Markus Becker Posted April 28, 2023 Posted April 28, 2023 (edited) Another thing about the "it was the US": the US already gotten what it wanted! NS2 DOA, general exit from any form of Russian energy faster and more total than required. Fucking 🟩 assholes. Schröder and the Merkel(PBUH) made us utterly dependent on Russian gas, the breakneck attempt to get out by the 🟩 only increases the damage. In the meantime the same idiots were doing their best to deny the Ukraine heavy weapons. Edited April 28, 2023 by Markus Becker
urbanoid Posted April 28, 2023 Posted April 28, 2023 Yeah, I'm pretty sure that everything was also completely legal when the Russians were buying a German Chancellor.
Ssnake Posted April 28, 2023 Posted April 28, 2023 1 hour ago, urbanoid said: Yeah, I'm pretty sure that everything was also completely legal when the Russians were buying a German Chancellor. They didn't stop there. Gasprom "donated" 20 BN EUR to the Mecklenburg-Pomerania Trust Fund for the Protection of the Environment (hah!). It's amazing h0ow that still hasn't blown up in the face of the whole social democrats' leadership. They're still in control of the narrative. Hats off to them, I would have never believed they were that competent.
Markus Becker Posted April 29, 2023 Author Posted April 29, 2023 11 hours ago, urbanoid said: Yeah, I'm pretty sure that everything was also completely legal when the Russians were buying a German Chancellor. Merkel did it for free because only with cheap Russian gas the green energy and anti nuclear policy could work.
Stuart Galbraith Posted April 29, 2023 Posted April 29, 2023 Is it cynical of me to wonder if she cut of the nuclear, purely so Germany would be dependent upon Russian gas? Is that at all plausible?
urbanoid Posted April 29, 2023 Posted April 29, 2023 They turned off the last of their reactors last month or so, they weren't dependent on Russian gas by that time. They had the excuses not to - Rus/Ukr/Nord Stream shenaningans + the majority of citizens wanted to keep them going. Aaaand... they still turned them off.
Ssnake Posted April 29, 2023 Posted April 29, 2023 1 hour ago, Stuart Galbraith said: Is it cynical of me to wonder if she cut of the nuclear, purely so Germany would be dependent upon Russian gas? Is that at all plausible? It's ... possible, like manned spaceflight. But the by far simpler explanation is populism.
Markus Becker Posted April 29, 2023 Author Posted April 29, 2023 (edited) 2 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said: Is it cynical of me to wonder if she cut of the nuclear, purely so Germany would be dependent upon Russian gas? Is that at all plausible? The woman had no convictions whatsoever. She was doing whatever was popular at the time to get good press. Thus she ditched nuclear in 11 and had to go all gas. Worked like a charm for her. The MSM sang her praises, allowing her to stay in power even after loosing a quarter of the votes in 2017. Edited April 29, 2023 by Markus Becker
urbanoid Posted April 29, 2023 Posted April 29, 2023 Yeah, she did things she THOUGHT would be popular. If they were not, she stuck to them anyway, because she was largely incapable of admitting a mistake.
Ssnake Posted April 29, 2023 Posted April 29, 2023 ...unlike all other politicians who would readily admit their mistakes, if they ever made them.
urbanoid Posted April 29, 2023 Posted April 29, 2023 Sometimes you can reverse your decisions without admitting a mistake, especially if there's a convenient excuse. Merkel was incapable of even that.
Markus Becker Posted April 29, 2023 Author Posted April 29, 2023 1 hour ago, Ssnake said: ...unlike all other politicians who would readily admit their mistakes, if they ever made them. The neither 🟩 nor 🟥 ones would eventually not have a choice as the media, particularly the public funded would point out and exaggerate every mistake, no matter how small. After she turned the CDU hard left the media acted as her shield and sword. Her mistakes were ignored or sugarcoated and critics attacked instead.
BansheeOne Posted April 29, 2023 Posted April 29, 2023 Getting out of nuclear power was a reversal. The Merkel II cabinet had actually extended operation of the German plants by eight to 14 years over the 2002 limit by the Schröder administration just a year before the turnaround over Fukushima. Merkel justified it by saying the latter had shown even a minimal risk could be too much, but it was clearly about the imminent state elections in Baden-Württemberg where the Greens were already poised to win their first premiership after protests over the controversial Stuttgart 21 railway station project. Of course they won anyway, however Merkel was obviously capable of correcting what she thought was a political mistake. That the correction turned out to be the actual mistake after her term ended is another story.
Markus Becker Posted April 29, 2023 Author Posted April 29, 2023 4 minutes ago, BansheeOne said: Of course they won anyway, however Merkel was obviously capable of correcting what she thought was a political mistake. That the correction turned out to be the actual mistake after her term ended is another story. The original decision was a deeply unpopular one, the 180° was just swimming with the current. And getting praise for doing it. That takes nothing.
BansheeOne Posted April 29, 2023 Posted April 29, 2023 Which is however the exact opposite of what urbanoid claimed - doing things she thought popular, then sticking with them even when they turned out not to be.
Markus Becker Posted April 29, 2023 Author Posted April 29, 2023 17 minutes ago, BansheeOne said: Which is however the exact opposite of what urbanoid claimed - doing things she thought popular, then sticking with them even when they turned out not to be. Uncontrolled mass immigration. She opened the borders and kept them open because while the public opinion had turned against her decision, the published opinion had not. And why would a spineless populist admit and fix a mistake if it doesn't make any headlines?
BansheeOne Posted April 29, 2023 Posted April 29, 2023 The refugee issue was always a 60:40 thing, with the 60 percent sometimes being for and sometimes against her policy (which actually adapted to criticism over time with more restrictions in detail). In fact it has been said this was the one major Merkel decision which didn't carefully wait which way the wind of popular opinion was blowing, but went out on a limb. But then it was more of a quick reaction to Hungary dropping the problem into the lap of the German and Austrian governments by bussing/railroading refugees to their borders overnight, and it was either accept them or close down and risk the breakdown of intra-EU commerce as everyone South and East followed suit. But we're getting rather far from the debris of Nord Stream.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now