Replies

The question is Biden a beneficiary or not is a red herring to start with. That is because the project is none of his bisuness nor he has power to affect it in any meaningful way.

What should he do if he was against the project? This entire narrative is pathetic.

Once again, what stops the American LNG from coming to Europe and doesn’t stop from coming to China right now?

You allegedly have the capacity, there is demand in Europe, but the tankers are coming to China.

And yet Europe has to believe in that good LNG and reject the evil pipeline gas, which keeps getting delivered without any problems according to contracts for affordable price.

Repeat of argumentum ad lapidem. Was Nord Stream II Trump’s business? He certainly thought so, and you are challenging Trump’s US foreign policy while evading mention of his name.

The question of Biden being a beneficiary is valid because he removed sanctions Trump put in place to stop the construction of Nord Stream II and put in place regulations to slow if not outright stop oil and gas production by hydraulic fracking plus stopped the building of a vital oil pipeline (constricting supply from US), all simultaneously. You are dodging that question. By pointing these events out, I answered the question of what is stopping the US from providing in the EU’s market—and the claim of the EU claiming that they are unduly shackled to Russia’s gas supply and calling on NATO to (somehow) defend them while they themselves tighten this alleged shackle is seen to be a very transparent lie.

You allegedly have the capacity, there is demand in Europe, but the tankers are coming to China …

What tankers, specifically?

Assuming this to be true, this is a machination of Biden once more. He certainly is hell-bent on reversing anything Trump has done, particularly sanctions on Red China. Can you prove that this was done to the detriment of the EU, since mentioning such things is the implication?