CitizenK

quote:

---

Very soon after NATO was created in 1949, Washington programmed its obsolescence. As early as 1951, Dwight Eisenhower, the first Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, said that if U.S.
Print Article
Very soon after NATO was created in 1949, Washington programmed its obsolescence. As early as 1951, Dwight Eisenhower, the first Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, said that if U.S. troops were to be stationed in Europe for more than ten years, then the whole project would be a failure. The NATO project was indeed supposed to be temporary, and last only until Western Europe was capable of ensuring its own defense. President Harry Truman was convinced European defense integration was the only way for Europe to protect itself from nationalism, preserve its independence from the Soviet threat, and strengthen its cooperation with the United States.

Seventy years down the road, the U.S. perspective on NATO has changed radically: President Donald Trump is leading a global revival of nationalism in Europe, he is questioning the U.S. security guarantee in a context of a resurgence of the Russian threat, and he is describing European defense initiatives as "protectionist." The future of the transatlantic bond will therefore depend, to a large extent, on Europeans themselves, and on their ability to reinvest in the strategic debate on the future of the European defense and security architecture—all in the difficult context of great-power rivalry.

---

LINK

My interest is in Europeans amazed at how wonderful the USA is. They are just like my son's then girlfriend from Austria in 2000, portion sizes for food is unheard of along with pricing lower as well. they find hard to believe the size of grocery stores and wide selection of foods in them. They've never met friendlier people than Americans dashing everything they ever thought bad about us.

Also, just like that same GF who looked miserable the day I took them crabbing/fishing and a tour of marsh, something they wouldn't experience elsewhere and amazed at the beauty of America. That was the only thing she talked about upon their return to Austria.

LSU fans found a fan base which can contend with them in Sottish fans drinking bars dry.

quote:

---

Refineries make between 10 and 15 cents per gallon. America buys $10 million gallon per day, so they make a nice profit.

---

Even Placid barely makes a profit some years and loses money other years and it's a refinery geared to gasoline.

I remember Russell Long and J Bennett Johnson

quote:

---

Guess it wasn't that big a deal, huh?

---

They made a deal with Saudi Arabia for Green Ammonia to sell to Norwegian Yara. CF is already doing CCS. Japan is building 4 new ships for liquid ammonia transport from Donaldsonville to Japan with Blue Ammonia at 80,000 tons per shipment.

Sounds a lot like Elon Musk buying a used ASU from Brazil for his Starbase just to make a deal with a major supplier to build a new plant there, then tore down the ASU and gave everything to the contractor dismantling it

The companies supply liquid oxygen by barge were screwing SpaceX is how it all began. That is nothing new with that cabal

FTR, I have seen a number of brand new chemical plants with new processes be cancelled after completion of the first commercial plant then dismantled. That is how I moved from Lake Chuck to BR over 25 years ago. Shell Chemical built new plant with new process at Geismar $110 million to build the first plant for a new plastic after $800 million in R&D then decided to cancel the entire thing before completed. They ran 43 batches to screw around with formula to see what would happen.

Dismantlement started 3 years after costruction began.

I saw the accounting as explained by one of their accountants. They got a write off for the entire ball of wax, including a double write off for building the plant.

Police chief name is LaDarian.

Other than demographics, i take everything Zeihan expounds on with a grain of salt.

FTR NATO was supposed to last for a decade or so.

quote:

---

What fields and where?

---

All tight shale for oil unless a hole was required to keep a lease.

Rig count for oil went to almost zero

As for subsidies, look at ethanol. The Feds are not subsidizing the ethanol plants. The states subsidized them at different rates from 20 to 30 cents per gallon of ethanol produced but only when local farmers owned 51% of the plant. It doesn't make a rat's arse who the operator it. The subsidies generate enough revenue and taxes on that revenue to more than make up for the cost of the subsidies.
What the Feds subsidize is the companies who blend the ethanol with gasoline. It's a fuel blender credit. Ethanol meets the EPA fuel oxygenation requirements enacted in the 1980's.. MTBE was cheaper but declared hazardous. The build out of the modern dry milling ethanol plants did not occur until MTBE was banned. This left ethanol as the low cost alternative.

quote:

---

Cool, tax payers do not need to be funding it. The only way it is profitable is via tax subsidies.

---

If you want $2 gasoline, it's subsidizing you.

quote:

---

Crude pipelines require above ground pumping (booster) stations. Many only 30-50 miles apart,

---

More like an average of 150 miles between pumping stations.

We still need to to Iraq, Kuwait and Qatar. Bahrain imports oil from Saudi Arabia to refine.

quote:

---

She just saw what happened to Cassidy for turning on Trump and his conservative voters.

---

Unless she is into big daddy spanking her. :lol: :lol: