It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russia Cuts Off Ukraine Gas Supply To 6 European Countries

page: 3
54
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 09:48 PM
link   
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

You are correct, reading the article from AFP on yahoo its an entirely different situation.

I'm just wondering now if the article on the daily mail is click bait to an old article or if they are just incompetent enough to post an old article as a new one.




posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 09:52 PM
link   
a reply to: nemonimity

It looks like a wrong interpretation of the Bloomberg article, however it`s still a big move into forcing Europe to start building.

But I upped my heating again for now.



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 10:29 PM
link   
Well, it is their right to do so. What do Europeans think, they can put sanctions against Russia and Russia cannot do anything? I have a feeling that Russia is ready for war. So is the USA. Nobody is a winner in war except the people running the countries. It seems the bombs always fall on the regular people, not the heads of government.

Has anyone actually verified if this is true yet? It could just be something made to scare the people.
edit on 14-1-2015 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 10:36 PM
link   
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

HOLD UP. Okay,this is a convoluted story. I followed the links because I had seen an article about the South Stream pipeline being dead and it was all over now. But no where in there was ANYTHING about Russia cutting off gas to Europe. So I followed the links in the story. I think this would be a very big story if true,big enough you would be seeing it on all the major news feeds. Yet they are all silent. So how reliable is the Daily Mail? It looks to me like the writer of this piece took a prior story and wove into todays headlines for better effect. I would say,hold judgement until we have more verification of this story from other news sources. There is nothing at all about it on AP or Reuters.



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 11:42 PM
link   



www.bloomberg.com...

“Transit risks for European consumers on the territory of Ukraine remain,” Miller said in an e-mailed statement. “There are no other options” except for the planned Turkish Stream link, he said.

“We have informed our European partners, and now it is up to them to put in place the necessary infrastructure starting from the Turkish-Greek border,” Miller said.


Does that mean no infrastructure exists via Turkey and Europe will have to build the infrastructure to get the Gas, until then they receive no gas from Russia ?


edit on 14-1-2015 by maddy21 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 11:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: elementalgrove
Man oh man things are picking up quickly in 2015!

It was clear that Russia was going to do this, to be honest I am surprised that it has taken this long.

I wonder what the next chess piece to be moved shall be!


Both Rooks will move at the same time.





that is much more like a check move done with an advancing queen



posted on Jan, 15 2015 @ 12:07 AM
link   
Mean while my gas bill near Portland OR is about 80 bucks a month, sounds like Europe needs to handle this on their own.



posted on Jan, 15 2015 @ 12:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: funkadeliaaaa
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

On a scale of 1-10 how bad is this?
(...we dont need gas right?... Just asking here before i go check out the sensationalistic BBC)


It's a 6 or a 7. Not catastrophic but enough to either push the EU to war for resources or to cave on sanctions. There is a way out though, the US has increased domestic production heavily and was already trying to position itself to replace Russia as the main supplier. This just moves up the time table.



posted on Jan, 15 2015 @ 01:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: funkadeliaaaa
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

On a scale of 1-10 how bad is this?
(...we dont need gas right?... Just asking here before i go check out the sensationalistic BBC)


It's a 6 or a 7. Not catastrophic but enough to either push the EU to war for resources or to cave on sanctions. There is a way out though, the US has increased domestic production heavily and was already trying to position itself to replace Russia as the main supplier. This just moves up the time table.


Thing is, you can't replace the supplier overnight , it takes a couple of months to build the infrastructure necessary to import gas supplies from U.S or any other energy supplying nation.
edit on 15-1-2015 by maddy21 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2015 @ 03:19 AM
link   
Ukraine just paid Russia another nstallment for past supplies of gas

news.yahoo.com...

now you know where the gold went


ukraine-gold-fake-criminal-probe.htm
edit on 15/1/2015 by douglas5 because: (no reason given)


au.ibtimes.com...

Ukraine Admits Its Gold Is Gone: "There Is Almost No Gold Left In The Central Bank Vault"

www.zerohedge.com...


edit on 15/1/2015 by douglas5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2015 @ 03:30 AM
link   
Smart move by Russia!
If they are going to get bullied, then expect them to push back. All the sanctions ordered by the US don't really hurt the US at all but are extremely damaging to European states. This is just another blowback incident and not unexpected, unless of course the stupid European leadership really thought they could keep pressuring Russia without any retaliation, which wouldn't surprise me given the bunch of US lapdogs and globalist banking owned politicians we have "leading" us all.

Play nice and, more importantly, ensure Russia is paid, and Russia will turn the gas on again. If not, well it becomes a problem of our own creation to deal with. Seems though that some of the European leadership are coming under increasing pressure from within their own states to quit acting in the interests of the US and start negotiating with Russia. Only way I can see that happening is via the removal of the current owned leaders.

The answer always seems to be another round of Russia bashing and threats, But, under the wonderful capitalist system, isn't it up to Russia to decide where it's gas goes? Even if they have contracts to supply, is it really a fair expectation that they will continue to honour that contract while at the same time the states they are supplying are openly doing their utmost to cripple and damage Russia with sanctions and trade blocks?

I think the simple answer is of course a resounding NO! Cancel the contracts and sell the goods elsewhere.
edit on 445Thu, 15 Jan 2015 03:41:45 -06004131300000015 by Britguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2015 @ 03:41 AM
link   
a reply to: maddy21

Make that couple of years to build the infrastructure!
I remember seeing talk of the US shipping LNG to the UK and other European states a while back, which was laughable as there are no ships, ports or storage facilities available to do this right now.



posted on Jan, 15 2015 @ 03:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Britguy

Since Russia is holding the biggest gas reserves in the world, yeah, it's kinda smart to get the lost earnings on oil, in gas instead


Just watch the prices on oil and natural gas at the current moment

Oil

source


Gas

source

It seems someone has a monopoly on oil, and someone has a monopoly on gas, while some attempt to get a monopoly on hot air

edit on 15/1/2015 by kloejen because: (no reason given)

edit on 15/1/2015 by kloejen because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2015 @ 04:11 AM
link   
let geyrope stokes the furnace wood or furniture we sell gas to China for money not $ onmounthoreb.com... quote: nuclear energy do not develop gas you do not want and what will use the stove - firewood? for firewood too need to go to Siberia youtu.be...
edit on 15/1/15 by mangust69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2015 @ 04:27 AM
link   
I thinks EU should drop the sanctions and start working with Russia and distance them selfs from US, at least outside the whips reach. That way war would be pushed further away, perhaps it would give enough time to balance things worldwide so war would become less popular option. We already have enough resources to go for every nations needs if we just learn to share it and build each other up instead trying to stick with the old corrupted systems that only "work" with extreme greediness. Maybe that would give US citizens time to make some needed changes in their leaders, politics etc too.



posted on Jan, 15 2015 @ 05:00 AM
link   
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

I wonder what the effect in global oil prices will be in the near term? It is obvious that with the US and the Saudis ramping up production and flooding the market, therefore dramatically cutting prices and revenues for Russia's main export was a probably on move too far for Russia to bare. The question is can they fight back on the economic warfare front by cutting Europe off and causing a crisis driven spike? If so how do they benefit? They will generate more profits for the US and KSA but will have no one to sell their own oil too? Are they hoping for a near term stabilization that will allow them, in a number of months, to slowly restart supplies via Turkey to a then stabilized global oil market?

What does this chess move mean? It certainly has to be more than a poke in the to Europe?



posted on Jan, 15 2015 @ 05:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: s3cz0ne
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

What does this chess move mean? It certainly has to be more than a poke in the to Europe?


If you like chess, maybe they got a point at RT?

This is a chess game. The raid on the ruble was supposed to be a checkmate. It’s not. Not when deployed by amateur scrabble players. And don’t forget the Russia-China strategic partnership. The storm may be abating, but the match continues.

source



posted on Jan, 15 2015 @ 05:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: kloejen
a reply to: Britguy

Since Russia is holding the biggest gas reserves in the world, yeah, it's kinda smart to get the lost earnings on oil, in gas instead


Just watch the prices on oil and natural gas at the current moment

Oil

source


Gas

source

It seems someone has a monopoly on oil, and someone has a monopoly on gas, while some attempt to get a monopoly on hot air

Yes but doesn't the U.S. have plenty on LNG? Granted there isn't a transatlantic pipeline to move it but if the U.S. has to start tanking LNG to Europe doesn't that drive up the price and leave Russia out in the cold with regards to profits as one of their main clients will have disappeared? Additionally, and I'm probably wrong, but isn't there usually some correlation between NatGas and oil markets?



posted on Jan, 15 2015 @ 05:49 AM
link   
a reply to: kloejen

You also have to consider what % of total energy use comes from gas to consider the impact cutting gas has on the economy.

For example, Estonia and Finland both import 100% of their gas from Russia, while using gas is quite unpopular in these nations (under 9%).

In total Russian gas makes up 6% of total energy used in EU nations. Lithuania is possibly the most dependent nation, as Russian covers about one third of their energy, while in most countries it makes up less than 10%. Most European nations would not be strongly impacted by Russia cutting its gas supply.
edit on 15-1-2015 by Cabin because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2015 @ 05:57 AM
link   
Russia wants to supply Europe via Turkey, which is why people are being programmed by state media to think Turkey is our enemy.



new topics

top topics



 
54
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join