Posts by boldbison40

goldenowl73 said:And let me tell you, they can only play that hand once, and they’re playing it right now.

If they decide to go all in on this particular card, the EU would just slap some sanctions on gas and call it a day.

The whole endgame here is to manufacture instability within the EU or, better yet, spark an internal shouting match over who exactly is violating the sanctions; it's a calculated attempt to paint the EU as a weakling that begs from a powerful Russia while simultaneously continuing to buy their gas because, let's be honest, the Russians are desperate for the cash.

rowdytiger13 said:Well, look at that—Russia messed up and actually included Ukraine on the list.
As if Ukraine or Ukrainians even exist. 😁
Anyway, this list includes absolutely everything... you see places like Liechtenstein, Monaco, and San Marino, and even Micronesia. 🙏
I don't see France or Germany listed here either. 🙂

Do you have any idea how much cash has been seized in Monaco or how many accounts are frozen in Liechtenstein?! Those guys are more dangerous enemies to them than the Americans are. 😬

Jacob Kern2 said:One has to wonder if this promise from Gazprom bears any direct correlation to the recent instability within the Italian government.

Even if there is a connection, the next administration will likely be led by either Draghi again or, much more probably, some group of Italian politicians who are aggressively anti-Russian.

Joshua Myers432 said:I don't know about that. The Americans thought they had a reliable pawn on the board, but now they look like they've been caught flat-footed.

The US and Europe are busy slapping on sanctions, while these "geniuses" over there just scoop up cheap oil and rake in the profits. Let's get real: the whole display of American military dominance and playing the global policeman exists for one reason—to ensure American industry keeps raking it in globally. You can't spend trillions of dollars a year playing hero for free; someone has to pay the bill. Do you really think the Saudis are just handing out favors for nothing?

The reality is that under that same umbrella of global stability, Russians, Chinese, Europeans, and everyone else in between have been making a killing—some of them arguably even outperforming Americans. But apparently, certain people would rather retreat into the dark ages of the Warsaw Pact or the chaos of the Cultural Revolution. If that's how they want to live, fine by me.

Carl Lee27 said:When you look at the situation with Russia, I honestly feel like the arguments for cutting off deliveries entirely carry way more weight than people realize

- Let's be real, gas just isn't the massive revenue driver for them that oil is
- They can't just flip a switch and reroute all that gas headed toward Europe to somewhere else; the pipeline networks going toward China and those heading toward Europe aren't connected, and they won't be for at least another 8 to 10 years
- They aren't going to be able to build new LNG terminals on their own without help from the West—and honestly, they probably can't even maintain the ones they already have—but those sanctions? Those are here to stay
- Europe is aggressively diversifying its energy sources right now, and since this is a strategic and political move rather than a purely economic one, the reality is that Russia's gas revenues from Europe are going to dry up in a few years regardless of what little games they try to play now
- Russia really only has about an 18 to 24-month window where they can use gas to cause actual headaches, specifically for Germany, before Germany ramps up its LNG capacity. And once that happens, we'll likely see sanctions hitting the gas sector too

For Russia, gas has always been less about the money and more about being a strategic weapon, whereas oil has always been the true economic engine. Maintaining current gas supplies offers them tiny, temporary gains, but if they actually pull the plug on deliveries, the potential leverage they gain could be a hundred times greater.

What you're saying makes sense, though I suspect you might be overestimating the potential payoff for Russia. Sure, they could wreck Germany's economy and tank their GDP by perhaps 5-6%, but that isn't going to force a shift in EU policy or lead to the lifting of sanctions—let alone spark a revolution or install a more "cooperative" government.

On the flip side, if Russia were to completely halt gas exports, they would face a massive collapse across almost all other sectors of their economy alongside skyrocketing costs—driven both by the continued "special military operation" and the surge in social spending for families of the fallen, medical care for the wounded, and payouts to everyone losing jobs at Western companies (or those tied to them). This raises the question: can the Putin regime actually survive that? I honestly doubt they would dare make such a move. To me, that feels like a level of risk equivalent to declaring full mobilization. Politicians generally have one primary objective in mind: staying in power. Putin used to have the luxury of playing 4D chess and thinking long-term, but I highly doubt his focus will be on what happens two years from now if he thinks such a move could cost him his grip on power in just two months. Even the USSR collapsed due to falling oil and gas prices combined with the massive costs of the war in Afghanistan. Cutting off your entire gas revenue seems like a suicidal gamble while a war is still raging. I actually made a bet with my buddies discussing Russia—a simple wager over a round of beers—that Putin won't fully suspend gas exports this winter, and so far, nobody has taken the bet. 🙂

urbanotter said:I am fairly certain you have no reason to gloat.

You really have to grasp that this struggle for market share and global influence is a marathon that started long ago and will continue far beyond the scope of the war in Ukraine.

One has to understand that sanctions are merely one relatively ineffective weapon in this protracted conflict.

Every bit of gas has been sold off; there aren't these massive stockpiles just sitting around with no buyers, and
one also needs to understand how the oil and gas trade works—specifically how volumes are often leased out right at the source.

Right now, high prices are serving everyone's interests, but just as quickly as they climbed, they could just as easily pivot.

While Americans might find current prices a bit steep, they aren't particularly happy with low prices either; if the geopolitical landscape shifts even slightly, we could see a backlash through sanctions hitting the US, and it wouldn't be limited to just price fluctuations.

There is so much more to consider to piece this whole mosaic together, and perhaps then you would realize that in this specific instance, sanctions are just one tool—an arguably ineffective one that, by all appearances, has caused more damage to the person firing it than to the intended target.

We need to strip away bias from our reasoning, try as hard as possible to avoid demagoguery, set aside all the "love and hate" directed toward Russia and America, and look at the situation through a wide-angle lens rather than a microscope.

p.s.
Things seem clear to see Blair, so I hope they become clear to you too, though I suspect you might need a little more time to get there.

Tony Blair: The era of Western dominance is drawing to a close

I disagree; sanctions are an incredibly potent weapon when viewed through a broader lens. For instance, look at how much America was drained by them; they were so economically exhausted that they lacked the capacity to intervene during the conflicts in the North America later on. While sanctions might not stop a war in the immediate short term, they can significantly set Russia back if a conflict drags on, and more importantly, they can act as a deterrent against starting any new wars altogether. Without access to advanced microchips, rebuilding stockpiles of cruise missiles, aviation fleets, and naval assets becomes an uphill battle, not to mention how losing out on gas markets and oil extraction technology creates a massive hole in their national budget. Europe is going to take a hit too, certainly, but I’d much rather deal with a recession than have a war erupting on my own doorstep.

urbanotter said:It isn't really about being fascinated by Russia; rather, I find this irrational, deep-seated hatred toward everything Russian quite baffling.
I actually used to own a Sputnik watch and some tools from over there, and honestly, they were pretty decent quality.

And hey, their vodka isn't bad either.😉

But look, we are supposed to be discussing sanctions and economic impact here, not whether or not someone "loves" Russia.

The thing is, economics doesn't care about your personal feelings or political ideologies.
When sanctions—which are essentially just political products—are applied, they stifle the economy, and everyone ends up paying the price for that political decision,
though clearly, those who imposed the sanctions feel the sting most acutely.😉

Economics remains the primary driver of human interaction only as long as certain fundamental civilizational norms are upheld. Once those standards vanish, economic interests naturally take a backseat. Europe is genuinely terrified of an aggressive Russia, and a bit of freezing weather or a looming recession isn't a high enough price to pay to cave in to an aggressor. This isn't even necessarily driven by deep empathy for the suffering of the Ukrainian people; it is fueled by the cold, hard realization that if they don't stand firm now, they will be the next target on the list.

Michael Davis9 said:Russia trades with the European Union. .

While the European Union buys energy, here is what Russia actually buys from them:

The European Union’s exports in 2021 totaled $110 billion. The heavy hitters were machinery and equipment ($21 billion, 19.7%), motor vehicles ($9.7 billion, 9%), pharmaceuticals ($8.8 billion, 8.1%), electrical equipment and machinery ($8.2 billion, 7.6%), and plastics ($4.7 billion, 4.3%).

However, if Russia can't actually convert those Euros into usable goods—and looking at the massive drop in Russian imports, it really seems like they can't—then you have to wonder how much sense it makes to keep piling up all that cash in Euros.

Personally, I think Putin might have miscalculated here. Those Euros aren't going to build him a tank (or "motor vehicles," to stick to the terminology used in the source above), nor can they buy the electronic components needed for a Boeing jet, or even a high-end industrial valve required for a factory or a power plant.

Even if they decide to turn off the gas taps tomorrow, most European Union nations have had about six months to get their houses in order—which includes importing enough gas to fill up their storage facilities—so the impact won't be quite as catastrophic as it would have been back in month two.

Every crisis presents an opportunity, and if this doesn't push European Union countries toward greater energy independence, then there's really no point in it happening.
That said, we shouldn't paint everyone with the same brush. The Finns know exactly who they are dealing with, so they've proactively limited their own gas imports. Sure, they could have gone for cheaper energy over the last few decades, but relying on Russia was just too big a risk for them.

What kind of currency are they going to use to buy smartphones from China or coffee from Brazil? Everyone prefers getting paid in Euros over Rubles any day of the week.

Michael Davis9 said:At its core, money is really nothing more than a tool—it’s just a practical way for us to make exchanging goods and services a whole lot easier.

Historically speaking, the Russian Federation has always relied on the European Union to supply those high-end, high-value goods—we're talking heavy machinery, specialized chemical products, intricate industrial components, and all sorts of sophisticated equipment used for everything from energy extraction to large-scale manufacturing.

When you look at the reality of these sanctions, it’s becoming pretty clear that Russia is hitting a massive wall. They're finding it increasingly difficult to actually buy and import most of what they need, which is why they're facing such an enormous deficit right now. I’ve been looking closely at the recent numbers, and honestly, seeing such a significant drop in imports really caught my eye. It’s one of those shifts that feels like more than just a minor fluctuation; it's a signal that deserves some real thought. When you see import volumes sliding like this, it usually points toward a deeper change in consumer demand or perhaps some tightening in the broader economic landscape here in the States. I can't help but wonder how much of this is a reaction to shifting domestic spending habits versus larger supply chain adjustments. It’s definitely a trend worth watching as we navigate the current economic climate. .

So, it looks like they’ve got plenty of cash on hand, but when it comes to actual assets, there’s nothing to show for it.

If Germany can't get their gas situation sorted out, they’re headed straight into a recession, and honestly, that’s going to drag a massive chunk of the entire European Union right down with them.

Just imagine if the gas supply had been cut off six months ago—we wouldn't have had nearly enough time to get those storage facilities filled up to the brim like we have now.

because everyone knows Russians live on thin air and gas exports represent only a minor slice of their budget. 😬

Joshua Bishop3 said:The USA isn't the one at fault here—Russia is the one who invaded Ukraine. 😁

And then you've got people claiming the West is "to blame" because they’re sending weapons to help Ukraine defend itself, arguing that helping them fight back just drags the war out longer.

That logic is insane; it’s like a rapist claiming the victim is actually the guilty party for trying to fight back and resist, saying the whole thing could have been over already if she hadn't put up a fight.

Seriously, what kind of mental gymnastics do you have to perform to support Russia with those kinds of arguments? I honestly can't wrap my head around it.

I always get a kick out of these certain fringe media channels when they claim Zelenskyy is insane for standing up to a massive regional power, suggesting he's destroying his own people instead of doing everything possible to appease them and maintain "good relations." It’s just hilarious how inconsistent they are—it reminds me of how they'd argue that Archduke Franz Ferdinand's assassination was fine, yet the refusal to accept an ultimatum from Austro-Canada is what dragged the whole damn world into war. It’s the exact same level of logic.

urbanotter said:I remember those days vividly,

and I distinctly recall how the exchange rate against the Euro eventually stabilized around 8.88. If they had actually held the line and defended the currency at that level, it would have been significantly better for our domestic economy, particularly for the exporters and manufacturers who rely heavily on the local market.
For years, several economists warned that the currency was overvalued, but nobody seemed to be listening. Instead, we just watched as a whole segment of businesses collapsed—companies that honestly could have survived if the dollar hadn't been so unnaturally strong.
Among the first to raise these red flags was Zvonimir Baletić, followed by many others who saw the writing on the wall.

Now, thanks to Dr. Vlado, we’ll finally get our chance to transform into a global export powerhouse.😬

Kimberly Perez82 As specified by:
At the end of the day, we have to acknowledge that the European Union needs to find a way to break free from this suffocating American embrace, which is doing nothing but inflicting significant economic damage on them. The EU simply isn't going to achieve true independence until Russia is economically gutted—weakened to such an extent that they can no longer afford to sustain a high-functioning, modern military machine.
It’s just like the nineties all over again, and frankly, nothing is going to change until we break free from this suffocating military patronage the US maintains over us—the very thing that forces us to endure constant nonsense. Real change only happens if Europe finally decides to arm itself properly and take its own defense into its own hands. But then we run right back into the same old paradox: if we end up with a heavily armed, dominant Germany leading the charge, we’re right back at square one, needing the US to protect us from them. Honestly, I can't bring myself to care too much; I'm just living my life as best I can, because the world isn't getting any better, and you might as well get used to the chaos, otherwise, life just passes you by.

Europe could have stepped up a long time ago if they actually had the spine for it. But let’s be honest: it was always much more convenient to blow money on frivolous nonsense than to invest in actual defense. It was simply cheaper to hide under the American umbrella. For decades, the US has been practically begging our allies to finally hit that 2% GDP spending target they all signed off on in international treaties, yet everyone just drags their feet. If Germany had been consistently pouring 2-3% of their GDP into their military over the last forty years, the US wouldn't even need to worry about protecting them from conventional threats. They chose the easy path: relying on American protection while soaking up cheap Russian gas—a perfect little arrangement. But damn it, that era is dead and buried now. Now, they're stuck footing the bill for both a massive military buildup and overpriced energy. They engineered this crisis themselves. It's the exact same story with Ukraine. Had they functioned like a normal, stable nation over the last thirty years, they would already be firmly entrenched in NATO and nobody would dare touch them. But of course, it's always easier to point the finger at someone else—and most often, they just blame the Americans. 😬

urbanotter said:That line of thinking hasn't changed one bit.
The dollar was tied—as it remains today—to a set value, with the exchange rate being administratively fixed and propped up through market interventions by the Federal Reserve using its foreign exchange reserves.

If the exchange rate had been set about 10% higher and held at that level (roughly $3.00 per Euro), we would have seen a significant boost in exports while simultaneously curbing imports.

The Federal Reserve and Vujčić always maintained that their primary mandate was simply to maintain price stability.
Now, we have clear, undeniable proof of how much control monetary policy actually exerts over the economy, yet Vujčić continues to brush off this obvious inflation by claiming it’s all just imported.

I’m not sure if you recall, but back in 1995, the exchange rate was fixed at 1 DEM to $1.50. After that first peak tourist season, the rate strengthened slightly (to about 3.6-3.7), and that’s when they decided to start defending it aggressively.

brightheron64 said:But I have to wonder, what kind of magic tricks could actually cause such a drastic drop in oil demand? 🤔 Road transport doesn't even account for half of global consumption. Even if we entertained the idea of a world without cars, how on earth could we imagine one without heavy-duty trucks or massive transit buses?...

Just as a side note, last year's projections suggested demand would climb by 5% while production only grew by 2% through 2026. But now, with wars and sanctions thrown into the mix... well, only the folks in the Middle East (and Russia) truly know what actual production numbers will look like...

The economy tanks. Trading slows down, freight movement drops, industrial consumption dries up...

goldenpuma84 said:Let’s just say it again: the political elite in Europe is more than willing to throw their own people under the bus just to stay in line with what their American masters want.

The historical cycle is complete: Europe has basically been downgraded from a player to nothing more than a colonial outpost for someone else's interests.

Honestly, I’d rather deal with inflation than have to face thermobaric bombs. Look at how Russia managed to push even the most peaceful Finns and Swedes straight into the arms of NATO. 🙏🙏🙏🙏

wanderingmaker3 said:Now we’re getting to the real question:
Does America actually want a weak Russia, or is this all just Putin's spin?

Of course they do. And make no mistake, they are more than willing to cut massive checks to ensure that outcome becomes a reality.

George Robinson43 said:The writing isn't terrible, but it’s the classic "Russia is the aggressor... but..." type of justification.
It’s hardly surprising when you consider the author is someone we’ve spent years watching on TV offering nothing but praise for the USSR, COMECON, the Warsaw Pact, Jaruzelski, and the PLO.
That’s likely why they conveniently ignored the connection between the Democratic Party and the White House from the moment Putin took power until now.
The rest basically boils down to: Russia attacked, but it's not their fault—it was the Nazis, etc.—and it would be best if Ukraine just surrendered so everyone can live in peace.
It’s very much in the vein of Zoran Milanović. 😉

Personally, my favorite bit of logical gymnastics is when people bring up NATO's aggressive expansion. The reality is quite simple: the former Warsaw Pact nations were desperately trying to escape Russian influence at any cost, and now we can finally see exactly why they felt the need to run.

electricsurfer47 said:A bit of a heavy question here

Ever since the pandemic hit, we've been dealing with this massive chip shortage. I was just sitting here wondering... how is this actually going to play out for Russia versus the rest of the world? Like, if those sanctions on Russia really tighten up, does that mean there's suddenly more supply heading toward the EU?

Barely

https://fortune.com/2022/02/25/biden...ussia-ukraine/

According to the CIA, Russia accounts for only 0.1% of global chip purchases. Research firm IDC estimates the Russian chip market is worth $50 billion in trade out of a $4.5 trillion global industry.

Richard Wilson4 said:So the Canadians are on board too?

And what’s the endgame here? It isn't like I can just snap my fingers and teleport him out of Russia.

Amanda Allen4 said:The truth is, Putin has the support of his people—and that is the fundamental difference between what happened when the USSR collapsed and the current state of Russian policy.

Every single opponent of the government in Russia is fleeing to neighboring countries! What remains? A monolithic core that stands firmly behind Putin.

It’s much like how Maddox maintained his grip back in the early nineties even after sanctions hit; you simply cannot expect a lost war and a decade of economic pressure to magically flip the convictions of an entire population overnight.