This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 30 May 22 11.45pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by The groover
Posted by Wisbech eagle: Clearly they did, or they wouldn't be members. The EU might have been flexible with their rules when admitting Greece. The EU bent rules so far they went up their own a**e. Greece later admitted that they had lied about their GDP to get in to the EU. The EU auditors must have been down the pub instead of doing their job. Greece then admitted to lying again when they wanted EU funding and lower interest loans. The rules that were originally made have been wiped out. This resulted in countries that were effectively 3rd world countries joining and thus this was the start of the cess pit conditions that eventually resulted in us voting to leave. In terms of Ukraine, were they to have EU membership granted that would effectively make them part of NATO. The EU isn't Nato. Both have entirely different entry criteria. For whatever reason the EU eased the way in for Greece, who conned them on the way and then have spent a long time paying for it. Ukraine joining the EU, which is possible, would have no bearing at all on whether it would be admitted into Nato, which I cannot imagine happening in the foreseeable future. The Eastern European countries who joined were far from "3rd world countries". They wanted to align themselves with the west after decades of being dominated by Russia. Building a democratic barrier between ourselves and the mafia state to the east made sense, and does so even more now.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
BlueJay UK 30 May 22 11.49pm | |
---|---|
Russian state TV's Olga Skabeyeva says it might be time to admit that the "special operation in Ukraine is over" Russia has now been "forced to demilitarise the whole of Nato", she claims - [Tweet Link]
Interesting to see that Putins grip on dissenting voices is loosening slightly of late. Also it's fantastic news that the Special Op is over.. All of Ukranians neo-nazis are now gone!! What a relief. Phew!
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
BlueJay UK 30 May 22 11.52pm | |
---|---|
"Agreement to ban export of Russian oil to the EU. This immediately covers more than 2/3 of oil imports from Russia"
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 31 May 22 1.29am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
You, obviously, or you wouldn't get so angry! Indifference isn't anger.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Matov 31 May 22 6.27am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by BlueJay
If the long term consequence of this is to make the West become energy self-sufficient then it will be a huge positive. Absolutely zero doubts about that. I look forward to the announcement of massive investment in renewables, nuclear, fracking and maybe even starting to mine coal, which Europe has huge amounts of, once more. But I suspect it will just make us even more reliant on the likes of Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Those liberal beacons whose petro-dollars have had such a positive effect on us all. Better to enrich, even more, those places than somewhere as barbaric as Russia. However, I am more than happy to be proved wrong on this. Edited by Matov (31 May 2022 6.37am)
"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
W12 31 May 22 8.06am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by BlueJay
"Agreement to ban export of Russian oil to the EU. This immediately covers more than 2/3 of oil imports from Russia"
You do not intentionally cut off your fuel/energy supply until you have a viable alternative in place. Also, you cannot build nuclear power stations overnight (and we seem to have lost that expertise anyway) and "renewables" are not commercially viable and only exist due to subsidies. I suspect the upshot of this is that we will end up with the same Russian oil/gas just sourced via a different route and at a much higher cost.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
BlueJay UK 31 May 22 8.17am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Matov
But I suspect it will just make us even more reliant on the likes of Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Those liberal beacons whose petro-dollars have had such a positive effect on us all. Better to enrich, even more, those places than somewhere as barbaric as Russia. However, I am more than happy to be proved wrong on this. Edited by Matov (31 May 2022 6.37am) I definitely agree that this would be a massive plus and that it's something that people and nations, regardless of environmental perspectives, should all push towards. Energy independence is not an overnight or painless move, but we see what can happen where it's a move we make too slowly or only see the downside of. Unfortunately, many of those who overwise would be suspicious of government and corporations, bought into ideas over decades from the oil lobby, that archiac and finite status quo is the way ahead (It's certainly not only the 'green' push that people should be wary of). Reliance on other nations for energy is a perpetually twisted arm. It doesn't matter how you do it (renewables + nuclear mix etc), it does though matter that you do.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
BlueJay UK 31 May 22 8.31am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by W12
A day that would never come, because despite your stated dislike of corporations and elites, aversion to energy independence due to pushed propoganda by said corporations means that you have an aversion to it. That comes of part of the 'package deal', with these pointless sets of packaged ideas that people are persuaded into subscribing instead of considering issues case by case.
The whole point of Brexit for instance was to have more say in our own affairs. It's funny then that people are happy to let other nations on a whim massively impact us in this area. Regardless of politics and perspective should've long been be a national no brainer to forge ahead with in a meaningful manner. It speaks to tribal foolishness that we're not already there. It's not especially a point about this individual situation, more that it shouldn't even be a question or whether other countries can put the squeeze on us in this regard. Hopefully moving forward we will appreciate that freeing ourselves of that is a good thing. Edited by BlueJay (31 May 2022 8.35am)
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Matov 31 May 22 8.40am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by BlueJay
I fully agree with all of this but, and for me this is the crux, why has energy autarky not been the goal for decades? I would argue that our entire political system in the West has been in the thrall of Middle Eastern petro-dollars for so long now that our current system is institutionally incapable of switching to the kind of long term policies required. Hence why this current 'embargo' actually makes us even more enslaved by barbarian regimes and why Russia's many attempts to enjoy closer relations with the West have been rebuffed ever since the wall came down.
"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
BlueJay UK 31 May 22 8.51am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Matov
I fully agree with all of this but, and for me this is the crux, why has energy autarky not been the goal for decades? I would argue that our entire political system in the West has been in the thrall of Middle Eastern petro-dollars for so long now that our current system is institutionally incapable of switching to the kind of long term policies required. Hence why this current 'embargo' actually makes us even more enslaved by barbarian regimes and why Russia's many attempts to enjoy closer relations with the West have been rebuffed ever since the wall came down.
I don't disagree. For a mix of reasons, all rather predictable and unfortunate, we have relied on areas of the world for our energy needs that bring with it more misery and trouble for us and them than it's worth. I hope for a future where we're relient on no-one, as that avoids numerous issues, some of which we're beginning to feel now. Technology and necessity will likely get us there, over and above governments with self serving election cycle mindsets.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Nicholas91 The Democratic Republic of Kent 31 May 22 8.54am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Matov
I fully agree with all of this but, and for me this is the crux, why has energy autarky not been the goal for decades? I would argue that our entire political system in the West has been in the thrall of Middle Eastern petro-dollars for so long now that our current system is institutionally incapable of switching to the kind of long term policies required. Hence why this current 'embargo' actually makes us even more enslaved by barbarian regimes and why Russia's many attempts to enjoy closer relations with the West have been rebuffed ever since the wall came down.
Yep agree with all of that and the post from BJ that you originally replied to. My guess is that whilst there may have been appetite and/or ponderance for looking at alternative energy sources governments in power may have seen it as a 'too risky' a move. Perhaps there had to be solid ground on which to make the decision to wholeheartedly switch attentions and indeed efforts elsewhere. No doubt the average Joe let alone corporations will feel some pinches in the meantime as this goes through. There might also be the suggestion that Russia's newly earnt pariah status and warmongering will pave the way for an undertaking of such magnitude. Just musings from me of course, not that they are often worth very much!
Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!! |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 31 May 22 8.59am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Indifference isn't anger. Of course, it isn't. That though is not what the primary odour that permeates your constant posts. If you were indifferent, you wouldn't respond.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.