Yes, with the mobile drilling rigs of today, extraction of gas could be underway quite quickly.
From Energy Post: Shale gas: what it could really mean for Europe
<<<At present, shale gas in Europe is in its exploratory phase and before starting commercial production of shale gas, pilot projects are indispensable. In this exploratory phase, which could take up to 6 months, between 8 and 12 wells per pad could be drilled. In the next stage, when it has become clear that there is gas in place and there is enough geological information, drilling efficiency could be substantially increased using modern equipment. Thus, a simple multiplication of an average number of rigs (20-25)[15] per year by an average number of wells per pad (between 12-20) shows that a fleet of rigs as well as a number of wells could be available to start commercial production of shale gas in Europe within a reasonable timeframe of 5-8 years>>>>>
The article is dated June 16, 2014 and it also explains that Europe doesn't have the rigs to do the drilling yet so they will either have to build them or import them from US. On top of that there is the political process to approve fracking which is controversial and the economics of shale fracking in Europe which is different than in US.
http://www.energypost.eu/shale-gas-really-mean-europe/
Can you present the source for your information?
Logically, the EU likely have already done enough testing to have gone to such efforts to persuade the Ukraine to go with them. Since we agree at least on the planning to frak the region, lets then presume this exploratory phase really the fraking of Ukraine. Mankind is already fully aware of all the controversy because of the ecological damage fraking does to the region. Compensation to those affected is very unlikely due to Ukraine's financial predicament. Doesn't this help clarify the likely reasoning though behind shelling those in the east? The longer it takes for the processing and distributing of these gases, they harder the sale must have been to get the EU to walk this path. Yet they walked it anyways!
I can't see how common folk so quickly forget the coincidence of Biden's son spearheading this endevour. Much the same way most forget that ISIS was US formed and backed to destroy Gaddafi, I'd guess. The US gov't has admitted to many of these tactics when cornered as shown here http://www.canadiangeographic.ca/magazine/oct11/fracking.asp
It appears they no longer even try hard to hide such conflicts of interest because they are used to the public not really caring. Meanwhile various financial analysts call B**S*** on the 4% rise in the GDP this year and show obvious contradictions that present a continual failing US economy instead. So when hyperinflation happens due to the usual shortages caused by a major war, the majority will likely believe that Putin is to blame for that too.
It is never in the benefit of the common citizen that we have a war. And for every person that you help convince that it is, the more likely our governments will keep baiting us along this path of destruction.
Here is a new item from RT on just this topic of how trustworthy is RT's news and others. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9pos-2H7cw
You can maybe see why they are presently the largest news agency in the world. No other has spanned every country and in so many languages. I guess that this is just something folks in Russia did first and doing so brought them the title of being the biggest. I think that to become this popular, they'd surely had to as a rule of thumb, keep their approach as neutral as possible when presenting the news.
Note how much Canadian news has to agree with US news these days to avoid any conflicts from occurring. Do you remember back when Micheal Moore made Bowling for Columbine? Do you remember how he finally concluded the major difference between Detroit and Windsor(which are across from one another) was that Canadian news displayed alot less violence to make folks wary. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3JMSTPSsbU (that was just partial..I can't find a link with his whole conclusion on it). The point to this reminiscing was that our news is alot more American these days than the news used in his video at that time. It seems to me we have less of the feel good stuff and more of world violence and aggression. Maybe this is another reason why we are overall less trusting as a whole society these days.
Now RT doesn't do the feel good either. They just show more of what our news seems to not wish us to see. It therefore gives another perspective on a given event. Mix this with our daily news and one can at least stand a better chance at discovering the underlying truth. Now here is RT explaining that a permanent ceasefire has been achieved in Ukraine due to Putin's influence. Will our news show this same response? I am waiting to see as I write this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lJ9Nm9MFqI
Seems Obama claims the ceasefire is a result of their sanctions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrKsly2bnrk
Kind of late to the party on this one he doesn't clarify how these sanctions persuaded the opposing forces of Ukraine to consider a ceasefire. Is Obama suggesting that Putin only brought the rebels to the table for a ceasefire because of sanctions? Isn't it the west that has been continually attacking the east and therefore it would require the west to wish to commit to a ceasefire before one could really commence.
Another major accomplishment that was achieved during this NATO summit was for members to recommit to each other that when one is attacked, all must react in their defense. Think maybe something bad is in the air??
A Study of Wording
So NATO's response now is to slam Russia with accusations of attacking when a cease fire was about to be established. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_M2-GoNE6w
Why would Russia do such a thing,especially now? So lets first challenge the comments presented by NATO's leader...
1/ Russia is to pull back Russian troops from Ukraine - states we know that you have them there and gives viewers the presumption that Russia is invading while they present no proof of any invasion
2/ To stop supporting insurgence in east Ukraine - this statement alone pretty much nullifies the first one because it suggests that Russia is still using subversive tactics and hasn't advanced to direct intervention as yet...replay the video and see if you agree with this determination.
3/ For Russia To end it's illegal and self proclaimed annexation of Crimea. This would still be a legal contention if ever brought to a court of law. Russia acted when the leader of Ukraine was still officially Ukraine's leader. The takeover was then the illegal act and Russia was aiding a neighbour in trouble. The region of Crimea obviously did not even fire a round in defense of it's sovereignty which showed they were not opposed to reuniting with Russia. They then held a legal vote with many countries witnessing the proceedings to ensure a fair vote. It was a really smooth move on Russia's behalf to do so before Ukraine could hold a vote to replace their dethroned leader, but Ukraine was no longer considered a united country once this takeover was under way...moot point in Russia's favour if ever put to a decent court of law.
Next, to demand this again of Russia at a time when Russia is supposedly invading the rest of Ukraine is showing once again that this invasion is therefore not really occurring. Second, they are demanding something that they know Russia will absolutely not bend on. This meas that NATO is not really trying for any resolution at this point but trying to justify the eventuality of war.
This is what I find when challenging the NATO leaders above comments.
Do you agree or disagree?
Al Jazeera news shows Russian armour advancing towards Ukraine occupied territory and suggest that Putin and Poroshenko's ceasefire is being destroyed by Putin. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocfxP-lerAY
They indeed look Russian but the so does everything that the Ukraine army owns... they could indeed be heading to the front lines but doesn't mean they are advancing, just heading forward. They suggest that they were targeting a town but then state shells were coming down at Maripols defenses.
Now here is RT's version showing the rebels setting up to attack a buildup of Ukraine army along the front lines. Bet that is the same place mentioned above. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KCzUCJzpig
Does seem they plan on fighting until a cease fire is declared.
So lets say that Russia is invading.... What would Putin gain from doing such a thing? Obviously he'd lose face if he committed such a deception and especially, it would really endanger Russia's immediate border at a time when NATO is about to begin war games. Why wouldn't Putin at least wait for these scheduled war games to end quietly and NATO to return home? Wouldn't that be a foolish act when he has been so smart up to this point? The ceasefire is about to come into effect on Friday afternoon. Does it now seem more likely that some are trying hard to destroy any possibility of peace talks from going anywhere?
So which makes more sense?
Could NATO be setting the stage for an intervention?... wouldn't this be the perfect time to have Russia commit some aggressive act and NATO could then jump right in and defend the helpless retreating Ukraine army who were about to commit to a ceasefire. That would even help better explain the speech that NATO's leader just presented to us, wouldn't it?
I don't know about your thoughts but I smell another trap .....wonder how Putin could dodge this one if that's their agenda ?
BBC news shows Ukraine forces shooting back at rebels . They too seem intent on fighting until told not to. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0SCoNcSKT4
The reporter also interview people in a rebel held town to show how they presently hide in basements. I do note that he forgets to mention that the shelling is only from the Ukraine army, not the rebels.
So the ceasefire is now in effect https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OG5uOqdGkSM
So I've spent a good deal of time this evening trying to find conclusive proof that Russia is indeed invading Ukraine. I've seen all kinds of video showing APC's and even tanks traveling down a road somewhere, but nothing to define the location.
If Putin truly doesn't have an army in Ukraine, he is going to come out smelling of roses again as there will be alot of folks then demanding to see some real proof of this invasion. NATO had best come up with some real irrefutable proof to back up all their allegations which came out today or they might start looking like the boy who cried wolf too often...yet if they did manage to capture some Russians, the tables would turn to where Putin would have to at least come up with a convincing answers to ward off a then justified confrontation. Just more random thoughts as events continue to unfold.
Now I too often wonder where to put an update to this Ukraine crisis. I feel I can't analyze so much if I place this elsewhere, and that is what I wish to do with the following...
Russia Breaks Ceasefire?
Seems that Mariupol received some shelling last night while a ceasefire is underway. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3Xs1MqsHcI
Now it was just a gas station and some industrial complex, which created a big bright fire during the night. Note the people being interviewed show little fear of further aggression and therefore one can conclude the event is already over...no invasion! But Euro News also suggests that rebels might attempt to create a corridor down to Crimea. This mention of this fact does better explain why the Ukraine army is now dug in so well around Mariupol. That would indeed likely be the first intentions of a possible invading Russian army.
Ukraine officials claim another attack at Donetsk airport https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzrER7anT2Y
Euro News suggests that the Ukraine army is doing the shelling in Donetsk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBL83S7BNO8
I have given a fair amount of time for alternative explanations to be presented and yet none seem forthcoming from Russia or even RT regarding this. One possibility is that any response would then require some finger pointing. Hopefully, these suspicious and unrelated attacks are only that of a small faction of rebels and can be ignored to sustain the ceasefire. Still, this action could be enough to then justify NATO's intervention and their presence so close to the Russian border would not be seen well by Russia as this news presentation also suggests https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4uW4tBBdWo
Repercussions of Action
What I do fear is that Russia will eventually conclude that battle is inevitable and so they'll finally react first to create such a land corridor to Crimea before the battle lines are firmly drawn as they would otherwise be quickly cut off from this region. Even though their defensive line would now be longer and thus harder to secure, they'd conclude that at least it'd be less likely the war is on Russian soil. How many of the 14 million people in the east Ukraine will now suffer for Russia being forced into this conclusion? And the bottom line is that Russia too has likely expected such a battle, knowing this Ukraine conflict can easily escalate into a world war with a front line that is fought on either Russian or Ukrainian soil. Imagine what that would be like to be a resident of such a region!
And once such a conflict starts, NATO must then also consider all possible Russian allies who could be poised to join in this battle. NATO may have just reconfirmed their deal to back one another, but we don't know if Russia also has such agreements arranged with other nations, should things escalate into all out war. Therefore there is a danger of surprise elements committing an attack on another front before they show their allegiance to Russia.
I do hope level heads prevail here and no one jumps the gun over these 2 infractions.
Seems the ceasefire is holding so far as an OSCE observer explains https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JYBbEP9ea4
Rebels handed over 1,200 prisoners to Ukraine as part of this ceasefire agreement and await Ukraine to do the same in turn.
Meanwhile the EU has further tightened sanctions on Russia. Now they halted business with Gasprom, who supplies Russian gas to Europe. In turn, Ukraine is selling minority stake is their gas network of which Gasprom is not allowed to bid. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Qg9hBcbBq0
This shows some obvious manipulations occurring to weaken Russia's hold on gas supplies to Europe.
The Ukraine army still holds the the city of Mariupol while it has pulled back from all others even though the civilian population disagrees https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZvkMWHhtvc
(So much for their story about defending the people from the rebels though....)
Reinventing NATO
The following is a debate about NATO and it's purpose today. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI8ItLATc54
This had some really good points to consider. While some claim that NATO hasn't had much of a purpose to this point, others show that NATO has only been the aggressor in every situation since it's creation. I was unaware of that. Also that it cannot allow Russia to join it's circle as it would take away it's reason to exist. If NATO did allow Russia to join, that there would be a continual power struggle within between Russia and US. NATO was formed mainly as a weapon against Russia and it grabs up every country it could surrounding Russia as they fell away during Russia's economic collapse to weaken Russia's hold over Europe.
There is a lot of truth in their arguments and as a whole, that NATO has created many of the present tensions which exist today.
US & Ukraine Military War Games
CNN: Seems the war games are going to be held in the NE corner of the Black Sea. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaqJUlSvjUIThis will definitely keep Russia on high alert as that puts them very close to Crimea and Russia's navy which is located there.
The ceasefire is still holding with Ukraine army showing the return of only 20 prisoners to the rebels in contrast of their 1200 received.
Not all are committed to the ceasefire as Ukraine army uses their banned phosphorus shells on Donetsk. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jul3tKahtXA
Ukraine army claims they are just flares to light up the sky but that doesn't explain why so many and how come they are hitting the ground while still burning white hot...these are definitely not flares!
Rebels claimed shelling of Donetsk came from Donetsk airport, so they attacked and occupied it for a short while. Ukraine army then shelled the airport to repossess it and shelled some of their own people too in doing so. No further info regarding this event so far.
Ukraine says 5 soldiers have been killed so far since ceasefire https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0CsfZntH2M
Russia may have Internal Issues Too
Now this is a Ukraine propaganda but it still gives some hidden insight into an otherwise closed society https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zx8Wxg1no0k
While it's obvious Ukraine Today is trying to create more internal conflict within Russia, it shows that some Russians too obviously challenge Putin's tactics regarding Ukraine.
It also shows that Russia's government responds quickly by even outnumbering the protesters with opposition and the matching jackets and toques show they are likely Russia's military performing this task. This stinks of a government organized non-violent approach to suppressing such protests with an added psychological intimidation factor of potential violence to subdue any protest. Also remember that every flag bearer is conveniently holding an obvious weapon should any confrontation arise. I doubt we will hear anything about the Sep 21 protest from Russia though.
But consider the overall success of such a tactic. Things never escalated due to the matching of force with just the visual equivalent force. No riot gear, no obvious advantage to their opposition so the protestors don't receive the "underdog" sympathy from others to further support their cause. In fact, their opposition leaves doubt that their just an organized, unified front of other civilians who wish to defend their country's stand.....you must admit, someone upstairs is thinking this out well ahead as this has never been done before!
Putin is continually winning the hearts of the people. Having a battle now so close to Russia's border is probably bonding all Russian's to believe in this leader as he continually side steps the many traps set for him to commit to war. Thus Putin will never have to resort to extreme tactics of Stalin during WWII to get Russian's to defend against invaders. With the internet constantly showing dissension amongst UN nations regarding events in Ukraine and neo-Nazi connections, open arm policy is likely the best approach. The fact that little useful intel is gathered against Russia shows just how loyal the majority of Russia likely is to Putin.
We constantly hear from our leaders that Russia stands alone and is chastised by many nations due to their actions. We should doubt this as many are likely cheering for Russia as they defy the bully that others were felled by. And the large number of POW's captured by the rebels suggest many of the Ukraine army surrender knowing they won't be mistreated and thus escape the possibility of dying for a cause they don't seem to believe in. It is these details that show many people of west Ukraine are losing faith in Poroshenko's promises made with the EU.
Yet it is this calm calculated aspect that makes me most nervous about Putin. He seems to bring a whole new concept to the game of war. Sun Tzu's book, "The Art of War" often mentions using distractions to occupy the enemy while the real attack is in play. I'm betting Putin is an avid student of such mind play. It often seems that Putin just has to patiently wait out his opponent as the coming winter and the failing Euro and US dollar weaken them daily. But this weakening also makes the EU become more desperate as each day passes too. So does Putin let the EU make the first crucial move to save face or strike when they least expect it to gain the upper hand?
I expect this conflict still has more coming yet!
Neo Nazis Power in Ukraine
After the overthrow of the takeover of Ukraine back in February, the new government soon removed the previous ban on Nazi symbolism to allow the neo-Nazi's to openly wear such insignia daily in public. This action showed the power and influence they had in the accomplishing the takeover. But giving power to groups such as these has it's problems too.
The BBC news goes into Kiev to report on the Neo Nazi threat there https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuPTqsPRrDE
Seems that they are now openly a public presence which is armed and have taken over former Communist headquarters in Kiev.
Amnesty International says a volunteer battalion with the Ukraine army has committed human rights violations in East Ukraine https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MS_ouLR6fA
Seems ironic to me that they don't also consider the bombing of innocent civilians for months a similar crime against humanity but at least this is a start.
To be pointing out such events now means that west Ukraine finally wants to separate themselves from this group as they no longer appear to be tolerant of their actions. This is a good start as it likely has weakened the morale of the west up to this point. It will also remove a recruiting tool for Putin to rally people behind if the west follows through with this.
Neo Nazis Power in Ukraine
After the overthrow of the takeover of Ukraine back in February, the new government soon removed the previous ban on Nazi symbolism to allow the neo-Nazi's to openly wear such insignia daily in public. This action showed the power and influence they had in the accomplishing the takeover. But giving power to groups such as these has it's problems too.
It would be nice to post the source for things like this. I tried google it but couldn't find anything.
If you'd read some history you would know that the rise of nationalism, extremism and antisemitism and such during times of economic crisis is nothing new. And it doesn't happen only in Ukraine, it happens in Russia and in western Europe too. I posted something about this in reply to another one of your posts (probably the one where you posted an youtube video containing antisemitic rhetoric 😎 )
It would be nice to post the source for things like this. I tried google it but couldn't find anything.
I must quibble with you when we are likely on the same side against prejudice. I am sorry that you defend our country choice in siding with a fascist influenced society. There are at this moment trying to change that but they already knew when they chose sides. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Efs52KviP8Y
Once again, my intent is to show others the real truth about government control through media manipulation. And this is made easy by presenting the fascinating lives of those Ukrainian folks who face annihilation for simply being in the EU's way while dangling bait in front of Ukraine's new puppet leader.
I found the change of Ukraine policy regarding Nazi symbols on another RT link and I know how much you wish to defend the west Ukraine's honor. I doubt that Ukraine would advertise such a change in policy... Is it also not obvious that this minor detail has been continually ignored by our media up to this point ( I mean we have seen this symbol painted everywhere on Ukraine vids these past months)....I wonder why?
Still, I am not or have I ever been on the side of Russia. I don't know for sure which is best for mankind...."War"(for the supposed industrial growth) or inevitable "financial collapse" we are destined for. I do know that our aiding the EU in any such tactics is wrong, no matter how you paint it. If we are to face hard times in the near future, let us face it with a clean conscience at least.
Why don't we just make a fair deal with Ukraine to extract their resources for a fair price with compensation being made to those in the east too. Also we could offer safeguards to prove to Russia there is no further expansion of EU territories into Ukraine, just a business deal... no NATO military base or dividing or weakening of Russia's present defenses required. When sheep fly, right? Our leaders try to paint Putin (and every other leader of a country with which they confront) as corrupt when they themselves line their pockets with oil shares and back door deals that they barely try to conceal. Try to remember ... we are but their servants!
Vice News: Seems that Vice news is back to playing where other reporters fear to tread... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1K6bn6f6kc
The reporter asks Poroshenko if he considers they lost the war in east Ukraine... direct and ballsy as hell! They report on what isn't being said and ask questions that are likely on all our minds.
This is how reporting should be done and used to be done! This is an American who doesn't work for any of the big government backed networks and it's obvious. This is also the same reporter that was held hostage for days by the pro-Russians and still showed unbiased reporting afterwards.
Other than this above tidbit, there seems to be a lot of censorship on You Tube lately as only the anti- pro Russian news is making it through. Hard to believe that all those East Ukraine uploaders quit all at once...
Still little useful info being allowed thru fro East Ukraine other than official west Ukraine news. But I find another story worth a listen. It is an interview with a long time American intelligence officer who walks us thru the events which led to Ukraine's present situation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_Frxfvtxz8
Seems Raymond McGovern is a veteran of the CIA. Every morning, for nearly three decades, the native New Yorker was in charge of the 'President's Daily Briefings' in the White House. Altogether, he briefed seven presidents. Because of their criticism of the US war of aggression on Iraq, McGovern and other veteran intelligence professionals founded the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) in 2003, to provide an alternative analysis to geopolitical conflicts. McGovern is also one of the signatories of an open letter to the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, in which veteran US intelligence officers warn the CDU politician about falsified evidence against Russia.
He uses all the same techniques that I often use here in this thread. Watch the video and see where you stand after. I know prom would truly like to classify this guy as a nut job but it seems his rationale is going to be hard to dispute. I'm betting the US isn't too happy either as his comments paint the US in a very poor light over present events in Syria and Ukraine. It seems that Mr. McGovern has grown a conscience in his old age and has even been arrested for committing a silent protest during a Hillary Clinton speech http://www.democracynow.org/2011/2/18/ex_cia_analyst_ray_mcgovern_beaten
You might also note his professional demeanor throughout many interviews and that his comments are direct, articulate and informative. With 25 years as a top CIA analyst, you might want to consider his present actions as that of a man who now wishes the world to see what he has seen as he mentions how often the data how presents is later twisted to suit their needs. Seems he is an older version of Snowden and the 3rd American to spill the beans on his nation.
Here is an example of Raymond McGovern's writing http://consortiumnews.com/2014/07/03/itching-for-a-genocide/
He points out the immediate changes in US policy when regarding Ukraine's overthrow. He doesn't tip toe around anything and remains factual throughout the article. This method leaves little room for conjecture as he is just laying out the hard facts for all to chew on at their own pace.
Amnesty International says a volunteer battalion with the Ukraine army has committed human rights violations in East Ukraine https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MS_ouLR6fA
Seems ironic to me that they don't also consider the bombing of innocent civilians for months a similar crime against humanity but at least this is a start.
What seems ironic to me is that this is a sample of how "trustworthy" RT (Russian Television) is. They present in the above youtube video news on Amnesty International condemning the abuses done by an ukrainian volunteer batallion, What they don't say is that the same Amnesty International is condemning Russia for: " fuelling separatist crimes as it revealed satellite images indicating a build-up of Russian armour and artillery in eastern Ukraine. " and they are showin sattelite images to prove that. They are also saying " Witnesses also said that separatist fighters abducted, tortured, and killed their neighbours. " Of course there's nothing on the RT report about this. This is typical soviet manipulation.
You started this thread to show us how the government is manipulating us and you present yourself as a champion of anti government manipulation, so my question to you in the light of the above is: did you have the curiosity to look up the source of that piece of news?
A simple yes or no answer would be appreciated but I know you can't do that.
You started this thread to show us how the government is manipulating us and you present yourself as a champion of anti government manipulation, so my question to you in the light of the above is: did you have the curiosity to look up the source of that piece of news?
A simple yes or no answer would be appreciated but I know you can't do that.
Why a simple yes or no when an explanation requires more.
1. Seems Raymound McGovern just covered this exact data in the article above and explained that the US has far greater satellite capability than that presented. Therefore these images should be immediately suspect as their own equipment could have produced definitive proof whereas these ones leave too much to speculation. (and this coming from a top dog CIA analyst).
2. Amnesty International points out this information which they justifiably have just cause in doing so. Yet I also mentioned that they never saw fit to comment on the atrocities committed on east Ukraine civilian population.
Seems once again you are trying to find fault in my conclusions where there is none. Because they are just in one act doesn't justify their non-actions of another. The question you should instead be asking is why didn't Amnesty International do their job regarding this other matter? It obviously shows that there is political influence in even their ranks to ignore such actions.
Better yet, why does our country also turn it's back on such issues when we too proclaim that we stand against military aggression committed upon civilian population. Did we not condone the dethroning of Gaddafi because he committed such atrocities against his people 20 years earlier? Yet this is somehow different today when considering Ukraine, why? You are simply trying to blame the messenger for the contents of the message..... maybe ignorance is Bliss.. I don't know because I don't ignore such as this! I know some realities are painful and yet only basic logic is required to sort these realities too. Seems all it takes to see past the smoke and mirrors is just the wave of a hand and a little logic to maybe even ask the question why every once in a while.
Now with the present ceasefire, both sides have grounds to deescalate the present situation and reduce the risk of war. The first act to further destabilize this of course is the UN now imposing further sanctions upon Russia. As predicted, Russia will now likely respond in turn as they stated they would. I see that they did not impose sanctions against Gasprom selling the Europe for now. This should at least keep the back door open for Europe's coming winter's supply to be met.
So why Does UN continue to Push
The obvious reason for this continued aggression is if the UN were to ignore this present opportunity, they would have a hard time justifying why they must later force Russia's hand. In the meantime, Ukraine claims 70 % Russia's soldiers returned home. And if they can continue this peace process for even a while longer, another stipulation of the cease fire was to create a buffer zone between Russia and Ukraine's border. If the creation of this zone could last the winter, we might even see some sort of wall being created as Ukraine has mentioned on various occasions. This would make it alot easier for the UN to identify any later Russian attempts to resupport east Ukraine's defenses, should the need arise. This also means that the next time Russia decides to act, it would more likely have to be a direct action instead of them simply sneaking in a hiding amongst the eastern population.
Many financial analysts on the web suggest that the UN has to continue aggression tactics toward Russia to sustain the value of the Euro and US dollar. With other world currencies gaining strength in world trade, these two currencies face greater devaluation and the ongoing BRIC ventures especially accelerate this impending doom. This is not an area I follow very close but it seems to better explain why the UN continues to threaten Russia. If these currencies lose their value on the world market, the EU, UN and NATO all would fail soon after as they would no longer have any financial funding. Therefore to sustain their present status, they must keep these currencies strong. And following this line of thought, one can see that war is likely the only means of retaining this position as our currencies impending collapse draws ever closer.
So taking in this above reasoning, does war now seem a better option than facing financial collapse , especially knowing other countries might even manage to flourish during our decline? I'm betting this doesn't sit well with any of us when you let "the shoe is on the other foot" concept really sink in. As all things must end, even the expansion of the EU must eventually meet the same fate as the Roman Empire once did, but accepting this event may now occur so soon is another matter. Consider that our own country could soon become one of those unstable nations we presently watch on TV, as all of this could soon become our new reality with the collapse of the US dollar. A previous article put forth by Denob mentions that Canada presently has half it's monetary reserves held in US dollars.
So even if all the above were absolute fact and an unstable US dollar points out war is the only option versus that of an impending social collapse, is this then justification for initiating WW3? Is it better to go out swinging (at those who did nothing) versus starving? Because we have the power to maybe take that which isn't ours, should we? So maybe the US is just better at accepting this basic fact and is thus forcing the rest of us to react before it is otherwise too late....Is this reasoning not why most wars were really fought throughout mankind's history...it's us or them...right? Right?