Nobody's trying to invade the us and level atlanta to get rid of our right wing militants. Russian propaganda outlets do have a long and successful history of appealing to the racially aggrieved in the us and west broadly, though.

I think I may have found a plan to end the war in Ukraine, and that is that everyone in Europe becomes a vegan.

Really. Europe gives Putin 1 billion dollars every day for oil, so if everyone in Europe becomes a vegan they can turn all the food for livestock into ethanol to run cars on it, and thus they won't need to buy Russian oil and Russia won't have money to fund the war.

Ironically, universal veganism would increase our reliance on synthetic fertilizers. That means oil and natural gas.

-But it's a good thought, pescetarianism would better fit that bill. If people ate (alot) more fish, the petrodollar couldn't be counted on to wage wars, though it would still be as useful at gassing up the war machine.

(April 13, 2022 at 10:29 am)Fake Messiah Wrote: I think I may have found a plan to end the war in Ukraine, and that is that everyone in Europe becomes a vegan.

Really. Europe gives Putin 1 billion dollars every day for oil, so if everyone in Europe becomes a vegan they can turn all the food for livestock into ethanol to run cars on it, and thus they won't need to buy Russian oil and Russia won't have money to fund the war.

I suspect mandatory veganism would cost more lives than it would save. I for one would blow my brains out if you took away my roast beasts.

I feel I’m not alone in this.

Boru

Listen up raddish heads ---- we carnivores look forward to killing shit.

Do you REALLY want to try and force us to stop?

Yeah? Good luck with that.

(April 13, 2022 at 11:10 am)onlinebiker Wrote: Listen up raddish heads ---- we carnivores look forward to killing shit.

Do you REALLY want to try and force us to stop?

Yeah? Good luck with that.

Hey, that's war, people need to sacrifice their confort. I guess your grandfather went to war to fight Hitler, so how do you think he would feel if you couldn't even stop eating meat to fight the war? Although I guess venison would not be off the table because wild animals are not fed with specially grown food.

FWIW, if a greener future had been effected back in the oughts, there really couldn't be any russian invasion of ukraine. A greener future, by default, accomplishes all (and more) of what the current sanctions seek to effect...and it would have been the preamble to hostilities.

On the other hand, in that (hypothetical) greener future, I suspect that chemical weapons not necessarrily designed to be effective against humans would be the weapon of choice. Russian forces, unencumbered by silly things like war crimes convictions, might be more effective out of desperation than they are at aping an actual 1st world conventional force.

(April 13, 2022 at 10:45 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Ironically, universal veganism would increase our reliance on synthetic fertilizers.  That means oil and natural gas.

-But it's a good thought, pescetarianism would better fit that bill.  If people ate (alot) more fish, the petrodollar couldn't be counted on to wage wars, though it would still be as useful at gassing up the war machine.

Really?   I would think more fertilizers would be consumed raising stock for meat consumption than raising crop for human consumption,  since it takes many times more crop to create a animal to convey calories to a human than it does to simply feed the human with the same amount of calories in the form of corps.

Yeah, really. Its one of those things where the need engenders its abuse. When we hit pavement, we have two options..... synthetic fertilizer, and livestock. The shit from livestock is already marketable, but it's the cheapest part. No one will (economically) keep cattle for bullshit alone when no one is eating steak.

So where then, do we get the outsized nitrogen requirement of contemporary ag? The baseline of conventianal agriculture assumes that hundreds and hundreds of pounds per acre of nitrogen are available in the form of cheap manure or synethetic equivalents. We've only ever met that condition when we've turned oil to N. With that n, alone, the us can produce 4x the grain...without it...well......... That was my first professional disappointment. When I realized that sustainable and organic...were not the same.

If people decided not to eat meat en masse, there would be less of an economic reason to raise livestock....and if that was true, we'd lose out on that n, which is already used to (fail) to satisfy global hunger. If every consumer in the us went full leafy green activist, people would die. That's a problem for those of us who advocate for something like that. -The Problem-...really. I don't personally have a solution. Wish I did, I'd be an american oligarch.

(April 13, 2022 at 2:48 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Yeah, really.  Its one of those things where the need engenders its abuse.  When we hit pavement, we have two options..... synthetic fertilizer, and livestock.  The shit from livestock is already marketable, but it's the cheapest part.  No one will (economically) keep cattle for bullshit alone when no one is eating steak.

So where then, do we get the outsized nitrogen requirement of contemporary ag?  The baseline of conventianal agriculture assumes that hundreds and hundreds of pounds per acre of nitrogen are available in the form of cheap maure.  We've only ever met that condition when we've turned oil to N.

If we’d stop using so much oil to run six blocks to the dairy for a candy bar and a Coke, we might be able to save enough to grow more food.

That stuff is far too valuable to be used in cars.

Boru