[wmiel]

1) From Russian perspective the biggest risk of having Poland and Ukraine as transit countries is that it limits the political costs of aggression towards Eastern European countries, period. It is not a good thing, because it decreases the stability in Europe, which serves only Russia as their strongest cards, such as military power, disinformation and intelligence services, can be played most effectively only in these circumstances.

2) It does not need to be a military aggression. I see your stance against Ukraine, but let's be clear Russia for a long time was involved in Ukrainian political processes as it tried to be in the USA, UK and around the world. It was Russia that annexed part of its territory and this is unacceptable.

5) If you need natural gas to balance the only other energy source you have - the renewables that's dependency. Poland is whole other topic - it limits natural gas usage to not be as you call it on "Russian leash" that much and will be seeking nuclear as the way out of that problem.

6) The nice political bonuses will potentially enable aggression in eastern part of Europe. I guess that's fine for you, but it's a very Russian perspective.

The rest basically is the argumentation based on "what you're saying is a US propaganda" so I'm not even going into that. Cheers. EOT.

[fuoqi]

So in the end your position boils down to "but, but Russian aggression!!111". You were unable to refute any of the evidence of Nord Stream 2 being a commercial project first and foremost presented in my comments. When I gave you hard numbers, you've continued to repeat the baseless assertions about Europe becoming more "dependent" on Russia. BTW try to calculate on how much this "dependency" will increase in the ultra-optimistic for Russia scenario of Nord Stream 2 being used at full capacity.

When you started to talk about the climate change, I've countered with the well recognized deep connection between natural gas and renewables at the current moment in history and presented the dirtiest Poland energy sector as a counter-example, on which you've replied with another apologetic propaganda line "but, but independence from Russia!!!11".

>It was Russia that annexed part of its territory and this is unacceptable

More unacceptable than bombing of Yugoslavia and recognition of Kosovo by the West? Or US' military invasions into Iraq and later Syria unsanctioned by the UN? I know that you'll reply with another "but, but it's different!" rooted in the deep and naive belief that the West lead by the US is always right and always on the side of "good guys". Also don't forget that even the Western polls admit that Crimeans overwhelmingly support the unification with Russia and this support again has deep historic and cultural roots. Now compare this effectively bloodless "annexation" with Ukraine blatantly killing its own citizens in Donbas using unconstitutionally deployed military forces.

I recommend for you to widen your horizons outside of propaganda templates and learn more about Russia. Right now you think about it not as of country with its own thoughts, believes, phobias, and interests on the world stage, but as of a pure evil incarnate whose only wish is to see the world burn. Note that in all wars the first thing propaganda does is dehumanization of enemies. I hope you can see the similarity.

A good start would be this lecture read in Yale: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X7Ng75e5gQ