This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

As Anger Over Russian Syria Veto Mounts, Putin "Briefly" Leaves Europe In The Cold

Tyler Durden's picture




 

Yesterday we presented why when it comes to Syria, the UN Security Council can forget any attempt at "overhauling" a regime that is a cornerstone for Russian naval presence in the Mediterranean and the middle east. Today, in the aftermath of the UN reminder that it is the world's biggest collection of post-facto hypocrites, not to mention, the world's most irrelevant and ineffectual organization, anger at the Russian and Chinese veto has already manifested itself, as protesters have attacked the Russian embassy in Tripoli and tore down the Russian flag, Al Jazeera reported on Sunday. As Itar-Tass reports, "According to Al Jazeera, the riots staged by the Syria opposition involved Libyans as well. No further details are available so far. None of the Russian diplomats has been hurt in an rally stage by the Syrian opposition in front of the Russian embassy in Tripoli on Sunday, an officer from the Russian embassy told Itar-Tass over the phone. “No one has managed to break into the territory of the Russian diplomatic mission, no one of the personnel has been hurt. All are safe and sound. Although the protesters have managed to tear down the Russian flag,” the diplomat said." Still, the wily occupiers of the Kremlin preempted what they perceived as potential 'displeasure' with Russian tactics to protect its own national interests. Because as Zero Hedge has been reminding readers on occasion, Russia has something that is far more valuable to Europe than the Goldman-alum controlled printing press: it has the world's largest natural gas reserves. Which for a continent gripped in one the coldest winters on record, whose heating infrastructure is based primarily on natgas, and where Russian imports account for 25% of total nat gas, Russia has the upper hand in, well, everything. Which it gladly reminded the world of yesterday. According to the AP: Russia's state-controlled Gazprom natural gas giant acknowledged for the first time Saturday that it "had briefly reduced gas supplies to Europe amid a spell of extreme cold."  Oops... Just a fat finger there, nothing to worry about. Oh, and if anyone forgets that in the Eurasian continent it is Russia who increasingly holds all the cards, Gazprom may "briefly" cut all supplies to Europe, -40 C degree temperatures be damned. Briefly...

More:

Gazprom deputy chief Andrey Kruglov reported to Prime Minister Vladimir Putin that the cuts lasted for several days and reached up to 10 percent, but supplies are currently back to normal. Officials in Austria and France, however, have reported cuts of as much as 30 percent, and Italy said supplies were down by 24 percent Thursday.

Naturally, there is a scapegoat:

Russia previously had blamed Ukraine for the shortages, saying Kiev is siphoning off more than its share. Authorities in Ukraine have denied the accusations.

 

The mutual rebukes echoed the previous gas crises, when Gazprom supplies to Europe were cut over price arguments between Russia and Ukraine, the conduit for the biggest export pipeline for Russian gas to reach Europe.

The response chain has been activated => committees have been formed and what not.

The European Commission put its gas coordination committee on alert Friday, but insisted the situation had not yet reached an emergency level as nations have pledged to help each other if needed and storage facilities have been upgraded.

 

Putin on Saturday tried to use the situation to emphasize the need for alternative supply routes bypassing Ukraine, including the Nord Stream pipeline under the Baltic Sea, the first line of which was inaugurated in November.

Unfortunately for Europe, Russia's monopolistic control of its warmth will only increase with time.

Another Russian pipeline, the South Stream, is expected to go online in 2015 to transport Russian gas to Europe under the Black Sea.

 

Putin said the current high demand for Russian gas underscores the need for the new pipelines. Europe gets about 25 percent of its natural gas from Russia, which has the world's largest reserves.

 

"It's obvious today that there is a strong demand for these projects, which both we and our partners," Putin said.

 

He ordered Gazprom to try to meet an increased demand for the Russian gas in Europe, but added that the company's priority should be to satisfy the local demand.

But, but, can't Saudi Arabia supply the missing gas (obviously this is a joke). After all the Saudis are confident they can be the source of all crude supply even if all the members of OPEC and Russia go offline, or so the joke goes. Apparently, the answer is no:

Putin scoffed at the EU's hopes to fill a higher demand for gas

Oh, and before we forget, Russia is also the world's largest oil producer in the world having recently overtaken Saudi Arabia, and second (possibly the) largest exporter. Any questions now who has not only all the trump cards, but all the cards, period?

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sun, 02/05/2012 - 10:30 | 2128362 Fips_OnTheSpot
Fips_OnTheSpot's picture

Delivery is back to normal - the propaganda says so

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 11:43 | 2128483 trav7777
trav7777's picture

these charts must be false...PO deniers inc. Douchinger have told me that oil productionj will rise forever.  Other morons said if I disagree, then I WORSHIP BALE.

the idiocy of the Germans to think they can shut down nuke plants...LOL

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 11:59 | 2128515 FinHits
FinHits's picture

Cold war reaches the freezing point.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:21 | 2128706 12ToothAssassin
12ToothAssassin's picture

-40C or -40F ???

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:13 | 2128911 Christophe2
Christophe2's picture

uh, I guess you don't realize that -40 is basically the point where both those two scales intersect?  -40C ~= -40F

 

Aside: seems like temps in France are reaching near -40, but only if you take the windchill factor into effect.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:52 | 2128998 Michael
Michael's picture

Fuck the UN. The UN should be irrelevant to American values. I agree with China and Russia for their decision.

What we should be promoting is universal gun ownership and put an AR17 in the hands of every Syrian citizen.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 16:14 | 2129169 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture

 

 

other

WO9520816

 

- LEWAN MATS: 'Cold fusion may provide one megawatt in Athens' INTERNET CITATION, [Online] 02 February 2011, XP003027505 Retrieved from the Internet:

 

- See also references of WO 2009125444A1

 

https://register.epo.org/espacenet/application;jsessionid=C0EFC1CB4CE2FFB48F70B8E6F5F79D83.RegisterPlus_prod_1?number=EP08873805&tab=main

 

http://peswiki.com/index.php/News:Rossi_Cold_Fusion

 

Successful Test of 1 MegaWatt Cold Fusion E-CAT w Q&A by Sterling Allan - Oct 28 2011 - Part 3 of 5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1W3Vm1HUO8&feature=endscreen&NR=1

 

Mon, 02/06/2012 - 05:42 | 2130006 Ying-Yang
Ying-Yang's picture

Have you pre-ordered your own E-cat yet? Looks promising and I hope the company does not get nuked.

Mon, 02/06/2012 - 07:57 | 2130071 GetZeeGold
GetZeeGold's picture

 

 

Puty drives his E-cat with his shirt off........looks cooler that way.

 

 

 

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 23:34 | 2129786 mkhs
mkhs's picture

Thank god for global warming.  Imagine what it would be otherwise.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:34 | 2128767 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Looks more like Schroedinger's paradox to me. Feels more like a boiling point in freezing times.

The UN is a club Plain and simple. A Bully Club and now they have a Billy Club, blue helmeted and all. I think we can shortly expect UN troops becoming parts of "willing coalitions" as democracy is gifted to all parts of th eworld, willing or other-wise.

Be nice to see it crumble under the weight of it's own fakeness. Peace my ass. Peace-keepers my ass. Raping, human-trafficking, merciless-killing. That is peace-keeping operations for you. Gratuitous LIFE photography aside.

ori

/san-onofre-33rd-parallel-4th-7th-feb-

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:23 | 2128942 SAT 800
SAT 800's picture

Just imagine if France had colonized India instead of England, you wouldn't know how to speak English, and we wouldn't have to read this useless crap.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:52 | 2129001 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Très bon point, monsieur SadAssTroll.

ori

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 23:44 | 2129793 jeff montanye
jeff montanye's picture

nice.

Mon, 02/06/2012 - 01:53 | 2129916 BorisTheBlade
BorisTheBlade's picture

Touché

Mon, 02/06/2012 - 23:20 | 2132813 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

/hattip

Mon, 02/06/2012 - 23:03 | 2132774 ucsbcanuck
ucsbcanuck's picture

What happened SAT? Your job got outsourced? Oh, you poor thing.

Anyway, time to educate you - France did colonize India:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_India

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:53 | 2128829 CrashisOptimistic
CrashisOptimistic's picture

Note that the cut off of nat gas flow to Europe was done in accordance with agreements that exist with Europe for that flow -- namely that if there is a spike in Russian domestic demand, it gets supplied first and exports last.

Russia had the same extreme cold snap and so had to supply the rise in their domestic demand.

This is the reality facing the non oil producing world.  Oil producers have domestic demand and because they almost always subsidize domestic pricing, that domestic demand grows sharply.  A price of 25 cents a gallon of gasoline will generally always make it the selected solution to an energy problem (portable gasoline powered Honda generators rather than some more expensive power source).

This means that (for example in Saudi Arabia -- 7%/yr) domestic oil consumption rises and export of oil declines.  

At the present rate of export decline, Saudi Arabia will export ZERO oil by 2030.  THe world can't tolerate that, but of course neither can they from an export revenue perspective.  Bottom line: They can't grow production to fix this.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 23:45 | 2129797 jeff montanye
jeff montanye's picture

but europe has a backup plan:  they can put their committee on high alert.  haven't had to yet, so that's like an ace in the hole.

Mon, 02/06/2012 - 09:33 | 2130231 Marco
Marco's picture

Is it really a worse backup plan than "more wars in the middle east"?

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 12:03 | 2128524 tmosley
tmosley's picture

No, you worship Ba'al because you refuse to consider even the possibliity of technological advance, or the fact that some things in life are caused by government regulation and NIMBY rather than your god, Peak Oil.

But then, you have always used any and all logical fallacies to try to make your "point" that no one should do anything and jsut sit and wait for death.  Fuck logic, fuck history, fuck supply and fuck demand, right?  Oh yeah, and before you forget, be sure to accuse everyone ELSE of using the logical fallacies you yourself take so much advantage of so you can deflect all criticism of your use of such as "coming from the KING of $logicalfallacyname".

Set up a structure of excuses and externalize your inadequacies more, faggot.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 12:29 | 2128571 trav7777
trav7777's picture

ROTFL.

You are a moron who doesn't even know Jevon's Paradox.

Most of your post is a strawman.  Not my fault you really are the king of it.

BUT THEN I JUST WORSHIP BALE

Good fuckin god, you are stupid.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 12:54 | 2128632 kito
kito's picture

@trav-- the two of you are worse than the Israelis and Palestinians

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:16 | 2128691 CrazyCooter
CrazyCooter's picture

While both of them occasionally post excellent thoughts, I don't recall anything valuable being contributed during the pissing contests.

Regards,

Cooter

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:40 | 2128797 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

Those two need to get a room already.

-Chumblez.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:18 | 2128696 francis_sawyer
Sun, 02/05/2012 - 15:19 | 2129054 Hulk
Hulk's picture

I sure hope Trav doesn't get nucs first !

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:07 | 2128665 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

Tmosely,

Your posts don't make any sense.  First you lead with ad hom EVERYTIME, which destroys your arguement.  Next you tell me that technology will save us because it always has, another fallacy.  And on this subject, which technology?  The one that will extract oil from the ground?  Because if we stick a bigger straw in the sundae we will only drink faster.

And as far as "abiotic oil", there is no evidence of it.  None.  Find some and post it here if you have it, but since we have been having this roundabout discussion for years now, I don't believe you have it.

I understand that it is scary to think that we are on the verge of running out of our most accessable and cheapest energy source, but we don't live in Never-never Land.  The earth is a thing, things are finite.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:40 | 2128799 disabledvet
disabledvet's picture

perhaps if he opened with an Ad Hummin'en attack instead...like this!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SILLltMB048&feature=player_detailpage

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:44 | 2128810 oddjob
oddjob's picture

Travs posts dont make any sense as well. How can one be a proponent of diminishing energy supplies and take the attitude towards Silver that he does. If oil is abiotic, Silver for solar is overvalued, if oil is not abiotic , Silver is invaluable for future energy production.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:55 | 2128845 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

We all have our misconceptions.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:01 | 2128871 tmosley
tmosley's picture

I'm sure you meant to say "biases".

Or perhaps "religious zealotry", in which case I disagree with you.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:10 | 2128883 CrashisOptimistic
CrashisOptimistic's picture

The most important item in replying to your post is to try to make something clear that the MSM waves a hand at:

There Is No Energy Crisis.  There is an oil crisis.  They are not the same thing.

There is always a smooth preference to rephrase talk about oil and instead talk about energy.  This is wrong and crushingly wrong.

Oil has no replacement.  There is no substitute.  Electric cars cannot carry refrigerated meat from Omaha to NYC.  Only diesel powered trucks do that.  It takes 740 watts to make just 1 horsepower.  A 400 horsepower engine in an 18 wheeler is 300,000 watts.  The batteries for that kind of power for a few hundred miles could not be portable.

When the talk is about oil, talk only about oil.  When it's about energy . . . it's largely a waste of time.  Energy doesn't bring food to grocery store shelves.  Oil does.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:58 | 2128926 oddjob
oddjob's picture

In no way am I suggesting that electric can entirely replace carbon fuels. It can help conserve. Per acre greenhouses can outproduce farmland by a longshot. When I see ski lifts shutting down their diesel electric powerplants, then I will know there is an acute shortage.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 15:57 | 2129135 granolageek
granolageek's picture

Electric trains however  can bring refrigerated meat from Omaha to NYC, and electric trucks can deliver it within the city limits.

 

Your point works much better in rural areas. From city to city, and within cities, electric transport is quite feasible. It would be painfully more expensive, say like $6.00 gasoline, but not catastrophic.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 16:11 | 2129148 CrashisOptimistic
CrashisOptimistic's picture

No they can't.  You see any railways from Omaha to NYC with electric wires over them?  

Trains run on diesel.  Not batteries.  The purely electric trains (light rail) you see around are purely local and carry 2 or 3 passenger units.

It's a physics problem.  Not an engineering problem.  745 watts per horsepower.  You just can't build electrics that can do thousands of horsepower from batteries.

Want another crusher?  A team of oxen can plow 1 acre of land in 8 hours.  A John Deere 400 HP+ tractor can do it in 2.3 minutes.  And it can do that as part of hundreds of acres it must do that day to feed 7 billion people.  You can NEVER do that with batteries.  They will drain in 10 minutes, and sink the tires into mud before that because of their weight.

This is not the sort of problem that can be solved with engineering advances.  This is 80 million years of energy concentration in 42 gallons of volume.  You can't fix that in less than 80 million years.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 18:22 | 2129402 trav7777
trav7777's picture

it is possible to do electric freight trains.  Gonna require a ton of juice and a lotta wires.  No way with batteries.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 23:44 | 2129794 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

Where has it been done?

Mon, 02/06/2012 - 02:35 | 2129928 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Are you guys serious?

 

All over the world. Electric Trains with hundreds of thousands of miles of overhead electricity. Just google it.

ori

Mon, 02/06/2012 - 16:13 | 2131606 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

true ORI. The real idiocy of course has been blowing the back end of oil supply on wars and hummers instead of building the new systems. Every year that goes by lying and hiding and wasting only makes the transition more tragic. The new systems will have to be electric in the long run. Even nuclear takes a hell of a lot of resource and energy to build and its resource will not last that long. Much of the solution is localization - in food production, in energy ( to save transportation loss) in manufacturing, and in everything else. This is how the pre-oil world generally ran, this is how the post world will as well.  

Thu, 02/09/2012 - 17:37 | 2143619 Axenolith
Axenolith's picture

Everywhere.  Technically, all trains are electric ('Cept maybe Zimbabwe and a few others, In Zim, heard they'd taken the steam loco's out of mothballs because they couldn't pay to service the diesels a while back).  They have a big diesel engine in them that generates power to run their traction motors.  The big fans on the tops of the locomotives are for shedding the heat when they brake by dumping motion generated power into large resistors.

The distances in the US are probably to far to do it without losing an uneconomical amount of power to transmission line losses.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 18:16 | 2129387 trav7777
trav7777's picture

HUH?

The SOURCE of oil is utterly irrelevant.

Buying silver into a price bubble is dumb.

You are guilty of petitio principii.

I shit on silverbugz and the absurd crap they say

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 20:10 | 2129548 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

Price bubble?  Not in real terms.  The high was $50 decades ago.  The dollar has inflated drastically.  Silver will be at its peak price point at $150, and that is when the lemming investors will start buying.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 19:36 | 2129511 The4thStooge
The4thStooge's picture

Tesla was working on free energy (as in unlimited, with 0 imput costs) over a hundred years ago. He was shut down by who? John P. Morgan!

Mon, 02/06/2012 - 03:08 | 2129954 matrix2012
matrix2012's picture

oddjob, may you pls explain further yr below lines:

"If oil is abiotic, Silver for solar is overvalued, if oil is NOT abiotic , Silver is INVALUABLE for future energy production."

Mon, 02/06/2012 - 10:23 | 2130343 oddjob
oddjob's picture

invaluable=valuable beyond estimation

If oil is valued for energy within, a substance that can produce near endless electricity thru sunlight has to be equally or more valuable. In 200 years there will be solar panels, but Kenworths will be few and far between.

Tue, 02/07/2012 - 13:30 | 2134323 matrix2012
matrix2012's picture

oddjob, thx for explaining

just don't think humanity can wait another 2 centuries for a very effective/cheap solar panels... 20 years may sound more acceptable :)

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:00 | 2128867 tmosley
tmosley's picture

There are numerous technologies out there.  The only question is "how expensive does energy or fuel (these are seperate issues, and are not to be conflated) have to become before they become economical?

The answer is "not much".  Energy dense fuel can be made from algae, or produced from natgas if you like.  Energy can currently be produced to power this process from nuclear (NIMBY!=peak anything) or wind (which has a positive EROEI, but not nearly as great as nuclear).

Peak theorists love to bring up the abiotic oil strawman, despite the fact that it has been PROVEN to exist (though the rate of replacement is very much in doubt), but that isn't the point, any more than the rise or fall of whale oil production was the point.  The real point is that oil is not the end all be all of human existance.  There are plenty of other ways.  Peak oilers don't care to change.  THey'd rather die, and they would rather not hear about anyone thinking that there is a bright future beyond the dark age of government intervention.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:15 | 2128917 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

You really should try to get a gig on a Fox News science and technology show...

I think you would fit right in....

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:33 | 2128961 oddjob
oddjob's picture

You watching Fox news is just as contemptable, for shame.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 15:50 | 2129118 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Naw... Jon Stewart provides me with enough clips of Fox to allow me to arrive at the conclusion I reached...

 

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 18:23 | 2129404 oddjob
oddjob's picture

You watching Jon Stewart is just as contemptable, for shame.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 18:29 | 2129417 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

In all fairness, it probably is the only show I watch with regularity with the exception of NOVA....

At least with JS I don't feel like my intelligence is being insulted, at least most of the time....

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 23:46 | 2129799 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

Jon Stewart thinks you're a dumbass

Mon, 02/06/2012 - 16:15 | 2131612 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

how's that seat on the writing team going?

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:45 | 2128983 tmosley
tmosley's picture

Ad hominem.  You can do better.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:49 | 2128991 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

You lead with Ad Hom everytime!

lol

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:36 | 2128966 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

Peak theorists love to bring up the abiotic oil strawman, despite the fact that it has been PROVEN to exist

Link please.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 15:02 | 2129017 tmosley
tmosley's picture

http://microbewiki.kenyon.edu/index.php/Deep_subsurface_microbes

Microbes exist far from surface inputs. As the mirobes produce lipids, this means oil is produced without surface input.  This does NOT mean that all or even any of the oil we have pulled from the ground was produced this way.  What it DOES mean is that there are more sources of energy deep within the earth.  Whether we can get to them economically or not is another question.

Lets not turn this into a bitch-fest over abiotic oil.  Just stop trying to label people because of their "stupid" theories, especially when there is a chance that those "stupid" theories might be right, or might lead to something that is right.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 15:06 | 2129026 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

Well I'll have to weigh the deep microbe theory.  It would seem plausible, since they would decay, like plant matter does, to form oil.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 15:43 | 2129101 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Deep microbes are by definition not "abiotic"....

 

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 20:11 | 2129550 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

Wasn't that my point?

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 15:44 | 2129102 tmosley
tmosley's picture

Exactly.

The original source for the energy they live on appears to be nuclear reactions cracking water into oxygen and hydrogen.

Even if these bugs are not producing usable or retrievable oil, they can teach us lessons on how to produce the fuel.

Another interesting article I found while looking for the original article I posted a year and a half ago is here: http://news.discovery.com/earth/bacteria-turn-coal-and-oil-into-renewabl...

Apparently, there are bacteria that can turn uneconomical coal seams into methane in the presence of CO2.

And these are just a couple of possibilities.  There are dozens if not hundreds of technologies that can be used to produce fuel and even energy for us.  All it takes is the motivation to develop them.  The main barrier is governemnt intervention in the markets via taxation, subsidy, and regulation.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 15:54 | 2129127 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

It's good to have dreams....

I suggest you check out the following if you are serious:

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/8851

Pay attention to the comments by Carnot.... he is actually in the energy business, I tend to get insight from people like him as opposed to cornucopian crack pots...

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 23:49 | 2129803 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

Maybe Carnot has ulterior motives, much like Pickens, who is also in the energy business. Do you really think these billionaires give a shit about you?

Mon, 02/06/2012 - 09:11 | 2130190 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Agreed, I don't think they give a shit.... conversely, I don't get all wrapped up in warm fuzzy dreams about the future...

Everybody has alterior motives, some less benign than others, but some are actually talking sense while others are full of shit..

What have you added of substance to any discussion here?

  

Mon, 02/06/2012 - 16:18 | 2131626 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

well said. Everyone has their motives, but this subject is too important not to do our homework and figure out who is full of shit and who isn't it.  This is literally our survival

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 18:27 | 2129412 trav7777
trav7777's picture

nuclear reactions cracking water into H2 and O2?

LOL...ok cliff.

How can bacteria and coal be turned into "renewable" energy?  LOL. 

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 18:57 | 2129453 tmosley
tmosley's picture

If you have a problem, feel free to email the author.  I'm sure he'll take your horseshit seriously and won't laugh in your face.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 23:47 | 2129801 trav7777
trav7777's picture

ROTFL..."nuclear" reactions cracking water to H2 and O2, huh? 

There isn't a scientifically literate person on here that doesn't see right through your bullshit, cliff.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:40 | 2128975 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

Yeah, I'd rather die.  That is why I came up with Crash JPM, Buy Silver, because I sit on my thumbs all day hoping to get eaten by rabid racoons.

Nuclear could have helped mitigate peak oil but we use it complacently.  Solar could help, but we have not developed it fast enough.  As far as abiotic, just give me some links to read.  Give me a book.  Give me anything.  I ask because I have been looking for this Grail, and have not found it. 

I do hope we can solve our problems, and don't tell me otherwise.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 18:28 | 2129413 trav7777
trav7777's picture

YOU JUST WORSHIP BALE

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 20:13 | 2129553 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

It's funny, when you write it like that I think of what's her tits from Modern Family pronouncing the city "Vale" with her accent.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:13 | 2128681 CrashisOptimistic
CrashisOptimistic's picture

I should like to point out the power of technological advance in oil production on the state of Oklahoma.

Oklahoma pumped about 700,000 barrels of oil per day in 1927.  They pump about 170,000 barrels of oil per day now, down 75% from that 1927 peak.

A full 85 years of technology advance (and abiotic refilling of those reservoirs) is in play there -- for a 75% decline.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:15 | 2128690 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

abiotic refilling

I couldn't even dream that shit up.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:32 | 2128723 CrashisOptimistic
CrashisOptimistic's picture

While I'm here, a word or two about Russia and its oil fields.

They are more or less Siberian.  Eastern Siberia and Western Siberia.  The Western Siberian oil fields are old and they are the bulk of production.  Eastern Siberia, all the way to the Pacific, are the prospective new fields that will come on line in a few years.

Russian oil production is somewhere just over 10 million bpd.  The measuring agencies have started the recently popular lumping in of NGLs to increase the number quote.  Reminding ZHers, NGLs are natural gas liquids like propane, ethane and butane and these contain about 55% on overal weighted average of the BTUs of a barrel of crude oil.  Meaning, they don't refine barrel per barrel into the same amount of gasoline that brings food to grocery store shelves, but they are lumped in to make "oil production" look better.

One other item in the Russian quote.  Their oil companies (Rosneft and Lukoil) are moving international.  Lukoil has big holdings in Africa now.  There are some whispered indications that Russian production quotes are summing the production of their oil companies, and some of that is not from Russia.  It has been suggested that Lukoil's African output is getting added in to polish the number.

The overall issue is this: The bulk of Russian production is from very old fields.  When you have old fields, you have to drill more holes to get the same level of flow rate (production) out, so you will see quotes like "We must have $25 billion of investment to maintain output".  Each hole drilled gets less oil, so you have to drill more of them to maintain the same rate of extraction.

They don't have much more time.  The sinking of the offshore rig off Sakhalin a few months ago has had a devastating effect on future projections, but this is not getting much attention.  All sorts of new procedures have to be followed, and these will apply to the drilling in the arctic, not just off Sakhalin.  Understand here that they KNOW the western Siberian fields will fail.  They are smart people.  They know they have to have new sources.

 

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 18:31 | 2129421 trav7777
trav7777's picture

YOU JUST WORSHIP BALE

Technology is great...it allowed us to suck the oil out faster and maintain the rate of growth in production!  Without technology allowing us to suck fields dry faster, we'd never have been able to support the grow-or-die system.  It would have inflected long ago.

Technology never prolonged a field; it was always used to raise rate of production.  It SHORTENED field lifespan.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:52 | 2128832 tmosley
tmosley's picture

So there is no other way to produce energy than to pump it out of the ground?

You are begging the question here.  More advanced technology could no doubt produce a better buggy whip, or increase the production of whale oil, but those techs are obsolete.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:56 | 2128851 CrashisOptimistic
CrashisOptimistic's picture

Well, now you're talking about a new physics.  Not new engineering.

That's miracle territory.  Nice to think about, but not the way to win when you're betting.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:03 | 2128879 tmosley
tmosley's picture

I see, so this newfangled nukular teknolergy is "new" physics?

Then I guess I beleive in "miracles", especially since they have already happened.

Mon, 02/06/2012 - 09:14 | 2130200 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Last time I checked, the worlds transportation infrastructure wasn't electrified...

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 15:34 | 2129084 imapopulistnow
imapopulistnow's picture

Or you could point out that Oklahoma's production has increased by 30,000 bpd since 2007 and will increase further because of recent advances in fracking and horizontal drilling. 

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 19:33 | 2129506 CrashisOptimistic
CrashisOptimistic's picture

Horizontals and fracking have no application in the type of rock under Oklahoma.  Those techniques are for shale layers that have essentially zero permeability and are surrounding oil pores.  If you didn't fracture the rock between the pores, which are laid out in horizontal layers, the oil could not flow pore to pore and then up the wellbore.

But that's not what's in Oklahoma.  They have normal rock with pores far separated from each other.  If you want each pore, you have to drill another hole.  There may be 1 barrel in each pore.  You have to spend $2 million to drill a bore to it.  

That will work at $2 million/barrel, but not until.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 23:51 | 2129805 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

How much oil does Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and Canada produce now compared to 1927? Is it enough to make up for the deficit from Oklahoma?

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:19 | 2128697 Eally Ucked
Eally Ucked's picture

Why are you so billigerent, I uderstand your points but on other side you have to understand history where any technological developments take long time not comparable with our life span. Forget about pick oil and just think clearly for the moment. Nobody sits and wait for death but we have to consider possibility that at some point we will run out of cheap energy, don't you think? Still you and I understand that all that wind and solar energy is so expensive that we won't be able to use it as it is for now. Give me a break with beautiful, sounding good propaganda language like " Set up a structure of excuses and externalize your inadequacies more" what the fuck it means?

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:11 | 2128906 tmosley
tmosley's picture

I am only beligerent against those that spread lies and discourage positive action.  Trav is the high priest of that particular cult.  He has, in fact, externalized all of the negative characteristcs he embodies onto me and onto nayone else who disagrees with him.  I can have a civil disagreement with a civil person who is willing to argue.  He, however, does nothing but lie and insult, and not just me, but anyone who disagrees.  

And no, new technology does NOT take lifetimes to come about  Take a look at the speed with which we moved from horses as beasts of burden to mechanical devices.  We already have methods online for replacement of fuel sources, we only need a period of higher prices so they can scale up production, which leads to an economy of scale, placing a firm cap on fuel prices.  At scale, some of these methods may even provide fuel for less than we pay now.

For energy, we need the government to GTFO and allow the market to work.  Get rid of these byzantine taxes and subsidies and let each tech stand on its own.  Nuclear will likely win out, but that is my opinion.  I am not the market, and unlike many of the doomers here, I'm not going to pretend that I know what will and won't work.  But as a student of ECONOMICS, I can say that there is a firm upper bound REAL price for energy.  

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:51 | 2128996 Eally Ucked
Eally Ucked's picture

I would not say that he spreds lies at all, I think he's reallistic but I agree that the form he presents his ideas are out of bounds, personally I got few "idiots" from him too, I got used to it. Probably he is an old person with strong convictions and antagonizing character, he gets pleasure from it. So what?

You have enough weight in this forum so you should ignore few personal attacks and go on.

If we talk about technology I won't agree, it took few hundred years to really start to use electricity or oil to power our "mechanical devices", they're much advanced now than 50 or 70 yrs ago but still they're the same thing. Just look at your mail and certainly you still use it as probably other 50% of population despite the advances of computer technology. The first programmable computer was build in what 1936, 72 years ago, about 3.5 generations ago and you want sudden jump to some new technology in next few years?

As economist (you don't have to be economist to predict it) you expect a firm upper bound price for energy, of course the same about silver and whatever but where is it?    

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 15:32 | 2129077 tmosley
tmosley's picture

Yes, Trav does lie.  A lot.  I can't let lies slide, no matter who they come from, and whether or not they are on my "side".

Silver does not currently have more expensive replacements in most applications.  I can say for certain that it will be superceded in the realm of antimicrobials, as my own company has a technology that beats the stuffing out of it for between 1/10th and 1/100th the price.

In electronics, graphene and other advanced forms of carbon will replace it eventually, but this takes time.

In reflectivity, there is currently nothing on the horizon so far as I can see.

But those are years out.  The industrial panic will happen well before then.  Hell, even if industrial demand dropped to ZERO, it would be a decade before stockpiles of silver would EQUAL those of gold.  Considering that currently only 7 times the amount of silver is produced as gold, it would be quite logical for silver to hit that level as a long-term stable price.  That is with ZERO industrial demand, remember.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 23:46 | 2129798 trav7777
trav7777's picture

you are so fucking myopic and stupid.

There is an upper bound on energy but NONE on silver...right.  You goddamned ridiculous idiot.

Keep your mendacious magical thinking bulllshit to yourself.   And keep making idiotic predictions that take all of a day to blow up in your face.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 23:51 | 2129806 trav7777
trav7777's picture

you fucking liar, you are BELLIGERENT against anyone who doesn't go right along with your shameless pumping of silver and who calls you out for the fool that you are whenever you say stupid shit about oil, economics, energy, physics...ok, it's a long list.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 16:32 | 2129199 smb12321
smb12321's picture

That type NEVER sees anything beyond the present  If somone has said 10 yrs ago that a light bulb would last for 15,000 hrs and use 1/3 the energy who would have believed them?  But it's not that they're simply waiting around for death; they seem to actually welcome  the destruction and violence of a societal collapse.  But if we're all doomed, then why bother about the future or care about the debt?  LOL  Energy technology is racing at an ever-increasing accelerated pace.  Good for optmists - bad for the whiners.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 19:29 | 2129375 CrashisOptimistic
CrashisOptimistic's picture

Light bulbs don't stock grocery store shelves.

But you're right that optimists are more pleasant people to be around than pessimists, or even realists.

They're also much, much, much more dangerous when it comes to risk evaluation.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 23:52 | 2129810 trav7777
trav7777's picture

YES!!!!!!11

Growth will continue forever!

And if you disagree, then YOU JUST WORSHIP BALE

Mon, 02/06/2012 - 00:31 | 2129854 steve from virginia
steve from virginia's picture

Supply and demand don't work when supply diminishes, that is it doesn't work the way folks want it to.

Limits, they must be lived within. Europe is going to have to learn how to cope with less availability, like adults do.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 12:55 | 2128634 Acet
Acet's picture

Why choose the lesser evil?

Vote Baal!

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 10:30 | 2128363 Gully Foyle
Gully Foyle's picture

Good old Vlad, rocking the Pimp Hand.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 11:36 | 2128457 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

OT here, because some may understand how I am like a pit bull on matters I believe are propaganda, and it's either an asset of my personality or its bane, but here's a late discovery I found regarding the BLS U3 NFP Report on Friday (prepare yourselves accordingly - we're dealing with a BLS economist in the following):

 

"There was not a big increase in discouraged workers," economist Betsey Stevenson (Betsey Stevenson, the chief economist at the Department of Labor, who works directly under the Secretary of Labor*) commented on Twitter. "What happened was Census found a bunch of old people we had assumed died." [The Wall Street Journal, 2/3/12]

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012/02/03/whats-behind-the-unemployment-...

Okay, so Betsey Stevenson (Betsey Stevenson, the chief economist at the Department of Labor, who works directly under the Secretary of Labor*), is essentially saying a predominant majority of the people the 2010 Census 'discovered' were "old people [they] had [previously] assumed died."

It's HILARIOUS in a sad way. And it's convenient, too, if their goal were to use statistics to minimize the reported rate of U3 ("Nawww, never, Ritholtz would doubt claim...never, ever...").

You see, it's a "bunch of old people" that they discovered, who are presumably too old to be counted for purposes of measuring the unemployment rate anyways.

That group of 'newly discovered people' did not include many "working aged, but unemployed people." No. /sarc

So it's all good.

LULZ.

 

*U.S. Department of Labor: Biography of Chief Economist Betsey Stevenson

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 12:10 | 2128537 americanspirit
americanspirit's picture

Sounds like Leona Helmsley has been reincarnated and found employment as an economist at BLS.

Great work TIS!

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 10:31 | 2128365 falak pema
falak pema's picture

Don't mix your metaphors, Putin is not Dr Freeze, he is just MR SQUEEZE!

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 10:31 | 2128366 bank guy in Brussels
bank guy in Brussels's picture

Hilarious video from Russian television, with English translation ...

Russians singing and laughing about the dependence on Russian gas:

 

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 10:35 | 2128374 Tyler Durden
Tyler Durden's picture

Here you go:

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 10:42 | 2128389 GeneMarchbanks
GeneMarchbanks's picture

We [Germany] require an unconditional union with Russia, together with a mutual plan of action which shall not permit any English schemes to obtain mastery in Russia. No American future!
On the Genealogy of Morals, Page 187 -- Nietzsche

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 11:05 | 2128408 citrine
citrine's picture

Thanks: this is hilarious. Love your tweets, by the way.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 11:14 | 2128438 Red Herring
Red Herring's picture

The video is from 2008 (see the sign in the background), and this is a parody on old soviet time songs, not necessarily gloating about the Russian hegemony in the field of natural gas.  Misleading...

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 12:50 | 2128619 Bananamerican
Bananamerican's picture

...and yet, completely in the national character..."uhh, mebbe sumting happenink to gas walve"

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:17 | 2128693 gdogus erectus
gdogus erectus's picture

Misleading?  Knowing it's from 2008 gives you even more insight into their tactics, not less.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 11:27 | 2128460 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

Gazprom Gustoso.  

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 11:28 | 2128464 trilliontroll
trilliontroll's picture

Is n't the price of natural gas in the us at a long time low ?

What about another BIG government project : transatlantic tunnel along with a

gas pipeline , would stimulate economy , cost about from $ 175 billion  to $12 trillion ONLY.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatlantic_tunnel

 

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:28 | 2128733 CrazyCooter
CrazyCooter's picture

If NatGas can't be piped, it has to be compressed to insane pressures and transported. The risk of a "ship" of compressed NatGas exploding is why you don't see a lot of NatGas facilities of this nature.

See BLEVE videos for fun footage.

This is why most gas is flared off at production sites. See various articles at TheOilDrum for more info.

Regards,

Cooter

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:29 | 2128950 SAT 800
SAT 800's picture

"If NatGas can't be piped, it has to be compressed to insane pressures and transported." This is not a sentence that has any reference to reality. Natural gas has been transported inter-state in pipelines for over a hundred years; it's an extremely well understood engineering technology. Also, it is not transported under pressure in the "ship"; it is transported at atmospheric pressure and a very cold temperature; The big round ball thingys you see in the pictures of the ships are insulated containers. Aside from that, you're doing pretty well for someone "educated" in North America.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 15:19 | 2129052 imapopulistnow
imapopulistnow's picture

No seriously, it is sooooo dangerous.  That why there's only gunna be 250 LNG ships on the high seas on any given day.

http://shipbuildinghistory.com/today/highvalueships/lngactivefleet.htm

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 11:45 | 2128490 DavidC
DavidC's picture

I prefer the satire of The Day Today or The Onion...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9_fBDDTIuI

DavidC

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 12:08 | 2128532 Xibalba
Xibalba's picture

Is that presenter wearing a jumpsuit?   wow. 

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 10:33 | 2128368 lindaamick
lindaamick's picture

Go to AsiaTimes and read the Roving Eye by Pepe Escobar.  The "civilian killings" may not be by the Assad government. 

The road to war with Iran may go through Damascus.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 10:50 | 2128400 meizu
meizu's picture

Make no mistake, a lot of civilian deaths are muslim brotherhood members killing and beaheading Alawites and Christians.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 11:11 | 2128431 john39
john39's picture

The killing is carried out by outside forces which have infiltrated. Libya 2.0 regime change BS. This is not a Muslim vs Christian situation.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 11:45 | 2128492 trav7777
trav7777's picture

yeah, the forcible depopulation of Christians is a mirage and there is always someone handy to make apologias for muslims.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 12:00 | 2128516 john39
john39's picture

no, but killing christians is the perfect way to get the idiot sheeple in the US to back an intervention.   save the poor christians from the evil muslims.  does that meme ever fail?

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 12:11 | 2128540 greyghost
greyghost's picture

CALLING SMB12321.....CALLING SMB.....you have an article to read in the asia times.....calling smb12321.....and no, i am sorry it has nothing to do with thomas paine or geo. washington but it does pertain to syria! calling smb12321...smb12321 are you there?

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:09 | 2128677 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

A lot of the genocide is racialy motavated, but what's new?

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:23 | 2128714 francis_sawyer
Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:32 | 2128959 SAT 800
SAT 800's picture

ans; "racialy motavated"---the spelling is new; in fact it is unique. try spell check. your computer is smarter than you.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:48 | 2128990 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

I am a bad speller.  Ask me if  give a fuck.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 12:11 | 2128541 meizu
meizu's picture

You are dumb, since when has US invaded a country under the pretext of defending christians?  It's always defending poor muslims: from defending bosnian muslims from evil serbian christians, to defending poor afghnan muslims from evil communists.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 12:24 | 2128552 john39
john39's picture

works for east coast and west liberals, but not southern and western evangelicals.  each segment gets its own mind control propaganda.

here is a perfect example, straight from the source:

http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=254721

 

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 12:30 | 2128573 john39
john39's picture

and to be more accurate, I do concede...  the propaganda is usually that we must kill all muslims to save poor little isreal, the only democracy in the ME, totally surrounded by crazed religious lunatics....  /s.   oh the irony.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 12:33 | 2128585 trav7777
trav7777's picture

what a total strawman.

The difference is that muslims in the ME really ARE waging wars of depopulation and extermination against christian minorities.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 12:46 | 2128612 john39
john39's picture

i wonder who profits from fighting between christians and muslims?  btw, not all Muslims take the bait...  true muslims have a deep respect for Christ as one of God's greatest prophets.   see this from Achmadinajad a few years ago.  you won't see this on CNN:

http://youtu.be/YoLpweto4sY

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 12:50 | 2128622 Randall Cabot
Randall Cabot's picture

Anybody ever hear of Albert Pike? There's a statue of him in Washington DC. He was a Confederate General. He said the Illuminati's plan is to eventually pit Christian against Muslim in a final war that leads to the One World Government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Pike

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 17:06 | 2129272 smiler03
smiler03's picture

Trav, I think you'll find this is true too..

"The difference is that Christians in NA really ARE waging wars of depopulation and extermination against Islamic majorities".

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 23:55 | 2129814 trav7777
trav7777's picture

that's complete and utter horseshit.

We haven't exterminated anyone. 

When you say stupid shit like you just did, it's hard to be taken seriously.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 12:32 | 2128581 trav7777
trav7777's picture

huh?  When has that meme ever been used?

Iraq's muslim majority has waged a successful war of depopulation against Christians and nobody in the western media said shit.  They don't particularly care about christians as this isn't the media's religion.

There will always be a bellycrawling western retard like you to make apologias for brown people.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 12:52 | 2128626 JOYFUL
JOYFUL's picture

Thanks for dropping by. I was looking forward to the day when you would totally lose credibility here.  We got a winner!

Listen fuckedup little man...Iraqi Muslims n Christians got along jus fine for several dozens of centuries, till about the time when shit bag white boys like yur cuzin Donald n brother Dick got together with unca tom Colin to invent a weapon of mass destruction that their sionist masters in israhell could use as a pretext to have the next stage of their massacre of all eastern Christendom accomplished...Armenia, Ukrania, Russia, Slavia, Syria....and most pertinently ASS WHOLE BOY TRAV....Palestine, where a large percentage of the so called ARAB population was Christian: till the genocidal maniacs who actually write yur pathetic scribblings here decided that their Christian sionist dupes were in control enough to make killing Christian Arabs for Christ COOL - ....that's the story of Iraq, and this is the story of your final exposure as A PATHETIC TOOL OF the OLIGARCHIC ELITE what hates this site and all it stands for....

Now, please... for the love of God....travesty 777

FUCK OFF & DIE.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:36 | 2128967 SAT 800
SAT 800's picture

Severe, crippling, illiteracy; ignorance. It must be hard to be stupid.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:47 | 2128989 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

Hey, you again.  You said you would write down my guess for stocks, I said the Dow would be down 122 points the next day, and from top to bottom that was the spread.  Do I get a prize?  A cookie?  Anything?

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 23:58 | 2129820 trav7777
trav7777's picture

Iraqi christians were fine until nobody was there to put the boot on the necks of muslims to prevent them from ethnic and sectarian cleansing.  No sooner was Saddam gone than each sect and ethnicity forcibly cleansed their areas of all outsiders.

I have no idea how you came to be as stupid as you are, but it's not my problem.  take some medication or something

Mon, 02/06/2012 - 16:31 | 2131661 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

of course, you see the hypocrisy of your historical argument? Trav I don't understand how a man who understands the ultimate value of oil can not understand how any man of any color and any religion would do anything to any man and any religion to control it.  Unfortunately, the white christian wins that ugly contest...and no, this doesn't prove he's superior to anybody else

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 14:46 | 2128985 Calmyourself
Calmyourself's picture

It has not failed in Nigeria so far but give it time they will run out of christians..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-16442960

One oj hubdreds of stories, when do we target mosques oh thats right never, tool...

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 11:44 | 2128487 mendolover
mendolover's picture

Posts like this one are the reason I LOVE this place!  Thanks a million lindaamick!

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 10:43 | 2128371 GeneMarchbanks
GeneMarchbanks's picture

World turning into a chessboard in real-time. What an absolute joke this whole 'democracy' thing has become...

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 12:49 | 2128621 greyghost
greyghost's picture

so very true genemarchbanks. however it appears our masters in washington don't know how to play chess very well. russia, china and india don't make very many moves, however their moves speak volumes. it appears that the clowns in washington are fixated on regime change and revolution while our opponents run around the world buying up anything of value with the worlds global currency. this will not end well for the u.s.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:12 | 2128685 DeadFred
DeadFred's picture

Obama is running the show. It's not designed to end well for the US.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:54 | 2128844 disabledvet
disabledvet's picture

i'm strapped in an watching the movie "War Games" as we speak. BRING IT!

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 13:43 | 2128806 johny2
johny2's picture

this democracy = same thing as a reality show called Big Brother. A same group of people with interest to make profit put some selected clowns in the positions as leaders of the nations, and people vote every 4 years. 

Mon, 02/06/2012 - 04:52 | 2129987 matrix2012
matrix2012's picture

Talking about CHESSBOARD, it reminds me of The Grand Chessboard - American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives (1997) - Zbigniew Brzezinski

one of the famous major lieutenant of the Oligarchs

pdf, 2,881,499 bytes with md5 hash: 3c19660f88b4dca51c4bd4fef8b11276

just torrent it

Mon, 02/06/2012 - 06:41 | 2130027 BorisTheBlade
BorisTheBlade's picture

Speaking of which, world and particularly Eurasia never ceased to be a grand chessboard. Russia briefly fell out of the game post-Soviet collapse, but now back on stage. In the meantime, any meaningful conflict for the past 20 years was about redrawing the map of Eurasia and securing energy flows, while attempting to prevent any competition to US that by definition can only be born on the Great Landmass. No wonder Rwanda (real) genocide was largely overlooked, while 'oppressive' regimes and 'terrorists' close to the Great Landmass bifurcation points were the ones getting under the limelights.

"... But in the meantime, it is imperative that no Eurasian challenger emerges, capable of dominating Eurasia and thus of also challenging America. The formulation of a comprehensive and integrated Eurasian geostrategy is therefore the purpose of this book."

Color revolutions, military interventions, sanctions and an angle of political bickering in the West mostly fall under this grand purpose - prevent anybody from dominating the Great Landmass. This is a core of US, and wider, Western strategy in Eurasia. Just like British Empire, American one is playing a Great Game with probably similar outcome in the end, given it is very hard to sustain a sea-based empire while taking on the continent with majority of population and resources indefinitely. Plus, competitors don't sleep and devise their own strategy, which is far more pragmatic and less dependent on raw military power that US seems to favor so much. US in Eurasia is playing 'divide and conquer', Russia and China - 'unite and counter' strategies respectively. Both sides understand the outcome defines contender for potential global domination, no more no less, kind of 'winner takes all' game.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 10:35 | 2128373 Gully Foyle
Gully Foyle's picture

There was an episode of Spooks that suggested certain US policies were actually designed to drive the UK into the Russian energy embrace.

I had a link to an article describing the Russian outmanuevering of the US with their pipeline strategy. Failry indepth article discussing the various Russian pipelines and how they managed to come online with more capacity then the US backed ones.

Sun, 02/05/2012 - 11:39 | 2128479 ucsbcanuck
ucsbcanuck's picture

Is this the article you were looking for?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16932

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!