wiredseal7 said:Yeah, I click through every other day, but I just don't catch the name.
The point stands—this thread is about sanctions on Russia. Threatening sanctions against the Saudi crew and the rest of the oil cartel falls under the umbrella of Russian-related sanctions here—since they weren't meddling so openly in OPEC decisions before—so we aren't even off-topic.
Just a reminder that Trump dodged implementing an arms embargo after the Kashoggi incident; those oil money interests were breathing down his neck, so he just waited for the heat to die down. I wouldn't expect anything different now, because let's be real—nobody is immune to that kind of cash.
And while America does its usual thing with threats, Russian firms kicked out of the West by sanctions are just pivoting to markets like Saudi Arabia and tightening their grip: https://www.arabnews.com/node/2175786/business-economy
The most ridiculous people are those who simultaneously claim the USA shouldn't interfere in global affairs, yet turn around and berate the US for not slapping hands on Saudi Arabia or some other close ally. You can't demand they stop acting like the world's policeman while also demanding they act as the world's moral compass. It doesn't work that way—the US acts in its own interest, if you haven't realized that yet. The fact that they have more skin in the game in Ukraine right now than in Yemen is a win for Ukraine. Regardless, their relationship with Saudi Arabia is fundamentally different from their relationship with Russia. The US hits Russia with sanctions, but it doesn't hit Saudi Arabia. Sure, they might be difficult allies, but they are *our* difficult allies. That doesn't mean things can't change—if Saudi Arabia stops being a useful partner, the US won't stay leaning toward them. Unlike Russia, which doesn't really have "partners"—they view everyone as vassals or protectorates to be squeezed economically and otherwise—the US protects its partners because there is massive utility in doing so. Of course, those partners need to maintain a positive relationship with the US; you can't just take—you have to contribute and be a constructive partner. We’re a long way from that now, but looking back after World War II, anyone who became a US partner ended up among the most developed nations (think South Korea, Japan, or Germany). Meanwhile, those caught under the Russians were left in poverty and are still struggling to recover today (Eastern Europe and similar regions).
Carol Johnson21 said:https://twitter.com/francis_scarr/st...OAkhHvw5l7jfqA I’m seeing this pattern everywhere in the clips posted here. When Russian commentators criticize the course of the war or the mobilization efforts, they always wrap their complaints in this polite little package: "It’s not your fault, dear Leader, it’s just that your advisors gave you bad intel." What we might actually be witnessing is the fallout from a power struggle between the military brass and the FBI—one of those two competing factions that Putin is constantly trying to appease while balancing their support against one another, as Baric pointed out.
With all this mystery surrounding the pipeline explosion, I’m starting to find spy movies more believable than reality.🤷
By the way, word on the street is that Lyman will be under Ukrainian control by the end of the day.
In regimes like this, whenever someone criticizes the status quo or calls for change, they lead with an alibi—vowing loyalty to the leader first. It’s a classic move. Take the political shifts back in the day during certain eras of American history—figures like Tripalo and Savka would swear their allegiance to Marshall before pushing for changes, framing the problem as a few "bad actors" within the administration rather than the system itself.
Russia clearly doesn't grasp the massive self-inflicted wound they've dealt themselves by holding these referendums and claiming those four regions. If they officially declare them part of their territory, how do they plan to deal with the reality that Ukraine still holds significant ground—including 40% of Donetsk and chunks of Kherson, Luhansk, and Zaporizhzhia? Ukrainians aren't just going to pack up and leave simply because the Russians are having some sort of delusional fever dream. What happens next? Nothing—they’ll just continue losing pieces of what they now claim is "theirs." More importantly, they've just elevated the status of these regions to match Crimea. Up until now, the West had largely treated Crimea as a silent, frozen issue—even if Russia hadn't launched a full-scale war, things might have stayed that way. In any potential scenario where Ukraine liberates its land, the West—specifically Germany and France—might have even conditioned support on not moving militarily, essentially pushing for a status quo or a peaceful reintegration over the next 50 years. But this move changes everything; now the Ukrainians have a green light to pursue Crimea with the same intensity they're using against Russian positions elsewhere.
electricsurfer47 said:if they surrender right away
Could Ukraine offer to let them leave peacefully for another country to seek asylum?
And how exactly are you going to know if they surrendered voluntarily versus when they were backed into a corner with zero options? Everyone who surrenders is going to claim they were forced into it—that they didn't want to be there, that they weren't coerced, and that they didn't even pull a trigger.
The reservists are basically former professional soldiers. I suspect they’ll start by calling up those who resigned right after the invasion began—specifically the ones who refused to deploy to Ukraine and walked away from their service. This is their "reward"; I wouldn't be surprised if they're shoved straight into the front lines. Next up will be the veterans who left the military years ago. Now, the question is whether they’ll be sent directly into combat, or if they’ll be relegated to "cold support" roles in Russia—think guarding warehouses and military installations spanning from the Baltic all the way to the Far East. Meanwhile, the soldiers who have been stationed there without seeing actual combat—the non-combat personnel, the administrative staff—will likely be the ones shipped off to Ukraine. Predictably, people will start hiding—moving across the country, fleeing to cities thousands of miles away to stay off the radar. Given how slow and disjointed the Russian bureaucracy is, finding someone becomes an impossible task while one military office waits days just to send a memo to another. The bureaucrats running these military offices will be rubbing their hands together; corruption is going to thrive. They’ll take bribes to scrub names from lists, shuffle files around, or simply declare someone unfit for service. It’s reminiscent of how Matt Spallatin used to dodge military service back in the day.
I doubt we’ll see any actual mobilization even if they officially declare an annexation—they simply don't have the bandwidth to arm and train a whole new army right now, at most just some reserve fillers. This move is more about leverage—the current regular military and conscripts can't exactly refuse orders to deploy to these breakaway regions under existing laws. Since the country isn't technically at war, any professional soldier can essentially quit whenever they want; they aren't legally obligated to deploy overseas. But—and this is the kicker—if they declare these areas part of the Russian Federation, those soldiers are suddenly stuck. Ultimately, this is an internal Russian power play designed to suit their own needs—it doesn't actually change much regarding Ukraine. The Americans will inevitably move to liberate that territory—they're going to do it regardless. It seems the Russians failed to realize that the real embarrassment wouldn't be the fighting itself, but the fact that Americans would reclaim land they've already decided belongs to them. Then again, long-term strategic thinking and Russian policy rarely occupy the same room.
Bryan Booth82 said:I honestly cannot wrap my head around this latest pivot in Russian propaganda regarding some supposed imminent World War III.🤔 What does "the West against Russia" even mean in this context?🤔
If we are talking about an actual global conflict, logic dictates there should be two distinct sides—major opposing coalitions of nations locked in direct combat.
But look at how they’re framing it: you have the Russians on one side—a group that most people aren't even taking seriously anymore—and then you just have the rest of the world, which happens to be mostly against Russia.
So, what's the deal here? Are we meant to redefine what a world war actually is, or should we just continue to dismiss those fools in The White House as completely delusional?
Best,
It’s just a coping mechanism for their losses. It sounds much better to claim they're losing to NATO than admitting they can't handle the Ukrainians—it strokes their ego.
Joshua Myers432 said:I'm just sitting here waiting for them to start making NKVD-style proclamations about how even a single inch of ground gained is a massive victory, especially with all these guys retreating under machine-gun fire.
That’s why the FBI has armed units right there on the ground—guys in full spec-ops uniforms. And they have Kadyrov backing them up. Honestly, I don't see the point of having military police at all if this is how things work.
If the Russians feel threatened by NATO expansion and are desperate for some kind of buffer zone, I think the most elegant solution would be to establish an "independent" people's republic covering everything from New York City, Cleveland, Indianapolis, and Memphis all the way down to the Appalachians. Both Ukrainians and NATO would likely get on board with that idea
Kate Lewis3 said:So, word on the street is the Russians actually managed to hit themselves with their own Kinžal. Talk about a massive fail. So much for that "unstoppable" hypersonic tech they keep bragging about.
All this constant bluster about nuclear weapons. Given the actual state of the Russian military and their equipment—they're the ones who should be terrified of their own nukes. Who knows where those missiles would end up if they actually tried to launch them 😵
Even if you consider that they’ve been meticulously maintained and have undergone a limited but genuinely high-quality modernization process, those Slovakian Mig jets would likely offer very little tactical utility to Kyiv in this current conflict, especially as Russian aerospace forces continue to tighten their grip and expand their dominance over Ukrainian airspace.
🤦
Those air forces are certainly something. After spending the first few days wiping out the entire Ukrainian air defense system and every single combat aircraft—achieving total air superiority, mind you—and then deciding to repeat the whole process just to be safe, we are now six months into this war and they are steadily expanding their dominance over Ukrainian airspace. 😵
Larry Walker24 said:CNN reported that about 419,000 people fled Russia during the first half of 2022—that’s double what we saw the year before.
For the first time in recent history, more people are packing their bags to leave than are actually moving in. The U.S. Census Bureau didn't break down the specific nationalities of everyone heading out.
Usually, the country pulls in immigrants from former Soviet states. But this year, the whole trend flipped. About 369,000 people headed out to those former Soviet territories, while only 295,000 moved in. Interestingly, nearly 80,000 of them picked Ukraine as their destination.
Ever since the invasion of Ukraine kicked off in February, we've seen an exodus not just from the war zone itself, but from Russia too, according to dpa.
It’s mostly opposition folks fleeing, along with a massive wave of young, educated professionals looking for work after all the Western companies pulled out.
Huge communities have already popped up in Armenia and Georgia, mainly because it’s way easier for Russians to get through the door there.
In just the first six months, the Russian population dropped by a total of 480,000, though part of that is just due to the natural decline in population.
This isn't a good look—especially if they are flooding into smaller nations like Georgia, Armenia, or the Baltic States. That creates long-term friction. If those countries lean toward the West, they'll eventually face pressure or feel threatened by these influxes. They should just head to Germany or France instead.
hollowdriver13 said:Of course this kind of policy comes with consequences. Even Germany is finally giving in and agreeing that we seriously need to go back and revise those European Union treaties.
So, I was just catching up on some news, and it looks like Germany is pushing for a major shake-up in how things work over at the European Union. Basically, they want to move away from that old-school system where every single member gets to use a veto to block everything. Instead, they’re advocating for a gradual shift toward majority voting. It's a pretty big move—it would definitely change the dynamic of how decisions get made, making it a lot harder for one country to stall the whole process. It'll be interesting to see if the rest of the bloc actually bites or if this becomes just another debate in Brussels.
It feels like they’ve been throwing these little grenades at us since way before COVID-19 even hit the scene. Now, between the whole pandemic mess and the Russian aggression, it’s becoming crystal clear: if we don't handle this exactly the way they want, the whole thing is going to snap back like a boomerang. We're basically setting ourselves up for a massive reality check if we don't get this right.
Sure, Canada might see a quick little boost from those cheap gas prices in the short term, but looking at the big picture? Unless Viktor Orbán has some kind of crazy terraforming superpowers that let him just move the entire country right up against the Russian border, they’ve basically shot themselves in both feet. Especially since Poland pretty much left them hanging when it mattered most.
Even if they did relocate to the Russian border, what’s the upside? The only people sticking with Russia are those who have no choice. Everyone knows being in Russia's sphere of influence means being poor and underdeveloped. Look at Kazakhstan—they saw an opening to slip away while everyone was distracted by Ukraine. Picture a foreign company operating in Canada that relies on gas (which Canada gets cheaply, for now). If Russian gas hits sanctions and they aren't allowed to use it, they’ll just shut down the plant and pack up. Or take ExxonMobil—if they deal with sanctioned Russian firms, they could end up facing sanctions themselves. That's what they're calling "success"? They'll be left without Western technology—tech that even the Russians can't manage to extract oil and gas without. People simply aren't thinking long-term; they act like cheap gas for this winter is the only thing that matters. They'll have to survive 2023, 2024, and beyond...
steelfox98 said:They lit the match, but we’re the ones getting burned. Politicians won't feel a thing, but they'll make sure the rest of us pay the price.
Your statement was a contradiction in itself. There's your answer. The Canadians will still use that 10%, or whatever percentage is left, and they'll enjoy lower prices than the rest of the EU. They'll probably make a killing reselling it, much like what's happening across Europe right now.
What happens when Russian gas isn't even needed anymore? Suppose that 10% margin disappears entirely—Russian energy firms get hit with sanctions, and suddenly, nobody can touch them. If ExxonMobil ends up under sanctions because of these ties, what then? Maybe they’ll be forced to sell their assets back to the US government. It’s just like how Chinese companies face a choice right now: if they cooperate with Russia by smuggling sanctioned goods, they lose access to the West. And let’s be real about what they'll choose—they aren't going to ditch a Western market that represents fifty times more trade than anything else.
And why on earth would Russian gas coming through a pipeline from Siberia be cheaper than gas from Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, or Algeria—assuming, of course, that all the necessary pipelines actually get built?
Canada and Orbán are completely blind—or perhaps they just refuse to look—at the reality of their current situation. I honestly don't get why they keep pushing this specific narrative so aggressively. If their previous policies were actually aimed at the prosperity of Canada, then these recent moves are nothing short of suicidal. You can't claim you aren't looking for sanctions while remaining tethered to Russian gas—all while refusing to seek out alternatives or negotiate new deals. They are losing on every single front with this strategy. It doesn't matter whose side you take; the undeniable fact is that year after year, Europe is becoming less dependent on Russian gas and oil. This is an unstoppable process. In five years, once all the alternatives we see today are fully operational, Russian gas will be nothing more than a niche product for the Russians themselves. Its share in the European market might hit 10% at most, and even then, they’ll have to slash prices just to stay relevant. Once everyone else disconnects, there won't be a market left for them to sell to, even in Canada.
It’s highly likely the Russians cooked up this whole nuclear plant drama—deliberately flying helicopters and opening fire just to manufacture an excuse to block the IAEA. Of course, they’ll play the victim and claim they're just "concerned about safety." It’s a classic move: stir the pot, blame the Ukrainians, and throw in some convenient stories about commandos to make it all look legitimate.
Hand on heart, our heating infrastructure is completely neglected in basically every major city—it’s just like the water systems where we lose about 40% of the supply to leaks. In certain neighborhoods, or even just specific apartment buildings, it gets so stiflingly hot that people are forced to keep their windows wide open. A massive chunk of energy is wasted just trying to get heat from the plant to the consumer because the grid is so poorly maintained. Beyond that, everyone has just become accustomed to discomfort rather than actual comfort. It’s ridiculous when you walk into a shopping mall in the middle of winter wearing a heavy coat, only to find it’s so unnaturally hot inside that you have to strip down just to breathe. What is the point?