Former UK Defence Sec.: ‘Putin as bad as Stalin'

[HT: AU].  Here's the most relevant bit in my view, as it goes for the U.S. as well as EU and NATO [emphasis mine]:

No sensible person wants, in the face of the many other challenges, to be forced to find money for increased spending on arms. No one wants the economic consequences that extensive sanctions against Russia will have on our own economies, but Putin will not be deterred by resolutions passed at Nato or EU summits.

So unless we want to gamble that this systematic aggression will fizzle out in the face of inactivity, and history tells us that doesn’t happen, we must find effective ways to deter him.

Both Nato and the EU have made a start but the small and reluctant steps taken so far sadly are not likely to be nearly enough.

All Nato countries should commit to reverse the recent decline in defence spending.

At the European level there is an urgent need to develop a strategy to decrease our heavy dependence on Russian energy.

Finally, Europe is realizing that Russia is not a reliable partner, since there is no separation of business and politics in Russia -- where everything is political, and politics is subordinated to one man, Vladimir Putin. Europe cannot abide the whims of one man in the vain hope of ensuring its economic and military security.

‘Putin as bad as Stalin’, claims former Defence Secretary Ainsworth

By Paul Dale

September 15, 2014 | The Chamberlain Files

URL: http://www.thechamberlainfiles.com/putin-as-bad-as-stalin-claims-former-defence-secretary-ainsworth/

Energy myths: POTUS and 'energy independence'

It seems my work is not done because I keep hearing two misconceptions in America repeated:

1) The President of the United States has something to do with gas prices; and 

2) The U.S. can and should be "energy independent."

The first is a myth because of supply and demand.  As for supply, with the exception of cartels, it's all poured into one big pool of oil, figuratively speaking.  As for demand, it's growing in China and other developing countries and there's nothing we can do about it. 

The second is a myth because there is a world market for oil, coal and natural gas, all highly fungible commodities.  America is not Venezuela and Obama is not Hugo Chavez: it's not "our" oil and gas, we don't nationalize it.  It belongs to huge MNCs like Shell and BP.

It does make sense to talk about "energy security," which Roger Altman explains: 

"Let's get to the point where the amount we import from rogue or potentially rogue nations who might be hostile to us is down to a point where, if suddenly that supply was interrupted or shut off, we go right on."

Even so, it's a global market and we must keep this caveat in mind:

Increased energy security on the supply side, however, does not mean energy independence on the economic side. A smaller share of the oil we use in the U.S. comes from foreign sources today than was the case a decade ago. But an increase in the world oil price has left U.S. consumers paying more at the gas pump and reminded them of their continued dependence on market events beyond White House control.

So if people want to blame something, blame capitalism.

Can A President Control Prices At The Pump?

By Michel Martin

October 25, 2012 | NPR

URL: http://n.pr/RiDxuF 

Energy Independence For U.S.? Try Energy Security

By Tom Gjelten

October 25, 2012 | NPR 

URL: http://n.pr/QYAvrGe