Gas can be easily exported from other nations. US has plenty od shale gas and oil which is main reason for falling prices. Another way to replace gas is electricity which can be easily generated from anything that burns.
Well.... not right now, but thanks to Lockheed-Martin, we'll have fusion power in a decade. If Europe can limp on for that long without Ruskie gas, we're golden! And don't worry, we got your back in case those evil Ruskies try anything.
Well.... not right now, but thanks to Lockheed-Martin, we'll have fusion power in a decade. If Europe can limp on for that long without Ruskie gas, we're golden! And don't worry, we got your back in case those evil Ruskies try anything.
From what I've read I wouldn't count on it. It's still all theoretical.
lol:
Spoiler:
''I'm glad to see that fusion power is still 10 years away. It has been 10 years away for the last 40 years.'' comment from an article regarding the supposed L-M breakthrough
You guys call yourselves CFC'ers and fail to realize that the sub does not have the experience to heal in open waters and is using a friendly territory to heal in?
Having performed many underway repairs on a submarine I scoff at your doubts about the realistic portrayal of self healing submarines in our favorite game!
Assuming that the submarine didn't enter the Baltic (Fairly certain that both the Danes and Swedes would have picked up on that) there are four options: Poland, Finland, Germany or Russia. Leaving Russia as the main suspect.
I doubt it's ours since we don't have any - peace treaty forbids. Russia is still the most likely candidate as they have hard time keeping planes on the right side of the border I don't see why the subs would be any different.
You guys call yourselves CFC'ers and fail to realize that the sub does not have the experience to heal in open waters and is using a friendly territory to heal in?
ah , the correct thread to ask Timsup2nothin whether he ever did the Swedish thing . ı hear once they were actually depth charging a West German 206 or so something .
Well when you have economy based on few resources and punch of weapons your way of influence is quite limited. Honestly Russia is simply isolating itself with expansive nationalism, active military harassing and using gas as a weapon. When you thread your neighbors and be a difficult and unreliable seller you soon wont have any friends nor customers.
Russia is harassing with a single submarine sent from its own nearby port in Petersburg, but 'Merica is just peacekeeping with drone bombings in Pakistan and 30 other countries, amirite?
I don't like how the media events play. It's all fun and games until some regions become a good source of glass.
Russia is harassing with a single submarine sent from its own nearby port in Petersburg, but 'Merica is just peacekeeping with drone bombings in Pakistan and 30 other countries, amirite?
I don't like how the media events play. It's all fun and games until some regions become a good source of glass.
Comparing/linking together Russia and US so often reminds me of divorced couple where other part (Russia) cant simply get over they are not together anymore and always mentions US.
I would not care if this case really would be "a single submarine" but since Russia has in this year already practiced a nuclear strike against Stockholm I find this more alarming.
Why would Russia nuke Stockholm? Sweden has no military to speak of in a context of war between main global powers. Seems more like sensationalist bait designed to boost antipathy/fear about Russia, and not news or information on actual threats to Sweden by a nuke..
Why would Russia nuke Stockholm? Sweden has no military to speak of in a context of war between main global powers. Seems more like sensationalist bait designed to boost antipathy/fear about Russia, and not news or information on actual threats to Sweden by a nuke..
So what in your view would Russia stand to gain by actually meaning to 'militarily harass' Sweden?
Or are you of the view that the leaders of that country are below the intelligence level of their counterparts in the west, and thus may just do random stuff without much of a plan?
Personally i don't see any gain for Russia out of trying to harass Sweden, so i suppose it likely did not do that at all.
Ah. The problem for a submerged submarine is that their position may have a 'more or less' aspect that makes the agreed special status straight too narrow.
That from both sides. The submarine may be running their location envelope down the center of the straight, but have a large enough envelope that they are actually out of it. Whoever detected the submarine may have a pretty vague idea of where it actually is.
Looking at the map though 'near Stockholm' wouldn't have anything to do with that. It looks like the channel into the Gulf of Bothnia is only twenty miles wide though.
It's interesting that it wasn't even established whether submarine existed at all. Not to mention it's belonging.
But people are already discussing why Russia is harassing Sweden.
So what in your view would Russia stand to gain by actually meaning to 'militarily harass' Sweden?
Or are you of the view that the leaders of that country are below the intelligence level of their counterparts in the west, and thus may just do random stuff without much of a plan?
Personally i don't see any gain for Russia out of trying to harass Sweden, so i suppose it likely did not do that at all.
I posted this on last page and here goes my theory:
One possible reason for this can be to show Finland what will/can happend if they move closer towards NATO. Backround: both Finland and Sweden have moved closer to NATO recently but Finland is much more friendlier towards Russia than Sweden.
It's interesting that it wasn't even established whether submarine existed at all. Not to mention it's belonging.
But people are already discussing why Russia is harassing Sweden.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
