Sanctions on Russia

brightheron64 said:I really feel like we should have made that a bit more noticeable... 😁

Canada: We’re bringing the Nord Stream 1 turbines back online, and frankly, the Germans are going to find themselves shivering without that gas supply...

I’m not just saying this for the sake of hearing my own voice, but honestly, this really is one of the most entertaining corners of Foruma.hr... 🎉

It is honestly pathetic how these clowns act, especially within Europe.
You talk big about sanctions just to end up folding and giving him exactly what he wants. 🤦

Anthony Hill5 said:Germany was once a defeated nation, subjected to total demilitarization and pacification.

Only when a similar transformation occurs in Russia can we truly discuss Franco-German relations and project those dynamics onto the West-Russia situation.

As long as this militaristic, fascist regime remains in power in Russia, any meaningful improvement in relations between the two sides remains an impossibility.

Who exactly is this "we"? You and me? I appreciate the sentiment, really, but politics operates on an entirely different level.

Didn't Margaret Thatcher publicly praise Pinochet by saying, "It was you who brought democracy to Chile."?
That’s enough said about being morally outraged by fascist regimes, because if we look at the reality of it: "I know how much we owe to you for your help during the Falklands campaign".

In short, once someone truly secures their seat of power and calculates exactly what they stand to gain or lose... all those lofty notions of "righteousness" tend to just wash away...

By the way, how exactly do you imagine anyone is going to "pacify" Putin?
Are they going to corner him in some dark alleyway, or perhaps orchestrate a coup d'état? Is he destined to receive a "lesson" similar to what Saddam or Gaddafi went through?
Has anyone even considered the possibility that Putin's successor might be someone even more rigid? Unfortunately, the tree that grows various versions of Stalin hasn't exactly withered away yet...

silentnomad7 said:The European Union is pivoting toward alternative energy sources, so Russia will never again be a significant energy factor for the EU.

Let me try to simplify this for you... maybe it'll make things a bit clearer.
Think about the islands off the coast of Florida; they rely on water and electricity supplied from the mainland via underwater cables.

Of course, there are alternative ways to supply them—things like aquifers, desalination plants, wind turbines, or solar arrays... but, for heaven's sake, they aren't doing that. Why?

mellowsurfer14 said:It is honestly pathetic how these clowns act, especially within Europe.
You talk big about sanctions just to end up folding and giving him exactly what he wants. 🤦

The only thing truly pathetic is seeing these absolute clowns showing up just to celebrate Putin.

brightheron64 said:Who exactly is this "we"? You and me? I appreciate the sentiment, really, but politics operates on an entirely different level.

Didn't Margaret Thatcher publicly praise Pinochet by saying, "It was you who brought democracy to Chile."?
That’s enough said about being morally outraged by fascist regimes, because if we look at the reality of it: "I know how much we owe to you for your help during the Falklands campaign".

In short, once someone truly secures their seat of power and calculates exactly what they stand to gain or lose... all those lofty notions of "righteousness" tend to just wash away...

By the way, how exactly do you imagine anyone is going to "pacify" Putin?
Are they going to corner him in some dark alleyway, or perhaps orchestrate a coup d'état? Is he destined to receive a "lesson" similar to what Saddam or Gaddafi went through?
Has anyone even considered the possibility that Putin's successor might be someone even more rigid? Unfortunately, the tree that grows various versions of Stalin hasn't exactly withered away yet...

Let me try to simplify this for you... maybe it'll make things a bit clearer.
Think about the islands off the coast of Florida; they rely on water and electricity supplied from the mainland via underwater cables.

Of course, there are alternative ways to supply them—things like aquifers, desalination plants, wind turbines, or solar arrays... but, for heaven's sake, they aren't doing that. Why?

Was Pinochet considered a threat to American security, or are you simply drawing parallels where none exist?

On a side note, how exactly do you envision someone "pacifying" Putin?
Will they corner him in some dark alleyway, or perhaps orchestrate a coup d'état? Is he destined to receive a "lesson" similar to what befell Saddam or Gaddafi?

I have no such illusions. At the onset of this conflict, I stated quite clearly that I did not expect Putin to be dethroned; however, I am fully aware that as long as he remains at the helm of Russia, there will be no possibility of repairing relations or achieving a diplomatic reset.

Anthony Hill5 said:Was Pinochet considered a threat to American security, or are you simply drawing parallels where none exist?

On a side note, how exactly do you envision someone "pacifying" Putin?
Will they corner him in some dark alleyway, or perhaps orchestrate a coup d'état? Is he destined to receive a "lesson" similar to what befell Saddam or Gaddafi?

I have no such illusions. At the onset of this conflict, I stated quite clearly that I did not expect Putin to be dethroned; however, I am fully aware that as long as he remains at the helm of Russia, there will be no possibility of repairing relations or achieving a diplomatic reset.

Not quite, I’m simply trying to illustrate the sheer consistency of international policy and this concept of "democracy" we talk so much about...

Let’s be honest here, if Saudi Arabia didn't hold the keys to the world's oil supply, nobody would give them the time of day, let alone go out of their way to maintain such tight diplomatic ties and strategic alliances...
Just look at Africa—sure, it's a complete powder keg of instability, but you won't find a lack of dictators, oligarchs, or political parasites there, yet the raw materials continue to flow out steadily... we just play at being peacekeepers, and that’s really all there is to it...

brightheron64 said:Not quite, I’m simply trying to illustrate the sheer consistency of international policy and this concept of "democracy" we talk so much about...

Let’s be honest here, if Saudi Arabia didn't hold the keys to the world's oil supply, nobody would give them the time of day, let alone go out of their way to maintain such tight diplomatic ties and strategic alliances...
Just look at Africa—sure, it's a complete powder keg of instability, but you won't find a lack of dictators, oligarchs, or political parasites there, yet the raw materials continue to flow out steadily... we just play at being peacekeepers, and that’s really all there is to it...

Honestly, the US wouldn't even keep Saudi Arabia around if it wasn't for all that oil. And as for being "consistent"... I don't get why everyone's so quick to blame Europe or the US when the USSR and Russia have been doing the exact same stuff for ages. Nobody is perfectly consistent; everyone's just looking out for their own interests, I guess. I mean, damn, Putler went on a war footing and started pulling massive bullshit moves, basically flirting with WW3. What were we supposed to do? Just sit there and watch him, kind of like how people watched Hitler take over one country after another?

silentnomad7 said:The European Union is pivoting toward alternative energy sources, so Russia will never again be a significant energy factor for the EU.

I'll avoid repeating myself.
True enough.
As for everything else... unless the regime in Russia changes—which isn't looking likely for at least the next 50 years—
I'm not sure if the memo went out yet, but the Cold War has officially begun. Relations with the Russian regime will stay at an absolute minimum until the situation shifts.

silentnomad7 said:The European Union is pivoting toward alternative energy sources, so Russia will never again be a significant energy factor for the EU.

Mark my words, there is absolutely no way Europe can fully cover its needs through alternative energy alone. The only real shot we had was building out nuclear power to kick Russian energy to the curb. Because of short-sighted, incompetent people, that option was tossed aside. Then, those same fools went ahead and slapped sanctions on Russia regarding those energy supplies—essentially sanctioning themselves.

Someone sold you this idiotic fantasy about alternative energy, and now you're just chanting it like a mantra. 🤦

Melissa Rivera5 said:Honestly, the US wouldn't even keep Saudi Arabia around if it wasn't for all that oil. And as for being "consistent"... I don't get why everyone's so quick to blame Europe or the US when the USSR and Russia have been doing the exact same stuff for ages. Nobody is perfectly consistent; everyone's just looking out for their own interests, I guess. I mean, damn, Putler went on a war footing and started pulling massive bullshit moves, basically flirting with WW3. What were we supposed to do? Just sit there and watch him, kind of like how people watched Hitler take over one country after another?

It’s true that Putin set his sights on war, but... (there goes the classic whataboutism) if the CIA really knew everything they claim to know, then they should have reacted much earlier and much more aggressively—something like, "Hold on, let's negotiate a 'Ménage à trois'," because no single life, whether Ukrainian or Russian, is worth this level of warfare and chaos. Instead, we are currently rolling out every possible sanction imaginable (all at once, rather than step-by-step), yet not a single drop of Russian oil or cubic meter of gas isn't finding its way to a destination somewhere.

It feels like a twisted kind of gymnastics, almost perverse, watching the endless talk about tens of thousands of deaths, the destruction, and the devastation... not to mention the economic fallout. Honestly, why didn't the EU simply say, "we are shutting down every single pipeline this very second, even if it kills us"? Even Ukraine, which is the one under direct attack, is still allowing Russian energy to transit through its territory, essentially collecting the cash from it...
Good grief, we aren't the Japanese, so why are we acting like kamikazes?

Man, even Domazet Lošo would have passed out looking at all of this...

It is fair to ask who actually threw the doors wide open for Putin to embark on this war adventure, and who is now trying to fix it with such desperation at the cost of tens of thousands of souls, misery, and hardship. Is someone truly invested in peace and reaching a solution right now (even if it doesn't favor Ukraine), or is a proxy war of attrition against the Russians actually more interesting to them, even if it drags on for years?
And in the end, what is the actual resolution? Are the Russians just going to hand back Crimea and Donbas?

Joshua Myers432 said:Mark my words, there is absolutely no way Europe can fully cover its needs through alternative energy alone. The only real shot we had was building out nuclear power to kick Russian energy to the curb. Because of short-sighted, incompetent people, that option was tossed aside. Then, those same fools went ahead and slapped sanctions on Russia regarding those energy supplies—essentially sanctioning themselves.

Someone sold you this idiotic fantasy about alternative energy, and now you're just chanting it like a mantra. 🤦

From what I can see, it looks like they sold that same nonsense to China as well.

brightheron64 said:It’s true that Putin set his sights on war, but... (there goes the classic whataboutism) if the CIA really knew everything they claim to know, then they should have reacted much earlier and much more aggressively—something like, "Hold on, let's negotiate a 'Ménage à trois'," because no single life, whether Ukrainian or Russian, is worth this level of warfare and chaos. Instead, we are currently rolling out every possible sanction imaginable (all at once, rather than step-by-step), yet not a single drop of Russian oil or cubic meter of gas isn't finding its way to a destination somewhere.

It feels like a twisted kind of gymnastics, almost perverse, watching the endless talk about tens of thousands of deaths, the destruction, and the devastation... not to mention the economic fallout. Honestly, why didn't the EU simply say, "we are shutting down every single pipeline this very second, even if it kills us"? Even Ukraine, which is the one under direct attack, is still allowing Russian energy to transit through its territory, essentially collecting the cash from it...
Good grief, we aren't the Japanese, so why are we acting like kamikazes?

Man, even Domazet Lošo would have passed out looking at all of this...

It is fair to ask who actually threw the doors wide open for Putin to embark on this war adventure, and who is now trying to fix it with such desperation at the cost of tens of thousands of souls, misery, and hardship. Is someone truly invested in peace and reaching a solution right now (even if it doesn't favor Ukraine), or is a proxy war of attrition against the Russians actually more interesting to them, even if it drags on for years?
And in the end, what is the actual resolution? Are the Russians just going to hand back Crimea and Donbas?

Not exactly thrilled about it, but yeah—they'll give it back.

Christian Torres3 said:Not exactly thrilled about it, but yeah—they'll give it back.

I'd really appreciate it if you could walk me through the math or just clarify the equation you're using to arrive at a result like that. 😉

silentnomad7 said:From what I can see, it looks like they sold that same nonsense to China as well.

Oh, they certainly did—both the Chinese and the Indians...

The reality is simply that we're looking at cheap Russian oil imports.

The way the Indian people describe the solution is almost philosophical in its simplicity:
"If India stops buying oil from Russia, the entire world will be chasing the same pieces of oil and that will further push up oil prices"
Analysts at Goldman Sachs say for every $ 1 increase in the price of oil, India’s import bill increases by $2.1 billion.

brightheron64 said:I'd really appreciate it if you could walk me through the math or just clarify the equation you're using to arrive at a result like that. 😉

Patience pays off.

brightheron64 said:I'd really appreciate it if you could walk me through the math or just clarify the equation you're using to arrive at a result like that. 😉

I would separate Crimea and the Donbas here, though the outcome for the Donbas would likely follow the pattern seen in similar conflicts.

One day, they'll just claim they've done their part and tell the people in those regions to figure out their own way and strive to become wealthy, prosperous neighboring nations.

The rest should be pretty obvious. ☕

rowdytiger13 said:I'll avoid repeating myself.
True enough.
As for everything else... unless the regime in Russia changes—which isn't looking likely for at least the next 50 years—
I'm not sure if the memo went out yet, but the Cold War has officially begun. Relations with the Russian regime will stay at an absolute minimum until the situation shifts.

Given Putin's biological age, a change in regime is actually quite probable much sooner than the 50-year mark. Will the successor follow the exact same path? I haven't a clue. However, they would be remarkably foolish to maintain the status quo without attempting some level of pivot. If one examines the history of the USSR (which the current Russian policy mirrors most closely) and their long-standing leadership, it becomes clear that every new leader introduced changes—often significant ones—to an otherwise rigid system. Stalin was distinct from Lenin; Khrushchev was different from Stalin; Brezhnev differed from Khrushchev; even Andropov, despite his brief tenure, was highly critical of those "years of stagnation." Chernenko was short-lived, perhaps the sole exception because he failed to truly grasp the reins, much like Andropov, who nonetheless left a mark. Then you have Gorbachev, the final icing on that particular cake. Ultimately, both Yeltsin and Putin employed vastly different governing styles. It stands to reason that someone following Putin will arrive with a new set of ideas, even if they utilize old structures to secure their grip on power.

brightheron64 said:Oh, they certainly did—both the Chinese and the Indians...

The reality is simply that we're looking at cheap Russian oil imports.

The way the Indian people describe the solution is almost philosophical in its simplicity:
"If India stops buying oil from Russia, the entire world will be chasing the same pieces of oil and that will further push up oil prices"
Analysts at Goldman Sachs say for every $ 1 increase in the price of oil, India’s import bill increases by $2.1 billion.

We're looking at a transition that could stretch out for 20 to 30 years, so we really need to see where things land two or three decades down the road... In the meantime, both China and India are reaping the benefits of that cheaper oil; honestly, they'd be fools not to take advantage of such a massive opportunity while it's right there in front of them.

brightheron64 said:Oh, they certainly did—both the Chinese and the Indians...

The reality is simply that we're looking at cheap Russian oil imports.

The way the Indian people describe the solution is almost philosophical in its simplicity:
"If India stops buying oil from Russia, the entire world will be chasing the same pieces of oil and that will further push up oil prices"
Analysts at Goldman Sachs say for every $ 1 increase in the price of oil, India’s import bill increases by $2.1 billion.

Let India and China keep buying Russian oil. At those discounted rates. It’s actually quite efficient—a win-win scenario, though perhaps with a slightly smaller "win" for everyone else involved. Guess which party is left holding that smaller slice? Sooner or later, people will start asking why we find ourselves in a position where we receive less value for our goods than our competitors do.

brightheron64 said:It’s true that Putin set his sights on war, but... (there goes the classic whataboutism) if the CIA really knew everything they claim to know, then they should have reacted much earlier and much more aggressively—something like, "Hold on, let's negotiate a 'Ménage à trois'," because no single life, whether Ukrainian or Russian, is worth this level of warfare and chaos. Instead, we are currently rolling out every possible sanction imaginable (all at once, rather than step-by-step), yet not a single drop of Russian oil or cubic meter of gas isn't finding its way to a destination somewhere.

It feels like a twisted kind of gymnastics, almost perverse, watching the endless talk about tens of thousands of deaths, the destruction, and the devastation... not to mention the economic fallout. Honestly, why didn't the EU simply say, "we are shutting down every single pipeline this very second, even if it kills us"? Even Ukraine, which is the one under direct attack, is still allowing Russian energy to transit through its territory, essentially collecting the cash from it...
Good grief, we aren't the Japanese, so why are we acting like kamikazes?

Man, even Domazet Lošo would have passed out looking at all of this...

It is fair to ask who actually threw the doors wide open for Putin to embark on this war adventure, and who is now trying to fix it with such desperation at the cost of tens of thousands of souls, misery, and hardship. Is someone truly invested in peace and reaching a solution right now (even if it doesn't favor Ukraine), or is a proxy war of attrition against the Russians actually more interesting to them, even if it drags on for years?
And in the end, what is the actual resolution? Are the Russians just going to hand back Crimea and Donbas?

Wait, so you think NATO is to blame for everything—that they opened the door and are now blocking any chance of immediate peace? Do you seriously think NATO is powerful enough to just *guarantee* peace right this second? Honestly, the only one who can do that is Vladimir Putin, whenever he feels like it, simply by stopping the aggression. He started this, so he's the one who can end it instantly. And if you ask me, the only person really pushing this whole proxy war thing is Vladimir Putin himself. I mean, why would anyone force a peace deal that basically results in Ukraine getting wrecked? It sounds to me like you're implying we should just force a Russian victory to get some peace.

silentnomad7 said:We're looking at a transition that could stretch out for 20 to 30 years, so we really need to see where things land two or three decades down the road... In the meantime, both China and India are reaping the benefits of that cheaper oil; honestly, they'd be fools not to take advantage of such a massive opportunity while it's right there in front of them.

Well, that sounds just wonderful.

The only problem is I don't plan on being around to watch the fireworks from the front row...

Melissa Rivera5 said:Wait, so you think NATO is to blame for everything—that they opened the door and are now blocking any chance of immediate peace? Do you seriously think NATO is powerful enough to just *guarantee* peace right this second? Honestly, the only one who can do that is Vladimir Putin, whenever he feels like it, simply by stopping the aggression. He started this, so he's the one who can end it instantly. And if you ask me, the only person really pushing this whole proxy war thing is Vladimir Putin himself. I mean, why would anyone force a peace deal that basically results in Ukraine getting wrecked? It sounds to me like you're implying we should just force a Russian victory to get some peace.

And how exactly would that work?
Are we talking about him saying, "We're bored now, let's call it quits," while keeping everything else exactly as it is under the status quo?
Or is he going to hand back everything, including Crimea?

Melissa Rivera5 said:Wait, so you think NATO is to blame for everything—that they opened the door and are now blocking any chance of immediate peace? Do you seriously think NATO is powerful enough to just *guarantee* peace right this second? Honestly, the only one who can do that is Vladimir Putin, whenever he feels like it, simply by stopping the aggression. He started this, so he's the one who can end it instantly. And if you ask me, the only person really pushing this whole proxy war thing is Vladimir Putin himself. I mean, why would anyone force a peace deal that basically results in Ukraine getting wrecked? It sounds to me like you're implying we should just force a Russian victory to get some peace.

If that's the case, why hasn't Putin been arming the Taliban to the teeth—if only as payback for that whole Soviet adventure back in the eighties and all that outside interference?
Why hasn't he sent the Iranians a full catalog with special pricing? You know, maybe an Onyx free with their first Patriot missile system purchase, followed by a 10 to 15 percent discount on the next ten...