Login

MalabarJag · 07-11-2018, 10:57 PM

(07-11-2018, 09:04 PM)mikesez Wrote: Germany gets about 20% of its total energy from Russia, and most of that is used to heat homes. Tomorrow they could switch to buying that methane from Qatar, and soon (with ebtter nautical LNG) buying it from us will be a viable option.

We buy stuff from Russia too, and have for a long time.

Buying something from another country doesn't have to mean that you are colluding with that country's geopolitical ambitions.

Russia definitely interfered in our election by trying to make us like Sanders and Trump. That is undeniable. Trump definitely wanted Russia to divulge dirt on Hillary, if they had it, and had his people meet with them for that purpose. So there was at least attempted collusion. But I don't think the collusion was actually consummated.

Here's why.

Russia wanted two things from us in 2016, : Magnitsky Act and other sanction relief, and for us to simply be weaker and more divided. The first thing, they can't get from a President alone. And they know that. The second thing, they got from simply stirring the pot as much as they did and injecting angry, vengeful outsiders into the race for both parties. That one of them won office is a bonus but doesn't really further their interests significantly more than the simple act of them interfering did.

1. Is there a natural gas pipeline from Qatar to Germany like there is from Russia to Germany? If so, why bother to build the pipeline from Russia?

2. There are more problems with Germany's actions than buying natural gas from Russia, but who is NATO defending against if not Russia. For one, former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder is Putin's chief lobbyist in Europe. Secondly, Germany hasn't come close to the treaty obligation to spend 2% of it's budget on the military, and is only promising to up their commitment to 1.5% in the future. Even excluding the need for expansion, their current military equipment (tanks and airplanes) are mostly inoperable and in need of repair, so basically they are just freeloaders on the US defense budget. While this is a problem NATO wide (only three NATO countries other than the US have spent over 2% on defense) Germany is the richest NATO country in Europe and the biggest beneficiary of NATO before the fall of the Soviet Union.

3. Russia spent some money on Facebook and other places to cause discontent, but it was a drop in the bucket compared to groups like Occupy Democrats and Red State. It's a stretch to claim Russian meddling had any effect on the election, although they clearly tried. Russia just isn't that competent. I'm willing to bet that you couldn't find a person to honestly admit they changed their vote because of Russian meddling.

4. If someone offered dirt on a political opponent, there is no way it would be turned down by anyone in any campaign. Collusion requires a quid quo pro arrangement; merely accepting information is not collusion. Russia was the source of the fraudulent "dossier," but unless they were paid for that (maybe by a promise of favorable relations from President Hillary?) it wasn't collusion.

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"