European Politics

[____no5]

I have no idea where you're going. You are just quoting stuff. And, to be very clear, "free press" is not about journalists doing what the hell they want and has never ever been. The editor-in-chief os the one that is the defacto publisher, not the journalist, and the one that acts as the director...

Where I'm going? That freedom of speech has been compromised in Sweden since the war. But not only in Sweden. Everywhere in the West when one's trying to say something different, immediate smearing as Russian propaganda. Does it look healthy to you?
I take it for granted that Putin spreads propaganda. But I also take it for granted that West spreads propaganda. This is the difference. I have no illusions.

If you read between the lines of what the editor-in -chief explains, you'll see that he is afraid for the future of his newspaper, that many people complained about that article for KI and he also laments that 2022 is not 2014 in anyway.
And what does he tells us about the KI article? First he says that "It was my decision to publish the article on Kyiv Independent. I have not changed my mind on that point" only to add in the next line that:
"Would I have chosen to write it now, when Russia is grinding down the eastern parts of Ukraine with unimaginable human consequences?
No." It doesn't struck me as a free minded decision.
It's Manufacturing Consent they are both describing.

To remind you the KI article was about the suspicious or even clear cut neo-nazi background of some of the editors in a time that all Sweden (and West apparently) was taking their information from there without challenging it.
The article was written when KI was 4 months old thus Ides of March 2022, the earliest. He fired her mid April. What changed in between? Invasion had started 24 February, by middle of March Russia had occupied 20% of Ukraine already. So it's a BS excuse that "he wouldn't have chosen to write it now, when Russia is grinding down the eastern parts of Ukraine"

 

[Yax]

He fired her mid April. What changed in between? Invasion had started 24 February, by middle of March Russia had occupied 20% of Ukraine already. So it's a BS excuse that "he wouldn't have chosen to write it now, when Russia is grinding down the eastern parts of Ukraine"

andreas.gustavsson@etc.se
Here's his email. Contact him, and post the reply here, if you get one. I imagine he has other things to do than to engage in online arguments, but you can always try.

(and one major development was the massacre in Butja in April, which completely and utterly pulled the mask off Russia).

 

[Vaenyr]

@____no5 Important distinction: Not everything is smeared as Russian propaganda. The things you specifically choose to post in every politics thread are blatantly Russian propaganda, as has been laid out beautifully on the previous page in a post you still refuse to respond to.

You claim to be so busy that you can't acknowledge how your approach in these threads has been dismantled, yet you find the time to keep posting more and more propagada. Do us all the favor and either finally have the figurative balls to respond to comment on the previous page or stop posting. It's the least you can do, as your behavior here and the utter refusal to take any kind of responsibility for the way you act is beyond disrespectful.

Don't even bother responding, no one cares. Go and respond to the post from the previous page:

Post in thread 'European Politics'

Jan 10, 2025

Okay.

*deep sigh*

*inhale*

*exhale*

I'm Zen.

Perfectly Zen.

Let's do this.

Elections were annulled because the anti-systemic candidate who was leading in the first round on grounds of Tik -freaking- Tok influence. Are we serious? Then why not just expose him and let the people decide in the second round? Because he would win, that's why. Not to mention that this was even debunked because it's not the point here.
Now they are trying to stop him from running again overall.

This is a misrepresentation. The elections were not annulled because Georgescu won (I'm...

• Perun

• 
• 

 

[Mosh]

The fact that he didn't bother to respond to a comprehensive rebuttal not only to the specific arguments laid out in the post Perun was responding to, but his entire belief system and frequent misrepresentation of facts on this board should tell you all you need to know about 5's interest in having good faith discussions. I would consider that when choosing to engage with him further. The ignore button exists for a reason.

 

[____no5]

The fact that he didn't bother to respond to a comprehensive rebuttal not only to the specific arguments laid out in the post Perun was responding to, but his entire belief system and frequent misrepresentation of facts on this board should tell you all you need to know about 5's interest in having good faith discussions. I would consider that when choosing to engage with him further. The ignore button exists for a reason.

I apologized publicly for my delay to him what are you talking about. And what is this about my belief system? Previously LC also chose not to reply. So what? This is also a form of reply.
Belief system. Bad faith. It’s going nowhere.

 

[Azas]

I'm scratching my head at why Germany has closed all of it's nuclear power plants. Such a stupid questionable move.
(Let's make all possible moves to be dependent on cheap but russian gas)

 

[Perun]

I'm scratching my head at why Germany has closed all of it's nuclear power plants. Such a stupid questionable move.
(Let's make all possible moves to be dependent on cheap but russian gas)

Because nuclear power was always unpopular in Germany. People have been protesting the plants and nuclear waste disposal with enormous passion since the 1970s. The country was already on the path to shut down its nuclear plants and develop renewable energy coverage starting in the late 1990s under Schröder with 2035 as the ultimate goal, but then the second Merkel administration stopped that process in 2009. Then Fukushima happened, a massive public outcry followed and the government flip-flopped to shut down all nuclear plants asap. Instead of allowing time for development for renewable energy coverage however, as the Schröder administration did, it was now decided to shut them all down by 2020 and bridge the gap to full renewable energy coverage through Russian gas imports.

There's no mystery here, it's public knowledge, and generally accepted to be a mistake of the Merkel era.

 

[Azas]

Are there moves to reopen some of the plants or those are closed for good?

 

[Perun]

It would be way too expensive to start them up again, let alone build new ones. Germany is currently covering its gas demand from Azerbaijan, Qatar, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, if I am informed correctly. There is definitely no returning to dependency from Russia.

 

[Perun]

Actually, I was not correctly informed. Gas coverage comes from Norway, The Netherlands and Belgium, see here:

Infografik: Woher bezieht Deutschland sein Gas?

Die Grafik zeigt die täglichen Gasimporte nach Deutschland nach Herkunft.

de.statista.com

 

[Vaenyr]

Also, opening up new plants is extremely expensive and takes too much time. Time that we don't have anymore. Had the government acted differently a decade ago we could think about it, but as it stands now it would make no sense to go for nuclear power.

 

[Perun]

Scholz said something about 40 billion Euros for two new nuclear plants last night. Don't know how accurate that is, but it gives a general impression of what we're dealing with.

 

[LooseCannon]

I disagree that it isn't worth doing. We'll still need nuclear plants, let's build more. It's a huge investment, but for the amount of carbon you can cut out, it is well worth it.

 

[____no5]

Also for the sovereignty it creates. Pipeline gas is the only competitive solution for Germany’s needs but only Russia can supply it in the quantities required.
Thus Nuclear is 1000% worth the investment. And not so huge in the end of the day, if Germany affords to give USD 44 billion to Ukraine it certainly affords to build a few nuclear plants.

 

[Perun]

Pipeline gas is the only competitive solution for Germany’s needs but only Russia can supply it in the quantities required.

I mean, that is very obviously not true. Germany's energy demand is 100% covered. Why do you keep saying things like this?

 

[Yax]

I mean, that is very obviously not true. Germany's energy demand is 100% covered. Why do you keep saying things like this?

It is untrue, but it is also true that it negatively affects Germany's neighbours (i.e. Sweden), which partially bears the penalties of Germany's closed plants through higher prices. Germany has consistently refused to implement dynamic area pricing that many other membership countries have accepted because it would cause skyrocketing prices in some areas of Germany (while stabilizing it in the countries that export to Germany). Sweden's energy prices have defacto turned volatile, and in part so due to the pricing mechanisms in the EU power grid, in part due to low transmission capabilities from the northern Sweden to the southern Sweden. The EU power grid and market is designed for a perfect flow between the countries and to maintain stability, but it also causes massive price spikes for countries that are fully or almost self-sustained.

All in all, the pricing mechanisms in the EU power system needs to be adressed. The EU is fully self-sustained, but the dynamic pricing is insane - it's a self perpetuating spiral.

 

[Azas]

If I would be citizen of Germany, i would support new nuclear power plants, I mean, the knowledge and infrastructure is there. To abandon it all while China and other super powers using it, is not wise thing to do, imo.

 

[____no5]

I mean, that is very obviously not true. Germany's energy demand is 100% covered. Why do you keep saying things like this?

It’s covered yes but at what cost. German economy is suffering precisely because of the cost of energy after 2022 not because demand is not covered.

PS Just in case you missed I was making a case for Germany to invest in Nuclear Energy.

PS2: I heard that Denmark asked Gazprom to start maintaining Nordstream. Be certain this is not a coincidence, but a kind of Plan D, initiated by no AfD

 

[Yax]

It’s covered yes but at what cost. German economy is suffering precisely because of the cost of energy after 2022 not because demand is not covered.

PS Just in case you missed I was making a case for Nuclear Energy

The obvious problem with new power plants is that A) it takes a massive amount of time to construct it - we need energy now, not in 15 years b) they never get finished on time; the one recently finished in Finland took what, 10 years in additional time, c) very expensive which will be paid by the consumers - they are not a means to lower prices, because they need ROI d) they go down for prolonged periods for planned and unexpected service work.

So yeah, there are a lot of problems with nuclear power too.

 

[____no5]

Yes nobody argued that, but the soonest they start they better.