Fennophile 🇫🇮🇫🇮🇫🇮

@@bunba_77_15 That’s so much better, thank you!

Yes - Texas is not fully synchronized with the rest of the continent. It didn't help them at all a couple Winters ago when their grid collapsed.

@@daniellarson3068 Agreed. It denies Texas the ability to buy excess power when they need it, and denies them the ability to sell excess power when they have it. Ridiculous.

ah yes, the germans should build that high voltage connector to norway to get access to their storage dams.

We can have unicorns fly all that unused excess solar power back and forth.

@@kenkeyes8148 Is the earth 🌎flat? You think? Solar power 🔋is plenty, more than we ever need, just so you know 😉.

👍🏾👍

Yet in Italy people do not want to give up a single inch of their luxury - they might say they condemn war, but will not act. I hope rising prices will make them do otherwise

@@gabrielecarbone8235 Too many pro-russian talking heads on their national TV + they are more dependent on gas than even Germany

Opposition to nuclear power goes well beyond the green party these days in Germany. When Merkel sealed the second nuclear exit after Fukushima the green party was not involved in the government. Also, while I personally think it is a mistake to shut down nuclear before coal and I wish it would run longer, nuclear does not change a lot about German gas dependence. The main issue there is that German heating is not electrified. The state of German gas dependence is a failure across the political spectrum and arguably the greens are least responsible for it.

If we would have smart and fair leaders, we would use more oil and gas until we have REAL replacement for those. Now people are suffering cause the "green" policies. Fortunately I will not have difficulties to buy gasoline for $10/l

Telsa

Great point! Also the western countries use the energy to provide the products and services that the world wants and demands. Those countries just order what they want… that’s the only reason they are not polluting. If they don’t like the carbon output….they don’t have to purchase the products! Then carbon output goes down. 🌻 Problem solved!

Turn on CC in upper right corner

A G A I N S T joining NATO : 1) Joining NATO means to serve as a target for Russia´s or China´s strategic nuclear missilles all the time in future, certainly not just untill Ukraine war would end. 2) USA may back off in case of nuclear war in Europe to save hundreds of their cities- than NATO would loose nuclear war in Europe. 3) USA would appreciate every new NATO land(Finland) to absorb some of Russia´s nukes, which otherwice would probably explode above USA´s cities in case of nuclear war between USA and Russia... 4) Finland managed alone in past, could manage in future. It is still far better option than to be incinereted instead of some USA´s cities one day...USA likes to be nuclear armed nation, on the other hand they can not defend themself against Russia´s nuclear forces, let alone to defend Europe against it! Finland would better to rely on Finish defensive means and not to mess with counting on USA and kind of stand up against nuclear superpowers like Russia and China to "fight" them one day... To "fight" them means - to absorb some of nukes which would otherwise explode above USA´cities very harmlessly for Finland.... 5) Joining NATO is the way how to assure the tottal destructin to Finland during a nuclear war between USA and Russia, or even between European NATO members and Russia... 6) If anybody thinks that USA is a morally "OK" NATO leader- kind of a "good guy" , than please try to google: "USA drone strikes" . You will find horrible crimes committed by USA on civilians including children in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen an other third world countries... 7) Pro NATO propaganda sounds like this: „No NATO country has ever been invaded. “ Russia has not been invaded either. It certainly does not prove, that NATO and Russia will not destroy each other one day without any invasion. 8) In case of nuclear war the destruction would be gruesome, but also very limited geographically to states involved. Joining NATO is possibly signing of a completely unnecesarry death sentence, since it is signing of being targeted by SATTAN II and more of similar machines of death instead of some USA´s mainland, which is warmly welcomed by USA.

I'm sorry but none of that is remotely true? 1) you do know the elite's of Russia have ALL their children living in the west. 2) you fo realise pootie doesn't have a big red button, which means he would be relying on the guys who do turn the 2 keys, killing themselves and their families too. In other words MAD, and even the Russians realised they went too far threatening nukes..my evidence; China TOLD putin he had to wait till after the winter Olympics in China. so chill out or wind your neck in, it's uncouth.

I do have to agree on all points you’ve made. I remembered 1/2 way through about turning on CC in upper right corner. Still ….. not as impressive as other interviews/videos from this channel. I have very much enjoyed listening these past few weeks!

That's a good question. Canada didn't succeed in building out pipelines to the west and east coasts: it was too easy to stay addicted to the US market. The other point is that US shale oil has a much lower production and transportation costs than most Canadian sources. Consider too that Canada doesn't own the majority interest in the Canadian oil industry: the Americans do. Add to these factors one final misstep: Canada hasn't developed enough value-added components such as oil refineries. We transport our raw crude - and thousands of potential refinery jobs - to the US where they add the value and make the significant profits. Sad that Canada missed out on such an opportunity, isn't it?

@@hungryghost3260 you made good points there. What you have pointed out together with a lack of preparedness in the Canadian Arctic, I feel Canada needs to do more to capitalize on their capacities. Now and going forward would be an ideal time to do so.

If you can wait for us to build a pipeline to the coast! Just like Germany we have too many lunatic environmentalists!

@@P_Izenberg I agree with you wholeheartedly, sir! Any ideas about how to wake Canada up? 😁

turn on subtitles?

A G A I N S T joining NATO : 1) Joining NATO means to serve as a target for Russia´s or China´s strategic nuclear missilles all the time in future, certainly not just untill Ukraine war would end. 2) USA may back off in case of nuclear war in Europe to save hundreds of their cities- than NATO would loose nuclear war in Europe. 3) USA would appreciate every new NATO land(Finland) to absorb some of Russia´s nukes, which otherwice would probably explode above USA´s cities in case of nuclear war between USA and Russia... 4) Finland managed alone in past, could manage in future. It is still far better option than to be incinereted instead of some USA´s cities one day...USA likes to be nuclear armed nation, on the other hand they can not defend themself against Russia´s nuclear forces, let alone to defend Europe against it! Finland would better to rely on Finish defensive means and not to mess with counting on USA and kind of stand up against nuclear superpowers like Russia and China to "fight" them one day... To "fight" them means - to absorb some of nukes which would otherwise explode above USA´cities very harmlessly for Finland.... 5) Joining NATO is the way how to assure the tottal destructin to Finland during a nuclear war between USA and Russia, or even between European NATO members and Russia... 6) If anybody thinks that USA is a morally "OK" NATO leader- kind of a "good guy" , than please try to google: "USA drone strikes" . You will find horrible crimes committed by USA on civilians including children in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen an other third world countries... 7) Pro NATO propaganda sounds like this: „No NATO country has ever been invaded. “ Russia has not been invaded either. It certainly does not prove, that NATO and Russia will not destroy each other one day without any invasion. 8) In case of nuclear war the destruction would be gruesome, but also very limited geographically to states involved. Joining NATO is possibly signing of a completely unnecesarry death sentence, since it is signing of being targeted by SATTAN II and more of similar machines of death instead of some USA´s mainland, which is warmly welcomed by USA.

Where was Europe's concern when the security of Libya, Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan as well as Vietnam were smashed to pieces? Or do you think this is a one-way street?

Or have you forgotten what NATO did in Serbia and Yugoslavia?

@@mekbebtamrat817 nice try but it was actually only European countries to be against many of those wars, they were even the ones to block usa from taking nato into war in afghasnistan, you re comment is so pathetic and xenophobe, why would you even talk about Vietnam as if your country was against war in Vietnam? absurd. where were you and your countr when russian invaded Georgia??!

@@jh5kl Georgia declared war on Russia. Russua responded.

@@jh5kl where were all the sanctions which even the so-called neutral Switzerland imposed on Russia when US destroyed those countries. They were spreading democracy, right? I do not think I need to point out the hypocrisy much more than this. And you should check out the meaning of the word xenophobe.

youtube has to generate them and can take hours to days.

Prices speak. It's a transitional stage to encourage consumers to use less energy so that they are more prepared if rationing starts

A G A I N S T joining NATO : 1) Joining NATO means to serve as a target for Russia´s or China´s strategic nuclear missilles all the time in future, certainly not just untill Ukraine war would end. 2) USA may back off in case of nuclear war in Europe to save hundreds of their cities- than NATO would loose nuclear war in Europe. 3) USA would appreciate every new NATO land(Finland) to absorb some of Russia´s nukes, which otherwice would probably explode above USA´s cities in case of nuclear war between USA and Russia... 4) Finland managed alone in past, could manage in future. It is still far better option than to be incinereted instead of some USA´s cities one day...USA likes to be nuclear armed nation, on the other hand they can not defend themself against Russia´s nuclear forces, let alone to defend Europe against it! Finland would better to rely on Finish defensive means and not to mess with counting on USA and kind of stand up against nuclear superpowers like Russia and China to "fight" them one day... To "fight" them means - to absorb some of nukes which would otherwise explode above USA´cities very harmlessly for Finland.... 5) Joining NATO is the way how to assure the tottal destructin to Finland during a nuclear war between USA and Russia, or even between European NATO members and Russia... 6) If anybody thinks that USA is a morally "OK" NATO leader- kind of a "good guy" , than please try to google: "USA drone strikes" . You will find horrible crimes committed by USA on civilians including children in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen an other third world countries... 7) Pro NATO propaganda sounds like this: „No NATO country has ever been invaded. “ Russia has not been invaded either. It certainly does not prove, that NATO and Russia will not destroy each other one day without any invasion. 8) In case of nuclear war the destruction would be gruesome, but also very limited geographically to states involved. Joining NATO is possibly signing of a completely unnecesarry death sentence, since it is signing of being targeted by SATTAN II and more of similar machines of death instead of some USA´s mainland, which is warmly welcomed by USA.

A G A I N S T joining NATO : 1) Joining NATO means to serve as a target for Russia´s or China´s strategic nuclear missilles all the time in future, certainly not just untill Ukraine war would end. 2) USA may back off in case of nuclear war in Europe to save hundreds of their cities- than NATO would loose nuclear war in Europe. 3) USA would appreciate every new NATO land(Finland) to absorb some of Russia´s nukes, which otherwice would probably explode above USA´s cities in case of nuclear war between USA and Russia... 4) Finland managed alone in past, could manage in future. It is still far better option than to be incinereted instead of some USA´s cities one day...USA likes to be nuclear armed nation, on the other hand they can not defend themself against Russia´s nuclear forces, let alone to defend Europe against it! Finland would better to rely on Finish defensive means and not to mess with counting on USA and kind of stand up against nuclear superpowers like Russia and China to "fight" them one day... To "fight" them means - to absorb some of nukes which would otherwise explode above USA´cities very harmlessly for Finland.... 5) Joining NATO is the way how to assure the tottal destructin to Finland during a nuclear war between USA and Russia, or even between European NATO members and Russia... 6) If anybody thinks that USA is a morally "OK" NATO leader- kind of a "good guy" , than please try to google: "USA drone strikes" . You will find horrible crimes committed by USA on civilians including children in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen an other third world countries... 7) Pro NATO propaganda sounds like this: „No NATO country has ever been invaded. “ Russia has not been invaded either. It certainly does not prove, that NATO and Russia will not destroy each other one day without any invasion. 8) In case of nuclear war the destruction would be gruesome, but also very limited geographically to states involved. Joining NATO is possibly signing of a completely unnecesarry death sentence, since it is signing of being targeted by SATTAN II and more of similar machines of death instead of some USA´s mainland, which is warmly welcomed by USA.

Nuclear and hydroelectric power were fairly "green" as far as emissions are concerned. And would alleviate the problem of overpriced oil in the hands of dictators. Cue in certain "environmentalists"...

A G A I N S T joining NATO : 1) Joining NATO means to serve as a target for Russia´s or China´s strategic nuclear missilles all the time in future, certainly not just untill Ukraine war would end. 2) USA may back off in case of nuclear war in Europe to save hundreds of their cities- than NATO would loose nuclear war in Europe. 3) USA would appreciate every new NATO land(Finland) to absorb some of Russia´s nukes, which otherwice would probably explode above USA´s cities in case of nuclear war between USA and Russia... 4) Finland managed alone in past, could manage in future. It is still far better option than to be incinereted instead of some USA´s cities one day...USA likes to be nuclear armed nation, on the other hand they can not defend themself against Russia´s nuclear forces, let alone to defend Europe against it! Finland would better to rely on Finish defensive means and not to mess with counting on USA and kind of stand up against nuclear superpowers like Russia and China to "fight" them one day... To "fight" them means - to absorb some of nukes which would otherwise explode above USA´cities very harmlessly for Finland.... 5) Joining NATO is the way how to assure the tottal destructin to Finland during a nuclear war between USA and Russia, or even between European NATO members and Russia... 6) If anybody thinks that USA is a morally "OK" NATO leader- kind of a "good guy" , than please try to google: "USA drone strikes" . You will find horrible crimes committed by USA on civilians including children in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen an other third world countries... 7) Pro NATO propaganda sounds like this: „No NATO country has ever been invaded. “ Russia has not been invaded either. It certainly does not prove, that NATO and Russia will not destroy each other one day without any invasion. 8) In case of nuclear war the destruction would be gruesome, but also very limited geographically to states involved. Joining NATO is possibly signing of a completely unnecesarry death sentence, since it is signing of being targeted by SATTAN II and more of similar machines of death instead of some USA´s mainland, which is warmly welcomed by USA.

@@mirekslechta7161 shouldn't you be out on a ledge somewhere?

@@chrisrosenkreuz23 Would you like to push me down?

As Russia was selling

On the contrary the over-production of renewables made it necessary to close nuclear power plants.

A G A I N S T joining NATO : 1) Joining NATO means to serve as a target for Russia´s or China´s strategic nuclear missilles all the time in future, certainly not just untill Ukraine war would end. 2) USA may back off in case of nuclear war in Europe to save hundreds of their cities- than NATO would loose nuclear war in Europe. 3) USA would appreciate every new NATO land(Finland) to absorb some of Russia´s nukes, which otherwice would probably explode above USA´s cities in case of nuclear war between USA and Russia... 4) Finland managed alone in past, could manage in future. It is still far better option than to be incinereted instead of some USA´s cities one day...USA likes to be nuclear armed nation, on the other hand they can not defend themself against Russia´s nuclear forces, let alone to defend Europe against it! Finland would better to rely on Finish defensive means and not to mess with counting on USA and kind of stand up against nuclear superpowers like Russia and China to "fight" them one day... To "fight" them means - to absorb some of nukes which would otherwise explode above USA´cities very harmlessly for Finland.... 5) Joining NATO is the way how to assure the tottal destructin to Finland during a nuclear war between USA and Russia, or even between European NATO members and Russia... 6) If anybody thinks that USA is a morally "OK" NATO leader- kind of a "good guy" , than please try to google: "USA drone strikes" . You will find horrible crimes committed by USA on civilians including children in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen an other third world countries... 7) Pro NATO propaganda sounds like this: „No NATO country has ever been invaded. “ Russia has not been invaded either. It certainly does not prove, that NATO and Russia will not destroy each other one day without any invasion. 8) In case of nuclear war the destruction would be gruesome, but also very limited geographically to states involved. Joining NATO is possibly signing of a completely unnecesarry death sentence, since it is signing of being targeted by SATTAN II and more of similar machines of death instead of some USA´s mainland, which is warmly welcomed by USA.

are you on drugs? ask putin that

There are more than enough European nukes. Thanks for your concern! 🙏

Ok Ruskii

nothing comes without a price. Not even freedom. They gave the answer at the very beginning: it's a geopolitical war and energy is being weaponized. 'Fuel' the aggressors and destroy Ukraine by whining about fuel prices. We (Europeans) are used to receiving great returns on our investments, this time sth else is at stake and if we just think 'cost' we fuck up big time.

How is taxing European consumers change Russian war? Russia will make even more money from gas and oil!

true and irelevent. russia is agressor and us wrongdoing doesn't make it right. And its about time to set example for future. Enough agressions.

The main difference is if you end with one country or two. Liberation - invade, appoint a government from within the country who trades favourably with you, allows your military bases, etc. Impose some form of democratic election as mode of succession with pre-defined terms (how long between elections) --- vs Invasion - invade, administer the country directly through an appointed military leadership or government. Invasion involves hegemony, or being integrated into an empire, union. Invader chooses if, when, and to whom succession occurs.

Confused? So confused that you have no idea what you are talking about. The Ukrainian people do not want the Russians, who are waging cultural genocide because Putin doesn't believe the Ukrainians exist as a people. The US never thought the people of any of those countries needed to be eliminated.

@@stischer47 systematic targeting of civilian people and non-military infrastructure .. I agree with you that the events in Ukraine are more than an invasion. There is weaponization of the mass displacement of people, and destruction for the purpose of destruction

Please explain how this laundry basket of yours lasers a useful solution to the pressing problem of European enslavement to Russia’s oil, gas, & coal. Which directly funds Putin’s bloody war against Ukraine?