesized to happen, if the oil companies didn't have their way with Washington.

Cooking food, though... I prefer charcoal or wood.


----------



## dazindude (May 24, 2021)

tabzer said:


> I think it would be great if Germany AND America can have their pipelines.  It's a personal opinion, but not the point I was trying to make.


The main problem we did a billion shitty things to build ours such as take indigenous land. Not to mention the constant leaks and the fact it was in disrepair before even being done like I'm not against pipelines when implemented and maintained properly. I mean I'd rather we use renewables where we can but there are still industries that rely on fossil fuels.


----------



## tabzer (May 24, 2021)

Honestly, I couldn't disagree because I lack the expertise.  The concept of "renewables" is egocentric imo.


----------



## Deleted User (May 24, 2021)

I was just watching a YouTube video on Solid State Wind Energy.

If they manage to apply Economies of Scale on that, it would be another tool to empower the average Citizen to be Energy-Sufficient. I am definitely looking into a future where there is both Self-Sufficiency and a comfortable Modern Lifestyle.

As we say in Asia, our grandparents were farmers but now we're city-folk.


----------



## dazindude (May 24, 2021)

tabzer said:


> Honestly, I couldn't disagree because I lack the expertise.  The concept of "renewables" is egocentric imo.


I'm actually curious how is it egocentric. Renewable electricity production in the united states already makes up more than 19% of total electricity use in the United States could be much more if some of the middle American states with huge open spaces embraced some of these technologies.


----------



## Taleweaver (May 24, 2021)

tabzer said:


> @Taleweaver Thanks for real facts.
> 
> 
> 
> My main idea was that the media is propaganda and would have attacked Trump if he was the one who waived sanctions.


...and he delayed it for two years, and at the end of his term the thing had gone from 0% to 90%. Attacks on Trump for that? None. Nada. Plenty for his actual scandals, but not for this stuff.

I blame your idea of media. Seeing how you start with downright propaganda, I can't even blame you for your idea.


----------



## CMDreamer (May 24, 2021)

It all gets resumed as this: "current political situation"...

Everything done against Russia-Germany pipeline is because US politicians (and everyone controlling them) aren't getting their "piece of cake", and not because it is a matter of "National Security" (i.e. real and verified public concern), because there's nothing public on interfering with other countries affairs, that's illegal intervention.


----------



## chrisrlink (May 25, 2021)

CMDreamer said:


> It all gets resumed as this: "current political situation"...
> 
> Everything done against Russia-Germany pipeline is because US politicians (and everyone controlling them) aren't getting their "piece of cake", and not because it is a matter of "National Security" (i.e. real and verified public concern), because there's nothing public on interfering with other countries affairs, that's illegal intervention.


think of all the shit russia's done since post WW2 and having a nuclear superpower, with a psycho leader (and ex KGB)we're walking on shards here, anyways we need one tech from one civilization game (being call to power) to end the threat of ww3


----------



## Tsundere_Neko (May 25, 2021)

Ew gross politics on my gaming site keep it away. (Seriously though I didn't know there was a whole category for politics here. And the fact that there is one both confuses and bothers me. But whatever.)
To be fair though I agree the media would be all over this if it was Trump as the largest media sources are left-leaning. But 2020 convinced me that American politics are the reason Aliens won't visit us and God has abandoned us, so I no longer care.


----------



## Lacius (May 25, 2021)

The Biden administration isn't helping to build a pipeline; they're indirectly easing restrictions on Germany doing what they want to do with their own country. As much as I'm against pipeline construction, it would be a diplomatic nightmare to make things unnecessarily difficult for Germany.



tabzer said:


> The concept of "renewables" is egocentric imo.


What's egocentric is the continual burning of fossil fuels with little to no regard for the future (and present) generations who are going to have to deal with the consequences.


----------



## tabzer (May 25, 2021)

They reversed a Trump policy, encouraging the pipeline, as opposed to doing nothing.  The point I made was if this was your opponent making this decision, your media of choice would have a completely different tone--as would you.



dazindude said:


> I'm actually curious how is it egocentric.



I find the classification to be subjective and sometimes arbitrary to fit the narrative of the people saying "green energy".  Good solutions are important, but the telephone wasn't invented because it was signed into law.  Unfortunately, the tech like the telephone could have been prevented from  circulating if big oil companies bought out the patent and sat on it--which is the nature of what we are dealing with now.


----------



## CMDreamer (May 25, 2021)

chrisrlink said:


> think of all the shit russia's done since post WW2 and having a nuclear superpower, with a psycho leader (and ex KGB)we're walking on shards here, anyways we need one tech from one civilization game (being call to power) to end the threat of ww3




Hold on, do you realize that in your statement by replacing "Russia" with "USA" the context doesn't gets affected?

It all depends on which "side" of the formula you are. One side wants to be blind about their own practices and prefers looking at the others'.

I'm a direct critic of Trumpet, but if there has been one single time I've agreed the most with him, was when he stated that US is not any better than Russia to deal with (in the context of two diferent parties fighting for their own interests). Democrats and Republicans would do anything if that helps them keeping control of the so called most powerful country (something that can be discussed).

Seeing this in an international context, we can argue that the US would do anything to disprove and affect Russia's interests by any possible means (illegal sanctions -USA's not the world's police-, weapons threatening by going on a parade near the Nord Stream 2 construction, menacing companies involved on business that "affect" their direct interests -but not necessarily US citizens interests when we talk about wealth-), and the list can go on forever just recall history of how many illegal international interventions have the US made in their war history with the complete lack of UN actions against avoiding them).


----------



## Seliph (May 25, 2021)

Oh no I've been betrayed by the man who's done basically everything to meet my very very VERY low standards for him! How could I have ever foreseen this??? The horror!


----------



## MaxToTheMax (May 25, 2021)

Imagine trying to bait people into a political argument using an article that you didn't even read through completely or think critically of at all. This post is shit, even for the politics board.

It's funny that people on the right were so quick to praise Trump for working with/building a relationship with Russia and then go fucking bat shit when Biden does the same.

How in the hell are you going to even comment on international politics if you so clearly don't understand American politics. 

Please just stop posting. You make GBATemp look bad.


----------



## tabzer (May 25, 2021)

MaxToTheMax said:


> Imagine trying to bait people into a political argument using an article that you didn't even read through completely or think critically of at all. This post is shit, even for the politics board.



Thanks for your invaluable opinion.  Imagine reading the OP and responding to points raised or discussing the material facts presented in the article.  The discussion has cleared the "did you even read it?" mark and is at an argument about the interpretation of "waiving sanctions" being a form of help or not.  I've made my stance known.  You are implying that your stance is that it is not helping?


----------



## Tsundere_Neko (May 25, 2021)

I find it funny how people always accuse the other side of being one way, and then when their side does the same thing it's completely ignored or blown off as "WeLl iT's DiFfErEnT"
Moral of the story; American politics are Devisive as f*ck and there's trashy people on all sides, and somehow that small minority is what the entire party is determined to be by the other side.
I didn't wanna join this convo but GBA temp isn't letting me leave so I guess I'm here now. And here I shall say; Biden is the Media's sweetheart and gets nothing but praise. Trump was the Media's bane and got nothing but hate.
When you have biased reporting it creates a warped sense of reality, wherein either you believe everything the media says because it's praising the person you like, or you ignore everything it says because it trashes the person you like.
Quite frankly I find it amusing how desperately people will flock to defend their side when less than a year ago the other side did the exact same thing and those same people where throwing a fit.
Feel free to respond to me. Or not. Either way depending on what you say I may just laugh at you.


----------



## tabzer (May 25, 2021)

For anyone interested in not seeing political threads in their dash, I'll refer you to this information:



Costello said:


> *HOW TO HIDE THESE THREADS ON THE PORTAL & THE 'NEW CONTENT' PAGE?*
> Open this: https://gbatemp.net/account/new-content
> Select the 'World news/politics' forum in the list & save your settings


----------



## Tsundere_Neko (May 25, 2021)

tabzer said:


> For anyone interested in not seeing political threads in their dash, I'll refer you to this information:


Much obliged.


----------



## Xzi (May 25, 2021)

Really this is just Biden letting Germany do what they want to do.  Which is something I didn't think the US had much say in to begin with.  Preferably the whole world would be on board with renewable energy and zero-emissions vehicles by now, but threatening/forcing other countries to convert is not an intelligent way to run government.  So what is it about this news that's supposed to make me feel "betrayed," exactly?


----------



## tabzer (May 25, 2021)

Xzi said:


> Really this is just Biden letting Germany do what they want to do.  Which is something I didn't think the US had much say in to begin with.  Preferably the whole world would be on board with renewable energy and zero-emissions vehicles by now, but threatening/forcing other countries to convert is not an intelligent way to run government.  So what is it about this news that's supposed to make me feel "betrayed," exactly?



I would agree that it is a rational perspective, but the fact being overlooked is that the US did have a limited say which was being exercised up until the point that Biden removed it.  It is not my point that this article isn't propaganda (it is), but that this would have been a lot more prevalent as propaganda with different verbiage, and references to President's love affair with Putin, had it been the previous administration (by your preferred medium).

I believe the "betrayal" is the suggestion that Biden hurt America by shutting down its keystone pipeline and then subsequently acted in easing restraints on one that benefits Russia.


----------



## Valwinz (Jun 24, 2021)

Biden gives Putin the go-ahead i guess Putin is cashing in on the favors now


----------



## Viri (Jun 24, 2021)

Tell Germany to stop destroying their nuclear plants, so they don't have to badly depend on Russian oil.


----------



## notimp (Jun 29, 2021)

Stop, stop stop stop...  (Didnt read most messages here..  )

This is not a 'If we cant have, it - they should not be allowed to have it either' thing. AT ALL. 

First and the most important part. Necessity. US be like 'we energy independent (for about 100 years) - if we go fracking' -- also we have the entire infrastructure to produce 'rare goods' people usually produce from oil (fertilizers and industery stuff), from natural gas. Oh, and we have natural gas. Actually so much of it, more than half of it just leaks out 'during production'. (Should be about right.) And we still dont know, what to do with the thing, because oil is cheaper.

Germany be like: We have coal? The one where you have to remove entire mountains, valleys and vilages, to then run 20 meters of the entire soil floor (level) through machines to crunch through, and then get some.

So anything germany does to produce value (value add), as a society, has to come from 'doing smart things with goods that arent in place in germany'. Then export. Also, in winter, germany has to heat.
--

Thats the first part of the 'what the heck are you talking about' argument.

The second part is. 'Get the f*ck out of our country.' In international relations. And of course you dont, because you have basically linked our elites with yours, and now everything our elites (all of them actually), do all day - is kiss US ass.



Issue - even kissing US ass gets harder and harder, if you decided as a society, to do the energy transition (towards renewables) earlier. Because to make it short, germanys gas demand will raise by about 50% in the short term (next 15 years or so), then drop off (become less and less).

And the only f'ckng thing the US is doing is, to pressure our political elites to go the dumbfuck route to import more US shale gas, that gets shipped around half of the world, by tanker, and is the most expensive, when germany has russia - quite a bit closer to their borders, which can (and in the past have) supply(ied). Further more, so that germany doesnt get to fossile energy independence 'as early' - because the US still has shale gas to sell.

Thats essentially the discussion here. US doesnt do our politics (get that straight), but does by buying our elites (transatlantic projects *bleh*).
-

And even outside of 'essentially' - keystone got build, so the US would get even cheaper fossile energy. While they had much, much cheaper alternatives in country than coal, just not as cheap as the stuff they were able to procure from canada.

And the entire thing with climate change is 'give carbon a price' not make oil cheaper. Iiiiiiidi*cough*t.

Also not as an absolute - but if you try to cut a countries gas supply, knowing they need to import the stuff. Its different than penny gouging in Canada over something you already have. While knowing that 'needing more of the stuff' in the short term comes from trying to switch to renewable sources. None of that was the cause for keystone. That was just 100 people wanting to make money.
--

Third point. Because your rightwing internet brain tries to pull the same thing they did with china now with germany - as the Joe is weak on china thing didnt work out. THE FLIPPING REASON for the 'weak on china' thing not having worked out with Biden, was - that China essentially pushed full climate agenda, and the US said, f'ck you we have oil. We do at our own pace.

So the only f'cking thing that Biden wants in relation to Germany currently, is push his goddamn tankers down our throat. Which HARDLY is a weak position to take. That the pushback 'might still need gas pipelines from Russia' worked at all, was a thing without an alternative (we actually need quite a bit of that stuff in the next 15 years, and it certainly would help if we dont have to pay freaking US having to ship that thing around the world f'cking prices), to try to be one of the first industrial societies that does the energy transition. If US would have said no - germany would still have done it, because they needed to.
-

And last point. Most of this is about US interests sitting in flipping Ukraine, wanting them to still be able to control, the flow (amounts), getting money just from being a transitionary country -- cutting some percentage off of the price - because... Idk NATO? So there already was a pipeline. Now Russia has a semi warm war simmering in that country - but also has to send its gas to Europe towards that country, and US told us - yeah, its a great Idea to keep it that way - because that way US and NATO influence in that country can be higher. LETS NOT LET THEM BUILD AN ALTERNATIVE PIPELINE. Thats called geostrategy, and has everyone hating the US, just ask around the world.





Viri said:


> Tell Germany to stop destroying their nuclear plants, so they don't have to badly depend on Russian oil.


They are just destroying them earlier. And the answer for future energy independence was not to build more of them. Literally. They are too frigging expensive to build (new). Considering alternatives.

Also 'just ask them to run a few old reactors, for a few decades longer' - who cares about risks (aside from that this was politically driven, but just about if now, or 10 years from now), is also the asshole move to pull.

They asked their citizens, citizens said, pull the plug now.


----------

