Yep, and I'm skeptical of any website that only has a "close and accept" option for their cookies.
Ireland has a serious Russia problem.
- Thread starter Sister Sara
- Start date
Unions are there to protect the "Haves" from the "Have nots" and they are running a business so they have to try to protect their income.
Pat and Nuala Geoghegan’s farm
gerrymcgovern.com
There was a big case in the 90s and early 2000s taken by a dairy farmer Pat Geoghegan of askeaton county limerick against aughinish over his dairy cows getting sick and dying from suspected pollution from Aughinish. At every turn though he met with secrecy and obfuscation from the state agencies . I remember it being on prime time back in the 90s, strangely though very little media reports on this are available now when you google it
It was a bloody scandal. Blood samples of local children being 'lost' and the Mid-Western Health Board's CMO filibustering on RTÉ about it.
Local farmers couldn't get their animals to thrive despite good feeding. Local horse rearers near the estuary marshes having animals just fall over and die after breakdown of their alimentary processes. And everyone in the media terrified to talk.
Looks like it was an internal report by the Dept of Enterprise, Tourism & Employment.
Oh whadda shimmy - moreover in these cynical days !
We're all improving along the road to social maturity. But not enough yet to be on the ball always.
But anyway, whether the Rusal Aughinish alumina goes into missile fins aimed at Ukraine or into can stock, it's clear that the availability of alumina from Aughinish enables Rusal's other aluminium resources to be diverted into armaments. This means that demand from other applications for aluminium won't be denied as they can be met by aluminium stock made from Aughinish alumina.
The question of whether Aughinish Al ions are within missile casings from the Ukraine battlefields is an irrelevant question in the overall context of Russia's war industry being bolstered by an alumina refinery in Ireland.
Last edited:
Sister Sara
Registered User
- Messages
- 270
It does make you wonder about these policies of sanctions that ultimately hurt the civilian population more than anyone or anything.
Iran, Cuba have been sanctioned for decades.
A Co-pilot question: who does Russia export aluminium to?
Here’s a clear breakdown of Russia’s raw aluminium export destinations (2024):
- China — $3.78 billion
- South Korea — $863 million
- Turkey — $818 million
- Japan — $165 million
- Chinese Taipei (Taiwan) — $155 million
Sanctions are daft really, do they ever work?
Last edited:
The general view is that they do work - but slowly and often indirectly.
Iran's population has really suffered through unavailability of western drugs as a result of economic sanctions and a hostile sentiment towards shipping anything there. Though senior mullah families will always get the stuff, local commissars' families won't. Net effect was a lot of public discontent. But as sanctions were mainly just from US, Iran can handle it to date.
South Africa pre-1990 had many non-sanctioning allies, including UK, US till 1986, Israel (of course), Switzerland (quelle surprise) and Taiwan. But the increasing political instability as evidenced by daily TV coverage of hippo lorries on the street, mine strikes, tribal battles, etc made all western bankers wary of continuing to invest in South Africa. The forced investment of South Africa's own banks in their own economy couldn't be sustainable and only increased the risk of the whole system imploding. Full enforcement of the 1986 Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act by President Bush in 1989 was the end of the line for de Klerk. He then had to talk to the ANC. So sanctions worked in ZA once enforced.
Sanctioning Russia's major exports will be of limited threat since China, India, North Korea and friendly states in E. Europe, S, America and Africa continue to trade with them. Sanctioning imports to them might be more effective especially in the technology sector. Secondary sanctions on states continuing to trade heavily with Russia is having an effect.
Have you any better ideas ?
Sister Sara
Registered User
- Messages
- 270
I'll accept that @trajan that sanctions can play a part in disrupting the governance of a State.
South Africa, sanctions played their part but I would suggest is was the rise of ANC in 1980's, 1990's as a mass political movement, coupled with international public pressure in Europe and America on Western governments to impose those sanctions that began to wake-up those in authority that South Africa was becoming ungovernable. The imposition of sanctions from Western authorities did not derive from those in authority, they derived from public pressure in their own countries to act.
Public support here for Ukraine was highly evident after the Russian invasion and a failure of the government to be part of co-ordinated sanctions program would have resulted in anti-government sentiment.
There is no, or little public support here or abroad that I can see for sanctions against Iran. Internationally or internally, and the videos of the funeral of the Ayatollah would suggest that there is mass support in Iran for the current governance.
Sanctions by State authorities, against another State, that unduly impacts the civilian population and without support from that population does not appear to be very effective and comes across as a punitive action against the civilian population more than the State authorities.
Yes,
- respect the sovereignty of internationally recognised nation States and their boundaries in conjunction with expressed wishes of its people.
- resolve any nation State disputes through diplomacy, recognising the sovereignty of nation States
- without mass support from the public for sanctions, direct sanctions against figures in authority and not on civilians.
Russia has clearly violated the sovereignty of Ukraine and its authorities should be targeted. Targeting the civilian population without mass support does not appear to be very effective.
In the end as long as those in power have the support of the civilian population (I would suggest maybe 30% support is sufficient in the absence of a co-ordinated opposition) then sanctions do appear to be futile.
South Africa, sanctions played their part but I would suggest is was the rise of ANC in 1980's, 1990's as a mass political movement, coupled with international public pressure in Europe and America on Western governments to impose those sanctions that began to wake-up those in authority that South Africa was becoming ungovernable. The imposition of sanctions from Western authorities did not derive from those in authority, they derived from public pressure in their own countries to act.
Public support here for Ukraine was highly evident after the Russian invasion and a failure of the government to be part of co-ordinated sanctions program would have resulted in anti-government sentiment.
There is no, or little public support here or abroad that I can see for sanctions against Iran. Internationally or internally, and the videos of the funeral of the Ayatollah would suggest that there is mass support in Iran for the current governance.
Sanctions by State authorities, against another State, that unduly impacts the civilian population and without support from that population does not appear to be very effective and comes across as a punitive action against the civilian population more than the State authorities.
Yes,
- respect the sovereignty of internationally recognised nation States and their boundaries in conjunction with expressed wishes of its people.
- resolve any nation State disputes through diplomacy, recognising the sovereignty of nation States
- without mass support from the public for sanctions, direct sanctions against figures in authority and not on civilians.
Russia has clearly violated the sovereignty of Ukraine and its authorities should be targeted. Targeting the civilian population without mass support does not appear to be very effective.
In the end as long as those in power have the support of the civilian population (I would suggest maybe 30% support is sufficient in the absence of a co-ordinated opposition) then sanctions do appear to be futile.
Last edited:
In realpolitik, respect derives from fear of the consequences of not doing so.
Likewise, resolution through diplomacy only kicks in when military efforts come to a stalemate or are too injurious/expensive to the combatant states.
Sanctions against Putin's personal wealth ? He'll just rob some more from Russia and put it where US can't touch it.
Personally I think financial sanctions might be the most efficacious move. Moreover the secondary ones against China, India, etc so they don't wash their oil roubles as yuan or rupee and hence into dollars. The effect is more immediate as financial flows must occur significantly every day for an economy to keep going.
Sister Sara
Registered User
- Messages
- 270
So they are futile?
Maybe I am misconstruing your point but that sounds like heralding the end of $US as the international reserve currency?
I can't think of any country that didn't make money from wars. This includes US, UK, France, Russia, China. Then we're expected to close the Aughanish plant for supplying aluminum to Russia. The US troops movement through Shannon Airport is down 42%. We never invaded anyplace, we never caused wars, we send peacekeepers to war areas. What help did we get from any country when we needed it? We got an expedition from Spain in the early 17th century which landed in the south of the country instead of the north. A few French solders came occasionally and underperformed. If the US, UK etc can make money from wars, what's the problem in us making a few bob too?
That's an absolutely fascinating perspective, Leper.
I suppose only super-economists would be able to readily grasp your notion of self-financing wars. The rest of us can only see the bill of ~ $300 billion (~ $4 trillion today) that the USA paid for WWII.
I admit that some folks did well from that war, like Herman Brown and even Norma Jean Baker. But for most it was long hard shifts at fixed wage rates and whatever skills women attained during the war these were of no use to them afterwards if it was a job normally done by time-served men: they had to return to their house bibs. I would see the suppression of women's contribution to the workforce for another generation as a loss to the economy.
Last edited:
Sister Sara
Registered User
- Messages
- 270
Probably the death count. Sending weapons or weapons materials off to the front-lines for the slaughter of soldiers and civilians in order to make a few bob doesn't sound very appealing, to me anyway.
Last edited:
But to make money, i.e. a net gain, from war manufacturing, this would mean that the manufacturing state was a non-combatant. Countries at war will finance the war on a debt basis - even on an inflationary basis, i.e. government orders to factories will be paid for in newly printed money bills while price controls will be imposed on nearly everything regardless of actual supply or demand conditions. Any paper "profits" made by the state would be thrown into the war expenditure a.s.a.p and profit margins of manufacturers would be controlled. I just don't see how a country involved in an existential war can do otherwise. Vietnams are another matter. The US federal government lost about $168 billion (~ $1 trillion today) to Vietnam expenditure. For sure this meant thick profits for the military-industrial corporations. For smaller companies or civil corporations providing goods or services in aid to the Vietnam effort, profiteering was either impossible due to competition or by commercial strategy (in hope of bigger higher margin work in the future) or by commercial ethics of the management generation of that time (many ex-WWII men) wanting to do their bit for Uncle Sam. The real cost of Vietnam during Vietnam was the impact of increasing war spending on the Johnson admin's Great Society programs. These were often cut to balance a budget where two big items couldn't be cut, the war budget and the space-race budget. LBJ's government would have wanted to spend more for the War On Poverty and Jobs Corps programs but the budget wouldn't pass congress if not near balanced.
Countries manufacturing for a country or alliance at war would be regarded as a legitimate target by the other alliance. So they would nearly have to be coerced to manufacture for one side. Switzerland manufactured artillery for Germany during WWII under threat of invasion. Sweden produced ores and presumably certain ferroalloys needed for the German war economy. These manufacturing states may have made a net gain from the war. But I doubt if the duress of manufacture as a condition of neutrality respect would have been salved by the profits gained.
Ireland had made favourable food supply deals with UK in 1938. Were we to renege on this to supply say Italy or Germany (I know it's implausible even if possible) that would be seen as aggressive towards UK and those merchant ships would be sunk. I'm not sure if people like my grandfather and father made a lot from selling spuds, pork, beef and butter to UK in WWII but it was sure better than having no market at all. I daresay they'd prefer if there was no war at all because WWII's main effect in our part of rural Ireland was to delay marriages.
Countries manufacturing for a country or alliance at war would be regarded as a legitimate target by the other alliance. So they would nearly have to be coerced to manufacture for one side. Switzerland manufactured artillery for Germany during WWII under threat of invasion. Sweden produced ores and presumably certain ferroalloys needed for the German war economy. These manufacturing states may have made a net gain from the war. But I doubt if the duress of manufacture as a condition of neutrality respect would have been salved by the profits gained.
Ireland had made favourable food supply deals with UK in 1938. Were we to renege on this to supply say Italy or Germany (I know it's implausible even if possible) that would be seen as aggressive towards UK and those merchant ships would be sunk. I'm not sure if people like my grandfather and father made a lot from selling spuds, pork, beef and butter to UK in WWII but it was sure better than having no market at all. I daresay they'd prefer if there was no war at all because WWII's main effect in our part of rural Ireland was to delay marriages.
Last edited:
Latest fudge by DETE detailed in Irish Times today.
It involves hiring SGS (a Swiss test, analysis and certification company who has the NCT contract in Ireland) to be hired by Aughinish Alumina to basically follow the alumina exported from Ireland to Russia and wherever it goes after that.
So all Rusal has to do is make sure no paper trail leads to a defence contractor in the Russia and they are home and dry.
The fact that Irish made alumina is identical to alumina made elsewhere and its availability frees up Rusal's Russian produced alumina for military component manufacture doesn't seem to be acknowledged by Aughinish Alumina, the Irish government or indeed The Irish Times.
It involves hiring SGS (a Swiss test, analysis and certification company who has the NCT contract in Ireland) to be hired by Aughinish Alumina to basically follow the alumina exported from Ireland to Russia and wherever it goes after that.
So all Rusal has to do is make sure no paper trail leads to a defence contractor in the Russia and they are home and dry.
The fact that Irish made alumina is identical to alumina made elsewhere and its availability frees up Rusal's Russian produced alumina for military component manufacture doesn't seem to be acknowledged by Aughinish Alumina, the Irish government or indeed The Irish Times.
Last edited:
Coming soon, Louisiana-style legislation where they threaten massive fines on anyone reporting pollution using non-EPA data (while ensuring EPA test facilities are miles away from the state's worst polluters.)
Another large drone spotted near Dublin Airport last night. At 6000 feet and large enough to be spotted from a commercial airline approaching the airport it wasn't some errant delivery drone.
The rational amongst us think that it was almost certainly the Russians, but it could have been the Illuminate or the Americans or the Lizard People (or the Jews, as part of their Space Laser programme).
We are little better equipped than we were last year, we now have basic anti-drone weapons with more on the wy, but we are still around 2 years away from having a ground based radar system which can detect aircraft which have their transponder turned off. The British had their first system in place 90 years ago.
We've had what could be described as a Russia Problem for a few decades now but in reality we are the weak link in Europe's defences and that makes us a target.
The objective isn't to kill our people but to cause division within the EU and generally undermine and weaken Western Democracies. It is part of a larger plan which includes feeding the far right and far left since both are equally anti-democratic. It's working.
The rational amongst us think that it was almost certainly the Russians, but it could have been the Illuminate or the Americans or the Lizard People (or the Jews, as part of their Space Laser programme).
We are little better equipped than we were last year, we now have basic anti-drone weapons with more on the wy, but we are still around 2 years away from having a ground based radar system which can detect aircraft which have their transponder turned off. The British had their first system in place 90 years ago.
We've had what could be described as a Russia Problem for a few decades now but in reality we are the weak link in Europe's defences and that makes us a target.
The objective isn't to kill our people but to cause division within the EU and generally undermine and weaken Western Democracies. It is part of a larger plan which includes feeding the far right and far left since both are equally anti-democratic. It's working.
Sister Sara
Registered User
- Messages
- 270
Just on that, it is reported in Israel that the Israeli government are doing this exactly. https://www.jpost.com/defense-and-tech/article-900854
Regarding the large drone in Dublin, it could indeed be the Russians but I wouldn't rule anything out. Antagonizing Europeans doesn't make much sense to me to be honest, maybe UK, France, Germany as they are to the forefront of supporting Ukraine.
But why Ireland, when we are a such a significant supplier of aluminum which may, directly or indirectly, be feeding their war machine?
If that's the case then you fail to see the bigger picture.