Ukraine

[Sibley]

Russia is agreeing to a temporary ceasefire in some cities (i.e. agreeing not to commit war crimes for a bit) - is this a ploy to buy more time to bring in reinforcements and level Ukraine? A ploy to declare "victory" and keep the eastern parts of the country? A ploy to lure more civilians out to be massacred? Some combination of the above?

Are we sure that they'll actually ceasefire? Because there's been several attempts to arrange safe corridors to get civilians out and Russia has kept shelling....

[Abe]

Russia is agreeing to a temporary ceasefire in some cities (i.e. agreeing not to commit war crimes for a bit) - is this a ploy to buy more time to bring in reinforcements and level Ukraine? A ploy to declare "victory" and keep the eastern parts of the country? A ploy to lure more civilians out to be massacred? Some combination of the above?

Are we sure that they'll actually ceasefire? Because there's been several attempts to arrange safe corridors to get civilians out and Russia has kept shelling....

Yep, that's why I added option 3. I personally think that's the most likely scenario.

[Sibley]

Russia is agreeing to a temporary ceasefire in some cities (i.e. agreeing not to commit war crimes for a bit) - is this a ploy to buy more time to bring in reinforcements and level Ukraine? A ploy to declare "victory" and keep the eastern parts of the country? A ploy to lure more civilians out to be massacred? Some combination of the above?

Are we sure that they'll actually ceasefire? Because there's been several attempts to arrange safe corridors to get civilians out and Russia has kept shelling....

Yep, that's why I added option 3. I personally think that's the most likely scenario.

Oh, oops. Reading comprehension fail there.

[Cassie]

It’s horrible what’s happening and also senseless.  My DIL’s family lives in Poland and we are very worried.

[lemanfan]

This shit is indeed crazy. What isn't crazy, apparently, is Putin. Or so says the CIA. But they have been known to lie, or they could just be wrong, so who knows?

Also in the crazy news: Putin is sanctioning himself possibly? Really can't see how not exporting is gonna help them. https://financialpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/russia-restricts-import-and-export-of-listed-goods-and-raw-materials-interfax

Well, Russia is a major supplier of some raw material that the world needs.

If you want to see another case of unintended consequences, check out the airline industry:

Step 1:  Since supply of spare parts is mostly halted due to sanctions, russian authorities have changed the rules to allow for longer times between service and maintenance on the planes.  That won't end well.

Step 2:  Since many airlines lease large parts of their fleets, the western leasing companies are forced to comply with sanctions and are trying to reposess the planes - which in turn have made the Russians to order airlines to bring all leased planes back in to Russia effective immedately.

This in turn can turn into a big liability for the leasing companies and their insurance companies.  A "nationalized" airplane can probably be considered a loss to claim on the insurance. If we assume a loss of 745 planes, each costing $100 million to replace...  Especially if the plane has not followed the service schedule and gotten new parts.  To re-certify such a plane for flight would be a big job.

And the next step is that parts of the world with high requirements on safety (like the EU) would consider Russian airlines unsafe and not allowed to enter their airspace at all even after politically motivated sanctions are lifted.

Sources:
https://theaircurrent.com/tac-explains/ukraine-russia-conflict-derail-global-aerospace/
https://youtu.be/Lz4gCE4ccRM

[Plina]

This shit is indeed crazy. What isn't crazy, apparently, is Putin. Or so says the CIA. But they have been known to lie, or they could just be wrong, so who knows?

Also in the crazy news: Putin is sanctioning himself possibly? Really can't see how not exporting is gonna help them. https://financialpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/russia-restricts-import-and-export-of-listed-goods-and-raw-materials-interfax

Russia may or may not be disconnecting themselves from the global internet: https://fortune.com/2022/03/07/russia-runet-disconnect-ukraine-dns-chernenko-letter/   (my bet is yes, but we'll see for sure)

From a western democratic citizens point of view Putin seems crazy but from a dictators/non democratic point of view he is behaving according to the handbook. A couple of years ago I read an interesting book called Dictator’s handbook by Alastair Smith about how dictators stay in power. Get rid of your enemies, restrict the information etc. Putin is behaving accordingly so my guess is that CIA is correct.

[dang1]

Russian economy. Many underestimate its dependency upon technological import. Russia's so deeply integrated into Western technological chains that severing these ties will lead to its collapse. Sanctions are already effective and can be made even more efficient https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1501360272442896388

Putin's moves make more sense if you consider that Russia is run by a mafia. By a criminal group which extracts tradable export goods through violence or threats. Violent image is Kremlin's means of production and must be kept https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1501389422683738123

[LennStar]

And Japan has decided to join the party! Challenging Russia on the Kuril Islands, which admittedly I've got zero clue what's going on, but ok. I also thought Japan didn't have much of a military, so more googling to come there (update: they have a military but its not a military? Seems to fit in the crazy theme). https://www.republicworld.com/world-news/rest-of-the-world-news/japan-says-kuril-islands-primordially-japanese-russias-occupation-against-intl-order-articleshow.html

The Kuriles are a century old thing, and the last treaty is interpreted differently by both sides. Some small Islands, but a lot of valuable (e.g. fishing) waters around.

Japan has "Self Defense Forces". Yes, they are an army, even though they specialize (for lack of fights you could say) in catastrophy help (lots of opportunities in Japan for that).
No, they are not an army, they tell you. Because while they have attack helicopters, they use the infrared cameras on them to search for avalanche victims. 

They did increase their 1% of BIP cap to 2% a few years ago though.

[Sibley]

This shit is indeed crazy. What isn't crazy, apparently, is Putin. Or so says the CIA. But they have been known to lie, or they could just be wrong, so who knows?

Also in the crazy news: Putin is sanctioning himself possibly? Really can't see how not exporting is gonna help them. https://financialpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/russia-restricts-import-and-export-of-listed-goods-and-raw-materials-interfax

Well, Russia is a major supplier of some raw material that the world needs.

If you want to see another case of unintended consequences, check out the airline industry:

Step 1:  Since supply of spare parts is mostly halted due to sanctions, russian authorities have changed the rules to allow for longer times between service and maintenance on the planes.  That won't end well.

Step 2:  Since many airlines lease large parts of their fleets, the western leasing companies are forced to comply with sanctions and are trying to reposess the planes - which in turn have made the Russians to order airlines to bring all leased planes back in to Russia effective immedately.

This in turn can turn into a big liability for the leasing companies and their insurance companies.  A "nationalized" airplane can probably be considered a loss to claim on the insurance. If we assume a loss of 745 planes, each costing $100 million to replace...  Especially if the plane has not followed the service schedule and gotten new parts.  To re-certify such a plane for flight would be a big job.

And the next step is that parts of the world with high requirements on safety (like the EU) would consider Russian airlines unsafe and not allowed to enter their airspace at all even after politically motivated sanctions are lifted.

Sources:
https://theaircurrent.com/tac-explains/ukraine-russia-conflict-derail-global-aerospace/
https://youtu.be/Lz4gCE4ccRM

Re the exports - yes, losing those exports will hurt the rest of the world, but its going to hurt Russia first. We might be ok for a while. Russia won't be ok very quickly.

And the flip side to the aviation is that, even if Russia withdraws from Ukraine and the sanctions are lifted, there will be consequences which will be around for a very long time. Not only is Putin catapulting Russia back in time, he's making it much harder for them to reverse that in future.

[zolotiyeruki]

Re the exports - yes, losing those exports will hurt the rest of the world, but its going to hurt Russia first. We might be ok for a while. Russia won't be ok very quickly.

And the flip side to the aviation is that, even if Russia withdraws from Ukraine and the sanctions are lifted, there will be consequences which will be around for a very long time. Not only is Putin catapulting Russia back in time, he's making it much harder for them to reverse that in future.

I think it's worth pointing out here that oil going from Russia to the US is a small fraction of the US's consumption, and also a small fraction of Russia production.  Realistically, while it's a strong PR move, the practical effect won't be much.

[roomtempmayo]

So about wheat...

There's been a lot of chatter that Ukraine is a huge supplier of the World Food Program, and it's a major source of grain for some food-insecure countries.

If we assume that the Ukrainian wheat crop is zero this year, what happens?

If the US and Canada were to take action now, could we stabilize the world wheat market? 

It seems like the problem isn't really our ability to produce enough calories to feed the world, it's what we're doing with our productive capacity and how food is distributed that are the problems.

It would be politically hard, but it seems feasible to put all of the CRP back into production, forbid the production of ethanol using corn, and greatly curtail or eliminate the planting of sugar beets.  Just those three policies would free up a lot of arable acres for growing grain. 

Ag would lose their minds, but I think it's pretty clear that the President would have the power to do all of those things under the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933, as long as the SCOTUS follows Wickard v. Filburn (1942).

I don't really know that much about world food supply chains work, though.  I'm sure others here can enlighten me. 

[pecunia]

Re the exports - yes, losing those exports will hurt the rest of the world, but its going to hurt Russia first. We might be ok for a while. Russia won't be ok very quickly.

And the flip side to the aviation is that, even if Russia withdraws from Ukraine and the sanctions are lifted, there will be consequences which will be around for a very long time. Not only is Putin catapulting Russia back in time, he's making it much harder for them to reverse that in future.

I think it's worth pointing out here that oil going from Russia to the US is a small fraction of the US's consumption, and also a small fraction of Russia production.  Realistically, while it's a strong PR move, the practical effect won't be much.

If they made peace with Venezuela, they could get some oil. I've heard it's not the best crude in town, but as the price for a barrel gets up there, refiners will find a way to crack it.  A few years ago, it was said that the US was a net oil exporter.  It seems like a relaxation of some rules would allow a supply increase.  I think there's a lot of places in the world where they don't pump the oil because the price per barrel has been too low.  The higher price will bring those supplies to market.

Actually, if it could be determined that these sanctions with Russia were going to last for a while, it would present investment opportunities to find alternative supplies to the Russian exports.  For example, nickel, deposits could be developed with new mines and investments could be made to expand existing production.

I don't think history will be too kind to Putin when this is all said and done.  I think the kids reading the history books will see a picture of a nasty looking bald man with a scowl on his face.

It's a big world.  Russian exports can be replaced.  They appear to be largely commodities and not high tech stuff.

[bacchi]

Re the exports - yes, losing those exports will hurt the rest of the world, but its going to hurt Russia first. We might be ok for a while. Russia won't be ok very quickly.

And the flip side to the aviation is that, even if Russia withdraws from Ukraine and the sanctions are lifted, there will be consequences which will be around for a very long time. Not only is Putin catapulting Russia back in time, he's making it much harder for them to reverse that in future.

I think it's worth pointing out here that oil going from Russia to the US is a small fraction of the US's consumption, and also a small fraction of Russia production.  Realistically, while it's a strong PR move, the practical effect won't be much.

If they made peace with Venezuela, they could get some oil. I've heard it's not the best crude in town, but as the price for a barrel gets up there, refiners will find a way to crack it.  A few years ago, it was said that the US was a net oil exporter.  It seems like a relaxation of some rules would allow a supply increase.  I think there's a lot of places in the world where they don't pump the oil because the price per barrel has been too low.  The higher price will bring those supplies to market.

The US is a net exporter (barely) of oil but that's because it exports refined oil. Mexico, for example, exports crude to the US, where it's refined, and then imports it as petrol.

[SunnyDays]

So about wheat...

There's been a lot of chatter that Ukraine is a huge supplier of the World Food Program, and it's a major source of grain for some food-insecure countries.

If we assume that the Ukrainian wheat crop is zero this year, what happens?

If the US and Canada were to take action now, could we stabilize the world wheat market? 

It seems like the problem isn't really our ability to produce enough calories to feed the world, it's what we're doing with our productive capacity and how food is distributed that are the problems.

It would be politically hard, but it seems feasible to put all of the CRP back into production, forbid the production of ethanol using corn, and greatly curtail or eliminate the planting of sugar beets.  Just those three policies would free up a lot of arable acres for growing grain. 

Ag would lose their minds, but I think it's pretty clear that the President would have the power to do all of those things under the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933, as long as the SCOTUS follows Wickard v. Filburn (1942).

I don't really know that much about world food supply chains work, though.  I'm sure others here can enlighten me. 

I've been thinking about this too.  I live in Canada's breadbasket, but wheat is grown at a much lower rate than previously.  I see lots of canola, feed corn and soy beans now, on occasion, flax.  It's probably too late to change planned crops this year, as I would think that farmers would already have their seed supply ordered, if not received.  Although, locally, we've received lots of snow, so it may be a late spring, allowing for some change of plans.  Not sure if different equipment is needed to plant/harvest wheat than other crops.  If wheat prices rise enough, it might motivate farmers to change their crops next year.

[Vashy]

I read an interesting thread that a lot (or most) of Ukraine's wheat is winter wheat, so it's already in the ground (harvest in September). Damage will focus on cities, so chances are it'll all be still there when the Russians have (hopefully) been kicked out.

[Michael in ABQ]

Ukraine's wheat harvest won't be zero. There are still large swathes of the country where no fighting is occurring. Russia simply doesn't have the ability to take western Ukraine by force. Not unless they started conscripting hundreds of thousands or calling up their entire reserves. They've committed 150,000+ troops to take the eastern edge of the country.

If Ukranian farmers can pull themselves away from hauling away millions of dollars of Russian equipment (one estimate I saw jokingly put Ukranian farmers as the 5th largest military in Europe by the number of tanks, APCs, etc. they now have) they'll go back to their fields and trying to make a living.


Frankly the larger issue is fertilizer. Most modern agriculture uses nitrogen-based fertilizer to improve yields. One of the reasons why we can get 100-150 bushels of wheat per acre whereas 100 years ago it was more like 10-20 bushels. Most nitrogen-based fertilizer is made from natural gas. Fertilizer plants in Europe have been suspending operations as the price of their input has gotten so high that they can't make a profit. So, farmers will either choose to use less fertilizer and have lower crop yields, or they'll have to pay a lore more for fertilizer which means prices will go up due to higher costs. Either way, more inflation in food costs which will affect the global market since many agricultural products are traded globally.

[zolotiyeruki]

I suspect Ukraine's raw agricultural production capacity won't be affected much--the Russians aren't salting the land or tearing it up or anything.  It'll be more an issue of transportation/distribution/etc, given the damage to cities and infrastructure.

That said, they might face a tractor shortage, since many of them seem to be busy towing abandoned tanks...

Re the exports - yes, losing those exports will hurt the rest of the world, but its going to hurt Russia first. We might be ok for a while. Russia won't be ok very quickly.

And the flip side to the aviation is that, even if Russia withdraws from Ukraine and the sanctions are lifted, there will be consequences which will be around for a very long time. Not only is Putin catapulting Russia back in time, he's making it much harder for them to reverse that in future.

I think it's worth pointing out here that oil going from Russia to the US is a small fraction of the US's consumption, and also a small fraction of Russia production.  Realistically, while it's a strong PR move, the practical effect won't be much.

If they made peace with Venezuela, they could get some oil. I've heard it's not the best crude in town, but as the price for a barrel gets up there, refiners will find a way to crack it.  A few years ago, it was said that the US was a net oil exporter.  It seems like a relaxation of some rules would allow a supply increase.  I think there's a lot of places in the world where they don't pump the oil because the price per barrel has been too low.  The higher price will bring those supplies to market.

The US is a net exporter (barely) of oil but that's because it exports refined oil. Mexico, for example, exports crude to the US, where it's refined, and then imports it as petrol.

I believe it was 2018 when the US became a net exporter of petroleum products, and only very recently a net exporter of oil altogether.

Whether or not it affects gasoline prices, IMO it's a worthy endeavor to replace Russia as a major supplier of European energy.

[PDXTabs]

A few years ago, it was said that the US was a net oil exporter.

The US is a net exporter (barely) of oil but that's because it exports refined oil. Mexico, for example, exports crude to the US, where it's refined, and then imports it as petrol.

The USA was never been a net exporter of oil. The USA is a net exporter of "energy" and as you correctly state "net petroleum products." Further reading:
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/us-energy-facts/imports-and-exports.php
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=51338

[PDXTabs]

I read an interesting thread that a lot (or most) of Ukraine's wheat is winter wheat, so it's already in the ground (harvest in September). Damage will focus on cities, so chances are it'll all be still there when the Russians have (hopefully) been kicked out.

I recently listened to an interview with an economist talking about the next crop of wheat. Farmers need to have enough stability to buy and plant that crop, and if they don't it's gone for that year.

EDITed to add that a lot of this year's wheat crop would ship out of the Black Sea where cargo carriers are having their insurance policies dropped and some of the port towns are currently in a literal war.

[PhilB]

Anyone else suspect that China is rubbing their hands with glee at the thought of lots of cheap oil and gas in the future?  If Russia can't sell to anyone else then Beijing should be able to negotiate a very good price indeed...

[Travis]

Anyone else suspect that China is rubbing their hands with glee at the thought of lots of cheap oil and gas in the future?  If Russia can't sell to anyone else then Beijing should be able to negotiate a very good price indeed...

Russia's economy in ruins is a gold mine for China. They'll be the only ones wanting to buy whatever Russia has to sell, be their sole provider of technology, and be the only way the Russian military builds anything new for a generation. 

[bacchi]

A few years ago, it was said that the US was a net oil exporter.

The US is a net exporter (barely) of oil but that's because it exports refined oil. Mexico, for example, exports crude to the US, where it's refined, and then imports it as petrol.

The USA was never been a net exporter of oil. The USA is a net exporter of "energy" and as you correctly state "net petroleum products." Further reading:
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/us-energy-facts/imports-and-exports.php
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=51338

Correct. I was using "oil" to mean both crude (oil) + refined (oil), combined. That's what your chart and the one below show. As stated, it's confusing because the US uses 20M barrels of oil/day but only produces ~12M/day. However, it produces petro products for its neighbors using their own crude.

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=49596


---
As far as Russian oil, Russia supplies almost 25% of crude oil to Europe.* It also has substantial refinery capacity and exports fuel oil and diesel. Weaning Europe from using Russian oil is not an easy undertaking. (And look at Russia's increasing sales to China. Russia's oil will make it to market eventually.)


*https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=33732

[pecunia]

I'll bet the OPEC folks are rubbing their hands together with glee.  Happy Days are here again!  The rich oil sheikh will be able to pay off his yacht or buy a used one from the Russians.

[Watchmaker]

I'll bet the OPEC folks are rubbing their hands together with glee.  Happy Days are here again!  The rich oil sheikh will be able to pay off his yacht or buy a used one from the Russians.

Or buy a football club from a Russian oligarch worried about having his foreign assets seized: https://www.football.london/chelsea-fc/news/saudi-chelsea-takeover-roman-abramovich-23317553

[PDXTabs]

It looks like the brain drain from Russia is accelerating: WSJ: Russians Rush to Leave as Sanctions Bite and Putin Clamps Down on Dissent Over Ukraine War.

[zolotiyeruki]

After this is all over, I have to wonder how many of them will want to return to the motherland.

[maizefolk]

So about wheat...

There's been a lot of chatter that Ukraine is a huge supplier of the World Food Program, and it's a major source of grain for some food-insecure countries.

If we assume that the Ukrainian wheat crop is zero this year, what happens?

If the US and Canada were to take action now, could we stabilize the world wheat market? 

It seems like the problem isn't really our ability to produce enough calories to feed the world, it's what we're doing with our productive capacity and how food is distributed that are the problems.

It would be politically hard, but it seems feasible to put all of the CRP back into production, forbid the production of ethanol using corn, and greatly curtail or eliminate the planting of sugar beets.  Just those three policies would free up a lot of arable acres for growing grain. 

Ag would lose their minds, but I think it's pretty clear that the President would have the power to do all of those things under the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933, as long as the SCOTUS follows Wickard v. Filburn (1942).

I don't really know that much about world food supply chains work, though.  I'm sure others here can enlighten me. 

Changing the ethanol blending requirements could be done today. You are right that farmers would scream, but as little sense as ethanol makes as a way to limit carbon emissions is makes a great deal of sense as a way to ensure our farming infrastructure is set up to have plenty of buffer calories in the system in the case of crop failures or geopolitical unrest.

But that gets you a lot of corn. Corn keeps the US food system running (so being able to cut ethanol requirements when we need to is good for internal food security), but it's not a drop in substitute for wheat which is the primary calorie source of poorer middle eastern countries. The last time it spiked this high we got global unrest and the Arab Spring.

Growing more wheat is trickier. The winter wheat crops all got planted last fall so it's too late to increase their acreage. Spring wheat can and will still be planted (although it tends to have lower yields than winter wheat). But producing the seed for farmers is its whole own supply chain with lead times ditacted by the lifecycle of the crop in question. If farmers decided they wanted to plant 2x as many acres with wheat this year as last there just wouldn't be enough seed for them to buy.

As someone else mentioned, even for Russia invaded Ukraine, this was already going to be a scary year for the food supply. The price of nitrogen fertilizer has tripled, which means farmers are going to use a lot less of it, which is likely to translate to lower yields across almost all the major crops in the developed world.

It's been bone dry where I am all winter, and we had a very dry fall. Still time for it to turn around, but if not we may add drought to the list of challenges we're gonna face in terms of producing enough food to keep prices stable.*

*Note: If you're reading this, you don't have to worry about starvation. The average american spends a small percentage of their money on food and most of that is on the cost of labor and processing. It's the people in countries where 30-50% of their monthly income goes to just buying food, and a lot of that is plain rice or flour (wheat or maize) who are going to suffer when commodity grain prices spike.

[zolotiyeruki]

My understanding of ethanol's major benefit is not one of reducing CO2 emissions*, but because it reduces other emissions (carbon monoxide, specifically) and increases the octane rating of the fuel (a role formerly filled by TEL, the lead in leaded gas).

* Which it does, but not as much as you'd expect.  Once you include all the energy required to produce it, the benefit drops significantly.  Of course, you have to also consider the impact from the huge tracts of land used for farming it, its lower energy density, its tendency to absorb water, its shorter shelf life, etc.

[scottish]

I'll bet the OPEC folks are rubbing their hands together with glee.  Happy Days are here again!  The rich oil sheikh will be able to pay off his yacht or buy a used one from the Russians.

The Albertans certainly are.   The provincial government is already finding ways to spend it's surplus.

[Sibley]

Re the exports - yes, losing those exports will hurt the rest of the world, but its going to hurt Russia first. We might be ok for a while. Russia won't be ok very quickly.

And the flip side to the aviation is that, even if Russia withdraws from Ukraine and the sanctions are lifted, there will be consequences which will be around for a very long time. Not only is Putin catapulting Russia back in time, he's making it much harder for them to reverse that in future.

I think it's worth pointing out here that oil going from Russia to the US is a small fraction of the US's consumption, and also a small fraction of Russia production.  Realistically, while it's a strong PR move, the practical effect won't be much.

I wasn't really thinking about the US. Russia exports a good chunk of oil and gas to Europe. If he stops doing that, then yes, he hurts Europe - but he also hurts Russia. Europe can scramble around and find alternatives. It'll hurt, but it won't be fatal. The complete loss of that income will massively hurt Russia. They'll sell at least some to China, but I think I read that the pipeline to China can't move all of the oil. And I also read that China pays a reduced price to Russia, so not only would Russia be selling less overall all, it would also be for a lower price.

I'm sure there's similarities on other commodities. Yes, not exporting will hurt Europe or the rest of the world. But it will likely hurt Russia more.

[Michael in ABQ]

I'll bet the OPEC folks are rubbing their hands together with glee.  Happy Days are here again!  The rich oil sheikh will be able to pay off his yacht or buy a used one from the Russians.

The Albertans certainly are.   The provincial government is already finding ways to spend it's surplus.

Same with New Mexico. About 25-30% of the state's budget is based off oil and gas revenue. The total state budget for FY 2022 is up 14% to about $8.5 billion, almost all of that based on higher energy revenue. Free college tuition, raises for teachers and state police, more money for Medicaid, some minimal tax breaks (reducing sales tax a whooping 0.25%), etc.

Every $1 change in New Mexico’s average price of oil represents about a $23 million impact on the state’s general fund. For reference, the LFC is anticipating average prices to be around $49 per barrel for FY2021 and go up to $57 per barrel in FY2022 – roughly a $184 million increase for the general fund.

Every million barrels of oil is about $3 million for the general fund. The LFC is projecting a 20 million barrel increase over previous FY2021 projections, or about $60 million in additional revenue for the general fund.

While the LFC doesn’t provide an estimate for FY2021 natural gas production, it does explain that “each additional 10 billion cubic feet of natural gas generates about $2 million for the general fund.” It also explains that for every $0.10 change in natural gas prices, the general fund sees about a $14 million impact. With an estimated $0.30 price increase in FY2022, that’s about $42 million extra for the general fund.

[jnw]

Since we don't want to step into Ukraine to help them, but we aren't against sending weapons to Ukraine, what would happen if we sent Zelensky 50 hydrogen bombs?  They would then become a nuclear state and Russia would have to withdraw and never invade again.

Sorry I just watched an emotional video of a Ukranian diplomat crying and pleading for help.  Seriously I don't know why we don't all just go in and help.  Putin would just have to withdraw.  There is no such thing as a World War III anymore.. nuclear bombs put an end to world wars.. there's no way he'd use one.. if he used one on Ukraine, then Ukraine would have 50 to fire back.

[PDXTabs]

Since we don't want to step into Ukraine to help them, but we aren't against sending weapons to Ukraine, what would happen if we sent Zelensky 50 hydrogen bombs?  They would then become a nuclear state and Russia would have to withdraw and never invade again.

Having read the full contents of the Budapest Memorandum I would consider that entirely appropriate. To be clear the Budapest Memorandum doesn't say that we can do that, but it doesn't say that we can't either.

[jnw]

Wow, I just read this from Wikipedia on Ukraine:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Ukraine

"After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Ukraine held about one third of the Soviet nuclear arsenal, the third largest in the world at the time, as well as significant means of its design and production.[2] 130 UR-100N intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) with six warheads each, 46 RT-23 Molodets ICBMs with ten warheads apiece, as well as 33 heavy bombers, totaling approximately 1,700 warheads remained on Ukrainian territory.[3] Formally, these weapons were controlled by the Commonwealth of Independent States.[4] In 1994, Ukraine agreed to destroy the weapons, and to join the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).[5][6]"

I bet they wish they didn't destroy them all.. Wow they none left?

[GuitarStv]

Nukes don't kill people, only bad guys with nukes kill people.  That's why I'm campaigning for a nuke in every classroom - for safety!

 - GuitarStv card carrying member of the Nuke Resolution Association

[jnw]

Nukes don't kill people, only bad guys with nukes kill people.  That's why I'm campaigning for a nuke in every classroom - for safety!

 - GuitarStv card carrying member of the Nuke Resolution Association

LOL

[maizefolk]

Putin would just have to withdraw.  There is no such thing as a World War III anymore.. nuclear bombs put an end to world wars.. there's no way he'd use one..

There is very much such a thing as World War III. All thousands of nuclear bombs in missile silos and submarines and circling bombers across the globe ensures is that there is no such thing as World War IV.

May I suggest Level 7 as good reading?

Or if TV is more your style: Threads (British) or The Day After (Set in the USA).

This is the stuff our parents' generations knew by heart. I grew up 30 year interval where it was possible to pretend the threat of nuclear annihilation wasn't real. Maybe you did too. But the reality and consequences of nuclear war haven't changed. We just didn't have to think about it as much as previous generations did. Until now.

[Travis]

Since we don't want to step into Ukraine to help them, but we aren't against sending weapons to Ukraine, what would happen if we sent Zelensky 50 hydrogen bombs?  They would then become a nuclear state and Russia would have to withdraw and never invade again.

Sorry I just watched an emotional video of a Ukranian diplomat crying and pleading for help.  Seriously I don't know why we don't all just go in and help.  Putin would just have to withdraw.  There is no such thing as a World War III anymore.. nuclear bombs put an end to world wars.. there's no way he'd use one.. if he used one on Ukraine, then Ukraine would have 50 to fire back.

I am just going to quit reading'/watching it.  Gonna start on my garden tomorrow and play with the dog outside.  I can't control what Putin does and it isn't good for my mental health to worry.  Thanks for the advice everyone.

Jenn, this is the second time this week you've practically called for nuclear war. Seriously, go take that walk.

[jnw]

I'm not calling for nuclear war.  I am saying I don't believe Putin would use a bomb.  I think he'd retreat.

[jnw]

Really I don't see how we can just stand by while Putin genocides people bombing a maternity hospital.  Holding hundreds of thousands hostage without water.  I am just trying to think of ways Ukraine can defend itself better if we don't want to go in and help.

[Sibley]

Unless you are someone who has political or military power - there is nothing that you, personally can do. Not really. Does it suck? Yes. But the world isn't fair. The world isn't kind. Feel free to scream into the sky or beat your pillow if it helps.

Ukraine's best hope is for Russia to collapse. Run out of money, run out of will. A revolution, an assassination, or simply a strike. But that takes time. And yes, more people will die. More people will be displaced. More buildings, more infrastructure, more blood and death. War is hell.

[pecunia]

Unless you are someone who has political or military power - there is nothing that you, personally can do. Not really. Does it suck? Yes. But the world isn't fair. The world isn't kind. Feel free to scream into the sky or beat your pillow if it helps.

Ukraine's best hope is for Russia to collapse. Run out of money, run out of will. A revolution, an assassination, or simply a strike. But that takes time. And yes, more people will die. More people will be displaced. More buildings, more infrastructure, more blood and death. War is hell.

Well - it doesn't have to be all of Russia.  What if the people of White Russia, Belarus, started to clamor for stuff?  I don't see why they don't.  This is the ideal time to negotiate with their government for more freedom.  Their military is still at home, but the people don't have to be concerned about Russia stomping all over cuz their soldiers are kinda busy right now.  There were demonstrations in Belarus not too long ago so it is apparent they have concerns about how things are run.  The more turmoil that the Russian government has the better.

[Sibley]

Unless you are someone who has political or military power - there is nothing that you, personally can do. Not really. Does it suck? Yes. But the world isn't fair. The world isn't kind. Feel free to scream into the sky or beat your pillow if it helps.

Ukraine's best hope is for Russia to collapse. Run out of money, run out of will. A revolution, an assassination, or simply a strike. But that takes time. And yes, more people will die. More people will be displaced. More buildings, more infrastructure, more blood and death. War is hell.

Well - it doesn't have to be all of Russia.  What if the people of White Russia, Belarus, started to clamor for stuff?  I don't see why they don't.  This is the ideal time to negotiate with their government for more freedom.  Their military is still at home, but the people don't have to be concerned about Russia stomping all over cuz their soldiers are kinda busy right now.  There were demonstrations in Belarus not too long ago so it is apparent they have concerns about how things are run.  The more turmoil that the Russian government has the better.

And that would be great for Belarus, if that's what the people want (from what I can tell, the current leader is not popular). If Belarus did revolt in some way, would that help Ukraine? I don't know. I can hope so. If Japan actually decided to go after those islands rather than just saying that the islands are theirs that might help too. I'm perfectly happy to wish chaos on Putin.

And hopefully all the diplomatic stuff and the logistical stuff will get figured out and Ukraine will get more fighter jets. It probably wouldn't be enough to deny the air to Russia, but it might help.

[Sibley]

https://www.reuters.com/business/russia-approves-first-step-towards-nationalising-assets-firms-that-leave-ruling-2022-03-09/

Isn't it fun when actions taken to help short term are likely to hurt long term?

[former player]

It's being reported that Russia has "walked out of" the Council of Europe. I haven't seen anything yet which confirms whether there is a possible way back (ie just refusing to participate for the time being) or if it is intended to be permanent (ie denouncing ratification of the international convention that sets up the Council).

This is significant because membership of the Council of Europe is what applies the European Convention on Human Rights in Russia, and while the Convention has never been fully applied in Russia, as it should have been since their accession to in in 1996, acceptance of the Convention has variously been lip service/aspiration towards the application of human rights in Russia, and has provided a mechanism for investigating human rights abuses in Russia.  Withdrawal is a clear and definite indicator that the current regime in Russia is making a definitive break from dialogue with the west and from western values, and that any way for Russia out of the war in Ukraine is not going to come from a voluntary move back towards acceptance of the international legal order.

[Sibley]

It's being reported that Russia has "walked out of" the Council of Europe. I haven't seen anything yet which confirms whether there is a possible way back (ie just refusing to participate for the time being) or if it is intended to be permanent (ie denouncing ratification of the international convention that sets up the Council).

This is significant because membership of the Council of Europe is what applies the European Convention on Human Rights in Russia, and while the Convention has never been fully applied in Russia, as it should have been since their accession to in in 1996, acceptance of the Convention has variously been lip service/aspiration towards the application of human rights in Russia, and has provided a mechanism for investigating human rights abuses in Russia.  Withdrawal is a clear and definite indicator that the current regime in Russia is making a definitive break from dialogue with the west and from western values, and that any way for Russia out of the war in Ukraine is not going to come from a voluntary move back towards acceptance of the international legal order.

https://www.coe.int/en/web/portal/-/council-of-europe-suspends-russia-s-rights-of-representation

Well the Council of Europe calls their suspension temporary.

It almost seems like Putin is determined make NATO/US/others attack Russia.

Edit: You know you've fucked up when even China nopes out. And China is playing the long game, they're going to benefit massively from Russia's reliance on them.
https://www.reuters.com/article/ukraine-crisis-russia-airlines-idUSR4N2V1013?utm_source=reddit.com

[pecunia]

It's being reported that Russia has "walked out of" the Council of Europe. I haven't seen anything yet which confirms whether there is a possible way back (ie just refusing to participate for the time being) or if it is intended to be permanent (ie denouncing ratification of the international convention that sets up the Council).

This is significant because membership of the Council of Europe is what applies the European Convention on Human Rights in Russia, and while the Convention has never been fully applied in Russia, as it should have been since their accession to in in 1996, acceptance of the Convention has variously been lip service/aspiration towards the application of human rights in Russia, and has provided a mechanism for investigating human rights abuses in Russia.  Withdrawal is a clear and definite indicator that the current regime in Russia is making a definitive break from dialogue with the west and from western values, and that any way for Russia out of the war in Ukraine is not going to come from a voluntary move back towards acceptance of the international legal order.

https://www.coe.int/en/web/portal/-/council-of-europe-suspends-russia-s-rights-of-representation

Well the Council of Europe calls their suspension temporary.

It almost seems like Putin is determined make NATO/US/others attack Russia.

Edit: You know you've fucked up when even China nopes out. And China is playing the long game, they're going to benefit massively from Russia's reliance on them.
https://www.reuters.com/article/ukraine-crisis-russia-airlines-idUSR4N2V1013?utm_source=reddit.com

China plays the long game, but what about the West?  Putin plays the long game too.  Putin knows that the goal of the firm is to make money.  Let's say he takes Ukraine.  It won't be long after that he dangles some offer that the West cannot deny.  He will make a minor concession and the West will use it as an excuse to trade with him again.  He knows this.  For example, he could participate in this "Council of Europe" in a few months.  All the news reporters would then be saying he is turning a "new leaf."  Tucker Carlson would rant that the world is mistreating Putin.  Other reporters would say that Ukraine has always been a part of Russia.  They would, in fact, parrot his lines.

[Nick_Miller]

Really I don't see how we can just stand by while Putin genocides people bombing a maternity hospital.  Holding hundreds of thousands hostage without water.  I am just trying to think of ways Ukraine can defend itself better if we don't want to go in and help.

I get your thought process. It's tough to just watch it.

In my mind, I've drawn a parallel to a schoolyard  fight where a jock is beating up a nerd. The other kids feel sorry for the nerd, they might offer Band Aids, they might help him to his feet when he goes down, they might even buy him elbow pads and a helmet to mitigate the damage a tiny bit, but what they WON'T do is...actually make the bully stop beating up the nerd. It just keeps happening and happening and happening.

Oh they will say, "Bully, you can't sit with us at lunch! You can't go to our parties!" but absolutely nothing provides an immediate stop to the physical brutality. It would feel like such an...impotent response.

Back to the macro scale, it's a very helpless feeling. We spend a gazillion dollars on our military, but we can't do anything when Russia (apparently) attacks hospitals and civilian escape routes.  I wonder where our red lines are? What if Russia breaks out chemical weapons? Do we just watch no matter what happens?  (I realize the answer might have to be "yes").

I also wonder when does one country (Russia) view others as 'declaring war' against them? I mean, I read about the Polish idea with the fighter planes. If (and I realize we probably won't) the US assisted in moving fighter planes to Urkaine how the hell is that any different, in Putin's view, than the US deploying our direct resources? Honestly I don't see how he doesn't view the other European countries providing missiles, 'defensive' or otherwise, to be an act of war. I don't pretend to understand any of this.

[maizefolk]

In my mind, I've drawn a parallel to a schoolyard  fight where a jock is beating up a nerd. The other kids feel sorry for the nerd, they might offer Band Aids, they might help him to his feet when he goes down, they might even buy him elbow pads and a helmet to mitigate the damage a tiny bit, but what they WON'T do is...actually make the bully stop beating up the nerd. It just keeps happening and happening and happening.

...

Back to the macro scale, it's a very helpless feeling. We spend a gazillion dollars on our military, but we can't do anything when Russia (apparently) attacks hospitals and civilian escape routes.  I wonder where our red lines are? What if Russia breaks out chemical weapons? Do we just watch no matter what happens?  (I realize the answer might have to be "yes").

If the only thing that doesn't count as "just watching" in your view is sending in US troops or committing to firing on Russian planes, then I think the answer is that the red line we have is the invasion of a NATO country and nothing short of that, no matter how horrible, is going to shift the calculus that global thermonuclear war is worse.

Instead of your analogy to a schoolyard bully where a bunch of kids ganging up really could solve the issue, consider a bank robber with a bunch of explosives and ball bearings strapped to his chest on a dead man's trigger who has taken 20 people hostage in a bank. He beats of some of the hostages. Shoots one of them. At what point do you storm the bank, knowing that if you don't he is killing and hurting people and will almost certainly continue, but that if you do all the people you're trying to protect will almost certainly die, plus the people you send in to try to save them?

[frugalnacho]

The "red line" of attacking a NATO country seems so arbitrary to me.  The reasoning no one can step in and directly help is because NATO is not an offensive treaty, and god forbid anyone attack russia because OMG NUKES WW3! but the ultimate extension of that logic is that it's never appropriate to attack Russia.  If allowing Russia to genocide a country is preferable to potentially invoking WW3 because everyone is scared shitless, then why doesn't it also apply when he attacks a NATO country?  I know NATO is supposed to defend all members, but if he attacks Poland what is the better scenario: We allow Poland to be attacked, or we fight back and risk WW3?  If WW3 is so terrible I don't see how the calculus changes when the genocide moves from Ukraine and goes 1 inch into NATO territory; if losing Ukraine is preferable to MAD, then surely losing Poland is also preferable to MAD.  We are allowing him to terrorize the world. I understand not wanting to go into Russia proper and attack them, but no one is seriously suggesting that, the only suggestions are to possibly attack Russia while they are invading Ukraine.

I also don't understand the arguments of "lets cripple them economically and wait for them to collapse" as an argument that we can't attack, or at a minimum defend Ukraine.  Russia says setting up a no-fly zone would be a declaration of war, but so fucking what? It's not Russia's airspace so I don't understand why anyone takes that demand seriously.  It's straight up terrorism: I'm going to take Ukraine, and if any other country tries to come into THEIR airspace we will nuke them.  What? It's fucking insane that anyone is tolerating that bullshit.  And if the logic is that we must acquiesce to all of Russia's insane and illogical demands because we fear MAD, then I don't understand how it makes sense to cripple them economically.  Like it's some kind of "gotcha" technicality that we can sanction them to hell and back and arguable do more damage to the country than a few fighters that aren't even in Russia's territory, and Russia somehow can't retaliate against anyone because of a technicality, even though they are openly committing war crimes.  He's using all the conventions that outlaw war crimes as a god damn check list, but we are all banking on the fact that we can ruin their economy with no repercussions because he technically can't attack us since it wasn't a direct attack, even though this entire situation is because he directly attacked a sovereign country completely unprovoked.

I sure hope the powers that be are playing some 4d chess and making moves that are beyond my comprehension to bring about the best possible solution with the lowest amount of casualties, because it sure is frustrating to watch this shit go down in real time and feel so helpless.