BlueOak

The trend is for fascism to rise and wars to come about, social unrest and hate to rise still, we haven't had enough war or suffering yet. Just the nonsense I'll have to listen to from Americans for the next four years will be unbearable, and I am already heavily suppressed in the current dynamic responding to it. We'll export maybe 10-20% of that fantasy here in UK. We'll have another bout of vaccine deniers in England or, more likely, something equally stupid like the homeless being blamed for housing prices. People will start discussing weather machines under someone's bed are causing climate change again. It's just general conspiracy brain idiocy and another round of rightwing suppression; maybe it'll be enough to start some severe counterculture leftism, but I don't think we are there yet. It's a pity we couldn't hold together NATO at this critical time, but the writing on the wall for America to shift fascism has been there for a long time, and Europe only has itself to blame if it's not armed sufficiently after two years of Russian aggression to stand against BRICS. I thought they'd dose Biden up for the debates with something like Alpha Brain, and Trump's charges would knock him down a peg; sadly, no such luck, a worse debate than I thought.

Socialize a lot. Go out there and spend time around people in different social settings. Society would reform its 60-hour work weeks if people were actively socializing again because that would form a core component of life again. Think about how many hours you spent for the friendships at school to form. They didn't happen in a meeting or two. It's no different for adults. Sure, our brains get increasingly set in our ways, but we are able to adapt and still need time around an acquaintance to form a friendship. Start with a light conversation, and if you feel relating to someone is leading to a friendship you want, deepen it or continue in further events. If not, enjoy the experience you went for; no big deal, and maybe try something else next week. I've not much to add; the analysis was great above. Only that socializing shouldn't take cerebral effort. As life has become increasingly cerebral (mentally focused), we've forgotten how to just be around people. Less thought, more doing. I should take my own advice. It's always money with me that holds me back; I struggle to pay for the necessities, so I don't put any aside for socializing. I never start off light either, because I am often serious. So it was good I found a writing group because I can continuously throw myself off the deep end by talking about the pieces we all write in as much depth as I like. It's a bit like this forum in that respect, and although the connection is limited to interactions of text, it's fairly broad, open to my responses (which is underheard of on places like YouTube), and maintains an often good quality of conversation, so I really appreciate the efforts of Leo and the moderators here. Like many of you, I miss friendships; when I see people who have strong friendships, I have a certain amount of envy for their relationship. @MuadDib The idea of creating a place that teaches and facilitates friendship is something you or someone else should do immediately. It is a brilliant one.

I often try to tell people economies usually win elections, it's hard in the current internet age of sensationalist drama to get this message to people on the internet, but it's still true for working people who make up the majority of the electorate. Immigration is pretty big this year, as well, at least in Europe; I hear it's similar in the US.

Alright, let's do one more layer back. Your thoughts are also imaginary. Resist the initial temptation to say yes. Think about what it means (sorry bad pun). The concepts you have of imagination and thought also do not exist.

Ukraine offered neutrality to Russia, it was rejected by Russia: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-offers-neutrality-exchange-nato-style-security-guarantees-russia-talks-2022-03-29/ https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/ukraines-zelensky-to-offer-neutrality-declaration-to-russia-for-peace-without-delay The opening part of the interview is almost entirely false. It still paints America as the one driving this, which is also a lie. This is best demonstrated by aid being withheld for a long period, by a large part of American pro-Russian Trump supporters and an even larger part of America wanting peace. So that is also a lie, and I am only 4 minutes in. It's the UK, Poland, the Baltics, Finland, and now France, to a lesser extent, pushing for the strongest responses because Russia keeps threatening them the most. Russia is no threat to the US anymore conventionally, it's too weak; they live in a fantasy where they are a superpower. China is the superpower in BRICS. Then he takes the Russian talking point of it as a civil war, Russia armed, gave manpower to, and funded the militias, and when the coup happened, it used them to attack, creating a war within Ukraine. Stating that Russia just happened to come along to help is a completely Russian position. I have talked about that before: it is not a neutral position; it is not a Ukrainian position or an Eastern European position; it is a Russian talking point that all world powers like to frame their wars as 'the liberators' or the people 'helping'. It's always BS, no war is moral, or better than the others. Maybe more democratic countries should start destabilizing countries again, or is that bad when others not aligned with Russia or BRICS do it? Isn't that the point of BRICS to stop people from doing that? No, it's not; it's to frame it so that when BRICS does it, it's okay; it's fighting the evil Americans. Despite the fact that it's in Europe, and much of America either has forgotten about it, doesn't care, or supports Russia and/or peace. 'Native Russian speakers' Yes, because the entire area was run by the Soviet Union, and that was its language. There was no problem between languages; he was listing Russian talking points. The Russian language was still spoken, and there was no ill will between the East and West of Ukraine from what I've been told. I only have secondhand people telling me that. Then I stopped at the Nazi's lies. The Azov battalion was a few hundred strong and integrated into the regular armed forces of Ukraine before the war started. Russia has far more far-right extremists in it than Ukraine because 1) This war is about restoring nationalism or Russian Imperialism. 2) Putin uses them to stay in power. 3) The leader of the Azov stepped down to run in the election; he got 2-3% of the vote combined with the other far-right parties. 4) Russia exports this far-right extremism around the globe. Russia has sent us into a war. This creates far-right extremists. What was 16% in Germany in the recent elections? Its trying to push migrants into Europe to keep fueling tensions. I could go on analysing the lies past the 5-minute mark, but there is no attempt at all for a balanced point of view or a meeting in the middle, just one side bare-faced lying. Maybe it gets better, but I doubt it.

@Hatfort Russia were gaining small amounts of territory at great cost on the battlefield because Ukraine didn't have much ammunition. They were outshelling Ukraine to 10 to 1. That is not the case anymore, and Ukraine is no longer out of ammo as Putin's Allies in America were beaten back. Ukraine is not hamstrung (as much) about where it can target Russian supply lines or troops. For most of this war, Russia has been able to pick and choose where it fights with safer supply lines; this is not so much the case now. Although Ukraine still has certain restrictions, there are not as many. The west collectively is pushing for a stalemate; it has been for a long time. To make an uncertain conflict certain. It gets nothing out of letting Russia dictate terms—nothing at all because that makes the entire West look weak and like an authoritarian power can do whatever it wants, threaten or invade wherever it wants, and they have to bow to it. If Russia was smart, it would think about what it could offer. Ukraine gets nothing if Russia takes its territory with no concessions, so there is no peace. Eastern Europe's concerns are not addressed in this either because a large chunk of a neighbor will have been given up, and it'll be the 9th Russian war pushing into former USSR territories. The only possible way this could be sold as even a minor victory for the West is when the Russian economy collapses, which it is slightly doing. Still, BRICS have extended this so much now by the need to be or at least appear a rival to NATO, that this hasn't happened significantly. There is no incentive at all for peace. I cannot communicate this to people who want this multipolar world. They have to see it play out I guess. There is only incentive for war. Suffering, you might say, but there is suffering either way and a lot of hate for Russia (and the other way to NATO) if you rely on emotion to be the resolving force of anything. The other problem you have Hatfort is you are completely sold on Russia propaganda about their capabilities and their intent to stop after this. So you overestimate their position and then wonder why people are not acknowledging it or fear their continuance. I'm not immune to this effect myself, but I tend to just watch what happens, the outcome. I saw Russia kicked out of the country unprepared in four different areas; then I saw a failed Ukraine counterattack because the West waited too long to supply it and Russia defended well. Now all I see is a lot of Russian casualties and some Ukrainian losses, but with very minor shifts on the front line, even when Ukraine was undersupplied. When Ukraine is properly supplied, Russia has just been kicked out of the Kharkiv region again. I daily see large hits on the Russian economy through regular refineries going up to drone hits, Russian oil shortages, and Putin needing to ask outside countries for aid. I saw Putin threaten Eastern Europe and the UK enough (almost daily if you watch their state TV), and BRICS embarrass France in Africa so that these countries pushed to send more aid to Ukraine, including troops, but the French settled on instructors. Now I see North Korea sending combat troops there and threatening the South after Russia gives them and Belarus Nukes. So the West can send anything. It should lock down the skies or secure the northern border. Despite Russian propaganda, there have not been combat troops in Ukraine from the West, Russia was never fighting 'the west', no matter how much it wanted to sell that reality to the world. Now you might see western troops there in a limited capacity. It might not need to be Troops, but we can send almost anything now.

Why the word dream?

Here is how to fix some of this. BRICS to the entire World. Do you want to join BRICS? This would also make BRICS dominant in the world, an open-ended message to every country all at once broadcasted publicly (even those they dislike). Ditto NATO, or a NATO-like alliance.

As always, the pro-Russian side makes this all about America because to consider Ukraine or even Europe would be to consider the full reality of the conflict. It also brings us a step closer to a peace deal, as all the relevant parties would be considered. But instead, they make the demonized 'other,' the Americans, their only focus, so they miss most of the factors involved and broaden a conflict. At the same time, they don't want American influence in their region; they want a smaller conflict. This contradiction works against them (and world peace). I have repeatedly demonstrated that the American population is 30% or so pro-Russian while showing that Eastern Europe is the most pro-Ukrainian region. Still, it becomes so convenient to ignore this fact because then we'd get closer to an uncomfortable truth: For Russia, Europe, Ukraine, and America. Everyone I've just mentioned would lose something by acknowledging it. Russia would be forced to acknowledge their campaign of fear, war, and territorial ambitions, causing these reactions in the East of Europe and causing what they don't want: people to move away from them and closer to NATO. They would be forced to realise they have actual responsibility for their own actions. America would be forced to admit that half of their country is becoming isolationist and a threat to their overseas empire, which is only increased by the railroading over these concerns. They may even be forced to reflect that a safer world isn't one in which you have 5,000 military bases, one can hope, and thus bring other countries in as more equal partners with direct military capability of their own. Europe would be forced to acknowledge its role in allowing Russia to become so dominant militarily compared to them and its role in funding this more fully. Decades of overreliance on America for their own security. To be fair, we've done some of that and made some adjustments, but it's not serious military spending in the UK, for example, or a complete break with Russian energy yet in central Europe (Germany needs to get over its nuclear power fears) Ukraine would be forced to admit that the support for them will only last while Russia makes this out to be a larger war. If Russia kept insisting on the complete opposite, that this was a local dispute, it would have gone more in that direction. Now that they are pulling in North Korean troops for example, it makes it even more international. *Obviously it was in the interests of the defenders to broaden the war, as they were the smaller side, now the power balance has shifted, Russia is forced to go to other countries for materials and manpower.

Dictating that you will give up nothing before the negotiations begin is not an olive branch; it's dictating terms. The west did exactly the same by saying negotiations can begin when you leave the territories you occupy. BOTH SIDES need to come together. Your bias is extreme here. So if the dialogue will do nothing, the battlefield is going to decide the war, not hopes, dreams, or one side's terms. I've heard reports it was Russian air defense fragments, but at the least, it was Russia that shot it down over a warzone. That is a fact. This is a war though this happens daily. People should get out of the land they've illegally occupied in a warzone, as Ukrainians have been forced to do. That should be step number one for the civilian population. Going for a holiday there on a beach with active military targets seems incredibly stupid. I also find it incredible that for two years, Russia has fired missiles into civilian targets, yet one beach gets all the headlines. The Russians are great at propaganda; we have to give them that. The ports in Crimea have to be eliminated to stop them from firing on civilian targets in Ukraine, and they are Ukrainian ports to target. Frankly, I am not sure how the moderators let you get away with saying this. If I said the same i'd expect my post to be locked or blocked. This is a European war, fought in Europe against European powers. America is backing its allies. Russian propaganda. As they are still recruiting them now. Russia has said this for 2 years, and it's never been true, only on their state TV fantasy land. They are using WW2 arms and ammunition, some older than that. They use human wave tactics; their experienced office core died at the start of the war, and their naval assets and airforce are being depleted faster than ever. Russia has lost about 60% of its soviet stockpiles. This is part of why the West is happy to continue. Because Russia keeps wasting its stockpiles. When they are gone, so is its ability to project power conventionally, it removes a massive threat to Europe. America and Europe are not doing this out of the goodness of their heart, while Russia keeps doing what they want, running themselves into the ground they'll continue. When it looks like a stalemate, they'll probably stop.

@zazen It has been a rough time. Sorry for the delay. It doesn’t matter if you kill a man in what you have arbitrarily decided is your backyard or a thousand miles away. Suffering is still suffering. You are arguing for a return to land grabs and border wars as preferable. Because you are trying to say it's somehow better than a war overseas, it isn’t. It still creates imbalance, instability, uncertainty, and suffering. Globalized supply chains, for example, cannot function in a world beset by people fighting wars with their neighbors, which means every aspect of your life changes because everything needs to be sourced locally. More expenses, regression in some areas of development, a lot more chaos and competition. In this multi-polar world, you are hoping for. People militarize to protect against their neighbors, which increases the use of the military to achieve aims. This is the cycle toward a global war that is now accelerating. It may settle down when the two sides solidify, leading to less frequent larger wars rather than smaller ones (or just a long cold war). This isn't a global collective emerging; it's two poles: authoritarian vs democratic. It is still colonialism; the method has just changed. Money does it now, as do mercenary forces like Wagner or proxy forces. The land is still giving its resources to the empires that control them, and the manpower will be used for their overlord's wars. What else is there? A label of independence on the country, but the wealth is still being shipped overseas. You are then arguing that both the US is dominant and that it is a multi-polar world. NATO’s collective GDP without the US is closer than you make out; I can’t remember the exact value now, but it's close. The EU’s is not insignificant either, at 18 trillion vs 26, or China is at 17, so it's not as lopsided as you are making out. BRICS are not patterning Western imperialism; they’ve invented their own. They either invade their neighbors outright to take over land, topple governments, or buy them out, fund favorable political parties, spread their propaganda, take their resources, and secure proxy states that way. I find it hard to understand why you consider this preferable other than aligning with your preferences. Then you get idealistic: BRICS is just another set of countries doing what they can for themselves. Don't tell me they are somehow more enlightened in their approach to governance or politics; this is the weakest part of your response. They take and take until they are stopped; where is the stage, green or yellow, BRICS leader? If this was a global collective emerging, this would be a different conversation. These two poles will lead to conflict and competition, not cooperation. Sure, there will be some benefits, maybe a proper space race, and development in some areas, but it will also create chaos. No positive elements of the liberal world order are going to be preserved by expansionist authoritarian regimes. We fight to keep those, or they get taken from us; I am talking domestically right now as I’ve seen it happening for 20 years. All I see BRICS doing is warmongering, so I see no positive outcome from them at all to the world as a whole, I see a positive outcome for their own countries. I understand people want more; they always do. So this is the path to a potentially larger war, or long cold war because they have convinced themselves that 2 is better than 1. (And yes, I realize the 1 was also poorly put together, even the UN) It's very obvious and playing out. Now I see Russia arming North Korea with Nukes and Belarus to justify their own expansionist aims, so a nuclear war is closer. This does not make the world safer because the other side will likely respond in some like-minded way.

Arranging her living environment to be therapeutic will be part of the medical care. This is why I never leave anything to doctors or a single doctor alone they are very narrowly focused on their own specialties. I worked in alternative therapies for 8 years or so. @Michael569 Appreciate it.

Hey, thanks for stopping by here. I'm looking to draw upon any and all information you have regarding strokes. My mother had swelling on the brain, and a pain in the back of her head. She slowly fainted and started shaking, going into the hospital on Saturday night, and has slightly recovered each day. Her levels of consciousness dip in and out from what they call a 15 (normal) to a 7 at her lowest, but her memory seems to function fine. Her speech is a bit slurred; she can now feel on her right side but not move it properly yet; her left is fine. She's not moved into therapy yet and is in a critical care unit still, but is off a heart rate monitor now. In my visits I've tried: Familiar smells from perfume. Textures on a blanket she owns and rests with. Pictures she sleeps with. Being there for her and encouraging her, telling her to take her time but keep trying to open her eyes (she can but not much and sees double), to keep her body moving like she was doing exercises at home. I don't have any headphones for her yet, but they said I could bring some in. I'm the one who is keeping it together, and part of the reason is acceptance of what we are, thank you all for that, but also solutions, so any you have would be great. More esoterically, I've realized that I can speak to her consciousness directly, even while alive. So I did a bit of that when she was at her worst and grieved for a time, but I made peace however it was going to go. I've tried to focus some healing on her left arm while I was there through movement and motion along her bad arm to stimulate any response, and energy transfer. Whatever else you know,. I don't care what it is or where it comes from, I'll investigate it all. Thanks.

Also, nobody has solved this problem, when they do, I (infinity) will have: I stand in front of you and shout in your face. How do you maintain bliss? The best I have is detachment, which seems like a poor answer for an infinite whole. I've toyed with love for anger, but that never works because anger is a detaching force.

Because life is many things to me, not just bliss. Though a once-a-month bliss experience would be nice to have and should be coded into the human experience naturally without needing to go anywhere, take, or buy anything,. What are my most common states: Observation Frustration Analysis Apathy Suffering Sentiment Synchronicity Sadness Happiness Peace Cyclic Pattern Institution Calm An alternate question: What stops you from dissolving into the emotionless void? Infinite sorrow, or infinite insert emotion here: X

For anyone going through this, I hope it helps: This man seems to know his subject, Dr. Eric Berg If I find anything else relevant in the next few days i'll link it here to help others.

I appreciate the feedback, but part of the way I cope with anything serious is by looking for solutions to problems. As in arranging her living area to be more suitable, moving things downstairs etc. Thanks, I made peace with either outcome, as with my heart problem. I'll keep looking for information. Sorry, universe, but I'm ignoring you this time in favor of not sitting on my hands, because never in my life has that ever done anything positive.

Respectfully, at this juncture, I'll consult with anyone. I am not stupid, Leo, and capable of double-checking sources and facts. Plus you know, we are consulting with our own projections and reflections.

One small realization I made in communicating about infinity. Infinity is seen by you deciding how you react to something. That is, you could react in infinite ways to what is otherwise a void of meaning that you fill. The void of meaning that you fill, I've understood for a while, but I thought this small nugget worth sharing if you are ever communicating with another. It seemed to take someone further into understanding their own nature. All the best.

First off, apologies for the obvious spelling mistake; it was early. @Hatfort Some outreach was made to Armenia, but I don't know how it will go; it's a complicated region now. Seeking EU Ties: https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/armenia-to-quit-pro-russian-alliance-seeks-eu-ties/ar-BB1o9LH6 Its the same with Turkey and Georgia seeking EU ties. I agree that China and India somewhat filled the void in Russia's economy. Is there oil in Nagorno Karavaj also? I know you were speaking more generally on the recent oil discoveries in the region, but I couldn't find information either way. I'd be interested to get your take on why the EU couldn't take the role of trading with Georgia, or this region more broadly. Especially if the condition was Turkey entered the EU which would probably be necessary. I'd genuinely be interested because West Asia and Central Asia are regions of the world we don't see much information on here. Obviously, proximity is huge, and I understand Russia owns a lot of the rail connections, but if Turkey joined, proximity would be the same either way.

@zazen China, Iran, BRICS, and Russia DO NOT limit their ambitions within their own borders, or we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Countries push their spheres of influence outward until they hit another because they are frankly incapable in their leadership of conceiving of another path forward. Chinese Imperialism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_imperialism Belt and Road: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative Involving 150 countries, that’s a global trading empire that is unseating the US; it's not ‘within its own borders’ at all. Chinese control over Africa: China is putting more arms into Africa than anyone but Russia; that’s primarily how you maintain a favorable government and indirect control over a region: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/china-arms-sales-cement-economic-093000334.html Current Colonial Ambitions: https://edition.cnn.com/2023/09/26/china/china-african-loans-development-belt-and-road-intl-hnk/index.html It maintains this control through control of industry, banking, arms dealing, establishing bases, supporting sympathetic governments, and trade. (Sound familiar?) The moral equivalency of: Oh, America did it too, does not work when you also tell me that BRICS countries stay within their own borders. Both statements cannot be accurate at the same time. Russian Imperialism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_imperialism https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2023/1/24/how-western-scholars-overlooked-russian-imperialism Russian influence on EU Elections: https://www.politico.eu/article/voice-of-europe-russia-influence-scandal-election/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/european-election-how-eu-says-russia-is-spreading-disinformation-2024-06-03/ This nonsense goes on all the time. Russia is always threatening to push its influence to the Atlantic ocean through Europe. Their state TV says something dumb like that every week. Let's mention Iran, like every country on earth, tries to push its influence outward. It uses its proxy forces to achieve this, and is looking to rebuild a greater Iran (which has a few different names) Historic Iranian Imperialism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pahlavi_Iran (Now sorry to your ego) Then, you again present a moral equivalency argument to justify warmongers. It will never hold up to a token analysis. They're flawed, so I don’t mind these other people being bad. It is just moralizing, which doesn’t mean anything beyond how you feel; it's just an excuse to behave a certain way. I used that moralizing to feel ' okay ' with some of the worst things I’ve done in my life. Addressing BRICS imperialism is just the same as when America did it. We are morally superior for these reasons, so it is okay to do what we are doing. No war is still war; death is still death. Meddling in elections still interferring with elections. Assassination, terrorism, cyberattacks, arming suppressive governments, the rich taking from the poor, Africa being exploited, trade routes being seized and robbed blind, and generally spreading fear and misinformation are still the same as it was. I am just looking at different people repeating the pattern. On the video: Stage Green, but let’s tackle it. Having two competing power blocks in a similar state of development, vying for world dominance, and thinking that will lead to a peaceful outcome or greater stability for the planet is equally a mind virus. Nothing about the leaders of BRICS countries shows me any capacity to think barely in ethical terms, let alone BEYOND their ethical value judgments. Their ethical value judgment will inevitably put or reflect themselves as the superior force for moral leadership and challenge anything that challenges it. – The fundamental flaw in the stage green argument. It is by definition impossible for you to both support BRICS ethically and, at the same time, acknowledge what they are doing is morally questionable if your entire argument is morality and ethics. I am not in America. I am in Europe. My concerns are from Europe, which is in a proxy war with BRICS, which is starting to escalate into a greater one. I do not for one second think that my own morals and ethics are superior to a Russian or you. A hint for you, for BRICs, for anyone: If you allow it, now I've hit your ego; I mean this part with the best of intent: List the benefits BRICS brings and the fact that America lacked in regards to world stability and security, faith, development, economic benefits, possible long-term interoperation, etc. I wouldn't mind seeing them. Ditch the ethics and morals, and this will be more productive. The weakest part of my argument above, without extensive sourcing and thought, is addressing the global south's prosperity, but why limit your analysis to just the global south? Trade routes and the breakdown of the global system, insurance hikes leading to increased prices everywhere, and lack of goods in stores, or technological development slowing down (which requires extensive global cooperation to advance), are obviously huge negatives I'll counter with - but that discussion would be better and more productive than this one.

Understanding reality is relative is a minor superpower. Just don't overuse it, or everyone will hate you for not saying anything. Drop it in when someone gets stuck somewhere, or you get stuck or find difficulty somewhere. Alone, it can be enough to get things flowing again.

In short: Identity - Threatened - Fear We create the identity, we create the perceived threat to it, and we create the fear. To expand a bit: The best videos will need to take this into account: how can something be perceived to threaten the identity of the person who fears X? If we remove individuality from the conversation, it's easier to talk about. X could be any number of things, and that is where the complication comes in, understanding individual or collective fears within the human speaking about them. Obviously, fear is uncomfortable to talk about; few want their own fears laid bare, and to associate someone with a fear merely for existing is also uncomfortable, so we all try and talk around the subject politely hinting at things. Though to me, the hinting and unknown is worse than speaking about it, I'm wired differently to most. Love sent to all the gay and lesbian people out there, I'm sorry this comes up at all.

@zazen You can cloak war, pushing out influence, and territorial expansion in any noble sentiment you like. I used to listen to liberals say we are liberating people from dictators all the time. Now I listen to BRICS saying we are liberating people, and in your case, 'it is simply incentive driven towards sovereignty.' - That's how the authoritarians love to frame it now; they just keep pushing the borders out for what that sovereignty is. Oh, it's this map, no, it's this one; I think we'll push the lines further out this year, what can we take next year? It's still warmongers making war for money, wealth, and power. It encourages the same; it always encourages the same cycle. People have learned nothing other than to frame it to make themselves sound better than their targets.

@Ajay0 You just told me that the EU reduced its imports down by a factor of 16. I haven't seen that extreme amount supported, but I'll take your source's word for it. There is no way you can phrase that, which makes it seem like the EU hasn't massively cut imports; they would be importing 1/16th of what they were. As you can see here, most of the LNG being used in the EU is coming in from America, and they keep increasing that. https://www.bruegel.org/dataset/european-natural-gas-imports Quote from your article: Yet much of this LNG is not needed by the European market and is being handled at European ports before being reexported to third countries worldwide, with some EU states and companies profiting as a result. "A lot of the Russian LNG that goes to Europe is just being 'trans-shipped,'" said Hilgenstock. "So that has nothing to do with Europe's natural gas supply. It's just European companies making money facilitating Russian LNG exports." End Quote Like the Indian and Turkish resellers you are speaking about, this is mainly individual billionaires and their companies profiteering, and these individuals will often be global in nature, shipping resources on through their existing supply chains. - Do I like this? No, but it is small potatoes comparatively that Spain and Belgium are using their maritime assets to profit for others. Otherwise, all those long-running supply chains will go bankrupt or adversely impact world trade. Russian supplies are still getting discounted; it's still hurting their war economy, it's still not going to fuel Europe, but yes, war profiteering should still be banned. Any money going to Russia, even indirectly shipped by companies with assets in Europe, needs to be squeezed. AND if other countries in BRICS or others didn't buy this Russian LNG through Spanish and Belgian companies, it wouldn't go through them in the first place!