Posts by gentleviper62

Brenda Murphy3 said:😁 ...good grief...🤦
of course it matters...

just look at the price tags on basic goods in Russian grocery stores... if you actually factor in the exchange rate—they're paying way more for things than anyone else in the European Union...

so how does that work then?😁

Or is that not important either?

And what specifically are they paying more for? Give me an example or even just a photo from a store.

analogbear5 said:I see this being posted on every single page—so I guess I'll go through the motions again.

The ruble's price since March isn't driven by the market—it's the Russian central bank pulling the strings with strict trade controls. It's basically just capital control.

The ruble looks strong because there's massive demand for it—every exporter is forced to buy it up.

On the flip side, importers in Russia aren't looking for euros or dollars because imports have absolutely cratered due to sanctions.

So, the exchange rate doesn't mean the world is suddenly dying to invest in Russia—it just means the Russian central bank is forcing it to stay at this level to try and keep inflation in check.

Plus, a strong ruble eats into export profits, meaning they'll eventually need even more euros and dollars just to plug those budget holes.

They are propping it up, sure, but foreign exchange reserves seem to be holding steady for now. People were predicting a total bankruptcy, yet here we are. If they manage to convince foreign buyers to pay for energy using rubles, it could set a precedent that challenges the dollar's global dominance.

Brenda Murphy3 said:Haha... yeah, right. That’s the same tired logic people use when they claim the ruble is "stronger" than it actually is.

Besides, you totally dodged my original question. Is there anyone on this planet who can actually swap rubles for US dollars at those ridiculous exchange rates Russia keeps bragging about? Can you do it? 😁

If you can't—then what exactly are you basing this whole "strong ruble" argument on?

That’s beside the point. What matters is how much someone in Russia can actually buy with their own money.

Brenda Murphy3 said:Oh yeah? And where exactly is this "strength" hiding?😁

If you're sitting on a pile of rubles and you can actually swap them for US dollars at that supposed "rate"—then fine, I’ll give you that one. You, me, anyone else on this planet...

But if you can't actually make that trade? Then your whole argument is just plain nonsense... right?

I was just looking at the Russian GDP numbers from April—it only dipped by 3%. So much for that whole "collapse" narrative. Just more British propaganda.

In the end, it looks like the Russian economy has actually outlasted their military performance. Even the ruble is holding up stronger than people expected before the conflict started.

Quote : Originally Posted by hollowdriver13

Betty Murphy3 said:"Quote:"

And who exactly from the West would step up to fight Russia on Russian soil—assuming we’re talking conventional warfare and leaving the nuclear option off the table?

I suspect even the soldiers themselves would start deserting or walking away from their posts the second they were ordered to launch an offensive against Russia. Just because someone is a professional soldier doesn't mean they’re a mindless drone—they aren't obligated to blindly back the reckless adventures of an idiot like Putin, or anyone else like him over here in the West.

At any given moment, an individual has the choice to refuse to be mere cannon fodder for some con artist's agenda. Being a soldier should be an honorable profession—not a way to serve as a puppet. A soldier ought to defend fundamental life values, rather than dismantling them just to satisfy the whims of questionable leaders like Putin.

If Russians were actually sane, they’d be rising up against this aggression themselves. If even a decent fraction of their military had an ounce of morality left, they would have refused to participate in the war in Ukraine. As for those stories about soldiers being lost—like children who don't know where they are? That's nonsense. Only children are that clueless. The rest of them know exactly where they are, and frankly, they seem to enjoy tormenting the Ukrainian people. There is no reason to feel any sympathy when they head back to Russia—whether they return crippled or simply as corpses.

At the end of the day, that’s exactly my point—being a soldier doesn't make you a fool. Theoretically, if I were a professional in the service and the US government or NATO ordered me to head into Russia, I wouldn't go. I simply wouldn't participate. It isn't about defending America or any other NATO ally at that point; it would be an act of aggression. It would be no different from what Putin is doing right now—and I have no interest in taking part in something like that against any nation or its people.

I don't maintain separate sets of standards for the Russians versus the Americans and NATO—my criteria remain identical across the board. I have neither any sympathy nor any understanding for anyone's posturing or their little displays of strength on someone else's soil.

As for NATO—it’s nothing more than pure Russian paranoia. They realize they’re facing a superior military alliance with much more advanced capabilities, and they view that proximity to their borders as an existential threat. In reality, those countries—especially those from the former Eastern Bloc—joined the alliance specifically to ensure Russia wouldn't touch them. It was never about launching attacks or causing chaos within Russia itself.

Russian propaganda is genuinely deranged. This war has made one thing crystal clear: they haven't moved an inch from Stalin’s purges and his entire playbook. Honestly, I can't wrap my head around the sheer stupidity of their rhetoric. It's obvious to everyone that if NATO were to attack Russia, we're looking at a full-scale nuclear war—so what exactly are these idiots in the Kremlin talking about? Who in the West actually wants a nuclear exchange? Sure, maybe there are some lunatics out there trying to egg Putin and his circle on, but I don't see them holding any real power. Even if they exist, they're just outliers—they aren't the ones sitting at the decision-making table. They simply don't have the authority to make moves against Russia like that.

When Putin made his move—triggering this massive confrontation with the USA, the EU, and NATO by invading Ukraine—he wasn't acting blindly. He knew exactly how much pressure would land on Russia. What he clearly failed to calculate, however, was the sheer scale of the resistance. He expected to steamroll through Ukraine in a matter of days, wrapping the whole thing up before the West could even process what was happening. His gamble? To present the world with a finished deal before anyone had time to react, forcing the West to simply accept his victory as a fait accompli. He thought he could outpace the global response—clearly, he was wrong.

The propaganda machine has clearly done its job—they’ve been completely fed a line because Russia is run by a dictator who doesn't tolerate dissent. When you’re a dictator, everyone just tells you exactly what you want to hear, right? So, it isn't exactly shocking that hollowdriver13 is acting surprised that the Ukrainians—and their military—weren't the total amateurs they were portrayed to be. They expected them to crumble at the first sign of pressure. Now that reality has set in and proven otherwise, they’re scrambling. They have no idea how to pivot, and frankly, they look like they're sinking fast—with nobody throwing them a lifeline while they continue to go deeper into the mess.

Sure, look—once communism collapsed, aside from a handful of hawks, about 99% of people across America and Europe stopped seeing Russia as a genuine threat. All they really needed to do was lean on that glorious past and just mind their own business within their own borders.

The issue arises when someone stays in power for too long; eventually, they lose all touch with reality. That’s precisely why, in Western democracies, we generally cap terms at eight years.

bluemason3 said:It’s because achieving that requires actual competition and the kind of meritocracy you only find in an open market.

Oligarchic oil capitalism doesn't care about progress. Why bother when you can just kiss the right leaders' feet, grab a seat at a state-owned firm, and spend your days lounging by a pool on a yacht without ever having to innovate?

Honestly, South Korea probably wouldn't have turned out any differently if they had oil. Japan is a different story entirely—given their history with occupation, they might have managed to pivot toward democracy even if they had plenty of energy resources. SK was a brutal dictatorship, too, but they didn't have any choice but to grow through tech and industry.

Russia went from a communist dictatorship straight into a petro-monarchy. I'm oversimplifying, but they skipped the serious development phase because the educated class basically fled, leaving them stuck.

They had a thirty-year window to get things right. Especially after 2000, everything seemed to be working in their favor—you had Bush and his wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which damaged the USA's global reputation, all while oil prices were skyrocketing.

Russia basically sabotaged itself because of this obsession with NATO paranoia. I’m convinced NATO would never have attacked Russia; up until this conflict, there wasn't even an anti-Russian sentiment in Western Europe, let alone any real appetite among regular people for a war. I just don't get why they can't offer anything beyond raw energy resources—they need to build an economy on something more substantial. Why can't they follow the lead of countries like Japan or South Korea? Those nations don't have massive natural resources, yet they maintain incredibly high GDPs.