Originally Posted by
OUTLAW 09
JMA--you bring up an interesting point by pointing to bloggers---
This today from Interfax proves your point---
Moscow - Russian Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov has said that U.S. intelligence officials have not presented a single piece of evidence capable of proving that militiamen in eastern Ukraine could have been involved in the July 17 crash of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17.
In addition to the US intel briefing they should have released every swinging photo analysis that kaur linked to as part and parcel of the briefing and simply said we concur---the photos would have been picked up by the global news cycle and then you would not have this Russian comment today.
That was indeed minor tactical mistake.
Yesterday I linked to an interview with a Ukrainian irregular commander who clearly stated another group had the Buk ---and signaled to a degree buyers remorse in the whole issue.
Why that was not splashed across the media linking again to the voice intercepts, irregular fighter interviews at the crash site and this article is beyond me.
It is as if the West does not want to rock the boat and it flies in the face of common decency to those killed---it does not confront who was behind it when the info is there in ones face.
Sorry, a regular investigation will very likely prove where the missiles were launched and who operated them. Why now this haste which could spoil the affair.
A well timed sequence of actions hurts but still offers Putin the opportunity to choose the lesser of two evils. He can not escape. Economic sanctions do not depmend on fast decisions.
What astounds me is the argument by the EU that it will damage their economies and business----there was yesterday an editorial comment by a leading Berlin newspaper pushing for some sort of action.
Sorry, of course sanctions will damage the economies of all involved countries that is trivial. Here again, one should first understand where the weak points of Putin are then act, this we-have-to-d -NOW-something argument is stupid. BTW the focus on Germany is nice, however, UK is the more important player here.
Depending on how one calculates the Russia German yearly business exchange it is only at the most 4% of their total GDP and they pointed out it is simple as an exporting country to find other outlets other than Russia for products---and about natural gas---first it is overcharged as Gasprom is in fact a total 1930 monopoly based on anyones definition and the EU is getting ready to charge exactly that and demand 10% duties on their yearly profits back to 2009.
Around 3% of German exports go to Russia, 8% of exported machinery. Compared to 2012 we have already > 20% less exports to Russia.
The Gasporm argument is nonsense, the gas price is already in most cases the pegged to the NG spot price and is not longer pegged to the oilprice. The developement was not that pretty for Gazprom the last years. But there is no short-term fix.
Secondly there is enough world wide supplies just a tad more expensive but in the end worth the shift.
The available LNG volumes are smaller than the imports from Russia, therefore a higher energy efficiency is the much better solution in combination with more LNG imports, but these take time. A 2% reduction of imports would give within a decade many options.
Interesting how the German SPD is attempting to protect Putin.
Sorry, the Steinmeier statement, the guy is SPD, was more than clear. You have a strange perception. :-)