[Lovera]

Interesting video by YouTube with a general point of view:https://youtu.be/BeacXBxPARQ

[pilowsky]

To get a real-time sense of the effect of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, have a look at flightradar24.
You will see that there is no air traffic at all between Moscow and Warsaw.
If you zoom in and click on an individual aircraft you see what it's up to.


Pakistan International airlines PK798 - a 777-240(LR) just flew over Moscow a few minutes ago after leaving Toronto - heading for Lahore.
China Eastern is still using Russian airspace, so is Emirates and Air China.
There's an Aeroflot A330 airbus heading for Moscow.


Almost all of the fleet arriving and departing from Moscow ATM are Boeing or Airbus.
At some point they're going to need parts replaced.

[y66]

Martin Sandbu at FT said:

In an echo of the 1970s, the world is in the throes of a geopolitically induced energy price shock. That decade is rightly remembered as a painful time for western economies. But high oil prices also yielded unexpected benefits. The end of cheap energy and the obvious need for long-term energy security spurred a successful drive for energy efficiency.

After Vladimir Putin’s assault on Ukraine, the EU’s need to remove the national security risk of relying on Russian energy is a new opportunity to make a virtue out of necessity.

EU leaders have already asked the European Commission to set out plans to wean the bloc off Russian energy dependence. Germany says it will largely end its reliance on Russia for oil and coal this year, and natural gas by 2024.

Europe can also turn energy policy into an active tool of external influence. The EU is — not before time — probing its ability to constitute a buyers’ cartel. Some member states have resisted calls for joint EU procurement of natural gas. Putin’s aggression has lifted their doubts: on Friday the European Council vowed to work on a common purchase platform.

This is a momentous move. Consider the global effects should EU countries collectively procure and manage the gas needed to fully replenish the bloc’s gas storage every year. That would mean annually buying up to 100bn cubic metres of gas, about one-tenth of the world’s annual trade. If it was all bought as liquefied natural gas it would be one-fifth of the LNG market. If largely concentrated in the summer, the temporary market share would be higher still. Alternatively, if a joint purchase agency bought at the same rate in winter as what it needed to replenish storage in summer, the market share could stay higher throughout the year.

This would not quite reach Opec levels — the oil-producers’ cartels account for more than half of global crude oil exports. But a European buyers’ cartel in natural gas could still wield significant market power.

The most obvious benefit is mercantile. The muscle of collective procurement would surely over time afford Europe lower prices than otherwise. It would also change the incentives guiding energy choices well beyond Europe’s shores. In the short run, joint EU purchasing in a squeezed LNG market would raise prices for others, especially Asian economies. In combination with European carbon border tariffs, that would boost demand for zero-carbon energy.

In the long run, joint procurement would make it easier for EU countries to pre-announce plans for scaling down gas use — which, through its global market influence, would cast doubt on the wisdom of investing in long-term gas development elsewhere. The overall effect would be a boost to incentives for global renewable energy investments today.

Then there is the geopolitical gain. If strategic autonomy means anything, it is surely that the pursuit of European values and interests should not be constrained by the stranglehold kept by Russia or other powers on the energy supplies of EU countries. Moscow has cut off gas supplies for geostrategic reasons before. And Gazprom’s unwillingness to fill its German reservoirs before last winter worsened the EU’s strategic position when Putin launched his war.

This is not a new point. There was interest in an EU energy union, including common purchases from Russia, in the last decade. German complicity with Russian energy interests stood in the way. But so did the tragedy of the post-2015 Polish government’s anti-European turn. It failed to collaborate Europe-wide on such an agenda because of domestic differences with Donald Tusk, the former Polish prime minister, who in his subsequent job as president of the European Council could have rallied a coalition of countries behind this vital Polish interest.

But better late than never. The conditions are propitious for Europe to make up for lost time. Germany has been shocked out of complacency. The EU has some experience with common procurement of a collective good: its purchases of Covid-19 vaccines during the pandemic were more successful than they get credit for, and innovative vaccines are a much more complicated market to enter than natural gas.

The EU is not ready overnight to become a gas-buying cartel at scale. It will have to build up expertise and boost its regasification and domestic piping capacity. But this is happening. And setting up a common purchase platform will accelerate the process.

The 1970s shocks came from the young Opec flexing its muscles. The 2020s shocks should give birth to a European anti-Opec.

[y66]

Gordon Smith, Jennifer Creery and Emily Goldberg at FT said:

The German government has taken the first formal step towards gas rationing as it braces itself for a potential halt in deliveries from Russia due to a dispute over payments.

Germany is one of the biggest purchases in Europe of Russian pipeline gas but is trying to drastically reduce the imports. Last week, the government in Berlin vowed to all but wean itself off Russia’s gas by mid-2024 and become “virtually independent” of its oil by the end of this year.

The US president Joe Biden vowed to help Europe cut its dependence on Russian energy after a summit in Brussels last week by redirecting at least 15bn cubic metres of additional liquefied natural gas to the EU.

The decision by Germany to prepare for gas rationing is the latest in a growing dispute that has raised the prospect of Russian gas supplies to Europe halting. Russian officials said yesterday they were not prepared to “supply gas for free” to Europe, a day after G7 countries unanimously rejected President Vladimir Putin’s directive requiring rouble payments.

Volker Wieland, a professor of economics at Frankfurt University and a member of the German council of economic advisers, warned that a halt in Russian energy supplies would create a “substantial” risk of a recession and bring Europe’s largest economy “close to double-digit rates of inflation”.

Europe’s wholesale gas price rose 8 per cent to €114.45 a megawatt hour today in early trading.

[y66]

Adam Tooze said:

It is the Ukrainians, to the amazement and not inconsiderable embarrassment of the West, who are enacting a drama of national resistance unto death. Under Russian attack, they are bonding together and demanding recognition of their sovereignty. There are many other peoples who are struggling for their existence and recognition today. The difference is that the Ukrainians do so in the classic form of a nation in arms rallying around a nation state. And the Ukrainians do so efficaciously. They have turned back a Russian army. They have saved their capital city. Those are not merely symbolic achievements.

https://adamtooze.su..._d5TYdRYW74&s=r

[hrothgar]

Now seeing reports that the Russian have used Nerve agents in Maripol

[Winstonm]

hrothgar, on 2022-April-11, 14:57, said:

Now seeing reports that the Russian have used Nerve agents in Maripol

At what point does the west say enough and engages in direct confrontation with Russian troops?

[hrothgar]

Winstonm, on 2022-April-11, 15:34, said:

At what point does the west say enough and engages in direct confrontation with Russian troops?

Never (I hope)

We've managed to avoid a nuclear war for 70+ years.
I hope to continue to do so for at least another 70.

What the Russian military is doing is barbaric.
Just as the the Russian devastation of Chechena was barbarbic.
Just as the Russian devastation of Syria was barbaric.

But you know what? The numbers of people who died there is dwarfed by the number of innocent Iraqis that died after the US decided to invade Iraq. A lot of ugly ugly ***** happens in this world. Direct military conflict between NATO and the Russia isn't going to make things better.

I dearly hope that the West has a strong but measured response to what is taking place in Ukraine.
This can and should involve crippling the Russian economy (because nations can't prosper after engaging in this kind of bullshit)

And, I very much hope that Western Europe and the US finally start getting serious about decarbonizing their economies, because we can't continue to be dependent on various autocracies.

And, I am all for NATO expanding into Finland and Sweden (Assuming that those countries agree). And, if / when things stabilize in Ukraine, I wouldn't object to NATO expansion there as well.

But, for me, NATO troops intervening in a hot war is a bridge too far.

[Winstonm]

hrothgar, on 2022-April-12, 14:30, said:

Never (I hope)

We've managed to avoid a nuclear war for 70+ years.
I hope to continue to do so for at least another 70.

What the Russian military is doing is barbaric.
Just as the the Russian devastation of Chechena was barbarbic.
Just as the Russian devastation of Syria was barbaric.

But you know what? The numbers of people who died there is dwarfed by the number of innocent Iraqis that died after the US decided to invade Iraq. A lot of ugly ugly ***** happens in this world. Direct military conflict between NATO and the Russia isn't going to make things better.

I dearly hope that the West has a strong but measured response to what is taking place in Ukraine.
This can and should involve crippling the Russian economy (because nations can't prosper after engaging in this kind of bullshit)

And, I very much hope that Western Europe and the US finally start getting serious about decarbonizing their economies, because we can't continue to be dependent on various autocracies.

And, I am all for NATO expanding into Finland and Sweden (Assuming that those countries agree). And, if / when things stabilize in Ukraine, I wouldn't object to NATO expansion there as well.

But, for me, NATO troops intervening in a hot war is a bridge too far.

I just wonder how far Putin would be willing to go. I don't think he wants nuclear war. He would have to think many times before engaging the U.S. Army in Ukraine.

[johnu]

hrothgar, on 2022-April-12, 14:30, said:

Never (I hope)

In the past few years, the US has already engaged with "Russian" troops in Syria, aka Wagner group, which is the Russia equivalent of Blackwater Group/Xe Services/Academi. Putin had no trouble ordering these mercenaries to engage with US troops.

hrothgar, on 2022-April-12, 14:30, said:

We've managed to avoid a nuclear war for 70+ years.
I hope to continue to do so for at least another 70.

Never would be too soon for me.

hrothgar, on 2022-April-12, 14:30, said:

And, I am all for NATO expanding into Finland and Sweden (Assuming that those countries agree). And, if / when things stabilize in Ukraine, I wouldn't object to NATO expansion there as well.

But, for me, NATO troops intervening in a hot war is a bridge too far.

There have been reports that Russia has been moving heavy weapons close to the border with Finland. Are you advocating doing nothing again if Russia invades Finland? What if Russia continues to Sweden?

What about Nato countries like Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia? If Russian launched a surprise invasion, much if not most of those countries would be overwhelmed before Nato had a chance to launch a response. Since it is already a hot war, should we just write those countries off?

[Lovera]

Is as far time that it remind me to this one:
The gleaner of Sapri
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Jump to navigationJump to searchThis entry on the subject of poems is only an outline .
Help improve it according to Wikipedia's conventions . The gleaner of SapriThe statue of the Gleaner on the Scialandro rock in SapriAuthorLuigi Mercantini1st ed. original1858TypepoetryOriginal languageItalianEdit data on Wikidata · ManualThe gleaner of Sapri is a poem by Luigi Mercantini inspired by the failed Sapri expedition by Carlo Pisacane (1857) which had the purpose of triggering an anti-Bourbon revolution in the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies .

Together with the Hymn of Garibaldi , it is one of the compositions to which Mercantini's fame as a cantor of the Risorgimento is inextricably linked.

Mercantini adopts the innocent point of view of a field worker, assigned to gleaning wheat, who happens to be witnessing the landing, meets Pisacane and falls in love with her; the woman sides with the three hundred and follows them in combat, but she ends up helplessly witnessing their massacre by the Bourbon troops.

Particularly known and quoted - sometimes even in parodied or ironic form - is the refrain "They were three hundred, they were young and strong, and they are dead".

Present in the nineteenth-century poetry section of many school anthologies of Italian literature, Sapri's La gleaner is considered one of the best examples of patriotic poetry of the time.


Index

• 1Text of the poem
• 2Related items
• 3Other projects
• 4External links

Text of the poem [ edit | edit wikitext ]
" They were three hundred, they were young and strong,
and they are dead!
I was going off in the morning to glean
when I saw a boat in the middle of the sea:
it was a boat that was steaming,
and raised a tricolor flag.
It stopped on the island of Ponza, spent
a little while and then returned;
she returned and came ashore;
he went down with his arms, and waged no war on us.
They were three hundred, they were young and strong,
and they are dead!
He went down with his arms and waged no war on us,
but bowed down to kiss the earth.
One by one I looked at their faces:
they all had a tear and a smile.
Thieves said they came out of their dens,
but they did not take away even a loaf;
and I heard them cry out a single cry:
"We have come to die for our shore".
They were three hundred, they were young and strong,
and they are dead!
With blue eyes and golden hair
a young man walked ahead of them.
I became daring, and, taking him by the hand,
I asked him: "Where are you going, handsome captain?"
Look at me, and he replied: "O my sister,
I am going to die for my beautiful homeland."
I felt my whole heart tremble,
nor could I say to him: "May the Lord help you!"
They were three hundred, they were young and strong,
and they are dead!
That day I forgot to glean,
and behind them I started to go:
twice he collided with the gendarmes,
and one and the other stripped them of their weapons:
but when the Certosa fired on the walls,
trumpets and drums were heard playing;
and among the smoke and the shots and the sparks
fell upon them more than a thousand.
They were three hundred, they were young and strong,
and they are dead!
They were three hundred and they did not want to flee, it
seemed three thousand and they wanted to die;
but they wanted to die with iron in hand,
and the plan ran blood in front of them:
until I fought I prayed for them,
but all of a sudden I came less, nor did I look anymore:
I no longer saw between them
those blue eyes and that golden hair.
They were three hundred, they were young and strong,
and they are dead! "


Related items [ edit | edit wikitext ]

• Sapri expedition [let you to see but probably have to be translated]

[hrothgar]

johnu, on 2022-April-12, 17:11, said:

In the past few years, the US has already engaged with "Russian" troops in Syria, aka Wagner group, which is the Russia equivalent of Blackwater Group/Xe Services/Academi. Putin had no trouble ordering these mercenaries to engage with US troops.


Never would be too soon for me.


There have been reports that Russia has been moving heavy weapons close to the border with Finland. Are you advocating doing nothing again if Russia invades Finland? What if Russia continues to Sweden?

What about Nato countries like Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia? If Russian launched a surprise invasion, much if not most of those countries would be overwhelmed before Nato had a chance to launch a response. Since it is already a hot war, should we just write those countries off?

US foreign policy has always differentiated between country to which we owe treaty obligations and countries that we don't.
Simply put, an attack against a NATO member is qualitatively different than an attack against Finland or, for that matter, Ukraine.
Throughout the cold war, predictability has been key

If and when Sweden and Finland join NATO, the game changes. Until then, I would expect to see the same sorts of aid given to them that has been given to Ukraine.

Please note: Finland has been preparing to deal with Russian invasions since the end of the Winter War.
I'm not sure that they'd need help from NATO to defend themselves against anything less than World War III
(Especially given how weak the Russia military is looking and how poor their logistics system is in practice)

[hrothgar]

It's worth noting that that Sweden and Finland just finished a joint press conference in which they announced that they expect to join NATO in a matter of weeks.

[hrothgar]

johnu, on 2022-April-12, 17:11, said:

What about Nato countries like Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia? If Russian launched a surprise invasion, much if not most of those countries would be overwhelmed before Nato had a chance to launch a response.

Stop being ridiculous

In this day and age, there is no such thing as a "surprise" invasion.

The Russian military was pre-positioning troops for 6-12 months preparing for the invasion in Ukraine.
All of their operational reserves are depleted.
New rounds of sanctions mean that they're going to have a hell of a time rebuilding.

Remember when the US launched the first and second Gulf Wars?
Precisely the same situation.
It took close to a year to prepare for those invasions.

[Cyberyeti]

hrothgar, on 2022-April-13, 07:24, said:

Stop being ridiculous

In this day and age, there is no such thing as a "surprise" invasion.

The Russian military was pre-positioning troops for 6-12 months preparing for the invasion in Ukraine.
All of their operational reserves are depleted.
New rounds of sanctions mean that they're going to have a hell of a time rebuilding.

Remember when the US launched the first and second Gulf Wars?
Precisely the same situation.
It took close to a year to prepare for those invasions.

Moldova would probably be next anyway

[cherdano]

hrothgar, on 2022-April-11, 14:57, said:

Now seeing reports that the Russian have used Nerve agents in Maripol

Have these reports been substantiated? My understanding is that the evidence is very flimsy.

https://www.theguard...emain-sceptical

Edit: link fixed.

This post has been edited by cherdano: 2022-April-13, 14:44

[Cyberyeti]

cherdano, on 2022-April-13, 13:55, said:

Have these reports been substantiated? My understanding is that the evidence is very flimsy.

https://www.google.c...emain-sceptical

That link just gives me a tiny G icon

[johnu]

hrothgar, on 2022-April-13, 07:15, said:

Please note: Finland has been preparing to deal with Russian invasions since the end of the Winter War.
I'm not sure that they'd need help from NATO to defend themselves against anything less than World War III
(Especially given how weak the Russia military is looking and how poor their logistics system is in practice)

Apparently Russia was testing the theory that it would be a good idea to attack in the middle of winter, which was copied by Hitler when he tried to finish off Russia later during the Russian winter. And then Russia repeated the tactic of invading during winter in Ukraine. Good ideas are timeless!!!

I would expect Finland to put up a valiant fight again, but overwhelming Russian military will eventually eliminate Finland as an independent country.

[johnu]

hrothgar, on 2022-April-13, 07:24, said:

Stop being ridiculous

In this day and age, there is no such thing as a "surprise" invasion.

Well, it may be true that intelligence gathering revealed that Russia was massing forces on the Ukrainian border. Still, a substantial portion of the world community including top government officials firmly believed that Putin was bluffing and there would be no invasion so when Russia did invade, the non-believers were totally surprised.

Even today, you can go on Fox Propaganda Channel and find Russian agents (aka Fox entertainers) denying that there was any invasion and if there was, no damage or casualties were happening. Of course you shouldn't believe anything Russian agents or Fox entertainers say, but many Fox viewers remain to be surprised if they ever start believing that Russia invaded Ukraine. Same thing in Russia.

[johnu]

hrothgar, on 2022-April-13, 07:24, said:

The Russian military was pre-positioning troops for 6-12 months preparing for the invasion in Ukraine.
All of their operational reserves are depleted.
New rounds of sanctions mean that they're going to have a hell of a time rebuilding.

Many sources say that Russia is facing logistical problems, which is not the same as saying their operational reserves are depleted. Intelligence sources report that Russia is massing military equipment along the Finland border so clearly they still have a lot of military equipment available. And Russia could relocate some of its forces from Ukraine to Finland if it accomplishes its goals in Ukraine. And even if Finland could manage to fight off Russia, it's economy and infrastructure would probably be in ruins, much like Ukraine will be after the fighting stops.

As far as Russia rebuilding, I see Putin as the next Stalin, without the bushy mustache and wearing the most expensive business suits. Putin believes there is no sacrifice too great for the Russian people if it means he stays in power and can do whatever he wants. So, like North Korea, Putin may starve his own country to keep his military at maximum strength.