Reply to US has no good options in Ukraine

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "US has no good options in Ukraine"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]We have tried to give Putin off ramp for weeks. For months,
He is sending in troops to kill civilians.
F this guy.
I just read a good piece by Fiona Hill, and she breaks it down.
We can’t be paralyzed by fear. We have to anticipate and move to act.[/quote]

We have acted and all Putin does is escalate. I’m not sure what additional actions you mean?[/quote]

What's the alternative, just let Putin keep conquering and destabilizing?  This needs to come to an end, and that end cannot mean Putin winning.[/quote]

Cut off his money supply - which is oil.  Stop buying oil from Russia and sanction sales.  
And, give Ukraine more lethal weapons to give them at least a chance.  [/quote]

The sanctions are meaningless if they don’t include energy. Oil production and exports from Russia have not slowed since the invasion started. Do people realize this? If we want to help Ukraine we need to stop consuming so much gas and be prepared to pay high prices at the pump. [/quote]

Or, we could actually increase our supply and help out Europe by providing the oil that they have bought from Russia.  
And, we need to stop buying oil from Russia.....

[twitter]https://twitter.com/StephenMoore/status/1498423944042397699[/twitter][/quote]

Well, we knew this to be true. What was especially shameful was the unwillingness to stop even after Putin invaded Ukraine, trying to assure the public that these sections won't impact energy prices. I am critical of Biden taking us back to energy dependence on foreign sources but I would have gladly met the consequences of cutting off Russian oil flow. They are so tone deaf.[/quote]

How exactly did Biden take “us back to energy dependence on foreign sources “?  And which foreign sources are these?

Yes, I know about Google, but assertions like that really need to be supported with specifics— if they’re going to be taken seriously. [/quote]

Republicans want to drill on federal lands and restart the Keystone pipeline. [/quote]

There are plenty of non-Federal lands to drill on. Keystone won't process fuel for vehicles and isn't even built yet. I'd don't buy any of these arguments because none of these actions would lower oil prices or inflation today. Or even next year.

You know what wrecked America's energy production? COVID-19, when oil was selling for negative dollars for first time in recorded history. Also, the huge amount of Boomers retiring and people dying from COVID which is leading to labor shortages.[/quote]

Biden has done plenty to make oil and gas exploration difficult in the US. 
This article is over a year old.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2021/01/28/biden-opens-new-fronts-in-his-war-on-us-oil-and-gas/?sh=3d910f187d9b

[quote]Regarding the promised fracking ban, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the Biden people have decided that a direct ban would become too politically costly in oil producing states like New Mexico, Pennsylvania and Colorado, and will likely instead attempt to accomplish the same net result via other administrative means. The moratorium on new leasing and permitting on federal lands and waters is one of those means, especially should the Biden Department of Interior (DOI) continue to extend it over the coming four years. As I pointed out in previous pieces, political appointees and career bureaucrats at the various bureaus within the DOI which control the leasing and permitting processes have all manner of means to slow or halt any company’s ability to get its business done on the leases it already owned before the moratorium took effect.

The point being that you don’t have to outright “ban” fracking in order to slow or stop it from happening.

Now, about those industry-specific tax treatments... - Another way to slow or halt drilling and fracking is to use the power of government to deplete the amount of industry capital available to fund the operations. In his very next breath following his remarks about the fracking ban, the President said this: “Unlike previous administrations, I don’t think the federal government should give handouts to ‘big oil’ to the tune of $40 billion in fossil fuels subsidies. I’m going to be going to the congress, asking them to eliminate those subsidies.”

Thus does President Biden trot out the tiresome Obama-era canard alleging that “big oil” gets $40 billion in subsidies from the federal government.

Several things to note about this:

The oil industry simply does not receive “subsidies” or “handouts” from the federal government. Those are specific words with specific meanings, and they do not apply to any industry-specific tax treatment in the IRS Code.
The number Biden quotes is not an annual number, although it is often misconstrued to be so in the press and by activists. It is in fact the same 10-year composite value that the Obama administration attributed in 2009 to every industry-specific tax treatment currently in the tax code. Of that $4 billion per year, the vast majority comes from deductions for percentage depletion or intangible drilling costs, two deductions that have been a part of the tax code since 1913
[/quote]

Then there is this....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/02/24/biden-climate-gas-prices-russia-sanctions/
[quote]But on taking office, Biden squandered the position of strength he inherited from Trump. He prioritized climate change over energy independence and launched a policy of energy disarmament. Biden rejoined the Paris agreement and canceled the Keystone XL pipeline, which by itself would have transported 830,000 barrels of oil per day from Alberta to refineries on the Gulf Coast of Texas — far more than the 538,000 barrels we import every day from Russia). He suspended oil and gas leases in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and sought to deliver on his campaign promise to ban all “new oil and gas permitting on public lands and waters.” And he made clear his intention to tax and regulate the fossil fuel industry out of business, promising that his administration would “end fossil fuel.”
These policies have backfired — undermining the United States in its confrontation with Russia today. Thanks to Biden’s climate policies, and the record inflation his administration has helped unleash, the price of gasoline has risen from an average of $2.38 a gallon under Trump to $3.53 today — the largest year-over-year price rises in at least 30 years. That leaves little room to absorb the impact of massive oil and gas sanctions on Russia. The highest U.S. price for a gallon of regular gas has been $4.11. If Biden were to impose the kinds of crippling energy sanctions required to truly punish Russia, prices could rise far higher.[/quote]

And more:

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/democrats-wage-war-on-us-oil-and-gas-industry-rep-pete-sessions
https://nypost.com/2021/12/05/the-costs-of-bidens-war-on-oil-include-higher-gas-prices/
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/27/biden-suspends-oil-and-gas-drilling-in-series-of.html
https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/585532-bidens-renewable-energy-rush-is-making-gas-prices-skyrocket
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/595706-biden-not-putin-to-blame-for-higher-gas-prices

There are a plethora of pieces about Biden's war on gas and oil and how it has made us more energy dependent and led to higher prices.  [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics