RugbyRebels

kk67 wrote:

Stones of granite wrote:

kk67 wrote:
C'mon, Fella. You know this story has been running for years.
https://www.platts.com/latest-news/natu ... s-26902984

At least the Russkis are attempting arbitration. The US are just planning to lob a few smart bombs delivered by the Playstation generation from 1,000 miles away and call it necessary regime change.

Right, so the pipeline ran nowhere near Crimea. The normal process for solving a payment dispute is arbitration, not annexation of an unrelated part of the country.

It’s all just smokescreen, which you are adding too. The Russian’s annexed Crimea so that could stake claim to hydrocarbon reserves in the northern Black Sea, with the added benefits that they deny them to Ukraine and save the peanuts they paid for leasing ports and airfields in Crimea.

Well,....the pipeline clearly ran through Ukraine,.. and they were clearly stealing gas.
There is the additional matter of the Gazprom pipeline to China. Something else the US wants to prevent.

As Rowan's article mentioned.... ISIS went straight to the hub and blew the hell out of it.

There is no argument that there was a dispute about Ukraine not paying for gas, but this cannot be used as an excuse for the annexation of Crimea as you seem to think. The pipeline ran nowhere near Crimea, and still doesn’t

ISIS destroyed a pipeline that runs from Russia to China? How exactly?

Stones of granite wrote: ISIS destroyed a pipeline that runs from Russia to China? How exactly?

No. I meant they went straight to the hub in Aleppo. The China market is as big or bigger than the European market. The potential war is about reliable delivery, as we saw in the UK over the 4 day snowmaggedon recently when supply became scarce and we had to buy back energy futures from industry. And they charged big money for us to do that.

We could have quite easily increased our supply from Gazprom..... but we didn't want to.

kk67 wrote:

Stones of granite wrote: ISIS destroyed a pipeline that runs from Russia to China? How exactly?

No. I meant they went straight to the hub in Aleppo. The China market is as big or bigger than the European market. The potential war is about reliable delivery, as we saw in the UK over the 4 day snowmaggedon recently when supply became scarce and we had to buy back energy futures from industry. And they charged big money for us to do that.

We could have quite easily increased our supply from Gazprom..... but we didn't want to.

The hub of what in Aleppo? The pipeline that al-Assad wouldn’t allow to be built? The domestic oil industry in Syria is tiny.

We don’t need to buy more gas from Gazprom, we get plenty from Qatar and now also from the USA. The short term shortage of gas wasn’t a supply problem, it was a storage problem.

Stones of granite wrote:

kk67 wrote:

Stones of granite wrote: ISIS destroyed a pipeline that runs from Russia to China? How exactly?

No. I meant they went straight to the hub in Aleppo. The China market is as big or bigger than the European market. The potential war is about reliable delivery, as we saw in the UK over the 4 day snowmaggedon recently when supply became scarce and we had to buy back energy futures from industry. And they charged big money for us to do that.

We could have quite easily increased our supply from Gazprom..... but we didn't want to.

The hub of what in Aleppo? The pipeline that al-Assad wouldn’t allow to be built? The domestic oil industry in Syria is tiny.

We don’t need to buy more gas from Gazprom, we get plenty from Qatar and now also from the USA. The short term shortage of gas wasn’t a supply problem, it was a storage problem.

The gas pipeline was designed to run through Syria, not begin there. It's source would in fact have been Qatar. This was all expained earlier.

The Crimea did not vote for a return to Russia because the Ukraine failed to pay for its gas. It voted for a return because Neo Nazis in Odessa were burning ethnic Russians alive - and the peninsula has an ethnic Russian majority. Also explained earlier

Stones of granite wrote: We don’t need to buy more gas from Gazprom, we get plenty from Qatar and now also from the USA. The short term shortage of gas wasn’t a supply problem, it was a storage problem.

Fella,..... trying to pretend that supply and storage are two separate variables makes me think you have an incredibly short time-frame in the industry you claim to understand.

rowan wrote:

Stones of granite wrote:

kk67 wrote: No. I meant they went straight to the hub in Aleppo. The China market is as big or bigger than the European market. The potential war is about reliable delivery, as we saw in the UK over the 4 day snowmaggedon recently when supply became scarce and we had to buy back energy futures from industry. And they charged big money for us to do that.

We could have quite easily increased our supply from Gazprom..... but we didn't want to.

The hub of what in Aleppo? The pipeline that al-Assad wouldn’t allow to be built? The domestic oil industry in Syria is tiny.

We don’t need to buy more gas from Gazprom, we get plenty from Qatar and now also from the USA. The short term shortage of gas wasn’t a supply problem, it was a storage problem.

The gas pipeline was designed to run through Syria, not begin there. It's source would in fact have been Qatar. This was all expained earlier.

What the actual fuck are you wi bling about now? Who said anything about it starting in Syria?

Stones of granite wrote:

rowan wrote:

Stones of granite wrote: The hub of what in Aleppo? The pipeline that al-Assad wouldn’t allow to be built? The domestic oil industry in Syria is tiny.

We don’t need to buy more gas from Gazprom, we get plenty from Qatar and now also from the USA. The short term shortage of gas wasn’t a supply problem, it was a storage problem.

The gas pipeline was designed to run through Syria, not begin there. It's source would in fact have been Qatar. This was all expained earlier.

What the actual fuck are you wi bling about now? Who said anything about it starting in Syria?

You're making childish, facetious arguments and twisting everybody's words because having lost your jingoist, Russsophobic argument you'd rather become moronic that simply give it a rest.

rowan wrote:

Stones of granite wrote:

rowan wrote:
The gas pipeline was designed to run through Syria, not begin there. It's source would in fact have been Qatar. This was all expained earlier.

What the actual fuck are you wi bling about now? Who said anything about it starting in Syria?

You're making childish, facetious arguments and twisting everybody's words because having lost your jingoist, Russsophobic argument you'd rather become moronic that simply give it a rest.

Oh do fuck off with your insults. You’re chipping into a discussion you clearly haven’t been following with irrelevances. Why don’t you get back to masturbating over bare chested photos of Putin riding a stallion you fucking dullard.

We all know that Syria itself isn't the issue.
No one fights over a bit of desert for humanitarian reasons. Certainly not the Yanks or the English.

kk67 wrote:

Stones of granite wrote: We don’t need to buy more gas from Gazprom, we get plenty from Qatar and now also from the USA. The short term shortage of gas wasn’t a supply problem, it was a storage problem.

Fella,..... trying to pretend that supply and storage are two separate variables makes me think you have an incredibly short time-frame in the industry you claim to understand.

Awesome. You’re lecturing me on the oil and gas industry now.

Stones of granite wrote:

kk67 wrote:

Stones of granite wrote: We don’t need to buy more gas from Gazprom, we get plenty from Qatar and now also from the USA. The short term shortage of gas wasn’t a supply problem, it was a storage problem.

Fella,..... trying to pretend that supply and storage are two separate variables makes me think you have an incredibly short time-frame in the industry you claim to understand.

Awesome. You’re lecturing me on the oil and gas industry now.

I've tried not to,.... but you ain't making it easy.

kk67 wrote:

Stones of granite wrote:

kk67 wrote:
Fella,..... trying to pretend that supply and storage are two separate variables makes me think you have an incredibly short time-frame in the industry you claim to understand.

Awesome. You’re lecturing me on the oil and gas industry now.

I've tried not to,.... but you ain't making it easy.

Well, before you make yourself look even more stupid, let me suggest that you go and do some research. Focus on storage problems. Sorry to sound like a patronising git, but you “aim’t making it easy”.

Stones of granite wrote:

rowan wrote:

Stones of granite wrote: What the actual fuck are you wi bling about now? Who said anything about it starting in Syria?

You're making childish, facetious arguments and twisting everybody's words because having lost your jingoist, Russsophobic argument you'd rather become moronic that simply give it a rest.

Oh do fuck off with your insults. You’re chipping into a discussion you clearly haven’t been following with irrelevances. Why don’t you get back to masturbating over bare chested photos of Putin riding a stallion you fucking dullard.

I'd take the Russians over the British any day. The British have the most racist, murderous, arrogant ideology on the face of the planet and have committed more evil on this planet than any other nation over the past few centuries, committing genocide and massacres throughout Africa, India, North America, the Middle East, the Far East, Australia, New Zealand and elsewhere. & Britain is still at it, helping America butcher millions across the Middle East. But don't let that stop your preaching to the rest of us and condemning everyone else...

Stones of granite wrote:

kk67 wrote:

Stones of granite wrote: Awesome. You’re lecturing me on the oil and gas industry now.

I've tried not to,.... but you ain't making it easy.

Well, before you make yourself look even more stupid, let me suggest that you go and do some research. Focus on storage problems. Sorry to sound like a patronising git, but you “aim’t making it easy”.

I understand the storage problems. Even with a huge storage capacity the UK would still be reliant on reliable supply.
Do you understand share prices..?.

kk67 wrote:

Stones of granite wrote:

kk67 wrote:
I've tried not to,.... but you ain't making it easy.

Well, before you make yourself look even more stupid, let me suggest that you go and do some research. Focus on storage problems. Sorry to sound like a patronising git, but you “aim’t making it easy”.

I understand the storage problems. Even with a huge storage capacity the UK would still be reliant on reliable supply.
Do you understand share prices..?.

Stones of Cowardice is simply on the wind-up now because he knows America is backing off in Syria as the evidence fails to materialize, just as it did all those other times, and just as it has in Salisbury, where the Brits have made utter buffoons of themselves.

The truth is Russia has thwarted US-Saudi plans for Syria and made an heroic stand by defending its ally from a marauding, rapacious super power hell bent on seizing control of the entire planet. Hopefully this will be a turning point, the US might start to back off a little, and, who knows, peace might even break out. That's all most of us want.

There has been some hilarious discourse on the Politics board but this is top of the tree.

Yes, I agree with you there. It was a good discussion until this evening, but now it's descended into a series of inane questioning, twisting of words and irrelevant replies.

There can be no denial that at the very moment when the Syria situation has become much more manageable in terms of civilian casualties, the US has decided to again ramp up the pressure with the clear aim of regime change and economic profit.

They desert their beheading, intermediate allies for money. It was ever thus.

Funny how the US allies in the middle east are either a bunch of psychopathic outsiders,... or their hegemonic insider counterparts.
As long as fuel is cheap,.... they don't really care.

In the midst of all the 'anti-semitism' directed towards the Labour party, you have to wonder if the vicious right wing were to be become the standard English response.....which political leaders would actually be manning the barricades to fight against anti-Semitism..?.
I doubt Boris, Foxy, Knut et al would be fighting the good fight.

I rather like being British (other than the disgust at the Brexit vote anyway)

Digby wrote:I rather like being British (other than the disgust at the Brexit vote anyway)

I'm half-British myself and have a UK passport to prove it. My earlier comments were a bit over the top but I does get my goat to hear Westerners trashing the Russians as if it were a foregone conclusion that we are the goodies and they are the baddies. Right now nothing could be further from the truth.

& through all of this, the US has been blocking any investigation into Israel's latest crimes against the Palestinians . . . as per usual

Digby wrote:I rather like being British (other than the disgust at the Brexit vote anyway)

Are you claiming to be British..?. Your headlong admittance of chasing profit suggests to me you are purely English.
Don't try and drag the rest of us into your tragic justifications.

kk67 wrote:

Digby wrote:I rather like being British (other than the disgust at the Brexit vote anyway)

Are you claiming to be British..?. Your headlong admittance of chasing profit suggests to me you are purely English.

I'm proud to be English too, and I tolerate having a Welsh mother

Digby wrote:

kk67 wrote:

Digby wrote:I rather like being British (other than the disgust at the Brexit vote anyway)

Are you claiming to be British..?. Your headlong admittance of chasing profit suggests to me you are purely English.

I'm proud to be English too, and I tolerate having a Welsh mother

Proud to be English..?. About what..?.
Are you proud about England's contribution to Afghanistan..?.

You know that England at Agincourt utterly revoked all rules of chivalric honour by murdering unarmed prisoners.
It wasn't the first time and it wasn't the last.

kk67 wrote:

Digby wrote:

kk67 wrote:
Are you claiming to be British..?. Your headlong admittance of chasing profit suggests to me you are purely English.

I'm proud to be English too, and I tolerate having a Welsh mother

Proud to be English..?. About what..?.
Are you proud about England's contribution to Afghanistan..?.

You know that England at Agincourt utterly revoked all rules of chivalric honour by murdering unarmed prisoners.
It wasn't the first time and it wasn't the last.

Like all English folk I derive most of my self worth from our participation in Afghanistan and Agincourt, it's just not evil if it's not alliterative