lynch
Midland League Division One
Posts: 252
|
Post by lynch on Feb 22, 2022 12:03:53 GMT 1
We need an oil and natural gas policy that takes into account all the uses. The focus seems to have been all about insulating and cutting car use. Insulating - yes, definately. Cut car use? Or maybe just make them more efficient? What seems to have been neglected is: How do they make Nitrogen for fertilisers? Using natural gas. How do they make loads of products, including plastics and road surfaces? Using oil.
Who is supplying too big a proportion of it? Russia.
Ukraine grain supply, impacted on a wider conflict, could destabilise countries dependent on imports. And as we’ve seen with oil and gas, worldwide commodity prices impacts all even if not directly importing from Ukraine or Russia.
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Feb 22, 2022 12:15:16 GMT 1
It was widely held to be the right thing to do when we stopped Chinese telecomm imports. Seems like we should also have looked at the more mundane, but essential imports from both China and Russia and eased our dependence on them.
|
|
|
Post by martinshrew on Feb 22, 2022 12:26:27 GMT 1
It was widely held to be the right thing to do when we stopped Chinese telecomm imports. Seems like we should also have looked at the more mundane, but essential imports from both China and Russia and eased our dependence on them. That should be the focus, just cut them off.
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Feb 22, 2022 12:38:57 GMT 1
Germany says it will not now ratify use of the newly completed Norstrom 2 undersea pipeline. That is a big step forward.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 22, 2022 13:17:03 GMT 1
It was widely held to be the right thing to do when we stopped Chinese telecomm imports. Seems like we should also have looked at the more mundane, but essential imports from both China and Russia and eased our dependence on them. Easier said than done. Whether we like it or not, the global economy is interdependent. Our own supply chains are heavily dependent on raw materials from Russia and vast amounts of western goods are manufactured in China. You can't just switch that off without inflicting enormous self-harm.
|
|
lynch
Midland League Division One
Posts: 252
|
Post by lynch on Feb 22, 2022 13:21:20 GMT 1
It was widely held to be the right thing to do when we stopped Chinese telecomm imports. Seems like we should also have looked at the more mundane, but essential imports from both China and Russia and eased our dependence on them. Easier said than done. Whether we like it or not, the global economy is interdependent. Our own supply chains are heavily dependent on raw materials from Russia and vast amounts of western goods are manufactured in China. You can't just switch that off without inflicting enormous self-harm. Like Ammonium nitrate, where Russia accounts for ~66% of world exports.
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Feb 22, 2022 13:29:53 GMT 1
It was widely held to be the right thing to do when we stopped Chinese telecomm imports. Seems like we should also have looked at the more mundane, but essential imports from both China and Russia and eased our dependence on them. Easier said than done. Whether we like it or not, the global economy is interdependent. Our own supply chains are heavily dependent on raw materials from Russia and vast amounts of western goods are manufactured in China. You can't just switch that off without inflicting enormous self-harm. Doesn't mean we can't look at the situation though. A few years ago Huwei telecomms equipment was deemed to have a big role in how 5g was going to be built.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Feb 22, 2022 13:45:21 GMT 1
It was widely held to be the right thing to do when we stopped Chinese telecomm imports. Seems like we should also have looked at the more mundane, but essential imports from both China and Russia and eased our dependence on them. That should be the focus, just cut them off. I think the only thing that might make him sit up and listen relates to Nord Stream 2. And I'm not too sure that would stop a full invasion if that is his intension.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 22, 2022 13:52:00 GMT 1
Easier said than done. Whether we like it or not, the global economy is interdependent. Our own supply chains are heavily dependent on raw materials from Russia and vast amounts of western goods are manufactured in China. You can't just switch that off without inflicting enormous self-harm. Doesn't mean we can't look at the situation though. A few years ago Huwei telecomms equipment was deemed to have a big role in how 5g was going to be built. That's really not the same though. Huawei has obvious high tech competitors in producing what it does. There's limited scope for competition when it comes to raw materials - they are where they are. And, if we're talking about China, you can't move your manufacturing capabilities to a new country without huge cost and disruption, especially if you're trying to do it over a short period (say, less than 5 years). If your manufacturing is outsourced, you've got to go through all the hoops of finding a suitable producer in another country that has the skilled workforce, the technology and can meet all the required standards at the expected price levels. Shifting production to another country, or bringing it back onshore, is a huge strategic change and not something that can be done without investing a lot of time and cost.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 22, 2022 13:58:58 GMT 1
I would recommend that anyone trying to follow this story spend a few minutes updating their news feed with RT. Before anyone starts up, I'm not suggesting that will give you any sort of true picture, just that it will give you an idea of the picture as seen from Moscow. You're not likely to get that from western media sources and it's always worth knowing how both sides view an argument.
For what it's worth, I think the whole thing is bloody ridiculous posturing and willy-waving. The world has real crises to deal with - global heating, poverty, disease, malnutrition, inequality etc etc - but it's always easier for so called leaders to wave the flags and stir up nationalist sentiments than to deal with real problems.
Humans are such slow learners.
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Feb 22, 2022 13:59:34 GMT 1
Doesn't mean we can't look at the situation though. A few years ago Huwei telecomms equipment was deemed to have a big role in how 5g was going to be built. That's really not the same though. Huawei has obvious high tech competitors in producing what it does. There's limited scope for competition when it comes to raw materials - they are where they are. And, if we're talking about China, you can't move your manufacturing capabilities to a new country without huge cost and disruption, especially if you're trying to do it over a short period (say, less than 5 years). If your manufacturing is outsourced, you've got to go through all the hoops of finding a suitable producer in another country that has the skilled workforce, the technology and can meet all the required standards at the expected price levels. Shifting production to another country, or bringing it back onshore, is a huge strategic change and not something that can be done without investing a lot of time and cost. You can, however, look into it. We have got into Russian finance and reliance way too deep.
We talk of no new oil and gas exploration, zero carbon by 2050, Russian reliance and Chinese treatment of the people who make our goods is something to go into long term plans. Sanctions right now depend on it hurting Russia more than us, but the idea that we have long term plans to reduce our dependence is a sanction in itself
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 22, 2022 14:10:26 GMT 1
That's really not the same though. Huawei has obvious high tech competitors in producing what it does. There's limited scope for competition when it comes to raw materials - they are where they are. And, if we're talking about China, you can't move your manufacturing capabilities to a new country without huge cost and disruption, especially if you're trying to do it over a short period (say, less than 5 years). If your manufacturing is outsourced, you've got to go through all the hoops of finding a suitable producer in another country that has the skilled workforce, the technology and can meet all the required standards at the expected price levels. Shifting production to another country, or bringing it back onshore, is a huge strategic change and not something that can be done without investing a lot of time and cost. You can, however, look into it. We have got into Russian finance and reliance way too deep.
We talk of no new oil and gas exploration, zero carbon by 2050, Russian reliance and Chinese treatment of the people who make our goods is something to go into long term plans. Sanctions right now depend on it hurting Russia more than us, but the idea that we have long term plans to reduce our dependence is a sanction in itself
Well that's fine but we've sat back and allowed the world to be the way it is. Russian billions have been laundered through the UK and elsewhere and we've not taken it seriously because too many influential figures, not to mention the odd political party, have benefitted from it. We thought Russia saw things our way, or at least sufficiently to keep their nationalism tucked away quietly in the furthest corner of Europe. We thought mutual economic interdependence was a way to secure lasting peace and stability, or at least it was convenient to pretend that it did. The clues have been there long enough - from the Russian intelligence agencies murderous actions against dissidents, whether at home or abroad, to its cyber attacks and disinformation and its interference in the US election and our EU referendum - but too many vested interests have got in the way of a firm and coordinated response. As for the oil and gas - 'solving' one problem by exacerbating another, bigger problem is delusional.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 22, 2022 15:01:17 GMT 1
See what I mean? Sanctions against 3 individuals and 5 banks? Laundered Russian money has bought a lot of influence.
I know you want to keep the highest levels of sanctions in reserve but that seems a weak and flaccid response by Johnson.
|
|
|
Post by ssshrew on Feb 22, 2022 15:20:36 GMT 1
Don’t worry he has summoned the Russian Ambassador. I hope there’s cakes and wine!
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 22, 2022 16:31:41 GMT 1
See what I mean? Sanctions against 3 individuals and 5 banks? Laundered Russian money has bought a lot of influence. I know you want to keep the highest levels of sanctions in reserve but that seems a weak and flaccid response by Johnson. Even worse than I thought. The three individuals have apparently been sanctioned by the US since 2018! And, as some are now pointing out, anyone not on the sanctions list just announced now has time to withdraw their assets from the UK, transfer ownership of properties etc etc. Johnson's response is not only weak, it actually seems designed to minimise damage to the Russian power elite. Apparently, he's also claimed Roman Abramovich is already sanctioned when he isn't. Incompetent or dishonest? Maybe just both, but then it's only wooden headed loyalists who haven't known that for a long time already.
|
|
|
Post by TOP MONNER on Feb 22, 2022 16:55:17 GMT 1
See what I mean? Sanctions against 3 individuals and 5 banks? Laundered Russian money has bought a lot of influence. I know you want to keep the highest levels of sanctions in reserve but that seems a weak and flaccid response by Johnson. Even worse than I thought. The three individuals have apparently been sanctioned by the US since 2018! And, as some are now pointing out, anyone not on the sanctions list just announced now has time to withdraw their assets from the UK, transfer ownership of properties etc etc. Johnson's response is not only weak, it actually seems designed to minimise damage to the Russian power elite. Apparently, he's also claimed Roman Abramovich is already sanctioned when he isn't. Incompetent or dishonest? Maybe just both, but then it's only wooden headed loyalists who haven't known that for a long time already. Rather than parodying your beloved Captain Hindsight, it would be helpful if you offered some sort of solution to the unfolding situation in Ukraine rather than simply adopting the position of your leader by barking insults from the sidelines and offering absolutely nothing of any substance. Your earlier prediction of there being no Russian invasion of Ukraine is already wrong. What's your next move o wise one?
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Feb 22, 2022 16:57:08 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 22, 2022 16:59:48 GMT 1
The problem is the City of London has an absolute advantage in laundering dirty money. Which is why these characters are herein the first place.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 22, 2022 17:21:47 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 22, 2022 17:33:58 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Feb 22, 2022 17:34:10 GMT 1
The sanctions that Boris Johnson has just announced in response to Russia’s breach of international law are fairly underwhelming. Five banks are being hit, three rich individuals and those members of the Duma who voted to unilaterally recognise the breakaway republics. They will not make Moscow take notice in the way that the decision to end certification of Nord Stream 2 has.
Johnson’s defence of the limited nature of these sanctions is that they are the ‘first tranche’ and the UK needs to hold things back to try and deter Russia from further action. But given that the UK, rightly, considers what Russia is up to is an invasion of Ukraine, these sanctions are nowhere near robust enough. The three oligarchs hit have been on the US sanctions list since 2018.
To date, the UK has responded impressively to the Ukraine crisis. It has called for the cancellation of Nord Stream 2, it has reinforced Nato’s eastern flank and sent aid to Ukraine. But these sanctions do not match those measures.
The Spectator.
Meanwhile, the rest of the oligarchs yet to be sanctioned will obviously be moving their liquid assets elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Feb 22, 2022 17:47:32 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by armchairfan on Feb 22, 2022 18:07:41 GMT 1
I have to say that I share some of the misgivings about the strength of these sanctions, at least so far. I am particularly concerned about the sources of the Russian money which, it is continually being alleged, has found its way into Conservative Party coffers.
|
|
|
Post by Worthingshrew on Feb 22, 2022 18:13:05 GMT 1
The sanctions that Boris Johnson has just announced in response to Russia’s breach of international law are fairly underwhelming. Five banks are being hit, three rich individuals and those members of the Duma who voted to unilaterally recognise the breakaway republics. They will not make Moscow take notice in the way that the decision to end certification of Nord Stream 2 has. Johnson’s defence of the limited nature of these sanctions is that they are the ‘first tranche’ and the UK needs to hold things back to try and deter Russia from further action. But given that the UK, rightly, considers what Russia is up to is an invasion of Ukraine, these sanctions are nowhere near robust enough. The three oligarchs hit have been on the US sanctions list since 2018. To date, the UK has responded impressively to the Ukraine crisis. It has called for the cancellation of Nord Stream 2, it has reinforced Nato’s eastern flank and sent aid to Ukraine. But these sanctions do not match those measures. The Spectator. Meanwhile, the rest of the oligarchs yet to be sanctioned will obviously be moving their liquid assets elsewhere. Putin will be quaking in his boots! If this crisis is a chess game, Putin is a grandmaster and the west is like an amateur player. NATO and the UN no longer seem fit for purpose and seem incapable of deterring Russia in Crimea or Ukraine.
|
|
|
Post by salop27 on Feb 22, 2022 19:13:11 GMT 1
I have to say that I share some of the misgivings about the strength of these sanctions, at least so far. I am particularly concerned about the sources of the Russian money which, it is continually being alleged, has found its way into Conservative Party coffers. You can only donate to a party if you're on the electoral register. The notion that sanctions so far aren't tough enough due to donations from ex Russians is left wing click bait similar to that from the last election where it seemed set in stone Donald Trump was going to buy the NHS😂😂😂
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 22, 2022 19:29:52 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 22, 2022 20:10:49 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Feb 22, 2022 20:22:53 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Feb 22, 2022 23:08:50 GMT 1
It was time to make Putin really sweat with sanctions that would hurt him, said Johnson. Only the sanctions he came up with – five relatively small Russian banks and three oligarchs – didn’t sound as if they would cause the Russian leader to lose a moment’s sleep. If that was the best the UK could come up with in response to the invasion so far, then Putin might as well make a bee-line for Kyiv. Compared to Germany’s decision to cancel the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, the UK’s response looked like p**sing in the wind. www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/feb/22/johnson-sounds-more-grownup-until-his-threat-to-get-russia-by-the-oligarchs
|
|
|
Post by frankwellshrews on Feb 23, 2022 1:01:08 GMT 1
See what I mean? Sanctions against 3 individuals and 5 banks? Laundered Russian money has bought a lot of influence. I know you want to keep the highest levels of sanctions in reserve but that seems a weak and flaccid response by Johnson. That'll show 'em. I believe we move onto strongly worded letters if this doesn't work. They won't know what's hit them.
|
|