Russian Casus Belli for war in Ukraine

1.53 trillion cubic meters of Norwegean gas will suffice for maybe a dozen years for the EU. Norway exports maybe 120+ billion cubic meters of gas a year.

1.1 Trillion cubic meters of Ukrainian gas will suffice for less than a decade more for the EU.

40 percent of the worlds Uranium production comes from Kazakstan.

The future is electrical. Batteries. Wind. Solar. And all the raw material recourses incorporated into these energy sources. Be aware!

Many countries benefit from a free and independent Ukraine since Ukraine is an agricultural hub. China even used to buy soil from Ukraine. If it wasn’t for Ukraine, my country Sweden’s population woul’d have really been hungry following the northern drought in the summer of 2018.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine was rather initiated because Russia is dependent on the Ukrainian war industry inherited from the Soviet Union. The Russian offensives inland nearly all targeted cities with crucial war industries for among other things Russian aircrafts. Ever considered why russia doesn’t seem to dominate the skies over Ukraine, thus becoming unable to win this war?

Don’t believe me? Remember the Russian ”help” convoys in the beginning of the war in Donetsk and Luhansk? Trucks drove into Ukrainian territory almost empty on aid, but they didn’t drive out empty. They had done a heist on Ukrainian war industries.

Military materiel comes first, oil and gas comes second.

Roger Klang, Lund Sweden

Kategorier: Crude oil, Defense, Deutschland, Gas supplier, Gas supplies, Germany, Kreml, Kremlin, Råolja, Russia, Ryssland | Etiketter: , , | Lämna en kommentar

The UK is certainly a friendly state to the Nordic countries

The United Kingdom will increase its military presence in countries such as Norway, Finland and Sweden.

This was said today by the British Minister of Defense Ben Wallace at a press conference in Norway, reports Reuters.

”It is great that you are making this remark,” says Minister of Defense Peter Hultqvist.


Thank you UK, it was very kind of you! We love you for it. But we have to defend ourselves, I think. It would be better if the UK could give us guarantees that Sweden will not be isolated from trade with the outside world and the purchase of ammunition, in a near war situation. At least guarrantees from the British part concerning Britain’s policies. I believe that we do not need ”boots on the ground” of a foreign power in the event of a Swedish defensive war against Russia. It would have been another thing if it was a Swedish defensive war against Germany.

Sweden will never go Viking against the UK as long as I have anything to say about that. I do not believe in war of aggression, war of aggression punishes itself as through divine intervention it seems. So live and let live, please Britain.

Roger Klang

Kategorier: Östersjöinloppen, Baltic Sea, Defense, Deutschland, Germany, Great Britain, Kremlin, NATO, Russia, Ryssland | Etiketter: , , | Lämna en kommentar


This following news article, bear in mind, is from 2014.

A former Russian insider says he was there when Putin began openly planning the present invasion of Ukraine back in 2003. At a conference in Brussels this week, Andrey Illarionov, a Russian economist and former economic advisor to Vladimir Putin informed that the invasion of Ukraine has been in official planning since at least 2003. Quote “Since 2003. I can say that certain questions relating to the future war with Ukraine were discussed in my presence. I didn’t think the talks would really lead to a real war,” he said end quote.

In an anguished response to the Orange Revolution a year later which brought about an ostensibly pro-Western government, Russian officials then began discussing the potential for launching a military occupation of Crimea and it’s subsequent annexation. Illarionov also discussed leaked documents which detail the operation of Russia’s future war with Ukraine. By 2009, he stated that plans to conjure and support separatism in Ukraine began to surface. It is now known that the terrorist organization known as the quote ”Donetsk Republic” began to reassert itself online in 2008 after then Russian-backed Viktor Yanukovych lost his position as Prime Minister. Created in 2005 also in the wake of the Orange Revolution, ”Donetsk Republic” members attended training camps in Russia funded by the Russian Presidential Administration, where instructors from the security services taught methods of espionage, sabotage and guerrilla tactics to attendees. Syncing with Illarionov’s statement, the group began organizing local terrorist training camps as early 2009.

Illarionov did not mince words, making clear that this is a very much a quote “Russian-Ukrianian war” or rather, as he described quote: “Putin’s war against Ukraine.” A war he steadfastly describes as being long in the works that will continue to play out in the long term. Quote “So, they were preparing the war for a long time. The other matter is that it is a long war that has been continuing for more than 16 months. It was officially launched on July 27, 2013, by Putin’s speech in Kyiv on the occasion of the anniversary of the baptism of Kyivan Rus,” he said end quote. The speech cited by Illarionov was on the topic of Ukraine’s quote “civilizational choice” and quote “orthodox Slavic values.” In it, Putin bloviates on alleged quote “common spiritual values” which make Russians and Ukrainians a, quote “single people,” calling for the preservation of quote ”ancestral traditions.” He also convincingly ignores centuries of persecution, telling listeners that subjugation (i.e. “union”) under Russia, quote “changed the lives of Ukraine’s population and its elite for the better, as everyone knows.” End quote. At another point, Putin speaks glowingly of Stalin’s reforms and investment in Ukraine during his first quote ”Five Year Plan,” a disastrous policy which resulted in the Moscow-orchestrated genocide of up to 7 million Ukrainians. Current conflict zones’ historical hallmarks were focused on in the speech, specifically calling the Donbass quote “one of Russia’s main mining and metals industry regions,” and Odesa “one of the Russian Empire’s biggest seaports.” end quotes. The next day Putin would attend Russian naval celebrations in the Ukrainian city of Sevastopol in Ukraine. All of this, of course, amounted to a cynical sales pitch Russia’s unborn Eurasian Union and reunion with Russia, and to convince Ukrainians the perils of European integration. With a smile; Quote “Let me say again that we will respect whatever choice our Ukrainian partners, friends and brothers make. The question is only one of how we go about agreeing on working together under absolutely equal, transparent and clear conditions.” End quote.

Numerous predictions

Illarionov resigned from his position within the administration in 2005, has been an outspoken critic of president Vladimir Putin since that time. Since becoming a dissident, his words to date have been prophetic. In October 2008 he quickly exposed, that the Russian invasion and occupation of Georgia in August of that year was premeditated and instigated by the Russian government, when many still debated whether Georgia fired on Russian soldiers first. In February of this year, prior to Russia’s “green men” swarming into Crimea, he fully predicted the occupation of the peninsula and similar destabilizing actions in the south and east. In March, after this had already come to fruition, he further predicted and warned of impending Russian forces seeping into eastern Ukraine during an interview on the Ukrainian network TSN. Russian Col. Igor Girkin, “Supreme Commander” within quotation marks, of the Donetsk Republic, openly admitted recently to Russia’s involvement in the war and told how his special forces group entered Ukraine in April to seize government buildings.

Source: Euromaidan Press, Wednesday the 26th of November 2014

As for my personal reflexion. What has happened to this Andrey Illarionov, a Russian economist and former economic advisor to Vladimir Putin? That is the million dollar question.

Kategorier: Russia, Ryssland, Vladimir Putin | Lämna en kommentar

Friendly ports and the economy

To ship cheap-line articles like beers through the Panama Canal I imagine is not very cost effective. But neither is shipping them to Europe all the way around Canada’s northern waters alt. around the south of Americas. I don’t even think they construct any ships, at any shipyard, that can travel such a long journey without refueling the ship’s fuel tank on fuel oil at least once.

Refueling ships’ fuel tanks is done often relatively far from the existing oilfield, but virtually always close to existing refineries around the world, which can complicate things, and it gets important for those extra miles that one has friendly ports one can use to refuel ones ships with fuel oil.

This is one of the main reasons why classical American conservatives have been all for globalism, since a nation with higher living standard is a nation that is less likely to cause any troubles, because they rely on American products to maintain their relatively high living standards.

Countries connect logistically, and new ports for selling American merchandise and buying the up-and-coming countries’ raw materials are built.

Another upside is that with more US friendly fuel oil supplying ports, the US gains an advantage over each single port, because the American ships can easily redirect their shipping routes to bypass, sanction or blockade a specific trouble making port nation.

But globalism isn’t so dandy in the US politics any longer since many countries are partly surpassing America economically and/or getting means to process their own raw materials in order to sell the finished product, instead of the unprocessed product, making America lose money, influence and power.

Albeit, this is not a zero sum game and it has never been one. The world economy grows long term, and with that the American economy grows. Till we run out of raw materials and oil that is. We are close.

You may come back with a rebuttal that America buys a lot of technical stuff from China now, and why would they do that if it is like I claim? That is exactly my point! This is a struggle over control.

Roger M. Klang

Kategorier: Africa, Australia, Östersjöinloppen, Baltic Sea, Barents Sea, Canada, China, Crude oil, Deutschland, Germany, Great Britain, Iceland, Irak, Iran, Iraq, Island, Israel, Japan, Kina, Latinamerika, Malacca Strait, Malackasundet, Persian Gulf, Persiska viken, Politics, Råolja, Russia, Ryssland, Saudi-Arabia, Silk road economic belt, South America, South China Sea, Storbritannien, Sydamerika, Syria, Tyskland, United Kingdom, USA, Venezuela | Lämna en kommentar

Alliansen Finland-Danmark

Det som började som en rysk och sedermera en amerikansk förtalskampanj mot Sverige i forum som Quora på nätet, har utvecklat sig till en nordisk grannfiendskap mot Sverige.

Vad skulle det innebära för oss svenskar om Finland och Danmark ingick en allians mot Sverige? För att besvara den frågan måste vi först titta lite på Finlands strategiska situation. Finland har inte längre tillgång till någon hamn vid Barents hav, som de hade vid tiden före andra världskriget. De kan alltså inte räkna med att använda någon rysk hamn för att försörja sitt eget folk. De blir således tvungna att alliera sig med åtminstone Danmark bland våra nordiska grannländer, för att försäkra sig om fri passage genom Öresund eller det danska Stora bält. De blir beroende av att Danmark kontrollerar Skåne och Blekinge med Karlskrona Örlogsbas. Annars drivs de ojämförligt mycket i händerna på Ryssland. Men finnarna ser sig sannolikt även nödgade till att invadera norra Norrland för tillgång till den svenska järnvägen till den norska hamnen i Narvik, för att inte hamna helt i händerna på danskarna. Där kommer Norge in i bilden. De måste hålla norrmännen glada. Hur gör de det? Genom att erbjuda norrmännen ekonomisk vinning. Hur? Malmfälten i Kiruna, energi, joint venture. För att riktigt göra Sverige till en slavstat så vill de säkert göra Göteborg till en norsk stad, som kontrollerar infarten av varor till Sverige.

Det de inte kan komma förbi är att vi kan ’andas under vatten’. Men det är trots allt ganska fåfänga förhoppningar våra potentiella fiender har.

Några funderingar

Det Finland försöker göra är att sänka Sverige. Det kan diskuteras hur mycket hjälp Finland fick från Sverige i deras förra krig mot Ryssland. Var det för lite? Var det mycket? Man kan argumentera för bägge. Men det vi inte gjorde var att hjälpa Ryssland angripa och ockupera Finland! Så mycket kan vi vara överens om, vem vi än frågar. Vår hjälp kan till och med ha tippat över vågskålen mot ett sovjetiskt misslyckande. Det är inte alls osannolikt. Sedan kan man argumentera för att vi gjorde allt vi gjorde för Finland i eget intresse. Men då kan man argumentera för att USA slogs i andra Världskriget och i Koreakriget i eget intresse. Detta ändrar dock inte på det faktum att Europa och Sydkorea var benefaktor för den amerikanska hjälpen. Det är nästan alltid så att hjälp i krig är villkorad på ett eller annat sätt. Det minst negativa man kan säga om Finland är att de är otacksamma. Objektivare än så här kan man inte bli.

Vi ses väl förmodligen på slagfältet. Ja inte jag, jag sitter ju hemma i relativ säkerhet. Men jag sticker ut hakan.

Kategorier: Östersjöinloppen, Baltic Sea, Barents Sea, Defense, Politics, Russia, Ryssland | Lämna en kommentar

Blogg på WordPress.com.