Crayons Loc: St Jo, Texas

bump

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

The members of the board are:

Gerhard Schröder, former Chancellor of Germany, former Prime Minister of Lower Saxony, Chairman of the Board
Oleg Aksyutin, head of the Gas Transportation, Underground Storage and Utilization Department of Gazprom
Alexander Medvedev, Deputy Chairman of the Board of Executive Directors of Gazprom
Hans-Ulrich Engel, Member of the Board of Executive Directors of BASF SE
Han Fennema, Chairman of the Executive Board, CEO of N.V. Nederlandse Gasunie
Isabelle Kocher, Chief Executive Officer of Engie
Vitaly Markelov, Deputy Chairman of the Management Committee of Gazprom
Mario Mehren, Chairman of the Board of Directors of Wintershall
Pavel Oderov, Head of Department of Gazprom
Marc Spieker, Member of the Board of Management of E.ON
Johannes Teyssen, Chairman of the Board of Management of E.ON

Note, the number one member of the board!

truthiness

What board?

Jakebrake Loc: Broomfield, CO

The Board of Directors. But you would have had to complete the 6th grade to figure that out all by yourself.

ldsuttonjr Loc: ShangriLa

dump!

truthiness

Board of Directors for what? The company to lay a pipe?--well, duh, I guess you would expect a bunch from the oil world. Not too bright, Jak. Why the concern over 9% energy from Russia? Think it will make Putin rich? No, Putin's going to ask his lapdog to lift sanctions. Putin will say nice things to lapdog and lapdog will reciprocate (because lapdog says nice things to anyone who is nice him) by trying to lift sanctions fearing that Putin will break out the tape of the peeparty in Moscow during the Miss Universe pageant. Pobrecito's between a rock and a hard place of his own making."SO SAD, TOO BAD," SAYS VLAD.

Jakebrake Loc: Broomfield, CO

Google is your friend my lil good buddy. Try it and it will answer all of our inane childish argumentative questions. I know you can do it rascal, hells bells, even my 7 year old granddaughter knows about google, so there is indeed hope for you Trut!👍

Bug58

Does it really matter when they are asking that we help protect them from big bad Russia???

Donald Trump may have used typically emotive – if premeditated – language from the outset at the Nato summit in Brussels to lambast Germany for its willingness to build a gas pipeline, but the US president’s view that this will make Europe particularly dependent on Russian gas is widely shared by European politicians, thinktanks and energy specialists, including some in Berlin.

No country is more angry about the pipeline than Ukraine, an ally Trump is supposedly poised to abandon when he meets the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, in Helsinki on Monday.

Ukraine stands to lose billions of much needed dollars if Russia can transfer its gas transmissions to Europe across the Baltic Sea, away from a pipeline running across Ukrainian territory.

This week the Ukrainian president, Petro Poroshenko, said: “This is not a commercial project – it is not economical or profitable – it is absolutely a political project. There is no point, from the economic point of view, creating this project. This is absolutely a geopolitical project.”

By contrast the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, has tried to maintain that the construction of Nord Stream 2 pipeline is a common sense economic project, with no political consequence. For many, her refusal to see the geopolitical implications of making Europe so dependent on Russian energy shows the reach that , the majority shareholder in the project, has into Germany. The presence of the former German chancellor Gerhard Schröder on its board and his friendship with Putin seems only to symbolise the triumph of Russian interests.

The aim of a second double-pipeline – which was once scheduled for completion by the end of 2019, but is now likely to be delayed – is to act as a decades-long substitute for the decreasing production of the Netherlands, Denmark and Britain. For Merkel it is also politically essential to get Germany out of nuclear energy by 2022, but still reduce her country’s carbon emissions. Sweden, Denmark and Finland have expressed ecological reservations about a second natural gas pipeline at the bottom of the Baltic. The Danish parliament has empowered its government to veto the pipeline on security or environmental grounds and, separately, the European commission has objected on the basis that the project will undermine its plans for an energy union, including a greater diversity of supply.

The UK has also been objecting, albeit less stridently. A letter sent by the former foreign secretary Boris Johnson to the all-party group of MPs on Poland two months ago . The Foreign Office, in the eyes of some MPs, has not been keen to advertise its differences with Berlin in the middle of the Brexit negotiations. Poking Merkel over Nord Stream 2 risks alienating her at a sensitive moment.

One of the curiosities of the controversy is that attitudes to the pipeline are thought to be a litmus test of how someone perceives Russia. Trump, famously well disposed to Putin, is, not for the first time, the exception that proves the rule. By opposing the pipeline, perhaps for an amalgam of US commercial and security reasons, he seems to set himself against Putin’s largest geoeconomic project. (But, yeah, he's OWNED By Putin--some people are damn stupid it's not funny)

But it is possible that Trump’s target is not Moscow, but Berlin, and the Russian president is merely the victim of a wider trial of strength between the two great western economies.

There are also questions over whether Germany needs Nord Stream 2. The pipeline will deliver at least 55bn cubic metres (bcm) of natural gas from Russia to Germany annually, just like the first-double pipeline, representing 110 bcm together. At present, German natural gas consumption amounts to about 80 bcm a year, of which just over a third is covered by Russia. Many energy experts say efficiency measures will result in reduced demand, leaving a gas surplus.

Merkel has promised Ukraine and Poland that existing transport routes over land would continue to be needed in the future, but these promises are seen as valueless in Ukraine.

Ukraine says that Gazprom’s chief executive, Alexei Miller, has differed publicly, stating that he would no longer want to use the Soyuz pipeline that crosses its territory from 2020 onwards. Gazprom insists all the natural gas for western Europe should be transported through the Baltic Sea, with Germany acting as a distributor country.

The biggest fear is that the pipeline allows Russia a boot on the throat of Europe. It had not been afraid to cut off supplies faced by price disputes with Ukraine. (They were cutting gas supplies to Ukraine during the dead of winter)

Nord Stream’s defenders, however, see the US protests purely through the prism of US commercial self-interest. Trump’s outburst is regarded simply as an effort to promote the sales of American liquified national gas.

The question now is whether the US Congress would follow through in its threat to sanction European companies involved in the pipeline. The US treasury has shown through secondary sanctions on firms trading with Iran that it possesses an overwhelming economic power to force EU firms to divest from commercially profitable projects.

For all the talk in Europe about establishing a European economic sovereignty, the reality is that the US under Trump can expose that ambition as a fiction. The question is whether it is in the US’s self-interest to wield its power over its supposed allies and partners quite so nakedly.


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jul/11/germany-and-russia-gas-links-trump-questions-europe-nord-stream2



Why is he stopping at the 1.5 percent in their defense spending when they pledged 2%, which is what they have agreed to already, and why wait until 2024???

https://www.dw.com/en/nato-chief-germany-must-increase-defense-spending/a-44573637


Speaking to the Bild am Sonntag newspaper, Stoltenberg (pictured) said he welcomed the German government's pledge to increase the defense budget to 1.5 percent of GDP by 2024.

But he said he expected the country "to do even more" to meet the 2024 alliance target of 2 percent of GDP that Germany and other NATO countries agreed on during a 2014 summit. "I assume Germany will continue aiming to meet that goal," he said.

Russia is totally dependent on these other Western Countries..

https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201801111060677926-norway-company-nord-stream-construction/

Jakebrake Loc: Broomfield, CO

Excellent post Bug!👍

Bug58

Lest People forget where Merkle comes from...she reminds them..

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jul/11/nato-summit-donald-trump-says-germany-is-captive-of-russians

Angela Merkel has pushed back against Donald Trump’s extraordinary tirade against Germany on the first day of the Nato summit in Brussels, denying her country was “totally controlled” by Russia and saying it made its own independent decisions and policies.

In less blunt language than the US president’s, the German chancellor made the point that she needed no lessons in dealing with authoritarian regimes, recalling she had been brought up in East Germany when it had been part of the Soviet Union’s sphere of influence.

Arriving at Nato headquarters only hours after Trump singled out Germany for criticism, Merkel said: “I have experienced myself how a part of Germany was controlled by the Soviet Union. I am very happy that today we are united in freedom, the Federal Republic of Germany. Because of that we can say that we can make our independent policies and make independent decisions. That is very good, especially for people in eastern Germany.”

She also hit back at Trump’s criticism that Germany contributed too little to European defence. “Germany does a lot for Nato,” she said.

“Germany is the second largest provider of troops, the largest part of our military capacity is offered to Nato and until today we have a strong engagement towards Afghanistan. In that we also defend the interests of the United States.”

Earlier the US president had accused Berlin of being a “a captive of the Russians” because of its dependence on energy supplies.

Europeans brace for worst from Trump at stormy Nato summit

At his first meeting of the summit, with the Nato secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, Trump described the relationship between Germany and Russia as “inappropriate”.

Nato officials had been nervously awaiting the first meeting as an indicator of how Trump – who arrived in Brussels on Tuesday night – would behave over the next two days. Within minutes they had their answer.

This summit is shaping up to be the most divisive in Nato’s 69-year history. Normally, Nato summits are mostly fixed in advance and proceed in an orderly fashion. Trump’s first words signalled this one was not going to be like that.


He complained that German politicians had been working for Russian energy companies after leaving politics and said this too was inappropriate. Germany was totally controlled by Russia, Trump said.

With Stoltenberg looking on uncomfortably throughout, the US president was unrelenting. “I think it is very sad when Germany makes a massive oil and gas deal with Russia,” Trump said. “We are supposed to be guarding against Russia, and Germany goes out and pays billions and billions dollars a year to Russia.
(he makes an important point, not only are German Politicians going to work for 'big bad Russia" they are paying them billions a year--all while expecting the US to 'protect them from big bad Russia).

“We are protecting Germany, we are protecting France, we are protecting all of these countries and then numerous of the countries go out and make a pipeline deal with Russia where they are paying billions of dollars into the coffers of Russia. I think that is very inappropriate.”


He added: “It should never have been allowed to happen. Germany is totally controlled by Russia because they will be getting 60-70% of their energy from Russia and a new pipeline.

“You tell me if that’s appropriate because I think it’s not. On top of that Germany is just paying just a little bit over 1% [of GDP on Nato defence contributions] whereas the United States is paying 4.2% of a much larger GDP. So I think that’s inappropriate also.” (They have already admitted they are only paying about 1.2% and wanting to go to 1.5% instead of the 2% they agreed to)
His comments were linked to his push for other European countries – particularly Germany – to pay more for Nato’s defence needs.

“I think it is unfair,” Trump said. Other US presidents had raised the matter of European defence spending levels in the past but he was intent on dealing with it, he continued. “We can’t put up with it.”

Germany’s plan to increase its defence expenditure to the Nato target of 2% of GDP by 2030 was not good enough, Trump said. “They could do it tomorrow,” he added. (this is correct, if they can send Russia billions for the Pipeline they can certainly pay the 2% to NATO, American Tax Payers should NOT be responsible to pay NATO to defend against Russia when they themselves are in bed with Russia)

Stoltenberg seemed surprised by the force of Trump’s remarks. He attempted to respond, saying mildly: “Even during the cold war, Nato allies were trading with Russia.”

Asked about Trump afterwards, he responded diplomatically, restricting himself to saying the US president’s language had been “direct” and “frank”.

Merkel and Trump have a one-to-one meeting scheduled for later on Wednesday. According to reports in the US media, Trump is keen to see Merkel replaced as chancellor. His outburst could be part of a strategy to try to undermine her at a time when she is domestically vulnerable.

Merkel has been one of the most outspoken critics of Trump among European leaders. The two clashed at the G7 summit in Canada last month. That summit ended in disarray and a spat between Trump and Justin Trudeau, the Canadian prime minister. Nato officials are clinging to hopes that the Nato summit will not end the same way.

Trump’s antagonism towards Merkel is partly personal, a reaction to a senior European politician standing up to him and her very evident dislike of him, which she makes little attempt to hide.

But it is also strategic: Trump resents Germany’s decision to pay much less than the US, UK or France, viewing it as allowing the country to spend more on welfare, health and in other areas. As he said in Brussels, he regards the US as subsidising German spending in popular domestic areas. (And this too is correct)

He also sees the money saved on defence being used to help Germany’s export drive, giving an edge in trade at the US’s expense.

The friction between the two is a long way from 2013 when Trump tweeted praise for Merkel. “Angela Merkel is doing a fantastic job as the Chancellor of Germany,” he tweeted. Youth unemployment is at a record low & she has a budget surplus.”

Trump’s criticism of a German deal with Russia on energy appeared to relate to the Nord Stream 2 pipeline direct to Germany.

Just before he and Stoltenberg sat down to breakfast on Wednesday, Trump claimed the US was paying a disproportionate share of European defence and this was unfair to the US taxpayer. (Again, He is correct)

Europe would have to step up, he said. “They will spend more. I have great confidence they’ll be spending more.”

Bug58

This is funny. Yeah, they are angry because he's demanding they PAY UP as opposed to being subsidized by the US Tax payer, and YOU are complaining about such things..(other Presidents have 'begged and pleaded they pay more, and they have balked and whined in the past and continued on their merry way nothing changing--he is demanding they make good on their own agreements to pay more--why do you have an issue with that???)

And No, nothing HE is doing is turning America into a Fascist Country..

Bug58

Seems to me he isn't tearing down NATO, but trying to grow NATO, by demanding these other Nations step UP to the plate and meet the Financial obligations, in which they agreed to.


Imagine if ALL of these NATO Countries actually paid what they agreed to how strong Nato could actually BE..hmmmm

Jakebrake Loc: Broomfield, CO

Some of the most frequently used words in Niki's lexicon are fascist, Nazi and racist. All directed I might add toward conservatives. What does that tell us?

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

The issue of paying is not something new.. trump is full of BS... the agreement of 2% is to be met by 2024, this was agreed to in 2014.

That is what the NATO members are meeting, the progress in on schedule. To my knowledge all are moving to that goal..

Nothing was changed.. The 2% looks to be met on schedule.. all is fine if trump does not screw it up

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

Interesting summary on things there. It's very complicated but I don't think Trump sees it in quite the detailed way. It's simple to him. Why do billions of dollars of business with Russia, strengthening their economy which in turn strengthens their military, while we spend billions trying to protect you from Russia.

By the way. no one ever mentions that Ukraine robbed Crimea of their sovereignty. Nor do they mention that Crimea essentially invited Russia to annex them. Crimea is a majority Russian nationals. They do not like the Ukraine gov.