SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Snowshoe who wrote (184592)2/28/2022 3:56:41 PM
From: TobagoJack  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 217975
 
Response announced already

So, besides taking out any location taking in weapons shipped in from abroad, Putin, under nuclear cover, can do pretty much any and everything, intentionally demonstrating to Russian people that Russia had been under siege all along, I imagine the narrative could be.

I suppose this is how big wars traditionally get started, from something smaller.

Gold, at the current time is saying ‘no war’. Given that the war-metal is saying ‘no-war’, then nothing much has been priced in, am guessing.

zerohedge.com

Russia In New 'Red Line': Western Countries Supplying Weapons To Ukraine Will "Bear Responsibility"


Sent from my iPad



To: Snowshoe who wrote (184592)2/28/2022 4:02:13 PM
From: TobagoJack  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 217975
 
Seems, so far, USA / NATO / EU is being less than full-on

The fourth estate wishes to see more, much more

The fifth estate very excited also, but instead wanting to see ‘more’, want to see ‘moar’

bloomberg.com

Pleas to Stop Buying Russian Oil and Gas Go Unheeded

Ukraine’s appeal to the West to end energy commerce with Putin’s regime are ignored — for now.

Javier BlasMarch 1, 2022, 1:00 AM GMT+8



The message from protesters in Berlin on Sunday.

Photographer: Hannibal Hanschke/Getty Images EuropeEven now, on the fifth day of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and Kyiv bracing for the worst, the West has continued purchasing the oil and gas that Moscow is desperate to sell — pocketing hundreds of millions of dollars daily to subsidize its war machine.

Washington and Brussels have carved out loopholes big enough for an oil tanker in their current sanctions policy, allowing the trade to continue. Western officials have also worked the phones, reassuring traders — and their banks — they can continue buying — and paying for — Russian oil and gas.

But Kyiv is pleading for it to stop. “We insist on a full embargo for Russian oil and gas,” Ukrainian Foreign Affairs Minister Dmytro Kuleba tweeted over the weekend. “Buying them now means paying for the murder of Ukrainian men, women and children.”

As with every other action that only a few days ago seemed unpalatable and unlikely — targeting the Nord Stream 2 pipeline and SWIFT foreign-currency system, or supplying offensive armament — the oil weapon is looming as an economic punishment that could provoke a dangerous military response.

Russia exports about 8 million barrels a day of crude, refined petroleum products and other oil liquids, a significant chunk of global demand of about 100 million barrels a day. About two-thirds of the Russian supply goes to industrialized nations in Europe, North America and Asia.

Germany is worried Europe won’t have enough gas to make it until the spring, and blackouts may follow. The U.S. fears oil prices will jump to $150 or even $200 a barrel, just ahead of its midterm elections. In Washington and Berlin, the message is almost unanimous: Sanctioning Russian oil and gas will hurt the West more than Moscow, and it’s unlikely to deter Vladimir Putin. For now, it won’t happen. John Arnold, a famed former commodity trader, summarized that school of thought: “As much as the world is mad at Putin, that is not a price the West is willing to pay.”

Others appear open to the idea, however. U.K. Foreign Secretary Liz Truss over the weekend floated the prospect of setting caps on purchases of Russian oil, progressively reducing them. Ironically, that sounds exactly like the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which set a 5% monthly output reduction. Other Western officials are asking, if not now, when?

I cannot see the status quo of the energy trade lasting forever. Unless the Ukrainian-Russian talks yield some quick results, the gruesome photographs and videos that will inevitably follow a Russian push into the biggest Ukrainian cities, including Kyiv, will harden Western public opinion. If the war drags on, it’s a matter of when, rather than if, the energy trade gets sanctioned. Already some European refiners have stopped buying Russian crude, self-sanctioning Russian oil. Even with the White House encouraging oil traders to keep going, moving Russian petroleum, particularly seaborne flows, is increasingly difficult.

Oil traders described it to me this way: Nothing official is blocking the energy trade, but there's a lot of sand in the gears. The system is at risk of seizing up at any time, they add.

In a sign of how reluctant the market is to buy Russian oil, its flagship Urals crude is selling at a record discount to the benchmark Brent. On Friday, it sold for minus $11.50 a barrel. The gap is likely to be much larger on Monday. For sure, China and India may buy more, but they can’t replace European demand. If that dries up, Russian crude will start to back up at ports. With limited domestic storage, and without the option of turning tankers into floating storage units, Russian producers will be forced to shut down wells, potentially damaging them for good.

Western countries have contingency measures. Washington, in talks with European nations and the International Energy Agency, has drafted a plan to release between 60 and 75 million barrels from the West strategic petroleum reserves as soon as this week, if needed. An emergency IEA ministerial meeting was for called for Tuesday to authorize the release and explore further measures.

For now, OPEC+ doesn’t see the need to deviate from its plan to boost monthly output by 400,000 barrels a day. But in the event of an actual disruption, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates may feel compelled to use their spare capacity.

A lot more would be needed, even if only half of the Russian oil gets hit by either official sanctions or corporate decisions. In theory, the IEA emergency reserves should be able to absorb even a 5 million-barrel a day disruption for a few months. But the West would be fighting an open-ended disruption with a finite stock. The market would anticipate that sooner or later the reserves would be exhausted, and oil prices would soar.

Ultimately, though, the biggest risk of deploying the oil and gas weapon, is military rather than economic. The Kremlin could consider it a casus belli. At current prices, Russia earns north of $1 billion a day exporting its oil and gas, and cutting that equals the economic decapitation of the regime. Putin has already raised nuclear alert levels. Put oil and gas on the table, and he’s likely to up the ante.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.

To contact the author of this story:
Javier Blas at jblas3@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story:
James Hertling at jhertling@bloomberg.net

Sent from my iPad



To: Snowshoe who wrote (184592)2/28/2022 4:09:43 PM
From: TobagoJack  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 217975
 
Interesting how quickly we got here

Let’s see who of where survive the next round of elections as the boyz compare sizes

zerohedge.com

Russian TV Host Threatens Nuclear "Destruction" Of America

Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

A Russian TV host dubbed “Putin’s chief propagandist” has threatened the nuclear destruction of America and NATO countries, asking, “Why do we need the world, if Russia isn’t there?”






Dmitry Kiselyov made the comments on national television just hours after President Vladimir Putin put his nuclear deterrent forces on high alert.

“Our submarines can shoot more than 500 nuclear warheads,” said Kiselyov, adding, “This would guarantee destruction of the USA, and all other NATO countries.”
The TV host suggested that there was no point to life continuing on earth if Russia ceased to exist, asserting, “In accordance with the principle, why do we need the world, if Russia isn’t there?”

Kiselyov went on to hype the strength of Moscow’s nuclear arsenal, bragging, “Russia’s nuclear arms are delivered by the world’s fastest strategic bombers.”

“That’s without even mentioning Russian Strategic Missile Forces. The Russian nuclear potential is the strongest in the world.”

Kiselyov also savaged British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss for suggesting that Russia’s actions in Ukraine could spark a military confrontation with NATO.

“A conflict between Russia and NATO over Ukraine – nothing like this has been said before,” he said.

Yesterday, Putin ordered his nuclear forces to adopt a “special regime of duty” in response to what he called “aggressive statements” from NATO leaders and economic sanctions.

NATO representatives labeled the move a dangerous escalation, with secretary general Jens Stoltenberg responding, “This is dangerous rhetoric.”

* * *

Brand new merch now available! Get it at pjwshop.com

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Get early access, exclusive content and behinds the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.

Sent from my iPad



To: Snowshoe who wrote (184592)2/28/2022 5:48:16 PM
From: TobagoJack  Respond to of 217975
 
Folks appear deliberate to confuse diversity of opinion with 'muddled' response to a complicated situation where there are no good guys and only innocent civilians tee-ed up

... even as the very same folks do not owe up to a 'cognitive warfare' campaign being waged by themselves

Go figure

China's response firstly is territorial integrity, and again firstly national security, and counsels 'do not make the situation worse, dialogue, and make the situation better'. Alas that is sacrilege and not per the scheduled program, some folks on-line discern. Arguable.

Am agnostic, and keep open mind. Let's wait and see. But, assuredly, the chapter might have great big implications going forward, as well as accelerating trending already in place.

bloomberg.com

China’s Muddled Ukraine Response Feeds Rare Domestic Debate

Internet users discuss Putin’s war as Beijing avoids criticism Critical voices planted as ‘cognitive warfare,’ paper says

28 February 2022, 15:46 GMT+8
As China holds off in publicly criticizing Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, a rare debate has emerged on Chinese social media over the military action by a close diplomatic partner.

Images of global anti-war protests -- including in Russia -- circulated on China’s Twitter-like Weibo over the weekend, as Putin’s forces shelled Ukrainian cities. Articles mocking Russia’s limited military gains were also shared, with some comparing Putin to a disgraced tai-chi master who was defeated in seconds by an amateur. Other users called for “defending common sense” by rejecting Russia’s perceived imperialist expansion, while state broadcaster CGTN aired appeals from Chinese students in Ukraine asking for peace.

Those criticisms were countered by a proliferation of pro-Russia voices, echoing Chinese Foreign Ministry claims last week that the U.S. was the “culprit” of the conflict for “hyping” war and backing the expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Communist Party mouthpiece People’s Daily and state-run CCTV both avoided the word “invasion” in favor of “Russia-Ukraine conflict.”

Beijing is struggling to explain its support for Moscow as it defends Ukraine’s sovereignty. On the same day China abstained from a vote on a United Nations Security Council draft resolution that condemned the Ukraine invasion, Foreign Minister Wang Yi called for “ordinary people’s lives” to be safeguarded and reiterated Beijing’s support for Ukraine’s “territorial integrity.” Initial attempts to blame the U.S. have been weakened by Washington’s decision to not send in troops and Putin’s civilian casualties. The Communist Party backed Global Times on Monday reported China’s position on the conflict “neutral.”

“The Chinese government’s ambiguity in the official stance has given a small opening for alternative voices social media,” said Maria Repnikova, an assistant professor in global communication at Georgia State University. “The official media coverage on Ukraine has shifted in recent days to allow for more perspectives from Ukraine and immersive imagery of the conflict. This signals a widening space for social media discourse also.”

Repnikova added that Chinese authorities have initially allowed some critical discussion of sensitive issues in the past, such as the outbreak of the coronavirus in Wuhan. “Leaving some space for critique facilitates venting but also public opinion observation for the Chinese government,” she said.

More on China’s response to Ukraine:
China Distances Itself From Russia, Calls for Halt to Violence China Leaves Russia’s War Off Front Pages as Xi Stays Silent Taiwan Dismisses Concern Ukraine Crisis Could Spill Over to Asia Xi Counts Some Diplomatic Wins After Polarizing Winter Games


The latest in global politicsGet insight from reporters around the world in the Balance of Power newsletter.

Sign up to this newsletter

Already, limits are emerging. Posts questioning whether the Chinese Foreign Ministry blundered by dismissing intelligence of Russia’s invasion and not evacuating some 6,000 Chinese citizens before the attack were censored. A joint letter signed by five university professors denouncing the invasion was also wiped from Chinese social media. The state-backed Beijing News last week asked reporters to avoid criticizing Russia or carrying pro-Western voices, according to editorial guidance posted on its social media accounts that was later deleted.

The Global Times newspaper warned in a Chinese-language commentaryMonday that “cognitive warfare” initiated by the West was now being waged online, suggesting critical voices had been planted by foreign forces. It was a possible sign the government may start to clamp down on users countering official narratives.

Weibo suspended or permanently shut 83 accounts for improper comments over the weekend, over fears jokes about welcoming “beautiful Ukrainian women” as refugees could lead to anti-China sentiment in Ukraine. Other platforms including WeChat and Douyin issues statements calling for rationality among users.

Fang Kecheng, a communications professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, cautioned against equating social media posts with broad public opinion in China. Only a small number of users ever post due to the potential severe repercussions in China for challenging official government positions, he added.

“Clearly, there is a strong pro-Russia voice on Weibo,” he said, “but we should take it with a grain of salt.”

— With assistance by Colum Murphy



To: Snowshoe who wrote (184592)2/28/2022 6:13:51 PM
From: TobagoJack  Respond to of 217975
 
China has an energy crisis

Am puzzled why some believe Team Russia would just rollover.

Did you ever play "Risk"? If yes, what was your top-of-mind takeaway from that very well designed game?

bloomberg.com

Gazprom Paves Way to New China Gas Deal as Sanctions Hit Russia

Gas giant signed contract to design link to China via Mongolia New pipe to China would enable 50 bcm/year of extra gas flows

28 February 2022, 23:00 GMT+8

Gazprom PJSC took a new step toward potentially its biggest-ever natural gas supply deal with China as nations around the world sever economic and political ties with Russia over the country’s invasion of Ukraine.

The Russian gas giant signed a contract to design the Soyuz Vostok pipeline across Mongolia toward China, Gazprom said in a statement. If Russia reaches a new supply agreement with China, Soyuz Vostok will carry as much as 50 billion cubic meters of natural gas per year to the Asian nation.

A new supply deal with China would also enable Gazprom to build an interconnector between its west- and eastbound pipeline systems, effectively allowing Russia to redirect gas toward China from fields that now only feed Europe. That could ease Gazprom’s reliance on the European continent, currently the single-largest buyer of Russian gas.

The pipeline-design contract comes as the European Union and the U.S., joined by countries such as the U.K., Canada and Japan, put unprecedented pressure on Russia after President Vladimir Putin ordered the invasion of neighboring Ukraine. Sweeping sanctions are limiting Russia’s ability to import key technology, tap foreign debt markets and even to access much of the $640 billion the country built up as a buffer to protect the economy.

While Russian energy exports remain unaffected at this stage of the war, Europe has been exploring options to wean itself off Gazprom’s deliveries.

Gazprom has been in talks to deliver gas to China via Mongolia for several years.

“Today, the design contract has been signed, this means that the project has moved to the stage of practical implementation,” Gazprom Chief Executive Officer Alexey Miller said of the Soyuz Vostok link. The statement didn’t give any details of progress on supply talks with China.

In 2014, Gazprom signed a 30-year, $400-billion deal to directly supply as much as 38 billion cubic meters of gas per year to China via the Power of Siberia gas link, where deliveries started in late 2019. In recent months, when Gazprom’s flows to Europe have been limited, shipments to China were regularly above daily contract volumes.

At the start of February, Russia reached a smaller gas deal with China for 25-year direct supplies of as much as 10 billion cubic meters per year from fields in the Far East.

— With assistance by Dina Khrennikova, and Olga Tanas



To: Snowshoe who wrote (184592)2/28/2022 6:44:43 PM
From: TobagoJack  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 217975
 
Re <<Another Russian convoy smashed to bits...>>

... appears that many if not much presented by the fourth and fifth estates are something other than current events zerohedge.com



To: Snowshoe who wrote (184592)2/28/2022 6:57:16 PM
From: TobagoJack1 Recommendation

Recommended By
kingfisher

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 217975
 
just spoke to some energy types from my coal trading days and the boys appear full of conflicted feels

as discounted Iranian energy might soon be joined by discounted Russian energy

I find it curious that in the lead up to the military operation / invasion we got all sorts of satellite pics of Russian order of battle around Ukraine

... but now we have nada zilch zip of Russian order of battle deployment inside of Ukraines

in the meantime with the inevitable ramping of military spending all around the world, am guessing that standard of living shall decrease, and for some, sharply, unless greater-good / common-prosperity protocol in place. Social tension shall ramp.