Monitoring Biden and other Contemporary Events

Lash has the same problems with that, but whataboutism doesn’t apply to what’s currently happening.

It benefits Putin in keeping Russian oil prices high as a source of revenue for his invasion of Ukraine.

And also makes resisting Russian energy blackmail more painful.

His main source of revenue is from Russian crude oil. That's why he was able to completely cut off the flow of gas to Germany—who is, or was, the biggest buyer of Russian gas—but only cut off the flow of oil to Europe to 20% capacity. Also, there is a bigger list of buyers of Russian oil than buyers of Russian gas.

I agree!

Worst case scenario: Russia and Saudi join forces to wreck our economy by decreasing production. Looks like it’s happening.

We’ll be going hat in hand to Venezuela.

I’m surprised it took the oil countries so long to figure this out. (Or maybe get brave enough to jump. They’ve definitely jumped.)

We’re on the precipice of it right now.

Ro Khanna is talking tough, but the only leverage we have are weapons—which they’ll probably use on us.

https://www.democracynow.org/2022/10/6/headlines/rep_ro_khanna_calls_on_biden_administration_to_end_saudi_arms_sales

You are so scared.

Europe does seem to be destined for flames, but Trump will probably be in prison or dead. What’s happening right now has nothing to do with Trump. Mr. Biden is lighting the tinder, but in his defense, generations of poor American economic planning and greed have led him to oversee this chapter in world history.

The US gets 51% of its petroleum imports from Canada. They get 11% from OPEC. The next thee largest imports are from the Persian Gulf, Mexico and Russia, which are all at 8%.

"The officials told their Venezuelan counterparts that any relaxation in U.S. sanctions would be conditional on Venezuela shipping oil directly to the United States, the sources said." Reuters

Given that, I don't see how any Saudi-Russian ventures would "wreck" the US economy.

Only in your head. One or two billionaires could think they have all the answers and completely control a president. Bill Gates is always dabbling his stupid ass in education policy, agriculture, pathology research. He’s only one and he dictates a lot of policy. Who flies below the radar, dictating foreign policy?—like his/her massive board game?

Your thinking is too boxed in. You don’t want to see what’s right in front of you.

I would love for you to be right. We’ll see.

OPEC+ is cutting global oil production to drive up prices. The move shows that Russia can still count on the cartel led by Saudi Arabia to help it bolster its war chest.

(OPEC+ - that*s OPEC plus Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Brunei, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Mexico, Oman, Philippines, Russia, Sudan and South Sudan.)

I agree completely. This alliance is very concerning for me and a lot of other people.

I think it was the casus belli for US vs Iraq.

Throwback Thursday.

https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2014/mar/20/iraq-war-oil-resources-energy-peak-scarcity-economy

Excerpt:

The real issue is candidly described in a 2001 report on "energy security" - commissioned by then US Vice-President Dick Cheney - published by the Council on Foreign Relations and the James Baker Institute for Public Policy. It warned of an impending global energy crisis that would increase "US and global vulnerability to disruption", and leave the US facing "unprecedented energy price volatility."

The main source of disruption, the report observed, is "Middle East tension", in particular, the threat posed by Iraq. Critically, the documented illustrated that US officials had lost all faith in Saddam due his erratic and unpredictable energy export policies. In 2000, Iraq had "effectively become a swing producer, turning its taps on and off when it has felt such action was in its strategic interest to do so." There is a "possibility that Saddam Hussein may remove Iraqi oil from the market for an extended period of time" in order to damage prices:
"Iraq remains a destabilising influence to... the flow of oil to international markets from the Middle East. Saddam Hussein has also demonstrated a willingness to threaten to use the oil weapon and to use his own export programme to manipulate oil markets. This would display his personal power, enhance his image as a pan-Arab leader... and pressure others for a lifting of economic sanctions against his regime. The United States should conduct an immediate policy review toward Iraq including military, energy, economic and political/diplomatic assessments. The United States should then develop an integrated strategy with key allies in Europe and Asia, and with key countries in the Middle East, to restate goals with respect to Iraqi policy and to restore a cohesive coalition of key allies."

The Iraq War was only partly, however, about big profits for Anglo-American oil conglomerates - that would be a bonus (one which in the end has failed to materialise to the degree hoped for - not for want of trying though).
The real goal - as Greg Muttitt documented in his book Fuel on the Fire citing declassified Foreign Office files from 2003 onwards - was stabilising global energy supplies as a whole by ensuring the free flow of Iraqi oil to world markets - benefits to US and UK companies constituted an important but secondary goal:
"The most important strategic interest lay in expanding global energy supplies, through foreign investment, in some of the world's largest oil reserves – in particular Iraq. This meshed neatly with the secondary aim of securing contracts for their companies. Note that the strategy documents released here tend to refer to 'British and global energy supplies.' British energy security is to be obtained by there being ample global supplies – it is not about the specific flow."

OPEC+ exists only since 2016/17.

I think Saddam playing around with his production/distribution of oil was the casus belli. Same behavior, different players.

I think this is why the US has made aggressive moves against Russia, and this recent alliance between Russia and Saudi is ominous of increased OPEC+ flexing against the US.

The hegemon is not too popular. I often wondered what it would be like when other countries decided to take down Goliath. I imagined this play.

I guess a lot of people probably did.

Russia resp. the Soviet Union is the first and thus oldest ally of the the Kingdom of Hejaz and Nejd (since 1932 names Saudi Arabia) - since 1926.

‘…renewed alliance…’ ‘…oil buddy alliance…’
Is that accurate enough for your delicate sensibilities?

If I point out that a partnership has existed for 96 years and was the first ever, yes, it may well be that this is part of my delicate sensibilities if I do not want to call such a thing recent.

Lash is just a distraction from this Russia discussion. Personally, I find the whole Russian escalation threat to be scary as heck, and I don't understand at all why in the world anyone would appear to be championing their side. It doesn't make any sense to me.

We must not ignore the non-nuclear options for Russian escalation

Well, seeking to discredit and demean the Democratic Party is Lash's fundamental activity here. And now, with an election coming, she's active again. Note up above she quotes from a site dedicated to the economic ideas of Ludwig von Mises. Of course, such a theory set is what Bernie Sanders has always promoted.