Putin threatens NATO & EU ?

[Wig Wag]

Putin 'privately threatened to invade Poland, Romania and the Baltic states'

Putin 'privately threatened to invade Poland, Romania and the Baltic states' - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/11106195/Putin-privately-threatened-to-invade-Poland-Romania-and-the-Baltic-states.html)

President Vladimir Putin privately threatened to invade Poland, Romania and the Baltic states, according to a record of a conversation with his Ukrainian counterpart.

"If I wanted, in two days I could have Russian troops not only in Kiev, but also in Riga, Vilnius, Tallinn, Warsaw and Bucharest," Mr Putin allegedly told President Petro Poroshenko of Ukraine, reported Süddeustche Zeitung, a German newspaper.

If true, this would be the first time that Mr Putin has threatened to invade Nato or EU members.

Bluster? If so, why?

[Dash8driver1312]

Alexander the Great: "If I conquer Sparta, I will kill your men, sell your women and children to servitude, and despoil your land"

Spartan king: "If"

There was no Macedonian invasion of Sparta.

Take the lesson from that as you will.

[sitigeltfel]

Bluster? If so, why?

For domestic consumption.

He needs to keep waving his willy, in the face of international sanctions.

[Bigpants]

Brussels political advances to Kiev and the Ukraine as big a threat to military stability as Putin.

Exactly where do the geographical and political boundaries of Europe end? In WW2 the Ukraine suffered about 7 million casualties and Moscow has a long memory with regards invasions.

I hope Brussels and Berlin think carefully about any further Putin baiting.

[t43562]

The fact that Ukraine suffered during WW2 should be to its credit, not Russia's.

One interesting thing is to look on a map at the size of Russia compared to Europe. Seems to me they've done a lot of advancing themselves.

[ORAC]

Exactly where do the geographical and political boundaries of Europe end? In WW2 the Ukraine suffered about 7 million casualties Less than they suffered under Stalin during the Holodomor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor). Which explains why the Germans were originally welcomed with open arms (http://www.historynet.com/a-warm-welcome-turns-cold-in-nazi-occupied-ukraine.htm).

No love felt in either direction I feel. Hence why Merkel et al are treated with such scepticism..

[squawking 7700]

A Ukrainian uncle of mine said that he joined the German army during WWII rather than be forced to join the Russians - he said the Germans were the lesser of two evils.
That's how much Urainians loathed the Russians then.


7700

[smujsmith]

"President Vladimir Putin privately threatened to invade Poland, Romania and the Baltic states, according to a record of a conversation with his Ukrainian counterpart." - Surely the deliberate ignorance of English, that the media love to misinterpret. Aided and abetted by the Kiev Klowns. As I read it he is not saying "I will" he is simply saying that he could, if he wanted to. Unfortunately, when it comes to creating chip wrappings the truth is often the first casualty. Here's one they could use, if Putin wanted to he could nuke us out of existance, now, is that a threat ?

Smudge:ok:

[t43562]

What is the intention behind saying it? To engender respect? Fear? I can't imagine another motive - in which case it is most certainly a threat and not even thinly veiled.

[Typhoon93]

It's like David Cameron saying, "If I wanted to, I could turn Moscow in to a pile of rubble by ordering the launch of one Trident missile."

If. If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.

I don't think that's a threat from Putin. Although I do think Russia hasn't quite moved on from its communism days.

[Stendec5]

Where would she move TO. Look at any typical western country (UK for example) Not exactly an advert is it? "Come on in, the insanity is lovely."

[Hangarshuffle]

Russians have always been difficult for the English (in particular) to understand. My observation recently being they can be wonderful, funny and generous people whilst also simultaneously very serious, and may not get the gist of jokes or innuendo which we deliver. And may take offence when none is intended.
I think you must need the wisdom of Solomon if you presently are a diplomat working within Europe's Governments, so many differing agendas. Why is Merkel so keen on advancing the EU into the Ukraine, was it strictly a increase in German trade and thus money thing?
My Dad told me never to poke a stick at an animal in its cage and it was good advice.
* Putin is simply very traditional Soviet era Russian - Soviets made him the man he is. I believe he sees the West as fairly corrupt (I'd love to read the files he has about Cameron, Obambam and more) and opportunist and untrustworthy and he wants to keep us at an arms length, is this so hard for the west to grasp?

[t43562]

For example: "If I had your name and address I could come over and smash you in the face with a golf club any time I liked."

It makes me squirm to even use this as an example. If someone said it, it would not be intended to make you feel confident. Hence it's a threat. If Cameron made it you might not believe his threat but it would still be one.

People say these things to make you frightened of the consequences of taking any action they might dislike. That's a threat.

[Heathrow Harry]

"For example: "If I had your name and address I could come over and smash you in the face with a golf club any time I liked."

It makes me squirm to even use this as an example"

I'm not surprised you are ashamed - who in their right mind would admit to being a golfer............................ :E

[effing Finn]

In case someone's interested in watching, there's is right now a pro-Ukraina anti-Putin demonstration by Russians going on in Moscow.

Here's a live Youtube link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1zUxu9wtYY#t=7043

[racedo]

I believe he sees the West as fairly corrupt (I'd love to read the files he has about Cameron, Obambam and more) and opportunist and untrustworthy and he wants to keep us at an arms length, is this so hard for the west to grasp?

Its kind of hard to disagree with that assessement.................

[effing Finn]

Okay, I managed to butcher that link, and due to probation couldn't see and fix it. Sorry. It's over now anyway. Seemed to go peacefully. Lots of people, on both sides of the riot police walls.

The chanting, nay, screaming of "Putin, Putin" (instead of, say, "Rossiya, Rossiya") gave me strange visions of bier halls in Munich. Those folks have gone full tilt with the person worship thing.

I know and see some Russians where I live. Generally quite affable folks, with many of the same traits that us fenno-ugrians tend to display, once you get to know them.

Always good to remember that Putin's government is a wholly another thing than the Russian people. The single-minded media bombardment would be hard for anyone to resist over time.

Anyways, it was nice to see that demonstration happening in Moscow. Always refreshing to get a bit of other viewpoints too...

[Al R]

Might Russia's precarious state compel Putin to deflect attention somehow, a la Galtieri?

Russia's Sovereign Rating Clings to One Notch Above Junk Status | News | The Moscow Times (http://www.themoscowtimes.com/article/510075.html)

[racedo]

Might Russia's precarious state compel Putin to deflect attention somehow, a la Galtieri?

Er Hardly

Russia has tiny and I mean tiny Govt debt, it runs Exports surpluses every month in the teen billions, it also has substantial FX reserves.

Putin called what he say happening in Libya and Syria and has been proven right.

West is in hock to the Gulf states because they need their cash so will bend over and let ISIS be funded by them with not a whisper nor a sanction mentioned as people are cowed into submission.

[Whenurhappy]

The targeted sanctions by the EU, UK and US - in spite of being laughed at initially - are having a huge impact, I understand. These oligarch mates of his control much of the economy and typically come from the same mould and in some cases the same organisation (KGB/FSB/SVR).

The worry is he could attempt to reverse (perceived) falling popular support by attempting to annex more errant parts of the Soviet Union. One thing that struck me there, albeit several years ago, was their preoccupation with Strategic (ie nuclear) studies and the constant calculus of nuclear parity - something we've 'moved on' from in the West.

Anyway, who'd want to invest in Russia?

[Al R]

Wherur,

Imagine if we had funded Herrick by doing.. this (http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/08/05/uk-russia-economy-idUKKBN0G526020140805) (and we think we have pension gap problems). His mates are watching their money going down the drain so is Putin mad enough to try something? I imagine it depends how much support he has from the generals - the people seem to forgive him anything.

[racedo]

something we've 'moved on' from in the West.


You have but those in the West who have a very large vested interest in Military industrial Complex need an enemy



Anyway, who'd want to invest in Russia?

Germany is heading into recession because of sanctions...............that impacst everyone across EU.
EU agricultural production in the order of billions is now banned and EU will be requried to compensate them.
EU sells 12 times what US was selling on Agric products so US happy to do over EU farmers.

[Whenurhappy]

Thanks for that link - hadn't seen that. A very interesting report on the shortfalls in the Russian economy was published a week or two showing the massive shortfall in the Federal Budget due the historically low value of oil ($84) versus a planned figure of $117. Venezuela is in a similar situation!

[unmanned_droid]

Yeah, there was a recent report (ny times I think) which gave a graph of barrel break even prices for the opec countries. Its almost like there was a plan...

[racedo]

Thanks for that link - hadn't seen that. A very interesting report on the shortfalls in the Russian economy was published a week or two showing the massive shortfall in the Federal Budget due the historically low value of oil ($84) versus a planned figure of $117. Venezuela is in a similar situation!

Guys Russia has $110 billion in US Treasuries and every month Trade surpluses of $12 plus billion. Selling off 5% and its more than pension raid.


Hell Uk pension raid is estimated to have cost $160 billion (£100 billion) in UK since 1997
Brown's pension raid 'cost savers £100bn' | This is Money (http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/pensions/article-1603390/Browns-pension-raid-cost-savers-pound100bn.html)

Russia also got China to stump up billions for Oil & Gas deliveries for the future.
If Oil goes below $80 then lots of fracking becomes uneconomic, not what they already drilled but being able to drill new wells.

[GreenKnight121]

So RR has got a newly-converted "fellow traveller" in racedo?

[ORAC]

Streetwise Professor: The Madness of Tsar Vlad (http://streetwiseprofessor.com/?p=8867)

Moscow Times: Is Russia Heading for a New 1998 Crisis? (http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/is-russia-heading-for-a-new-1998-crisis/509982.html)

WSJ: How Russia’s Debt and Currency Markets Could Spiral into Crisis (http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/10/03/how-russias-debt-and-currency-markets-could-spiral-into-crisis/)

[Al R]

Racedo,

Swapping pub ammo from the past is all well and good but seeing as we're at it, I suppose we could offset that by including the $45 billions which Russia knows it'll now never (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-11/russia-writes-off-90-of-cuba-debt-as-putin-meets-castros.html) receive from Cuba or N Korea? In effect, it's buying business. The current certainties and likely possibilities are that Russia is dipping into its contingency fund deep and fast and it's resorting to quite desperate (http://www.businessinsider.com/russian-government-passed-law-allowing-government-to-seize-foreign-assets-2014-10) measures to retain money and influence. No one respects a needy partner.

If the bonds become pretty much worthless, the issue isn't about the past, it's about the future. Energy prices are low and western stocks are high (Putin will be praying for an icy winter), the currency is through the floor (and Russian markets likewise - they fund expansionism in the west) and the people are not ready or expecting periods of hardship. My question was, could/would Putin do something to take their attention elsewhere?

[Hempy]

His economy may or may not be in the toilet, but how do you reckon Vlads combat regiments are traveling? Suffering from budget cuts? Slashing manpower/aircraft/tanks/ships etc? Battle weary after 12 years of constant deployment?

Lots of historical parallels to the current situation :( He knows how to time things, thats for sure.

[racedo]

So RR has got a newly-converted "fellow traveller" in racedo?

Nope but after watching various residents of Penn Avenue come up with idiot ideas I think stepping back and looking long term is a better bet than doing what the Saudi's want. Remember it was their citizens who were in the planes on 9/11 and the country got a pass.

Nothing I have seen Russia do in last 10 years is likely to see bombs on streets of London but after Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and now Syria I start to wonder what is happening.

US Foreign policy seems knee jerk and always needing a bogey man.

[racedo]

Swapping pub ammo from the past is all well and good but seeing as we're at it, I suppose we could offset that by including the $45 billions which Russia knows it'll now never (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-11/russia-writes-off-90-of-cuba-debt-as-putin-meets-castros.html) receive from Cuba or N Korea? In effect, it's buying business. The current certainties and likely possibilities are that Russia is dipping into its contingency fund deep and fast and it's resorting to quite desperate (http://www.businessinsider.com/russian-government-passed-law-allowing-government-to-seize-foreign-assets-2014-10) measures to retain money and influence. No one respects a needy partner.

If the bonds become pretty much worthless, the issue isn't about the past, it's about the future. Energy prices are low and western stocks are high (Putin will be praying for an icy winter), the currency is through the floor (and Russian markets likewise - they fund expansionism in the west) and the people are not ready or expecting periods of hardship. My question was, could/would Putin do something to take their attention elsewhere? Point is that they have the money, the oil and gold and now not using dollar to trade with China and others.

EU Agri trade is now going to South America, Turkey and Israel, it won't come back quickly or cheaply.

Between them and China they hold 25% of Foreign US Treasuries holdings, I don't Russia is acting on its own.

As for the trade with NK/Cuba............. er what is US military aid to Israel / Egypt and other countries, how does US taxpayer benefit ?

As for taking peoples attention elsewhere as he has ratings double Obama I don't see him worried, remember Russia knows hardship and it has been invaded by the west twice in 100 years, the people know their history.

[Less Hair]

Russia might be at a point like in the late 1980s when the soviet union realized they had lost the race against the west.

Today they might have realized they didn't get their economy going even with all those years of hard currency raw materials export earnings. Now the oil and gas income goes down again and they realize China has taken over forever.

They will never be as "strong" as today. Sort of a dangerous moment of truth.

[racedo]

His economy may or may not be in the toilet, but how do you reckon Vlads combat regiments are traveling? Suffering from budget cuts? Slashing manpower/aircraft/tanks/ships etc? Battle weary after 12 years of constant deployment?

Lots of historical parallels to the current situation :( He knows how to time things, thats for sure.

I don't think he timed anything until yushenko was overthrown in a Coup, following that things happened as clear who was behind it and then set about protecting Russian interests in his backyard.

Given the neo nazi element in West Ukraine it was not a shock and once that genie was let out it was not going back in........... who in their right mind would allow self proclaimed neo nazis in Govt, hell the Poles were angry as the guys these hero worship killed couple of hundred thousand poles.

[racedo]

Today they might have realized they didn't get their economy going even with all those years of hard currency raw materials export earnings. Now the oil and gas income goes down again and they realize China has taken over forever.

Equally applies to the US as Russia not carrying out military manouvres and stating China is the enemy.

I think west blew a great chance to get Russia on board when it needed support, too many cold war types thought lets kill the bear rather than lets make it a partner.

[air pig]

Interesting comments on this subject, I suggest you all read Cauldron by Larry Bond, available from the river company. Written in the late 90s as a view of the future in Europe when the EU has disintergrated. Far too close to the present happenings.

[West Coast]

Racedo, you've really taken off on this bash US theme haven't you. Your man Vlad invaded Ukraine, not the bamster, he'll he has a Nobel peace Prize from you euros. That the EU was likely just to continue wringing its hands and declaring there was nothing to be done, the Ukraine would belong to Russia. Far be it from me to defend Obama, but anything was better than the path Europe was headed down under its own lack of leadership.

[Turbine D]

Original quote by racedo: I think west blew a great chance to get Russia on board when it needed support, too many cold war types thought lets kill the bear rather than lets make it a partner.
There used to be a statue in front of the KBG headquarters in Moscow, Feliks Dzerzhinsky, the founder of the Soviet secret police, I think. He looked down on the Kremlin as a reminder to those who occupied the Kremlin. It was no accident he faced that direction. Today an ex-KBG agent occupies the Kremlin and the statue is gone… Never, ever trust an ex-KBG agent, they are the best of the best when it comes to stealing, lying, cheating, etc.

[Heathrow Harry]

actually he didn't - he looked across the square at the old Lubyanka Insurance Building - ie to the NE

He had his back to a large office block and so couldn't "look down" on the Kremlin - which lies some 800 m++ south WEST of the old site of the statue

GUM is in the way as well............

[racedo]

Racedo, you've really taken off on this bash US theme haven't you. Your man Vlad invaded Ukraine, not the bamster, he'll he has a Nobel peace Prize from you euros. That the EU was likely just to continue wringing its hands and declaring there was nothing to be done, the Ukraine would belong to Russia. Far be it from me to defend Obama, but anything was better than the path Europe was headed down under its own lack of leadership.

Bash US Foreign Policy when again i see it likely to cause issues on London streets.

Libya and Syria are really in nobodys back yard yet because Saudis / Qatar wanted something they got it, these the same guys who recognised Taliban and supported them.

Yet the guys who didn't support Taliban and Al Qaeda are the ones targeted...... do you not ever wonder about that ?

[Kerosene Kraut]

This "blame the US for everything" gang must be a funny crowd.

[West Coast]

Curious racedo, your response to me mentions everything but Ukraine. You're predisposed to find fault no matter what direction the US takes. Your body of work speaks to it so save yourself a response.

[racedo]

Curious racedo, your response to me mentions everything but Ukraine. You're predisposed to find fault no matter what direction the US takes.My criticism of US Foreign Policy is pretty much similar to my criticism of the FP of Russia, UK, France, China, EU.

All interfering in rights of other countrys rather than leaving them alone.

I distinguish the ineptitude of a countrys Political Leadership and its Foreign Policy to the people of that country as there is a real difference.

Frankly if people knew what their Govt really got up to there would be lots of internal revolutions.

I read what the propoganda merchants want people to believe on economies and then look for the facts.

[rh200]

All interfering in rights of other countrys rather than leaving them alone.

All very well and good, unfortunately there is no way of stopping "everyone" from interfering with others. Hence the old saying you either interfere and try and get the outcome you want, or your enemies will.

So I hear you say, we should be better than them and not do it due to our moral superiority. Well theres nothing in nature thats says the righteous has to prevail, in fact its the opposite. Nature says the strong will survive.

Hence you either try for a good outcome for yourself/ country or run the risk of falling some time down the track. Life's unfair.

[West Coast]

The US policy WRT the Ukraine has been to condemn Vlad's actions and to do its best to ensure he doesn't annex anymore than he already has. Had the US "left the issue alone" Vlad arguably would have taken the rest of the Ukraine. Certainly Ukraine's neighbors thought so. Euro action alone wouldn't have stopped him.
You go off on a tangent talking about generalizations of government incompetency. You might get a few head from nods from fellow US bashers but you've not said a damn thing.
You're being called out, man up or shut up. Explain EXACTLY how US policy is to blame with regard to Ukraine. If your comfortable condemning US policy, then you should be just as comfortable explaining how the US is to blame in the Ukraine.
I'm not so biased to say the US hasn't cocked up things in the past and surely will in the future. I however look at policy on a case by case basis, and avoid broadly condemning actions. Might work well in the cocktail circuit but doesn't do anything but call your bias into question.

Face it, no matter the situation, you are predisposed to point your finger at the US.

[Typhoon93]

All interfering in rights of other countrys rather than leaving them alone.

How?

Surely we protect our own interests as well as helping the innocent?

[Al R]

I read what the propoganda merchants want people to believe on economies and then look for the facts.

Recedo,

Further to that (and your previous response to me), Russia might have wealth, but it doesn't have the wealth it did a few years ago. It doesn't have as much flexibility in varying how it derives it, it has fewer options where it draws it from and she has greater demands, bleaker prospects, worsening conditions, far fewer friends and rapidly reduced options. She doesn't have the money she needs or want for the future she has promised her people.

America is addicted to borrowing, but only in the way that Russia and China are addicted to lending. How else could Russia and China get meaningful exposure to the west? It's a weakness for Obama, but also one for those who hold the debt (owe the bank £100,000 and it owns you, owe it £100,000,000 though and you own it). What is Putin going to do now, flood the market with US sovereign debt to prove a point? Hardly.

The US/Israeli comparison is a pointless one and no one is suggesting Russia is going to be invaded and it doesn't matter either that Russia doesn't use the dollar (her currency has fallen almost 20% this year). That is the only silver lining, ie; she exports in dollars and spends in rubles, so the horrific devaluation means there are more rubles kicking around. But Putin has spent $13 billions alone this month to support the ruble and keep it from free fall. He might be managing the battle but he is losing the war. And investors are hard nosed people. They won't forget in a hurry.

Forgetting for one moment, the Kremlin sofa cushions are being groped behind daily for shrapnel, and the fact that the state has effectively stolen the state pension fund for two years running (Maxwell would be proud), the oligarchs didn't exist 100 years ago either and it's probably going to be them turning the screw on the Colonels and Generals, quietly. Putin should be worried, look (http://www.businessinsider.com/russian-government-passed-law-allowing-government-to-seize-foreign-assets-2014-10) how he is trying to keep them sweet. As recently as late last week the Russian government announced it was planning to shelve infrastructure and social projects too, and actually forecasting recession if this goes on any further.

Russia is in a situation that will affect her far more than a similar set of circumstances would affect a far more mature, evolved and diversified (50% of Russia foreign income comes from natural resources) economy in similar foreign policy straits. And it was against that backdrop that I posed my question a day or so ago. Could Putin decide to deflect attention to save his own career/skin? I think/hope that realpolitik will kick in and he'll blink, he knows how resolute the west can be with sanctions (Iran?) and he knows that the west will tolerate only so much sand being kicked in its face by a bloke with a private gym and an inferiority complex.

[racedo]

You're being called out, man up or shut up. Explain EXACTLY how US policy is to blame with regard to Ukraine. If your comfortable condemning US policy, then you should be just as comfortable explaining how the US is to blame in the Ukraine.
I'm not so biased to say the US hasn't cocked up things in the past and surely will in the future.

I give you Victoria Nuland from State Dept who caught deciding who should or who should not be in power in Ukraine and boasting of how much she had spent of US taxpayers $$$ in the country.

[Ronald Reagan]

Putin is great, seeing a leader push back against the western elite is brilliant indeed. He is working against the EU, so that's one good point, he is also working against Washington, so yet another good point.


Putin has been totally right about all the western interventions in the middle east. He is a far more effective and logical world leader than Washington can ever hope to be.


As Russia and China grow closer together we are seeing the creation of the future dominant power block in the world. India, Brazil, South Africa, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Argentina, DPRK and Syria are with them to.


One can tell Washington is worried as the Russian and Chinese forces combined are vastly superior to those of the US and from this point on the US military will grow weaker and smaller. All empires fall in the end!

[racedo]

How?

Surely we protect our own interests as well as helping the innocent?

Er is that not what Russia is doing ?
Looking after its own interests ?

[racedo]

Further to that (and your previous response to me), Russia might have wealth, but it doesn't have the wealth it did a few years ago. It doesn't have as much flexibility in varying how it derives it, it has fewer options where it draws it from and she has greater demands, bleaker prospects, worsening conditions, far fewer friends and rapidly reduced options. She doesn't have the money she needs or want for the future she has promised her people.

In 1998 yearly average Oil price was $11.91
In 2013 it was $89.84........................... which would you rather have ?

Someone already mentioned the Pension steal but UK has had £100 ($160) billion stolen from its pensions since 1997.

[racedo]

Putin is great, seeing a leader push back against the western elite is brilliant indeed. He is working against the EU, so that's one good point, he is also working against Washington, so yet another good point.


Putin has been totally right about all the western interventions in the middle east. He is a far more effective and logical world leader than Washington can ever hope to be.


As Russia and China grow closer together we are seeing the creation of the future dominant power block in the world. India, Brazil, South Africa, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Argentina, DPRK and Syria are with them to.


One can tell Washington is worried as the Russian and Chinese forces combined are vastly superior to those of the US and from this point on the US military will grow weaker and smaller. All empires fall in the end!

Think when I see things like the above its time to stop.:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

[Ronald Reagan]

Well racedo, it either comes down to Washington or Moscow/Beijing doesn't it! We know Washington have basically come close to ruining the world though their actions. The political elite in Washington are utterly useless in every respect. Most other western governments appear to be nothing more than puppets and willing accomplices to US foreign policy, a foreign policy that is a total disaster. I think Moscow and Beijing (along with some of the other nations I listed) are about the only ones who can change the existing world order for the better. I would imagine in time that China and India alone will dominate the world each a full and true superpower while Washington will be essentially irrelevant. Russia's best bet is to attach itself to China and India.

[Mil-26Man]

Ronald, I think everyone in this forum knows your views on the subject by now. Let's just take it as read that for this and all related threads your opinions are that:

1. Washington and the West are evil
2. Moscow is good
3. China is the future

There, now there's no need for you to chime in any more....

[Typhoon93]

Putin is great, seeing a leader push back against the western elite is brilliant indeed.

Isn't that what Adolf Hitler did in the late 1930's?

[Lonewolf_50]

Typhoon Godwin has arrived, right on schedule. :rolleyes:

[Ronald Reagan]

Ukraine crisis: Vladimir Putin pays visit to Crimea - YouTube (http://youtu.be/zKiC-ChA0Ak)

[Ronald Reagan]

Russian Military : Tribute music video - YouTube (http://youtu.be/t0foBniCd1o)

[Typhoon93]

Lonewolf, it's true though!

So why is it a good thing with Russia, RR?

[Ronald Reagan]

Typhoon93, after the disasters of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and very nearly Syria (still time yet) it became apparent to me (someone who you could describe as your typical pro western average citizen) that western foreign policy is nothing but a total disaster. Basically the world needs someone who can push back enough to ensure western leaders don't always get their own way, someone who can stand against them. Right now the most effective individual at doing that is President Putin. Nations like China and India as well as various South American nations can also take up this role.
The west was supposed to be engaged in a war on terror but actually its actions have greatly helped terrorists and actually removed various secular dictators who were enemies of the terrorists. In many situations Washington, various Middle Eastern allies and European governments are actually supporting the terrorists ie Libya and Syria. The western attack on Libya, removal of Gaddafi and resulting disintegration of Libya as a nation state was the thing that made me realise western governments were essentially the bad guys. Up until then I was naïve enough to think that Iraq was a kind of honest mistake that no one would repeat! But then after Libya they wanted to remove Assad and follow the same game plan in Syria. Compared to western leaders Putin is a genius.
You mentioned the Nazis, well who is engaged in the most warfare around the world, the clue is it isn't Russia!

[Typhoon93]

Typhoon93, after the disasters of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and very nearly Syria (still time yet) it became apparent to me (someone who you could describe as your typical pro western average citizen) that western foreign policy is nothing but a total disaster. Basically the world needs someone who can push back enough to ensure western leaders don't always get their own way, someone who can stand against them. Right now the most effective individual at doing that is President Putin. Nations like China and India as well as various South American nations can also take up this role.
The west was supposed to be engaged in a war on terror but actually its actions have greatly helped terrorists and actually removed various secular dictators who were enemies of the terrorists. In many situations Washington, various Middle Eastern allies and European governments are actually supporting the terrorists ie Libya and Syria. The western attack on Libya, removal of Gaddafi and resulting disintegration of Libya as a nation state was the thing that made me realise western governments were essentially the bad guys. Up until then I naïve enough to think that Iraq was a kind of honest mistake that no one would repeat! But then after Libya they wanted to remove Assad and follow the same game plan in Syria. Compared to western leaders Putin is a genius.
You mentioned the Nazis, well who is engaged in the most warfare around the world, the clue is it isn't Russia!

In what way was Afghanistan a total disaster?

Do you disagree with going in? Or do you disagree with the way in which NATO forces went in?

[Valiantone]

Q

Which of the following is a lovely settled country now? Free of trouble strife and so on

A Iraq
B Libya
C Afghanistan

Answers on a postcard to........:rolleyes:

V1

[Ronald Reagan]

I think Afghanistan is certainly the most legitimate of the western interventions and one I supported back in the day. However the Taliban still exist and they control huge areas of the country. The so called government has control over only small parts of the country.
With hindsight Britain should have specified a time limit on the length of its deployment for say something like 2 years maximum. The US is now trapped there, if they leave totally the Afghan government will likely collapse and the country will revert to how it was before.


We must remember that during the 1980s Washington supported the very people in Afghanistan who turned into Al Qaeda. Maybe if the Soviets had won in Afghanistan it might have ended up a stable country. Many Afghan women look on that era as a golden age!


We can look at Washington foreign policy for a moment:-


Supported various Afghan rebels during the 1980s who later became an enemy after attacking the US homeland, fought a long lasting war against the Vietnamese communists in Hanoi killing millions along with 58,000 of their own soldiers and spent a fortune, now friends with Hanoi. Friends with Iran thus armed them but then enemies with Iran, so supported and armed Saddam Hussein in Iraq, did everything to help him as he was an enemy of Iran, later go to war with Saddam Hussein twice and eventually remove him, aftermath ongoing! Libya, enemy of Gaddafi, bomb his country, later become friends with Gaddafi and celebrate the great foreign policy achievement, later remove Gaddafi thus breaking Libya apart creating a total disaster which is ongoing. Planning to go to war in Syria to remove Assad and hand the country to various rebels who's ultimate goals can only be guessed at (did not take place thanks to Russia and huge domestic public opposition, later go to war against one of said rebel groups so almost on the same side as Assad for now.


I will add though that there are many great things about the USA. The problem is purely the political class and its foreign policy.

[Typhoon93]

Isn't the Army still training the Afghan folks for the next few years, but not participating in combat ops?

[Ronald Reagan]

One only has to look at the support the Iraqi army had and how they disintegrated in the face of the ISIS assault. We can pour more money into Afghanistan but in my opinion it will achieve nothing.
We only have to look at the US in Vietnam, look at how they built up the ARVN, on paper it was one of the finest military forces on Earth, one of the largest also, with some of the finest special forces on Earth! They had a reasonable air force also. We both know what happened to South Vietnam and the ARVN.

[rh200]

The anti us side has a history of supporting the countries that have a history of suppression of their citizens by genocide or torture. Though the US is that far away from being perfect it isn't funny, I would rather it any day than the alternative.

If being dominated by the US means freedom to make up my own mind, then I say dominate.

People throw around a few assertions about countries and successful outcomes, there is no rocket science in this. For the countries mentioned, solutions take decades, and in some cases centuries. In Iraqis case it was a huge success, we just didn't follow though on several fronts.

Afghanistan, will be the same problem, it needed to be a 100 year project. It is easy to break something, a lot harder to fix.

Peoples particular love of 2nd world countries like Russia that are bordering on being failed states is humourous.

[Typhoon93]

Their aircraft are cool though....

[West Coast]

I give you Victoria Nuland from State Dept who caught deciding who should or who should not be in power in Ukraine and boasting of how much she had spent of US taxpayers $$$ in the country.

That's it? For all your ranting and raving, all you can come up with is some minion in the state dept voicing an opinion? Holy crap, US underling voices an opinion, all US policy is now sh!tty, and I'm going to flog the dead horse more about US policy regarding Ukraine than I am about Putin actually invading it. Btw, can you provide a link to her comments?

I get it, you've an ax to grind with the US, just try not to make it so obvious. And do try to find better than some low level staffers comments to condemn US policy. At least RR actually tries on his posts.

[Al R]

Racedo,

You compared the entire annexation of two years worth of pension contributions to a relatively young system of Advanced Corporation Tax relief which was only introduced to kick start spending anyway, a 1970s recession form of quantitative easing. The relief was already in decline, the Tories introduced it and they had already started to cut it back. It was not the 'theft' so often attributed to it (imho).

It sought to return to a partial imputation system of taxation to encourage companies to reinvest in jobs and development instead of paying out in dividends (to higher wage earners and foreign shareholders who had come to benefit more) and to fund - generally - long overdue social reform and fairer taxation for lower earners. In hindsight, it generally achieved Ed Balls' objectives. I wonder if Putin's motivation was as equally considered.

[racedo]

That's it? For all your ranting and raving, all you can come up with is some minion in the state dept voicing an opinion? Holy crap, US underling voices an opinion, all US policy is now sh!tty, and I'm going to flog the dead horse more about US policy regarding Ukraine than I am about Putin actually invading it. Btw, can you provide a link to her comments?

I get it, you've an ax to grind with the US, just try not to make it so obvious. And do try to find better than some low level staffers comments to condemn US policy. At least RR actually tries on his posts.

NATO Ambassador
Principal Foreign Policy adviser to Dick Cheney
Assistant Sec for European affairs

That is NOT a minion and not voicing an opinion either.

Funnily enough is that conversation leaked she was pushing hard for one person who became Ukranian Prime Minister

[racedo]

You compared the entire annexation of two years worth of pension contributions to a relatively young system of Advanced Corporation Tax relief which was only introduced to kick start spending anyway, a 1970s recession form of quantitative easing. The relief was already in decline, the Tories introduced it and they had already started to cut it back. It was not the 'theft' so often attributed to it (imho).

It sought to return to a partial imputation system of taxation to encourage companies to reinvest in jobs and development instead of paying out in dividends (to higher wage earners and foreign shareholders who had come to benefit more) and to fund - generally - long overdue social reform and fairer taxation for lower earners. In hindsight, it generally achieved Ed Balls' objectives. I wonder if Putin's motivation was as equally considered.

Brown's raid on pensions costs Britain £100 billion - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1531448/Browns-raid-on-pensions-costs-Britain-100-billion.html)

Brown?s 1997 pension raid has cost OAPs £120bn - UK / News & Views / The Sunday Post (http://www.sundaypost.com/news-views/uk/brown-s-1997-pension-raid-has-cost-oaps-120bn-1.339179)

"
Figures from the Office for Budget Responsibility released last week show the tax changes have saved the Treasury £117.9bn between 1997 and 2014.
Over the same period the number of private-sector workers with a defined benefit pension collapsed from 5m to 1.7m.
Thousands of companies have closed lucrative final-salary schemes — which pay a retirement income based on an employee’s length of service and pay — after they could no longer afford them in the wake of losing this big source of income."


Brown killed pretty much defined benefit schemes with his ham fisted approach despite advice on its consequences

[Heathrow Harry]

Actually the companies killed those schemes - they HATED the idea of having to kick cash into the schemes to keep them going when the cash could be used for bonuses instead

[Lonewolf_50]

RR, you use "actually," "basically," and "essentially," in a wasteful way, much as the term "literally" has become wasted filler in a lot of conversation among the younger generation.
I have used underscores ( _ ) to indicate where that wasted term was removed. Your edited post makes as much sense as it did, but it takes less effort to never introduce the throwaways. :ok:
I also removed the "nothing but" waste, since it weakens your statement about western policy.
This tip on usage and style is brought to you by Mr Long, my 8th grade English teacher.
Typhoon93, after the disasters of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and very nearly Syria (still time yet) it became apparent to me (someone who you could describe as your typical pro western average citizen) that western foreign policy is _a_ total disaster.

_The_ world needs someone who can push back enough to ensure western leaders don't always get their own way, someone who can stand against them. Right now the most effective individual at doing that is President Putin. Nations like China and India as well as various South American nations can also take up this role.

The west was supposed to be engaged in a war on terror but _its_ actions have greatly helped terrorists and _removed_ various secular dictators who were enemies of the terrorists.

In many situations Washington, various Middle Eastern allies and European governments are _supporting_ the terrorists ie Libya and Syria. The western attack on Libya, removal of Gaddafi and resulting disintegration of Libya as a nation state was the thing that made me realise western governments were _the_ bad guys.

Up until then I was naïve enough to think that Iraq was a kind of honest mistake that no one would repeat! But then after Libya they wanted to remove Assad and follow the same game plan in Syria.
Compared to western leaders Putin is a genius.
You mentioned the Nazis, well who is engaged in the most warfare around the world, the clue is it isn't Russia!
Is that due to lack of capability, or lack of desire?

[melmothtw]

Go easy Lonewolf, English isn't his first language.

[Lonewolf_50]

I am aware of that, mel.
I am trying to be helpful.
If one is exposed to bad English, particularly conversational American English, one might develop bad habits without being aware of it.

RR makes a couple of points worth considering. If the message can be better packaged, those points might get a better, more thoughtful response.

Regards
LW_50

[Ronald Reagan]

Just trying to be polite Lonewolf, you have made my message appear more blunt but maybe that is good, thank you

[racedo]

Actually the companies killed those schemes - they HATED the idea of having to kick cash into the schemes to keep them going when the cash could be used for bonuses instead

Companys were already putting a lot into the schemes but when Govt decided to screw pensions it was then eitehr ask employees to contribute more or stuff the companys with lots more.

Just how much has BA contributed to Pensions since 1997 ?

[Al R]

Racedo,

In the days before links were available, companies weren't putting lots into pensions.

At the the risk of you loosing off another Gordon Brown broadside, it was actually Nigel Lawson who cast the first stone. It was he who decided to allow employers to take contribution breaks from contributing to final salary pension schemes and to also tax scheme surpluses above a funding level of 105%. Unions and memberships didn't mind. Ironically (and this was before my time) the pension holidays were presented as a way to stop companies from growing vast pension funds (and subsequently allowing them to pay employees whatever pensions the unions demanded).

So the unions played along with anything that seemed to allow members to get benefits earlier by making the earlier drawdown of benefits from employers far easier to acquiesce to. And members too, demanded and introduced lower retirement ages but actually had the audacity to start living longer. Who blames myopic union stupidity though? So, it was probably Lawson who created the funding crisis, not Brown (and it was Lamont who decided to reduce ACT).

Increased longevity (to name but one thing) based on over-optimistic actuarial assumptions has resulted in the decline of final salary pensions. 20 years too late, someone eventually realised that if the relationship between entitlement to a pension and salaries has not changed, but sovereign bond yields, mortality rates and interest rates have, then the present value of a future promise has/had to change. Even as babyboomer membership climbed, no one bothered to think ahead.. . actuaries, g'ment, employers, trustees and employees, none of them stopped to question where the money was going to come from.

Finally, thankfully, policies, expectations and commitment levels are starting to converge. Like it or not (and I'm guessing you won't), that's the reality.

[West Coast]

That is NOT a minion and not voicing an opinion either.


Son, that is a staffer, not a power broker. Is this basis for your condemnation of US policy? One point of contention and the policy for the entire US is wrong?

You've a policy of anti Americanism, problem is when you have to defend it to you have to go back through the timeline and build an opinion. In other words, your anti US stand comes before the facts of any given situation.

Makes reverse engineering an opinion tough as evidenced by your reliance on a staffers comment as the centerpiece of your dislike of the US policy. Amazing you don't seem to spend much time on Russian aggression, unless of course you and RR are like minded.

[Al R]

Predictable?

NATO Intercepted 19 Russian Military Aircraft Today (http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/natosource/nato-intercepted-19-russian-military-aircraft-today)

[melmothtw]

'NATO bombers and combat aircraft were intercepted as they flew along the coast of Russia', no credible news source said, ever.

[racedo]

Son, that is a staffer, not a power broker. Is this basis for your condemnation of US policy? One point of contention and the policy for the entire US is wrong?


This is not a staffer, Darth Cheney didn't have mere staffers advise him on policy or have appointed as NATO Ambassador.

[racedo]

In the days before links were available, companies weren't putting lots into pensions.

At the the risk of you loosing off another Gordon Brown broadside, it was actually Nigel Lawson who cast the first stone. It was he who decided to allow employers to take contribution breaks from contributing to final salary pension schemes and to also tax scheme surpluses above a funding level of 105%. Unions and memberships didn't mind. Ironically (and this was before my time) the pension holidays were presented as a way to stop companies from growing vast pension funds (and subsequently allowing them to pay employees whatever pensions the unions demanded).

So the unions played along with anything that seemed to allow members to get benefits earlier by making the earlier drawdown of benefits from employers far easier to acquiesce to. And members too, demanded and introduced lower retirement ages but actually had the audacity to start living longer. Who blames myopic union stupidity though? So, it was probably Lawson who created the funding crisis, not Brown (and it was Lamont who decided to reduce ACT).

Increased longevity (to name but one thing) based on over-optimistic actuarial assumptions has resulted in the decline of final salary pensions. 20 years too late, someone eventually realised that if the relationship between entitlement to a pension and salaries has not changed, but sovereign bond yields, mortality rates and interest rates have, then the present value of a future promise has/had to change. Even as babyboomer membership climbed, no one bothered to think ahead.. . actuaries, g'ment, employers, trustees and employees, none of them stopped to question where the money was going to come from.

Finally, thankfully, policies, expectations and commitment levels are starting to converge. Like it or not (and I'm guessing you won't), that's the reality.

The £100 billion losses quoted are from Institute of Actuaries who don't really have a political axe to gring so take it up with them.

Companies decided why would they dump more and more into pensions when Labour policy was anti private pension.

[racedo]

'NATO bombers and combat aircraft were intercepted as they flew along the coast of Russia', no credible news source said, ever.

Possibly because Russia hasn't got the equivalent of Daily Mail................

Where did U2 get shot down again.........

[melmothtw]

Seriously racedo? The U-2 that was shot down in 1960?

I think your post just about sums up the problem with Putin and his ilk - they've yet to get the memo that the Cold War is over.

[Al R]

Racedo,

Your view is simplistic. The Faculty of Actuaries, the Institute of Actuaries and the Government Actuarial Department have all come under fire at various points for not being on the ball and highlighting the problems as they should have. Notwithstanding your counter-perspective, I suppose today's gratifying Purple Book defined benefit funding news couldn't have come at a worse time for you?

PPF News Article (http://www.pensionprotectionfund.org.uk/News/Pages/details.aspx?itemID=383)

[Lonewolf_50]

Ronald, my intent was helpful, even if I came off as a bit high handed.

The discussion seems to be meandering off into other areas, will see what's on offer in a few days.

[racedo]

Seriously racedo? The U-2 that was shot down in 1960?

I think your post just about sums up the problem with Putin and his ilk - they've yet to get the memo that the Cold War is over.

So if its over then why has NATO and its allies been expanding right up to its border ?

[racedo]

Your view is simplistic. The Faculty of Actuaries, the Institute of Actuaries and the Government Actuarial Department have all come under fire at various points for not being on the ball and highlighting the problems as they should have. Notwithstanding your counter-perspective, I suppose today's gratifying Purple Book defined benefit funding news couldn't have come at a worse time for you?

Doesn't mention anywhere the £100 billion lost since 1997........... that is the figure pretty much everybody is in agreement with on DB schemes.

[rh200]

So if its over then why has NATO and its allies been expanding right up to its border ?

NATO doesn't expand, nations freely get to be part of it on certain conditions if they so want. Usually they think they need protection from someone else.

Though NATO may look like it is expanding, you could say in capability it has actually shrunk making it more vulnerable. You could take that up to now, as a example of it didn't think Russia was a threat anymore. Something which has now changed.

So that begs the question, why are the Russians so afraid of freedom and other countries having free will.

[racedo]

So that begs the question, why are the Russians so afraid of freedom and other countries having free will.

Guess being invaded from the west twice in 100 years does that to you...

[Typhoon93]

Russia's reputation isn't exactly squeaky clean, though, is it?

[melmothtw]

Guess being invaded from the west twice in 100 years does that to you...


Looking at the map, it's hard to see how they can be invaded from any other direction.

And on the subject of 'NATO expanding' to Russia's borders, further to rh200's comments I would add that NATO has been up against the Russian/Soviet Union border since its inception (Turkey and the US [Alaska]). It only now seems to be a problem though....

[t43562]

How did Russia get so big? Surely it did a lot of invading itself?

[Ronald Reagan]

The problem is Washington and Bonn promised Gorbachev that if he withdrew all Soviet forces from eastern Europe, especially Germany then they guaranteed verbally that NATO would not move one inch eastwards. Its possible that eastern nations may have wished to join but they could have been refused membership to honour this promise leaving eastern Europe as a non aligned buffer zone between east and west.
Some western leaders such as Thatcher wanted some Soviet/Russian forces to remain in Germany as a counter to future German economic dominance of the European continent but sadly Washington did not agree. The Russians should have kept forces in Germany, would have given them much more power over Berlin.
Moscow and Bonn also were interested in the possible breakup of NATO as with no Warsaw Pact anymore there seemed no point in NATO continuing, again Washington were very much against this idea as they felt they would lose influence over Europe without NATO and that Europe might become truly independent of Washington which is something they could not tolerate. We are and remain puppet states of Washington.

[rh200]

Guess being invaded from the west twice in 100 years does that to you...

Comparing a fellow socialist regime intent on taking over the world and NATO, isn't relevant.

F#$k, its almost impossible to get them to agree on anything thats a threat and take action. probability of NATO invading Russia, 1 in infinity. Anyone who thinks otherwise needs help. Probability of NATO taking action against Russia if (not saying they would) it commits genocide amongst a portion of its population 1 infinity.

Look at the Ukraine situation, they could legally go in at the invitation of the government. But what are they getting, meals and uniforms, NATO a threat to Russia, what a F$#king joke, how stupid you people must think we are.

[Ronald Reagan]

rh200, Ukraine is not a NATO member state luckily so its none of NATO's concern. Even if they were to ask for assistance one would have to question the benefit of doing so, NATO is not some kind of world policeman. If the ''North Atlantic'' Treaty Organisation had not moved to the east then likely none of this would be happening. I can say the same about the EU. There was no need for NATO expansion post 1990 and actually an argument for NATO disbandment.

[melmothtw]

There was no need for NATO expansion post 1990

I'd say Putin's actions over the past 14 years disprove that.

Granted, it's a 'chicken and egg' situation as to cause and effect, but NATO is expanding for one reason only - because countries keep requesting to join it. And why do they request to join it?

[Ronald Reagan]

I firmly believe that if eastern Europe had been left as a non aligned buffer zone then the Russians would have not intervened anywhere.

[melmothtw]

The problem with that plan Ronald is that these Eastern European nations are not prepared to bankroll their continued existence on your 'firm belief'.

[Ronald Reagan]

It also comes down to Washington's desire to control them, to get NATO closer to Russia. In effect to replace Soviet domination with US domination.
Washington wants to dominate the whole world in a kind of empire, any nation that opposes them is either attacked and invaded if its weak, or surrounded and suffers a propaganda war against it and possibly economic warfare like Russia right now.
Also enlarging NATO makes a world war more likely as it risks turning what would otherwise be a smaller conflict into something far larger, assuming that is NATO would honour its commitments which it may not.

[Lonewolf_50]

It also comes down to Washington's desire to control them,
Nope.
I was involved in some work with former Eastern Bloc nations (Ukraine, Romania, Hungary mostly) and their military folks, during the 90's in the NATO "Partnership for Peace" era of the cold war thawout. 15-20 years ago. The consistent theme I ran across went something like this:

The nations involved wanted into the NATO relationships for a lot of reasons, the main one of them being financial, the other main one being fear/wariness of the Russians. There were other reasons as well, to do more with EU and European relationships than anything to do with the US of A. We had a little bit of PfP work with a few Russian teams, but I didn't get as involved with them as some of my colleagues did on other projects. There was a Russian liaison office established in Brussels, IIRC at NATO HQ, during the late 90's.

The intent was there for a closer working relationship, not a further estrangement.

As an American, I was against NATO expansion. Hell, I am for bringing our troops home from Europe, and was back then.

It was enough of a chore to fold in Spain, once Spain they decided to be "all in!" (Truth here: I was glad when Sarkozy got France to finally be "all in!" instead of "sort of in" NATO after DeGaulletossed his toys out of the pram in the 60's).

Ronald, in the nations that spent 40-50 years in the Soviet/Russian sphere, the experience taught a lot of people a lot of things about the Russians.

It seems "trust" isn't one of them.
Sad but true. I don't think it has to be that way, and I do wish it were otherwise.

[Heathrow Harry]

"The problem with that plan Ronald is that these Eastern European nations are not prepared to bankroll their continued existence on your 'firm belief'."

:ok::ok::ok:

[Al R]

Russia seeks to court western favour by restarting energy supplies to Ukraine? Interest rates soar to 9.5% on back of weak rouble.

BBC News - Russia raises interest rates to 9.5% (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29848940)

[KenV]

'NATO bombers and combat aircraft were intercepted as they flew along the coast of Russia', no credible news source said, ever.

During the cold war, US (and other nations') military aircraft of many types were routinely intercepted along the borders of Russia. Some were shot down. A few of the shootdowns turned out to be off-course civilian airliners.

[melmothtw]

During the cold war...

You said it KenV - during the Cold War, not 2014. And as for civilian airliners being shot down, sadly not much has changed there either.

[Ronald Reagan]

This discussion is making me feel all nostalgic


Kim Il Sung´s Africa and Europe visit 1975 - YouTube (http://youtu.be/MgX8Je-BRrE)


kim il sung - YouTube (http://youtu.be/AcHDlBoUUWk)


Tribute to Marshal Tito - YouTube (http://youtu.be/oji2dlcgPO4)


ANTHEM EAST GERMAN (DDR) 1989 / HIMNO DE ALEMANIA DEMOCRATICA (RDA) - YouTube (http://youtu.be/TiXctCPNEcM)


Die Internationale - DDR Ost Berlin 1986 , Parade der Arbeiterkampfgruppen - YouTube (http://youtu.be/QDNe6Ra4__M)


Tribute to president Ceausescu - YouTube (http://youtu.be/GzUyVyho6R8)


PRL 1984 Kim Ir Sen w Polsce. Po?egnanie drogiego go?cia - YouTube (http://youtu.be/BOdob3ZIAb0)

[KenV]

You said it KenV - during the Cold War, not 2014. And as for civilian airliners being shot down, sadly not much has changed there either.


I can't speak for other nations, but USAF aircraft and USN ships and aircraft are routinely intercepted today off the coasts of Russia. China and other nations do the same. Intercepts of US military assets are fairly routine all over the globe.

[racedo]

Comparing a fellow socialist regime intent on taking over the world and NATO, isn't relevant.
Russia has seen NATO go into Afghanistan............... as far a stretch from North Atlantic as you can have




F#$k, its almost impossible to get them to agree on anything thats a threat and take action. probability of NATO invading Russia, 1 in infinity. Anyone who thinks otherwise needs help. Probability of NATO taking action against Russia if (not saying they would) it commits genocide amongst a portion of its population 1 infinity.

Look at the Ukraine situation, they could legally go in at the invitation of the government. But what are they getting, meals and uniforms, NATO a threat to Russia, what a F$#king joke, how stupid you people must think we are. 100 years ago Russia would not have thought it would be invaded twice and millions killed.

History does that to a people, look at German attitude to INFLATION, Japanese peoples attitude to its military doing anything outside its shores, Chinese attitude to Japanese military or anybody else on it borders, Israels attitude to ANY attack on Jewish people, UK/French attitude to Germany having a strong military, US attitude to Russian nukes on Cuba............... Russian attitude to what it sees on its border is no different.

Its the intent that is seen as threatening because even when person making it has no malicious intent the person following may have a different viewpoint.

Russia had a declaration from a US President that NATO would not expand eastwards, next President then does the complete opposite, would you then trust the words of a US President ?

I have heard the semantics that as it wasn't in a treaty then you cannot rely on it.

In which case the interpretation of Russia is that the US President stating something as CiC of the US to Russian President only applies when he is in office...........in which case Russia automatically disregard his word and commitment because next incumbent is not bound by it and can ignore it.

Its not a place US and Russia should even be.

[Heathrow Harry]

"100 years ago Russia would not have thought it would be invaded twice and millions killed"

Actually they did - they remembered the Napoleonic War , and the Crimean War and the Japanese War

They were allied with the French to try and ensure no war broke out in Europe and when Bismark ran things they were allied with the Germans

[Whenurhappy]

Lone Wolf - I concur fully with your comments. About 12 years ago I too was a lowly minion dealing with accession issues in NATO. In my trips around former WARPAC Countries there were two recurrent themes:

NATO will keep the Russians Out, and,
This will bring us closer to joining the EU (in fact, you couldn't slip a cheap cigarette paper between NATO & EU).

I never, ever recall undue US pressure (my boss was a senior US diplomat) nor do I recall MFA and MOD staff in these countries ever exclaiming 'Amerika, Amerika!' I do recall, however, being assailed with all manner of pretty awful stories about the Soviet occupation...

[ORAC]

About the Russian economy and reserves...

Are Russia’s Usable Reserves Running Dangerously Low? (http://blogs.piie.com/realtime/?p=4624)

........

[NutLoose]

Bit of a long haul

Retired generals unfazed by Russian bomber patrols in Gulf of Mexico - Europe - Stripes (http://www.stripes.com/news/europe/retired-generals-unfazed-by-russian-bomber-patrols-in-gulf-of-mexico-1.313807)

[NutLoose]

How to contain Putin (http://www.ipolitics.ca/2014/10/01/how-to-contain-putin/)

[racedo]

About the Russian economy and reserves...

Are Russia’s Usable Reserves Running Dangerously Low? (http://blogs.piie.com/realtime/?p=4624)

........

Read down to where he starts talking about crony capitalism and gave up given Putin has been the one to drag back the Yeltsin give away contracts to the west.

[Al R]

After the National Wealth Fund has sapped state pension contributions for two years, why wouldn't Rozneft tap it up for $50 billions? If there's no backlash soon.. there will be in a few years.

Former Russian Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin Warns Putin Over 'Populist' Policies (http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/former-russian-finance-minister-alexei-kudrin-warns-putin-over-populist-policies-1475920)

And this puts HS2 through Dudley into context. Russia wants to reach out and this is the sort of stuff we'd read about 40 years ago as a fantastical aspiration, but at $150 billions where's the money really going to come from?

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/russia-eyes-chinese-cash-for-150-moscow-beijing-high-speed-railway/511644.html

[ORAC]

Same point made in The Economist this week, cover, leader and long article inside. Leader and article links below.

Russia - A wounded economy - It is closer to crisis than the West or Vladimir Putin realise (http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21633813-it-closer-crisis-west-or-vladimir-putin-realise-wounded-economy.)



The Russian Economy -The end of the line - For more than a decade oil income and consumer spending have delivered growth to Vladimir Putin’s Russia. Not any more (http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21633816-more-decade-oil-income-and-consumer-spending-have-delivered-growth-vladimir-putins)

[ORAC]

Capital controls feared as Russian rouble collapses (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11266746/Capital-controls-feared-as-Russian-rouble-collapses.html)

The Russian rouble has suffered its steepest one-day drop since the default crisis in 1998 as capital flight accelerates, raising the risk of emergency exchange controls and tightening the noose on Russian companies and bodies with more than $680bn (£432bn) of external debt.

The currency has been in freefall since Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states vetoed calls by weaker Opec members for a cut in crude oil output, a move viewed by the Kremlin as a strategic attack on Russia. A fresh plunge in Brent prices to a five-year low of $67.50 a barrel on Monday caused the dam to break, triggering a 9pc slide in the rouble in a matter of hours. Analysts said it took huge intervention by the Russian central bank to stop the rout and stablize the rouble at 52.07 to the dollar. “They must have spent billions,” said Tim Ash, at Standard Bank.

It is extremely rare for a major country to collapse in this fashion, and the trauma is likely to have political consequences. "This has become disorderly. There are no real buyers of the rouble. We know that voices close to president Vladimir Putin want capital controls, and we cannot rule this out," said Lars Christensen, at Danske Bank. "Funding problems are increasing dramatically. We think Russia is now flirting with systemic problems,” he added.

Some Russian banks have already started limiting withdrawals of dollars and euros to $10,000, an implicit lockdown for big depositors..........


The rouble's slide has led to fury in the Duma, where populist politician Evgeny Fedorov has called for a criminal investigation of the central bank. Critics say the institution had been taken over by "feminist liberals" and is a tool of the International Monetary Fund. The office of the Russia general prosecutor said on Monday it was opening a probe.

The central bank has refused to intervene to defend the rouble over recent weeks, letting the exchange rate take the strain rather than burning through reserves to delay the inevitable, as Nigeria and Kazakhstan are doing. It squandered $200bn of reserves in a six-week period in late 2008 and triggered an acute banking crisis, learning the hard way that currency intervention entails monetary tightening. By letting the rouble fall, it shields the Russian budget from the slump in global oil prices, though not entirely. Deutsche Bank said the fiscal balance turns negative at crude prices below $70.

Yet the devaluation is causing prices to spiral upwards in the shops and may at some point cause a self-feeding crisis if it evokes bitter memories of past currencies crashes. The finance ministry said it expects inflation to reach 10pc in the first quarter of 2015. There is already a dash to buy washing machines, cars and computers before they shoot up in price, a shift in behaviour that signals stress.

The rouble slide is ratcheting up the pressure on Russian companies facing $35bn of redemptions of foreign debt in December alone, mostly in dollars. Yields on Lukoil’s 10-year bonds have jumped by 250 basis points since June to 7.5pc.

[racedo]

Yet the devaluation is causing prices to spiral upwards in the shops and may at some point cause a self-feeding crisis if it evokes bitter memories of past currencies crashes. The finance ministry said it expects inflation to reach 10pc in the first quarter of 2015. There is already a dash to buy washing machines, cars and computers before they shoot up in price, a shift in behaviour that signals stress.

The rouble slide is ratcheting up the pressure on Russian companies facing $35bn of redemptions of foreign debt in December alone, mostly in dollars. Yields on Lukoil’s 10-year bonds have jumped by 250 basis points since June to 7.5pc.

Author is looking at Russian Economy from a Western Consumer Economy perspective............

Perhaps its worth remembering 2009-2010 when western economies pretty much went nowhere as consumers stopped all spending.

The new TV's / Washing Machines / Cars / Kitchens that I knew friends were buying over a period of time and discussing completely stopped as nobody was buying. Ensuring food on table and house warm was a bigger issue than new LCD 50inch tV or whatever

Western Govts came up with another Ponzi scheme called TARP / QE where money they didn't have, magically appeared to buy assets worth little to get economies moving. Nobody knows how it will be paid back.

Relatively easy to stop consumer spending as people will just do it and Govts stop spending.

Yup in Russia Western stuff will be dear but lets face it what western consumer goods are not made in China ? and as for Western cars................ the factorys are already in Russia so who loses ? their western owners as their investment is worthless as nobody buying their cars or the Russians buying home produced stuff ?

[Al R]

The scribbly is looking at it from a western perspective because that's what Russia has evolved into, or at least, is trying to. We know where Putin is drawing his war chest from..

?????? ?????? :: 2014 (http://minfin.ru/en/nationalwealthfund/statistics/balances/2014/index.php?id_4=21675)

Those figures are scant, the additional danger is that the fund has been buying Russian institution and bank instruments which are hurtling South too, and recently, more natural resource debt was added to the shopping trolley. That has a plummeting value. His shopping trolley has been changed; no longer one of those lithe ones, now he has swapped it for a deep weekly shop jobber. The wheels are groaning under the weight of all the stuff being chucked into it, I think there was another $10 billions last week.

TASS: Economy - Russian Finance Ministry to buy VTB, Rosselkhozbank shares worth $6.6 billion (http://itar-tass.com/en/economy/746544)

He is doing what we did (say, supporting Northern Rock) but he is doing it on a grand scale. We did it by creating money (I agree, we just kicked the problem to the right) but he is taking hard cash from future pensioners. The problem is, our destinies are all linked now - his czarist pretensions become our economic malaise. The worrying thing for Russia (and us) is, sentiment turned away from Russia long before this happened, God know what it's going to be like after it has all (hopefully) been resolved.

http://www.trustnet.com/Factsheets/Factsheet.aspx?fundCode=HXF56&univ=T

On the plus side, fewer Russians in the pool bar maybe. ;-)

[Al R]

PS:

Heard the one about Putin, oil and the ruble? They will all hit 63 next year.

PPS:

Judging from this press release from earlier today, you asked how we repay our debt. Well, at least we repay it.. eventually. ;)

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/chancellor-to-repay-the-nations-first-world-war-debt

[KenV]

Wait a minute.

The UK government is taking out a loan in 2014, to pay a loan taken out in 1932, to pay a loan taken out in 1917. It looks like the UK Parliament is as clueless as the US Congress which also uses debt to pay off debt and calls that "sound financial planning." It's lunacy.

[Load Toad]

All money is debt matey. FIAT currencies and all that. The only valuation is faith. For all Russia's sabre rattling its now being financially shafted; which hurts most.

[Heathrow Harry]

"The UK government is taking out a loan in 2014, to pay a loan taken out in 1932, to pay a loan taken out in 1917"

trick is in the cost of the loans Ken-

Originally it was 5% then refinanced at 3.5% in 1932 - they wre also "infinite" so they just had to pay the interest and never worry about repaying the capital

its a sad reflection on UK economic performance that is was cheaper to keep paying the 3.5% as it would have cost more to replace them at any point in the following 82 years. They can now borrow at lower rates so it makes sense to finally retire them........

[KenV]

trick is in the cost of the loans Ken-
I'm well aware of that.


Originally it was 5% then refinanced at 3.5% in 1932 - they wre also "infinite" so they just had to pay the interest and never worry about repaying the capital

its a sad reflection on UK economic performance that is was cheaper to keep paying the 3.5% as it would have cost more to replace them at any point in the following 82 years. They can now borrow at lower rates so it makes sense to finally retire them........
US Congress does the same smoke and mirrors games with US finances. Debt is paid with debt and Congress crows about "retiring" the old debt. That is "refinancing", NOT "retiring". For a private citizen, refinancing a mortgage (or other loan) is way way different than retiring a mortgage. But not for the politicians on both sides of the pond. This is pure lunacy.

[Al R]

US sales continued to moderately decrease in 2013. Russian sales increased by 20%.

15 Dec. 2014: Sales by largest arms companies fell again in 2013 but Russian firms? sales continued rising ? www.sipri.org (http://www.sipri.org/media/pressreleases/2014/SIPRI-Top-100-December-2014)

Even at startex this morning, 100 Roubles to the Pound seemed implausible. Another bad day for the Russian people.

XE.com - RUB/GBP Chart (http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=RUB&to=GBP&view=1D)

[ORAC]

Russian crisis turns systemic as rouble crashes 13pc (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11295402/Russian-crisis-turns-systemic-as-rouble-crashes-13pc.html)

Russia is in the grip of full-blown currency crisis after a panic scramble for dollars sent the rouble crashing 13pc, with contagion spreading to Brazil, Indonesia and across the emerging market nexus.

The rouble smashed through resistance to an all-time low of 65.5 to the dollar in a crescendo of selling on Monday, as oil prices continued to slide and markets braced for a likely default in Ukraine. The Russian currency has lost half its value since President Vladimir Putin first sent forces into Ukraine, setting off a chain of events that the Kremlin can no longer control.

“This is being driven by pure fear. We have crossed a line and the crisis is now self-feeding,” said Chris Weafer, from Macro Advisory in Moscow. “The central bank must intervene immediately with a great deal of money to overwhelm the sense of panic.”......

[Al R]

And despite saying it won't interfere to prop up the currency and despite committing £4.5bns last week to doing just that, the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Bank of Russia) has just announced it's raising interest rates from 10.5% to 17%. This is history either unfolding or unravelling before our eyes.. Putin's gamble.

http://www.cbr.ru/eng/press/pr.aspx?file=16122014_010920eng_dkp2014-12-16T01_04_09.htm

[rh200]

The Russian currency has lost half its value since President Vladimir Putin first sent forces into Ukraine, setting off a chain of events that the Kremlin can no longer control.

Well that really depends on what his end game is. There are all sorts of things they could do.

[Al R]

I don't think he had/has an end game. He went into it, full of his own PR, and he's been badly burned. Russia's destiny (and his, I suspect) are no longer in his control. I hope the results of his vanity and his insanity were worth it to him.

JP Morgan is reporting that Russia's central bank needs to make $100bn or more of its reserves available to markets, just to meet dollar demand.. so stand by for capital restrictions. On the plus side then, fewer charmless and sunburnt legless Russians staggering about the pool by mid morning.

[ORAC]

Russia risks Soviet-style collapse as rouble defence fails (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11297770/Russia-risks-Soviet-style-collapse-as-rouble-defence-fails.html)

Russia has lost control of its economy and may be forced to impose Soviet-style exchange controls after "shock and awe" action by the central bank failed to stem the collapse of the rouble. “The situation is critical,” said the central bank’s vice-chairman, Sergei Shvetsov. “What is happening is a nightmare that we could not even have imagined a year ago."

The currency crashed to 100 against the euro in the biggest one-day drop since the default crisis in 1998 as capital flight gathered pace, despite a drastic rise in interest rates to 17pc intended to crush speculators and show resolve. Yields on two-year Russian bonds spiralled to 15.36pc, while credit default swaps are pricing in a one-third chance of a sovereign default. The shares of Russia’s biggest lender, Sberbank, fell 18pc.

Neil Shearing, from Capital Economics, said the spectacular failure of the rate shock may bring matters to a head. “If a rise of 650 basis points won’t do the job, we are near the end. That means stringent capital controls,” he said. Michal Dybula, from BNP Paribas, said the rouble's plunge risks setting off a systemic bank run. “A large-scale run on deposits, once under way, would make capital controls pretty much unavoidable,” he said, adding that the authorities may start by forcing state-controlled companies to sell foreign assets and repatriate funds........

The rouble crash has doubled the cost of servicing nearly $700bn of external debt owed by Russian banks, companies and state bodies, mostly in dollars. They must repay $30bn this month and a further $100bn next year. Oil giant Rosneft has requested $49bn of state aid to weather the crisis. Traders in Moscow expressed fury at the central bank’s refusal to deploy its $416bn of foreign reserves to “turbo-charge” the defence of the rouble, though the authorities may have intervened in late trading. The currency clawed back some ground - to 69 against the dollar - after one of the wildest days of the modern era. Eugene Kogan, from Moscow Partners, said the Russian stock market faces “slow death” over the next six months as liquidity vanishes.

It is clear that the authorities are guarding their reserves jealously after burning through $100bn this year to little avail. BNP’s Tatiana Tchembarova said what remains no longer covers external debt, unlike 2008 when there was still ample cover. “In addition to being twice as levered, Russia is entering this crisis with lower reserves,” she said. The government has already committed $143bn in foreign reserve spending for next year. “We think that more will be required to support Russia’s banking system,” she said. The Kremlin had to spend $170bn rescuing the banks in the 2008-2009 crisis.........

The central bank knows that Russia’s seemingly large reserves are a Maginot Line. Yet its attempt to defend the rouble only by raising rates is itself lethal. Even before the latest move it warned that the economy could contract by 4.7pc next year in a scenario of $60 oil prices. The slump may now be far worse as a violent monetary squeeze sends tremors through the banking system and sets off a wave of corporate bankruptcies. BNP Paribas said each 100-basis point rise in rates cuts 0.8pc off GDP a year later. Rates have risen 750 points in a week.

Lars Christensen, from Danske Bank, said the Kremlin’s actions have led to the “absolutely worst possible outcome” since the botched move is enough to do grave damage, without solving anything. “They should have let the currency go rather than killing the economy. Investment is in freefall, and I fear this shock is going to be even bigger than in 2008-2009. Nothing suggests that oil is going to rebound quickly this time,” he said............

There is no sign yet of relief from the oil markets. Brent crude fell below $59 a barrel on Tuesday for the first time since the depths of the Great Recession in 2009. The fallout from the crisis is already hitting banks linked to Russia and Ukraine. The share price of Austria’s Raiffeisen fell 8pc in Vienna. More than 240pc of its tangible equity is exposed to the region. The biggest external lender is France’s Societe Generale, with €25bn of exposure, or 62pc of tangible equity. Contagion is spreading across the emerging market nexus, hitting countries such as Turkey and India that should be beneficiaries of lower oil prices. “There is absolutely no liquidity anywhere. The system is stressed and we have a crunch all over the place,” said one hedge fund trader. There are signs that the sell-off is becoming self-feeding as investors withdraw money from emerging market bond funds, forcing the funds to liquidate holdings into the downturn. In some cases managers are acting tactically, selling “proxies” such as Turkish debt given the difficulty of exiting Russian positions.

The rouble has now fallen 56pc against the dollar over the past year. Russian GDP has shrunk to $1.1 trillion, smaller than the economy of Texas, and half the size of Italy’s. The effect has been to double Russia’s external debt to at least 70pc of GDP, a high-risk level for rating agencies.

“A Russian downgrade to junk is only a matter or time,” said Tim Ash, from Standard Bank.

[Al R]

10 year Russian bonds, when I looked the other day, were only marginally below junk anyway.. god knows what they are now. Each Xmas, I shuffle my fantasy league play fund and retain new holdings for 12 months (nothing big, just a few hundred blatts in each) only. 5 years ago, this JPM fund formed part of my thinking and although I really wanted to keep it, my own rules compelled me to bang out. Thankfully! Fear and greed can affect us all.

JPM Russia | JP Morgan Asset Management | Fund factsheets | FE Trustnet (http://www.trustnet.com/Factsheets/Factsheet.aspx?fundCode=JWF86&univ=B)

[ShotOne]

Al, the reason Russian sales increased by 20% is that ordinary Russian people have seen this coming and would rather buy something,say a car, or fridge, than have a pile of Roubles to look at.

[ORAC]

Putin's economic lies over Russia have been dangerously exposed (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/11296934/Putins-economic-lies-over-Russia-have-been-dangerously-exposed.html)

Vladimir Putin has been cornered - and now he could now lash out

.......The most dangerous outcome is that Mr Putin responds to the crisis by lashing out. He knows that time is against him. The European Union is dismantling his most important business model – the corrupt and exploitative export of pipeline gas. Nato is getting its act together, ending a decade of military weakness and indecision. The Russian leader needs a game-changer – something that can rewrite the rules and show the Russian people that their economic sacrifice is merely the cost of political glory. He also knows that geopolitical tension is a surefire way of sending the oil price up again. As the country’s woes deepen, and his options narrow, Mr Putin’s recklessness will come to the boil. Stand by to be scalded.

[Lonewolf_50]

Nato is getting its act together, ending a decade of military weakness and indecision.
What evidence do you have to support your assertion that NATO is getting its act together?

[pr00ne]

Lonewolf50,

That wasn't ORAC's assertion, he was quoting from the article in the Daily Telegraph, so you'd be better off directing your question to the defence, economic and foreign affairs correspondents of the Torygraph.

My take on "getting its act together" would he the large scale military exercises conducted by NATO in Poland and the Ukraine, the ongoing increase in operations like Baltic airspace policing, deploying USAF F-16's to Poland, stockpiling military equipment in the eastern half of the alliance and increased border surveillance.

[Lonewolf_50]

That wasn't ORAC's assertion, he was quoting from the article in the Daily Telegraph, so you'd be better off directing your question to the defence, economic and foreign affairs correspondents of the Torygraph. Hmm. Had that passage been in quotes, it might have been obvious that it wasn't his own work. Thanks for that.
My take on "getting its act together" would he the large scale military exercises conducted by NATO in Poland and the Ukraine, the ongoing increase in operations like Baltic airspace policing, deploying USAF F-16's to Poland, stockpiling military equipment in the eastern half of the alliance and increased border surveillance.
Large scale as compared to what? REFORGER this ain't.
Increased Baltic Ops: Well, now that we have added 3 Baltic states to NATO, we need to do exercises there. Otherwise, the capability of actual coalition operation is a chimera, a fraud.
Deploy USAF F-16's to Poland. As they've been part of NATO for well over a decade ... that should be "ops normal, we det to alliance territory as a matter of habit." You're telling me that this is a sign of NATO getting its stuff together? Hardly. It's basic ops. It's also as much an example of bilateral ops as anything "NATO" in character.

Adding equipment and increase in border surveillance.
OK, that's improving posture in a zone of potential trouble. You'd rather expect a DEFENSIVE alliance to do that, wouldn't you?

Sorry, not impressed. (Had the opportunity to serve in NATO proper for a few years).

The underlying political fault lines within the Alliance cannot be so easily masked by the above mentioned smoke screens. I think we all can remember how many nations it takes to get anything done as an alliance.
All of them.

[Finningley Boy]

Mr pr00ne,

By getting its act together, NATO needs to do the following, ahem; all member states, with immediate effect, should commence plans to convert to wartime economic production. We need to introduce rationing straight away. During the last lot, the population was fed better than ever before or since, everyone had a properly balanced diet and nobody had type 2 diabetes and gastric bands were unheard of. The Armed Forces of all member states should be expanded fourfold with a call up of all reservists and plans for the invasion of Russia commenced, possibly with landing points along the Black Sea coast and should the Baltic states have already been over run by the Russians then we may need to look at landing grounds along the Baltic coast and ....... where's everyone gone?

FB:)

[Ian Corrigible]

Russia's economic woes are already impacting the VVS:

http://i.imgur.com/v3VEw4m.jpg (http://aviationweek.com/node/1234751/slide/slide-17-field_images-1234751)

I/C

[KenV]

Russia's entire economy is highly dependent on selling oil and natural gas. With the price of oil nose diving, the Russian Ruble is in "catastrophic decline". And the outlook for increased oil prices is grim. The US has two huge oil fields coming on line, either one alone has more reserves than all of Saudi Arabia BEFORE they started pumping oil. The US will soon not only be energy independent, but will be a huge exporter of oil. And that does not include the huge oil field in Canada also just coming on line. Once the pipeline from Canada to the Texas gulf coast is complete, North America will be awash in oil.

No amount of sabre rattling and invading of neighbors is going to change the realities for the Russion economy.

One last point: Here in the States the concept of "drill here, drill now" as a means to reduce oil prices and reduce our oil dependency was laughed to derision by the left. I just paid $2 per gallon for gasoline. Looks like all the oil coming on line is doing exactly what our leftists said never would or could happen.

[Wander00]

Photo - caption comp?

[Finningley Boy]

Caption Competition entry:

No Control, the canopy and chute have worked fine but the seat...

FB:)

[air pig]

Good job GSFG and Wester Direcroate aren't still around or you could see a 'Red Storm Rising'

[Lonewolf_50]

One last point: Here in the States the concept of "drill here, drill now" as a means to reduce oil prices and reduce our oil dependency was laughed to derision by the left. I just paid $2 per gallon for gasoline. Looks like all the oil coming on line is doing exactly what our leftists said never would or could happen. Yes, but the relative "glut" in the current global market will eventually be consumed as some production stalls/is unprofitable until the price per barrel goes back up a bit.

That the Saudis have recently chosen to not cut production meets two of their needs: their revenue keeps coming in, and their marginally profitable competitors are put in a tougher position, cash flow wise, in the short to mid term. The oil business remains competitive.

[Bigbux]

Lonewolf

isn't that the point Ken's making? A competitive market is good for the consumer and with the US and Canada's new and significant contribution the OPEC cartel is effectively neutered. Saudis need oil at 80 -100 per barrel, they have taken the decision not to cut production primarily to maintain market share. Their secondary considerations are to hurt investment in fracking and some local payback. The long and short of it is that we have some breathing space to develop less carbon-dependent energy strategies.

All this hurts Putin, will make him weak at home and has little to do with sanctions. He can howl away to his heart's content, he can't fight the economics and the Chinese have said they won't bail him out.

[Al R]

Bigbux,

Have the Chinese actually said that? If so, it would surprise me, they want (need, now?) to become the de facto World Bank. The Russian crisis would allow them to use reserves currently earning them nothing and allow them to drive a hard bargain into areas they want to diversify into. It might be they know that Russia has no one else to turn to now, Putin's intransigence and inability to accept the reality.. just one last hurrah.

[Finningley Boy]

Falkland Islands defence review after military deal between Russia and Argentina | UK | News | Daily Express (http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/549006/Falkland-Islands-defence-review-after-military-deal-between-Russia-and-Argentina)

The only point I can pull the reporting up on here is the claim that its recent defence cuts which have left a force of only 4 Typhoons? Did the journalist in question not enquire as to how many Fighters used to be based there? He would surely have been told, just the 4 sir, of any type post-conflict?

FB:)

[Ronald Reagan]

China foreign minister says willing to help Russia | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/22/us-china-russia-idUSKBN0K004Q20141222)


EUobserver / China ignores EU, offers to help Russia (http://euobserver.com/foreign/127036)


China Steps In as World's New Bank - Bloomberg View (http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-12-25/china-steps-in-as-worlds-new-bank)

[Lonewolf_50]

Big bux:
I don't think the Saudis ever "need" the price to be that high.
It's a matter of profit margin per barrel, not "are we making or losing money per barrel if producing at that price" ... which is a concern for some other producers.

That said, I am sure they'd rather get as much profit per barrel as they could (who wouldn't?) but reducing production at the moment would enable some of their competitors to "overproduce" without a consequence. By keeping their production up, the Saudis are allowing a bit of pain to be felt by some who are not playing along.

There are politics involved in a lot of this, not just market/economics.

[Bigbux]

Have the Chinese actually said that?

Actually, you are right to call me on that. They said they would provide financial assistance only if officially called on to do so - which is not a refusal, but an offer! (got caught up in the context of the article which was not primarily about finance). They were also making noises about the importance of keeping Putin in power - which would fit well your analysis. If someone else gets in then Russia's economy might stand a chance.

[Bigbux]

LW

Russia faces oil export catastrophe, snared in Opec price trap - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/11310312/Russia-faces-oil-export-catastrophe-snared-in-Opec-price-trap.html)

I agree with you on that. My assumption on the Saudi "need" was a budget break-even. But they do have deep pockets.

[Heathrow Harry]

the Saudis can produce at price levels so far below everyone else and still turn a profit it's untrue

It also reminds the US of their "old friends" in the Middle East and a touch of the whip on shale oil producers, who, even if the price comes back, will have more trouble raising cash in the future

Secondary, but also benifical results from a Saudi view, is it puts internal pressure on Iran and Russia (they could care less about Venezuala) and it makes the contracting business reduce its exhorbitant prices

lots of wins and not many losses for them TBH

[Lonewolf_50]

The long and short of it is that we have some breathing space to develop less carbon-dependent energy strategies.
Such as?

We'll see what the price per barrel is in April.

[ORAC]

The Oil Price Decline: No Conspiracy Theories Need Apply (http://streetwiseprofessor.com/?p=9051)

[Bigbux]

LW

I'm not suggesting that there is an out of the box, single solution that can replace oil - I don't think there is- yet. But we can reduce our reliance on oil, and we should do for more reasons than just political ones.

We are already seeing markets react to the need for efficiency; you can buy 3 cylinder, turbo-charged Fords with all the performance of "traditional" cars that produce less than 100g /l CO2. Pretty much all audis have regenerative technologies as standard.

If as a windy, rainy, rubbish-producing, tidal sea-surrounded country we can't see more opportunity for energy conversion to power our cities then we deserve to be held ransom by our suppliers.

I won't go into climate change.