Russia is about to win Cold War 2.0
Russia completed a major new gas pipeline this week.
Russia’s de-facto gas export monopoly Gazprom says it will start filling the Power of Siberia pipeline to China from September 1, rather than December, as was initially proposed.Gazprom and CNPC signed a contract worth US$400 billion to supply 38 billion cubic metres (bcm) of gas per year over 30 years through the pipeline.
...
Russia overtook Saudi Arabia as China’s largest oil supplier in 2016.
$400 Billions is a nice chunk of change. For Russia it was critical, because a third of their revenue comes from oil and gas exports. Diversifying exports away from dependence on Europe is also important.
The second-most important pipeline is Nord Stream 2.
Notice the article above is nearly a year old.
Below is an update.
So, no matter how much the U.S. and the anti-Russian forces within European and British society want to stop this pipeline, as evinced by this week’s non-binding vote against it in the European Parliament, there isn’t the appetite in the U.S. to actually do it.
The U.S. Senate has no interest in telling the President to sanction the companies building Nordstream 2...
The real reason Trump won’t sanction Nordstream 2 is the same reason he will fold to China on trade: dollar liquidity and world trade.He’s already done enough damage...
If he was going to sanction Nordstream 2, he would have.
Comments
The End of the Dollar is Coming - Lavrov
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oekNLjLKOhg width:500 height:300]
We wanted decent healthcare, a living wage and free college.
The Democrats gave us Biden and war instead.
This too will pass
american short term gain is practically all the policy the US has anymore. This also will pass away quickly. The myopic american dream doesn't play well on an international stage.
question everything
Back in the day trading would topple the Soviet Union
During the Cold War, there was an idea that the West needed to trade with the Soviet Union as a way to transform them. Sell them Levi jeans and rock and roll records, etc and let the Soviet peoples see the wonders of Western capitalism. And now trade is being "weaponized" to not only punish Russia but any Western ally who goes against the sanctions regimes.
The irony is that some pundits have noted that Russia was becoming more and more dependent on Western products before the sanctions. The sanctions cut off products/services and potential dependencies. But again arrogant attitudes toward Russia believed that Russia could not sustain the sanctions. Instead, the Russians became self sufficient in many areas.
I remember Ron Paul in the gop debates being the only peace candidate on that side. He said that he didn't want to fight with our enemies but instead trade with them, echoing that trade brings peace and cooperation. But that is a long term view--we will have none of that.
Dutch Disease
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-bKFo30o2o]
Ironic ain't it.
EU countries literally said to Russians, "here take over our import markets into your country that were making money." I think part of this was ignorance caused by arrogance. The Russians even with all their achievements seem be viewed by the west as some incompetent country and boneheaded people. Hey, no way Russia can survive sanctions from the uber people of the West.
Not many comments here
and I don't have any, but thanks for posting this information.
dfarrah
Honestly I think the empire is dying
It's not so much that Russia "won" as we lost. In fact, we stopped playing. Putin is playing a long term game carefully thought out. It's one that relies on diplomacy rather than guns. Ditto with the Chinese. The US, on the other hand, is playing with a ridiculously short-sighted vision. We can't seem to stay focused on anything and the goals we set seem poorly chosen even ignoring the moral and ethical dilemmas. How many dollars did we waste in Syria? For what? Libya, Afghanistan, soon Venezuela and Iran? Even ignoring the monstrous toll in human life and suffering, these were all poor investments.
I'm pretty impressed with Putin's strategy but honestly, it isn't rocket science. As near as I understand it, he's just setting up Russia to be a good business partner. That plays pretty well in comparison to the west which is a horrific business partner.
A lot of wanderers in the U.S. political desert recognize that all the duopoly has to offer is a choice of mirages. Come, let us trudge towards empty expanse of sand #1, littered with the bleached bones of Deaniacs and Hope and Changers.
-- lotlizard
Some cultures have long term plans
And it is an important national discussion. "In three years this industry will be 100 percent green." "Our goal is to life everyone in the nation out of poverty by 2025." By the end of the decade we will have the backbone of a nationwide public transportation in operation." "We plan to provide access to a trading infrastructure to all land-locked countries on the continent so they can develop quickly."
The US deplores five and ten year plans as communistic. Therefore the people don't know where they are going and cannot unite around a central vision. They have no hopes to pin their futures on.
I think that, alone, killed the Empire, just as it is killing the American people and reducing their lifespans. Nations are judged by the wellbeing of their people. Americans are treated badly and corporations are asset-stripping them of their resources and their future. Nations are disengaging from the US, and that will last for centuries.
A one-trick pony like certain companies—Kodak, Polaroid, Xerox
that did great for a long time, but in the end failed to adapt.
Somehow unable to imagine a different business model from the old military and monetary model (war and crony-cabal central banking).
The US in one Simpsons clip:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=e6LOWKVq5sQ&feature=youtu.be
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
Maybe cold war battle? Or skirmish?
I don't think there are any true winners in this. With climate change looming we all lose.
Russia is very serious about growth
Current annual GDP growth is about 1.8%. That growth is based on very conservative economics and almost no debt. Russia's growth is in solid industrial sectors. She used to import heavy farm machinery, now she manufactures and exports them. Russia strives to be very reliable economic partner. They are the most reliable supplier of natural gas in Europe, even Russia's detractors admit that. As Merkel pointed out, Germany bought lots of gas from the USSR during the cold war and that was not considered a political risk. Now Russia is a democratic, capitalist country and the idiots in the US are trying to tell her that trading with Russia is too large a risk. US fracked gas is expensive, short term, and unreliable. The US fracking model is based on short life wells, and a ballooning capital debt that will never be paid.
Russia physical infrastructure model is based on smart, liveable cities. The critical size threshold is one million people. At that size their cities provide a very livable quality of life, as many Soccer World Cup fans discovered last Summer. They currently have sixteen cities in that category. The US has ten cities over one million population. I have visited four large cities in Russia and was completely blown away. The term that comes to mind is livabity. They are attractive, with significant resources supporting daily life from transportation to shopping to business to recreation and celebration of history. They are planning to be successful, and will succeed. We are planning to make sure that they fail, believing that will ensure that we succeed. This is a losing strategy for the US.
Capitalism has always been the rule of the people by the oligarchs. You only have two choices, eliminate them or restrict their power.
China and Russia both have been very fortunate
...in leadership over the past two decades The current leaders of China and Russia set long term goals, with a key priority to vastly improve the lives of their people and the beauty of their environment and infrastructure. The is as it should be in every nation. It's the reason why people form governments in the first place.
The leaders in both countries foster a vision of the future, which they share the people. The process is very uplifting. For much of the 20th century, China and Russia have suffered neglect under mediocre and misguided leaders, with periods of oppression, corruption, and terrible suffering. Superior leaders can bring significant good fortune into the lives of the People — but they are very rare in any country, so you hang onto them when they come along. That's what 5,000 years of continuous civilization has taught the Chinese about leaders. Not surprisingly, Chinese philosophy consists mostly of dialogues that focus of the qualities of enlightened leadership. Both China and Russia, independently, chose to legally extend the service of their current leaders for an additional term. It's an opportunity for the government and the people to consolidate and build on their new found successes. So, it is inappropriate for the US to treat these term extensions as "dictatorships" and to regard these countries as outlaw nations, while calling for regime change.
A few months ago, Mr. Yang Yi, State Councilor and Foreign Minister of the People’s Republic of China showed up at the headquarters of the Council on Foreign Relations. He had a very specific message for the Cartel. Here’s how he started it off:
After Mr. Yi's address to the CFR, the floor was opened to some Neocon-style questions. Oh, brother.
It is a fascinating read for anyone interested in China and the changing forces in geopolitics.
China is evolving rapidly.
Thank you for this!
Wow. Maybe what we need is more dialogue and communication between our countries, not threats of annihilation. Ya' think?
I'm glad you found it interesting,
... . As culturally bound and mannered as the Chinese are, the past few years have changed them. That speech was very direct and firm. We've spent 20 years mocking them and insulting them and accusing them of theft and sabotage and stupidity.
They maintained a mild demeanor throughout, as if they didn't hear or understand what was said. In that time, they have had to negotiate with us while not reacting to our insults and slander. They did that to let us save face, so when we came to our senses and behaved in a civilized fashion, we could return to a productive partnership with China without shame and self-consciousness. We could tell ourselves that China never saw our disgrace.
But that CFR meeting was something else; something new. China has turned a corner with the US. They've always known they have an intelligence advantage over Westerners, yet they hold themselves back and maintain a modesty about it so that we do not feel inferior or slighted — and react dangerously. The Chinese can dominate every science we dabble in, but their self-effacing behavior about it may have come to an end.
China's intelligence advantage is not so great that it, alone, is responsible for its superior accomplishments, however. The Chinese have another tremendous advantage over US scientists and innovators. They have a communist government that will back their research and ideas with unlimited resources on behalf of the Chinese People. Scientists and innovators in China are empowered and likely able to bring their projects to fruition. Furthermore, a strong and wealthy central government can take on monumental projects on a scale that we could never entertain. A billion Chinese will throw all their efforts into a vital goal with a shared vision. They will make it manifest with the force of their combined will. (The Chinese are the reason that I don't worry too much about climate change. They got this.)
In the death throes of our empire, the meaning of this will become very clear: It will become evident that capitalists cannot hope to compete with modern communism, the way China has evolved it. Actually they feel inadequate to any form of communism. This is why the Fourth Reich, which now occupies the US, is so willing to launch a first-strike nuclear attack to eradicate it.
When a massive population of ordinary people unite their vision and work communally to accomplish a shared goal, they become the most powerful force on the planet. Moreover, they change the very structure of time and reality, so that the future we wake up in will be a world of the People' design. Little wonder Americans are kept fragmented, fractured, and divided. Nonetheless, it's inevitable that Americans will witness the failure of predatory capitalism against the backdrop of communism and communal action. There's no way to hide this from the People.
I am actually
thrilled by your remarks here because they're so clear and refreshingly at odds with everything we're supposed to believe. So if I respond in disagreement, I respect you for thinking outside the box we're struggling within. These are the parts I want to respond to:
My perception of the Chinese government and economy is that they are a manifestation of the U.S. government in corrupt alliance with business interests who moved their manufacturing to China in order to take advantage of oppressed labor. The Chinese government provided the oppression. Clearly that is an old view as a lot has changed, but control by the government of China still maintains the profits garnered by both control of labor and environmental deregulation, relative to the U.S. And the environmental costs to the planet of this forced marriage are well documented. China's massive industrial development has polluted the earth. So I am waiting to hear how you can say,
(The Chinese are the reason that I don't worry too much about climate change. They got this.)
But I think you can probably convince me. The reason I think you can convince me is that your statement here makes perfect sense to me:
The reason the Bolshevik leadership succumbed to a working relationship with U.S. industrialists was not just famine but that the U.S. would take Russia by force. The Bolshevik need for industrial development was urgent and absolute. But the industrialists' lust for Siberian resources and labor was also absolute. The threat capitalists held was that if they didn't get their way, they're killed everybody, a threat that we're familiar with today. As we speak.
So maybe what you're saying is that the Chinese government has recognized this reality and has taken the long view that working for the capitalists' companies will eventually morph into labor owning the means of production. I wish I could believe it. I hope the planet can survive the transition. But I can only begin to appreciate the many things implied by the message you quoted from the Chinese Foreign Minister. Thank you so much for posting it.
Well, our insane foreign policy
and clear, consistent signs that our leadership is willing to engage in nuclear war seem to have driven Russia and China together, so who knows what will happen. Russia, however, is unlikely to help with the global warming problem. They, too, are too dependent on petroleum and methane for their power.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Not just their power
But their economy, too.
I hope you're right,
but I'm not really sure this is true:
They have a communist government that will back their research and ideas with unlimited resources on behalf of the Chinese People.
Seems to me that they let Apple Corp drive the Chinese working people to suicide in forced labor camps. I really, really hope they have something else up their sleeve and that they have some kind of long plan that is less inefficient, brutal, and deadly than late-stage capitalism.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Pluto's Republic
So, it is inappropriate for the US to treat these term extensions as "dictatorships" and to regard these countries as outlaw nations, while calling for regime change.
Inappropriate? It's absurd.
We are the country that doesn't prosecute election fraud. We are the country that legalized torture, indefinite detention, constant war, prison labor for private profit, and mass warrantless surveillance. The idea that the United States can call any other regime a "dictatorship" is almost as stupid as the idea that we can justify war with Venezuela because the people there are hungry, while half of our own country is in poverty and half a million people are homeless while houses stand empty, serving no function except to make more money for the FIRE sector.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
They went through a period of imperialist expansion
welding many regional powers into what today is China. It was not necessarily always a particularly ethical or decent process. But the difference is that they formed the current China, and then stopped. With the exception of Tibet, of course, which wasn't their finest hour.
The difference between them and the U.S. is that they do not have an addictive or cancerous approach to political and economic power. The U.S. must continue to expand until it achieves hegemonic dominance. The European powers and Britain's former colonies, along with Israel, Saudi Arabia and a few other Middle Eastern "allies," all seem to be going along on this ride. There is a lack of rational thought, analysis, and decision in this drive toward hegemony which is usually found in addicts or religious cults.
To quote D.H. Lawrence:
“There must be more money! Oh-h-h; there must be more money. Oh, now, now-w! Now-w-w – there must be more money! – more than ever! More than ever!”
Hmm. I guess, actually, Britain started all this. We just picked up the torch where they dropped it.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
The indigenous People of North America
...for at least 50,000 years, formed tribes and small civilization on the continent — and at various times they would war between themselves, where the winners might drive the losers off the land or even take them as slaves.
Is this what you are calling Imperialism in regard to China? Indigenous people in their homeland fighting among themselves? That's probably not what you meant, otherwise the US Civil War would be an Imperial war.
In the modern world, the Chinese describe themselves in a way that is fundamentally different from Imperialism:
.
.
Now, the Romans were badass Imperialists. They can also be compared across time to the United States. But the Chinese are utterly and completely void of any qualities that can be compared to the United States, then or now. There is no similarity in any way at all between the two countries at any point in time. That's just a fact.
No, and I'm not trying to insult China either.
The Chinese themselves, or at least their filmmakers, seem to see their own history this way. See Zhang Ymou's excellent movie Hero. And I know he's just one filmmaker, but the Chinese consider him a national treasure, so I'd have to think his viewpoints are not considered eccentric.
Many regional powers had to be subdued and welded together into one to make China. I'd even cite the fact that they called their leader "Emperor" for many centuries, but I know that translation can be a bitch, and that Westerners might be imposing their own ideas on China in that translation. But I don't think it's that out of line to say that when a warlord successfully subdued the warring provinces and unified them into one, that he was establishing an empire. I just believe that the Chinese concept of empire rests on a different basis than the European/American version (in particular the version that gets passed along like a virus amongst the English-speaking cultures of the world). The most important difference I see is that the Chinese concept of empire doesn't appear to require infinite expansion to survive. They are (I think) smart enough to see that infinite expansion is foolish, and that one cannot establish an enduring empire on that basis.
It's the need for infinite expansion of territory and infinite concentration of control that makes the Anglo-American version of empire more like a disease than a social mechanism.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I understand your point
...and the definition you are constructing for "Empire."
China for five thousand years had Dynasties. But this is just a word, as well.
The distinction — the line I draw — is racial and indigenous, and it relates to the modern era, beginning with the Roman Empire.
I am speaking of distinct races of people who evolved in isolation for 100,000 years or so, for example white-skinned light-haired people who evolved in isolation in only one single slocation on the planet. There was an ebb and flow within those isolated races as they built their moral laws and cultural standards and settled their differences. Those are the civilizations of distinct racial evolution, not imperialist empires.
It is when one racial civilization becomes so perverted and depraved that it decides to capture, enslave, or destroy a different racial civilization that it commits an imperialistic affront against all of humanity. I define that as Empire. At first the US did this to steal the wealth or land of others. In the 20th century they began destroying race-based civilizations because they objected to certain "beliefs" that other civilizations had, such as communal sharing among the people. Or the people's ownership in common of a valuable natural resource, such as oil. They also attack and attempt to destroy race-based civilizations that try to develop defenses to protect them from US attacks, such as North Korea.
I think we have clarified our definitions and that is a good thing for building a productive relationship and excellent communications.
I think so too.
Our disagreement is not trivial, but we agree on values and, I think, on a lot of what currently constitutes political reality.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
“MAGA man, MAGA man! Did I say ‘MAGA man,’ mother?”
“Do you think I'm lucky, mother? I knew ‘MAGA man,’ didn't I? Over eighty thousand pounds! I call that lucky, don’t you, mother? Over eighty thousand pounds! I knew, didn’t I know I knew? The ‘MAGA man’ came in all right. If I ride my horse till I’m sure, then I tell you, Bassett, you can go as high as you like. Did you go for all you were worth, Bassett?"
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2147833/paddy-power-stung-for-3-5million-a...
It's a creepy story, isn't it?
I only wish the phenomenon were confined to the MAGA crowd.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
The elites in the U.S. are not interested
in nation-building. They are not, in fact, imperialists, though they share many awful qualities with them. Think Genghis Khan. This is more a loot-and-pillage operation.
Though I feel I'm being unfair to Genghis Khan, since he didn't do that to his own people. Then again, the elites in the U.S. do not view the rest of us as their tribe. This should be obvious to everybody by now, but unfortunately, it's only obvious to supporters of Trump and Bernie Sanders, while everybody who supports the mainstream Clinton/Bush/Obama politics still pretends that we and the elites can be one big happy family, if only the little guy would curtail his unreasonable expectations.
Correction: it's also clear to those of us who don't participate in this politics at all, but we have no vehicle for action and few arenas for speech.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
That’s what the people pushing the E.U. in its present form
also want to pretend.
In particular in Germany and France, with Merkel and Macron’s just-signed Elysée Treaty, initiating a weird “merger“ of the two countries on a parliamentary level.
On top of this they want to pretend they can, without any repercussions worth talking about, continue to add to the “happy family” millions of “new Europeans” from Africa, Turkey, and the Middle East.
Anyone who publicly spotlights the problems can be counted on being ostracized as a nasty populist neo-Nazi.
yeah, did you see Maischberger last night?
Couldn't believe what they were thinking. Happy family of the United Nations of Europe being at their throats against each other. This idiocy to think and talk as if anything would be comparable to the Untied States of America, is beyond pale. The EU is an idea that had passed its purpose. The member states of the EU are not united and don't want to be other to ger their piece of cake to eat.
At least that's how I become slowly to understand it.
https://www.euronews.com/live
That sounds fucking insane.
From a traditional political perspective, that is. From a "nations are marketing devices and multinational corporations wield the actual power" perspective, I guess it makes sense.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Russian - Chinese co-operation
Another example of the forward thinking policies of these two nations. We build walls, they build bridges.
The 2,209-meter-long (1.4 miles) structure will link Russia’s Far East with China’s northernmost Heilongjiang province. The Nizhneleninskoe (Jewish Autonomous Region) to Tongjiang (Heilongjiang province) bridge will become the first railway bridge between the two countries. China has already completed the construction of its part.
“It is expected that Russia will complete the installation of the last steel beam with a length of 132 meters on March 20-23, which will officially mark the linkage of the two sides of the bridge,”
https://www.rt.com/business/454185-russia-china-bridge-amur/
question everything
Counterpoint: Russia is not Shangri-La
Oh, and China's population and pollution problems are immensely problematic for them.
And one of the many, many reasons that I couldn't bring myself to vote for Clinton was her association with and support from the Kagens who see Russia as ripe for an overthrow. I used to think that there was no way the Dems would come up with a candidate who could beat Trump. Now, because of the wonders of IdPol, and the very real possibility of a Biden-Abrams ticket, it seems to me there's no way they can lose unless Bernie and Our Revolution can't pull it off. So, cheers:
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2019/01/29/the-looming-russian-recession-...
clinton sold the country out
with help from the Bushes and many others
instead of competition we have have monopolies
the enemy lies within, that's why tptb tell us
the danger is everywhere else
I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish
"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"
Heard from Margaret Kimberley
Bushworld.
Great book about that, I am currently doing a re-read as it requires more than one read to really get it all - "Family of Secrets" by Russ Baker. For anyone who questions the existence of a truly Deep State it is one hell of an eye opener. It also shows in a rather stark and chilling way just what we are up against. If after reading that book one can still bring themselves to believe in electoral politics, well, more power to them, I can't. Of course this is not the only book that I have read that got me to this point, but it's one of the best.
Mueller makes an appearance, so far I'm into the part about his part in Iran-Contra but if I remember right he also appears under the Iraq war and WMD lies later in the book. Manafort and Stone both part of Bushworld but not much detail on them in it but then again upon a second read I may get more on that. It is an excellent book, one I personally think should be required reading for all Americans but there are simply too many books that fit that description.
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
Bushworld it is then, thanks for the rec.
And yes Mueller was all in on WMD's
where there be any other way?
I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish
"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"
Heard from Margaret Kimberley
I wish their win took some form other than
adding another big pipeline to the world, but at least they don't want the world to end in nuclear fire.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Thanks for some consistency
Too bad such criticisms will soon probably be considered fake news and liable for prosecution.
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2019/03/18/putin-signs-fake-news-internet...