Hacker News Reader

Comment by lizardactivist | Hacker News Reader

Without a doubt US American sabotage.

During the days and weeks leading up to Russia's move into Ukraine, the US rhetorized over and over again about Nord Stream. All the time the main issue was that the EU must not buy LNG from Russia, it must agree to USAs "energy dominance" politics and buy LNG from them and only them.

This is a way to make sure that when winter comes, the EU has nowhere to go for LNG but to the US.

It's getting more and more clear that the one major obstacle to true US hegemony is not Russia or China, it's the EU with its strict principles, laws and regulations, and that the US is working hard to wear down this resistance and force the EU into dependence and coerciveness.

View on HN

"Without a doubt"

That phrase doesn't mean what you think it means.

I wouldn't say that this is a operation for global hegemony or energy dominance. It's simply about preserving political influence in Europe. Unfortunately, I must say, Europe/the EU is not capable of a proper geopolitical strategy. Europe would easily be annihilated by Russian psyops, so in all that misery this brings to the alliance, it's still net positive.

From an EU perspective why would peace and trade with Russia be so bad?

Clearly US psyops are stronger than anything Russia puts out because EU governments have been persuaded to participate in a crusade in Ukraine against their own economic self interests.

Making the EU kowtow to America may be in American interests but it certainly is not in EU interests.

I am not sure when this myth of Russia psyop dominance came from. Only seemed to become a thing after Hillary lost the election and Brexit. More likely source of blame for that falls on endogenous populism in reaction to economic and social changes in the last decade or two. Russia was not responsible for bailing out western banks while real wages stagnated and also was not responsible for widespread immigration and others consequences of globalisation and conflict in the middle east and Africa.

Reality does not correspond to the social media mythology that Russia has some how infiltrated western politics at a significant scale.

> From an EU perspective why would peace and trade with Russia be so bad?

Because Russia every once in a while invades a part of Europe to carve off territory for itself, then holds the rest of the continent hostage by withholding gas during the freezing winter.

Why would you want peace with a country that is just biding its time before it starts it's next war?

Every once and while?

When was the last time Russia invaded the EU?

I didn't say the EU, which has a collective defense treaty similar to that of NATO. I said Europe. And to answer that question:

2014, Ukraine

2008, Georgia

1992, Moldova and Romania

And of course the Soviet Union invading, occupying and brutally oppressing half of Europe after WW2 (including several countries now in the EU and NATO). Or have you forgotten? They haven't.

Well for starters Georgia is not in Europe. It is in asia.

I am not sure what you mean about 1992. If Moldova can be independent why not Transinistra?

Ukraine was subject to a coup and civil war. Right or wrong reacting to a coup is not the same as an unprovoked invasion.

> Ukraine was subject to a coup and civil war.

Until this line it wasn’t clear whether you were deluded or actively pushing propaganda. Thanks for clearing that up.

You always give someone a chance. Once they give the game away, it's no longer worth your time to engage.

Why would doing business with dangerous psychopath be so bad?

After all, we’d just continuously give him money and depend on his services for our wellbeing, choosing to ignore that he kills „some less important people way east”. Nothing to see here.

Maybe the less important people should recognise that they are less important and make peace with their powerful neighbor? When did Ukrainian interests exactly correspond to EU interests? Governments are not charities. What is so important about Ukraine that Germany and France need to suffer for it? Didn't German voters elect their government to put German interests first?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neville_Chamberlain

I am speechless. That is the most cynical approach I’ve ever seen. Makes me kinda happy that Germany is loosing its power in EU with every passing day of this war.

I worry that the temptation to defeat Russia is stronger than the desire to end the war. No one wins but many lose.

Gas transfered by pipelines is not LNG (it's lot liquified). That's why you need LNG terminals to deliquify it after sea transportation before putting it in a pipeline.

But the US have limited export capabilities, and Europe is going to turn to Norway, Algeria and Qatar. If it is the US, I would say it's only to destabilize the Putin regime, Russia's economy, to generate protests, and make a coup. But I would wait before making any guess.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com