Posts by Nancy Gomez26

Thomas Nelson25 said:Europe could probably hold out for a few months before Putin actually runs out of cash.

It’s a tricky balance—you have to prep for winter, but if we're going for total sanctions, the sooner the better.

If the Russians manage to oust Putin, things might get back to normal pretty fast.
I mean, we aren't expecting some miracle or a complete 180 in Moscow's policy—plus, you've still got the whole aftermath between Ukraine and Russia to deal with. Not to mention the reconstruction.

There are plenty of scenarios. etc.

It makes little sense for the Russian Federation to replace Putin only to maintain the exact same trajectory. So, if he is actually removed—I'm betting on a genuine policy pivot. It wouldn't be their first time pulling a hard U-turn like that.

The sheer variety of hardware they're throwing together... it's going to be a logistical nightmare.

Zachary Jackson4 said:Prostitutes will face fines of $4,000.
In Russia, penalties for sex workers have been increased by 40 times.

https://www.gazeta.ru/social/2022/04/16/14742278.shtml

Sanctions can go screw themselves.

Are you actually certain you comprehend what that link is even about?

Dana Chase51 said:I suspect Bill Gates cooked this one up too.

Then you have that naive child in the White House, falling for every single thing served up by the cursed West:

The West: Don't attack Ukraine, Vladimir—it will cause nothing but trouble.
Vladimir: Actually, I really want to!
The West: Fine, we're arming Ukraine, just don't invade—you've had enough of Crimea...
Vladimir: But I still want to!
The West: If you attack, you'll face sanctions!
Vladimir: You think you can intimidate me? I am fearless (he thinks: why bother warning me if they weren't so weak and powerless? If they actually had teeth, they would have let me go in there to get stuck and bleed out; they wouldn't be giving me a heads-up), besides, you all depend on me for your gas supplies. If you were serious, you would have hit me with sanctions when I took Crimea (he thinks: they're clearly terrified of me).
The West: Vladimir, please don't attack, we're all going to end up screwed because of you.
Vladimir: I feel like it (he thinks: They are definitely weak; now is the time to strike...)

It is a game of chess that an ordinary person can barely wrap their head around. Next to a titan like that, even Bill Gates looks somewhat pathetic.

rowdytiger13 said:The issue is systemic.
You can’t project optimism if your economy is crumbling. Military might is useless without economic backbone, and as we've seen, Russia's supposed strength is highly questionable right now.
On top of that, people naturally gravitate toward freedom—even if it’s just a shiny illusion—because it’s always more appealing than an obvious dictatorship.
Russia had nothing to offer besides brute force, yet they tried to play at being the USA. If anything, Vladimir Putin was obsessed with acting as the leader for Europe, but to pull that off, you need to lead in almost every sector, not just through sheer aggression.
But Russia isn't even a military leader. They can't impose themselves on Europe because Europe rightfully feels superior. The Russians kept complaining about a lack of respect from Europe, and as that frustration grew, so did the instability in the surrounding regions.
It was only a matter of time before they decided to use the one thing they thought they had left: raw power. Honestly, blaming the West instead of looking in the mirror is laughable; Russia has the capacity to be superior in many ways, but the reason they aren't lies squarely at home.

What you wrote is accurate. I would merely add that there is no true military struggle without economic power behind it. Russia has succeeded only in constructing an illusion of military strength; in reality, the structure is hollow and decaying from within.

In my view, Russia's perennial mistake has been this desperate urge to compete with Americans on their own terms. They lost that game the moment they agreed to play it. This failure is simply the byproduct of uninspired politicians—career bureaucrats who have traditionally held the reins in those territories. There were those with different, more sincere ideas, but they never survived politically, as facing reality head-on is viewed there as a fatal weakness.

northernangler8 said:Congrats to you, then, for only seeing Russia. You're totally ignoring Australia, Austria, Germany, Canada... what exactly did those countries do to their own people during the pandemic? And you really want to claim they're any better than the Russians?

They are better because they will eventually have to answer to their voters at the ballot box—once. That is the difference. Putin acts this way because he knows there is no accountability mechanism for him to face his citizens. He can send tens of thousands of his soldiers to their deaths without blinking an eye, all to satisfy his own personal frustrations, fears, and miscalculations. That is the fundamental, qualitative distinction here.

Brenda Murphy3 said:And you seriously think the Turks would try to use force to stop an American carrier?
Would Turkey actually go through with that? Considering the absolute nightmare of consequences that would trigger?

It's just... honestly, it's pretty delusional if you ask me. Why on earth would they even attempt something like that in the first place?

What purpose would an aircraft carrier serve in the Black Sea? Could it even get in there to begin with? There is a massive network of NATO airfields lining the coast, not to mention aerial tankers for those operating from further afield—sending a carrier into that environment simply lacks logic.

Furthermore, NATO (technically speaking) is not a 'belligerent power' in this conflict, so there shouldn't be any restrictions placed on them.

Carl Lee27 said:Honestly, I’ve got a feeling those shipments were already en route by the time the announcement even hit the news feeds.

https://twitter.com/visegrad24/statu...h3LDdiw2A&s=19

A Pole on Twitter is claiming there is absolutely no connection between those hundred tanks sitting idle near Buffalo suddenly vanishing, only to have a hundred identical tanks surface in the Donbas this week. As if one could simply pick up such hardware at any local surplus store—much like the equipment used by those "little green men" during the 2014 attempt to annex Crimea.

Quote:>

Binance says: Exactly. If it works, it works. The odds of Russ falling for that specific disinformation probably aren't high, but there's no harm in trying. On a different note, remind me of when my hometown was being shelled by the Mexicans back during the Dr. Phil era. They miscalculated slightly; the shells landed on a ridge outside of town where there’s absolutely nothing. Yet, the local news reported they were hitting the downtown area—just a little trick to ensure if they decided to fire at those same coordinates again, they’d actually hit something.😁>

Naturally, nobody expects anyone to speak the truth during wartime. I don't waste my energy worrying about what those "Twitter generals" report regarding casualties from the comfort of their couches. My only real pity is for the Russians, though they essentially brought this on themselves. In this particular terrain, Ukrainians are simply better players than the Russians. It makes sense—it's the only way they could have survived under the Soviet boot. Back in the USSR, Ukrainians learned how to hold their own so Moscow wouldn't swallow them whole; they know how to hold a line. The Russians arrived here unprepared, and all this talk about "brotherhood" and being "one people" is just a performance for the international community. On the flip side, the Ukrainians have managed to execute a brilliant PR campaign through social media, earning widespread support for their struggle (which is deserved). The Russians are heading toward a point where, even if they finally decide to tell the truth, no one will believe them anymore.

David Torres2 said:The only thing that makes sense to me right now is that they're trying to prop up the Ruble, but honestly, you can't really do much with the Ruble anyway, not even over in China.

Sure, they could support the ruble by manipulating the conversion rates to the dollar—essentially rigging the exchange rate. But there’s a catch. How exactly do they plan to pay people out in physical cash when those digital dollars in a bank account become practically worthless? Most wealth today exists as digits on a screen, not paper in a wallet. If you get kicked out of that digital ecosystem, you're left staring at everyone else spending money while you have nothing.

Nathan Thomas12 said:JPMorgan Chase hasn't been kicked out of SWIFT—meaning, not every single bank is off the grid yet.

So, what does ExxonMobil plan to do with all that cash piling up in those accounts?
I am not suggesting their strategy is foolish—they clearly understand why they are accepting payments for gas into those specific accounts, regardless of the circumstances. They have a reason. My question is simply looking for a competent answer. This could even be a matter of pure logistics; I am aware that certain supply hubs cannot simply be shut down overnight. Like a pressurized system, the flow has to stay constant, even if it's just a trickle.

velvetbadger11 said:They are essentially purchasing things they don't actually possess, since nobody else is willing to touch the Ruble.

Legally speaking, they won't be able to purchase a single thing—nobody wants to be even remotely associated with them. It isn't just because they lack any real assets; it's because their own subordinates are terrified of what might happen if they're caught in the crossfire.

slyfox43 said:1. Fill up a fire truck with gasoline.

You can probably handle the rest on your own. 😉

As for peace and prosperity in SJ Africa... I suppose looking at Libya gives us a glimpse of what happens when various tribes actually find common ground. It’s hardly a universal rule, of course, but there isn't much of a precedent for political pluralism in that region.

Eventually, they will tire of the constant bloodshed. One just has to wait. When the time comes for them to draft a peace treaty, they will inevitably look for a guarantor—someone capable of ensuring everyone actually sticks to their word. And we all know exactly who holds that kind of leverage.

velvetbadger11 said:Unless those Russian oil and gas pipelines are shut down completely, the Russians aren't going to budge; I truly believe we ought to consider this move as soon as possible. After all, summer is just around the corner, and we simply won't be needing the heating.

Can someone please explain what the Russian Federation actually does with the revenue they pull from selling gas to the EU? What can they even accomplish with those funds once they've been cleared? I should clarify—I'm not talking about physical piles of cash, but rather simple digital entries sitting in some computer database somewhere.

Nathan Thomas12 said:From what I gather, the BRICS nations are planning to roll out their own alternative to SWIFT.

They have been planning this for ages, yet it remains stuck in development. It is unlikely that a nation like Brazil would compromise itself just to serve the specific interests of Russia. They aren't Belarus; they don't need this kind of headache, and frankly, it offers them nothing but trouble. Sure, let them attempt to build an alternative system—if it actually gains any legitimacy, perhaps it might survive.

Nathan Thomas12 said:Modern banking is all about risk management and credit ratings—once you hit default, the lending tap just shuts off. Because of those crappy ratings and the sanctions, the Asian Development Bank has already pulled the plug on doing business with the Russians.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/north America...-i-bjelorusiji

Fine, let’s assume they aren't in default and their rating is A +++++++. Even then, how does anyone lend to them? How do you actually wire funds to an account when they are cut off from SWIFT? Suppose someone manages to get money into an account—who would they even buy from with that cash? They can't move money out of the account to pay international suppliers if they aren't in SWIFT. And even if they did manage a purchase, how would they physically bring goods home? Eventually, all trade will dwindle down to small-scale, border-town cash transactions through China, Kazakhstan, and perhaps some other Central Asian nation where people are desperate enough for any kind of profit. Maybe there will be some complex barter schemes involving goods with China, but that’s just discounted liquidation. If this persists, I expect life along certain borders to become very interesting.

The current US default situation—if we look at it through that lens—is really only a problem for the creditors. It’s the lenders who will miss their scheduled repayments. It isn't that the US won't have the money to pay those installments; it's the fallout for the banks. There is an old saying: if you owe $100,000, you have a problem; if you owe $100,000,000, the bank has a problem. I have no idea what the actual debt levels or the immediate obligations are, but theoretically, if we are talking about massive sums, the global economy—which is already struggling—could certainly feel the impact.

In my view, all this talk about a potential default is being wildly overstated given the current circumstances. What would a default even signify for them when they are already effectively severed from the global economy? It’s as if people believe it could somehow jumpstart economic activity in this situation. The only real risk might be a sudden wave of panic among citizens rushing to the banks, but that is easily managed by simply shuttering branches and placing strict limits on ATM withdrawals. These people are already under blockade; they are essentially living through the consequences of a default without actually having triggered one. You can't kick someone out of SWIFT twice.

coastalbison6 said:German generals claimed the Bradleys from Raytheon wouldn't be the same quality as the ones being sent to Ukrainians.
Honestly, feels like a weak excuse to me.

There is a logic to this.
For the Germans—as major arms manufacturers and exporters who are deeply invested in their global reputation—this matters. They invest heavily in refinement and quality control. They likely realize those older transports aren't exactly reliable, and they fear that if other hardware from their factories fails in the field, it tarnishes the entire brand. We are talking about used equipment, probably maintained just enough to pass inspection (given the various scandals involving their military's upkeep), and now they don't want the world to see them sending poorly maintained vehicles to Ukraine. They don't want the perception to be that a once-formidable military force can't even maintain its own armor. For a military built on a sense of duty, that’s an embarrassment—especially for a nation with such a storied combat history and significant wealth. They watch what they export because they know it dictates how the world views their military industry.
And perception is everything today. Just look at how our collective view of the Russian military shifted based entirely on the narrative established before this conflict in Ukraine began.

wanderingmaker3 said:They didn't send them; they're just planning to.
Huge difference.

Can someone explain why the Germans won't just ship the M2 Bradley IFV

Based on this, the Bundeswehr could hand over 30 units right now, and Raytheon would have new ones ready by late 2022.
But NO.
Wait until the end of the year just to sell new ones to Ukraine.

What's the logic with the Germans?

The state's logic is likely rooted in a desperate fear of being branded an aggressor again. They might actually want to help Ukraine, but there's a psychological barrier they can't seem to breach. Besides, it provides perfect ammunition for Russian propaganda: "See, we told you this was about Nazism, because the 'original' Nazis from the homeland of Nazism are aiding the Nazis in Ukraine." (That’s a rough draft; one could expand on that narrative further). The Germans refuse to even be a footnote in that story. Yet, they will eventually have to face it, sooner or later. Once the reconstruction of Ukraine begins, the rhetoric will shift entirely.

If my job involved driving through Ukraine and these people hit any kind of train—anywhere at all—I’d personally go public and claim they had wiped out that entire system myself. To highlight how uncoordinated their operations really are, I’d probably even suggest the damage was done without needing to target a specific train or convoy at all. You know how it works; someone on the other side would jump at the chance to brag about being the one who finally took down an S-300. And honestly, that might actually solve part of the problem.