Posts by Joshua Myers432

Michael Ortiz68 said:And where exactly did I suggest that was the case?

I'm only weighing in because I constantly hear the narrative that "Americans" have been profiting from this. Sure, speculators might be, but the American people haven't seen a dime of profit (and while they might certainly want to, they definitely haven't yet).

I highly doubt anyone was even thinking about the American public here. Even if there was some indirect benefit, that's still up for debate.

brightheron64 said:It’s funny how sanctions can feel like a windfall for some, while for everyone else, they just feel like a total disaster...

I was looking at the earnings reports last night for the four biggest oil giants here in the States, and it’s honestly staggering. On average, their profits have tripled this year, all thanks to the ongoing crisis in Ukraine. 😲

And let’s be real, they haven't even touched much Russian oil. Aside from a tiny amount used as an additive, they have absolutely zero justification for sending gas prices through the roof. It’s even worse for the Arab producers. You’d think they’d be thrilled to swallow up the market share left behind by Russia, but despite that, oil isn't sitting around at $70 a barrel—it's hitting $107.

So when I pulled up to the gas station this morning and saw those updated prices on the sign, I couldn't help but wonder who is actually pulling the strings here. Americans and the Arabs could easily produce more oil than we actually need, but instead, they claim competition is too fierce, pushing the Iranians (and even that Chermakov tanker) right into the crosshairs of sanctions. Meanwhile, you or some regular guy like John Doe is stuck buying fuel drop by drop, because at this rate, running a dairy farm or a brewery would probably be cheaper than filling up a tank.

In short, it's pure wartime profiteering at its finest...

Impossible. 😁

Which means the American defense industry will probably sink. 🍿
Not.

Brenda Murphy3 said:You're tripping... seriously...

If we actually end up slapping sanctions on China (which, fingers crossed, won't happen), the West would probably handle that way easier than this absolute mess with Russia. Russia is vital to the European Union because of primary energy sources—stuff that is genuinely strategic and critical. China? They produce a ton of junk, sure, but they don't manufacture nearly as many things that are truly "strategic" for the West. Yeah, we buy mountains of cheap t-shirts and random crap made in China, but we aren't talking about high-stakes strategic assets in most cases.

Thinking that this whole situation is somehow a win for China is such a massive reach it's almost painful. What China actually wants is a fat, greedy West that keeps buying and buying more Chinese trinkets and nonsense, making us even more dependent on them (at least mentally, given how much stuff we rely on). Any drop in that consumption is bad news for China... it's not rocket science.

Actually, China stands to gain, and I see India benefiting too, since they'll get the chance to pick up Russian energy at a discount. What exactly does China lose from this Russia-Ukraine conflict?

hollowdriver13 said:Well, it's not like China can just go out and start throwing punches at the West whenever they feel like it; you only had to look at how things kicked off earlier this year.

Their entire budget and national stability are built on this borderline insane GDP growth. Back in 2021, when Xi announced those economic reforms—trying to dial back the shark capitalism and lean more toward socialism—there was this massive exodus of capital from China. That automatically put the brakes on their economy, which led to all that "oh, we didn't mean it like that, it's business as usual" talk and them backing away from the reforms entirely.

But yeah, I totally agree that untangling these relationships would be incredibly painful for everyone involved. If anything, China would probably take a harder hit... so I guess the only real question is who has a higher tolerance for pain.

Ah, it's all relative. When China grows at 7%, heads roll. When we grow at 7%, people hand out medals and ribbons. It’s hard to say who would suffer more; again, it’s entirely relative.

Brenda Murphy3 said:Look, the West was already developed long before China started its massive climb to the top.

It’s not like Western greed and gluttony haven't played a part in creating some level of dependency on China, sure, but I see people here just throwing around nonsense claiming nothing gets manufactured in the West anymore. That is pure idiocy. There is still a massive amount of production happening in the West, and let's be real—the technical and digital expertise is still firmly rooted there too. Just look at the industrial and manufacturing output from places like Germany or the USA—it's still absolutely massive.

To be more precise, only certain Western countries still produce anything; others wouldn't even know how to make a matchstick anymore. Generally speaking, the West is trending downward while China trends upward, and this has been happening for decades. This trend needs to be broken, but how? Everyone knows the answer, but nobody wants to give up cheap labor—which brings us right back to greed and avarice.

Brenda Murphy3 said:China’s entire growth trajectory and economic expansion is built squarely on Western consumer spending.

And which cheap labor force and filthy industrial sector are those clueless Westerners using to prop up their own development?

boldcanyon14 said:I honestly don't get how you think China could just screw over the West and side with Russia. Just look at this:

https://tradingeconomics.com/china/exports-by-country

In the USA alone, China's exports are 9x higher than what they send to Russia. Go ahead, try adding up all the "Western" countries. It's not like Chinese people are stupid; they're looking out for their own interests here. There's just no scenario where they ditch the West to stand next to Russia.

The China-West dependency goes both ways—China can't function without the West, and neither can they. China isn't going to ghost the West; if anything, a potential invasion of Taiwan would likely trigger massive Western sanctions against China.

Meanwhile, China will just suck up cheap energy from Russia while offering plenty in return. This setup works perfectly for China, and frankly, the Russians don't have much of a choice anyway.

Douglas Perez3 said:First question: how exactly do they plan to fund their budget, bankroll the military, and modernize everything for the 21st century if the European Union—their biggest customer—stops buying their oil and gas? Who else is going to buy it? Some random country in Africa where people can barely afford a basic meal? They’re bleeding hundreds of billions of dollars right now. That isn't just pocket change you can swap out overnight while expecting everything to keep running smoothly. You can't just replace that kind of revenue and expect the economy to stay stable or maintain a decent standard of living.

Second of all, how are they actually going to keep pace with the West technologically? Let’s look at the defense industry as the first real test case. There's this persistent argument that a massive chunk of Russia's military hardware simply couldn't exist without high-tech microchips and specialized electronics—areas where the Russians are lagging behind the West by an eternity. And yet, despite that gap, they seem to be sourcing all of it directly from the West.

It’s honestly hard to wrap my head around how they let a blunder like this happen. You act like you're this global superpower, yet your entire military-industrial complex is basically tethered to your biggest potential rival—NATO.

You raked in hundreds of billions of dollars over the years from selling energy, yet you didn't bother investing a single cent into high-tech, IT, drone manufacturing, microchips, or anything else that actually builds a technological powerhouse and a truly independent nation?

Give me a break. This is absolute amateur hour. What are they going to do once the Americans and the European Union pull away all the top-tier engineers? And let’s not forget, the Russian state paid for their education and kept them trained up all this time. The West recently made it clear: the plan is to scout out every high-level engineer and scientist in Russia and bring them over under their wing. We're talking massive salaries and insane benefits just to get them through the door. They'll be handing out passports like candy.


Are you kidding me? How the hell are they supposed to build cutting-edge fighter jets, warships, or tanks now? What are they going to use, North Korean electronics or something?

It’s honestly mind-blowing how they rushed headlong into this war without doing the legwork first. They completely failed to shore up their own industrial base or get their high-tech capabilities ready for a conflict of this scale. You can't just jump into a fight like this without ensuring your supply chains and tech sectors are actually prepared for the long haul. They didn't pull all their cash, gold, and assets out. Where exactly do you think they were keeping them? Right in the vaults of their biggest enemies' banks.

You wouldn't even get away with a stunt like that if you were just some random guy posting on a local message board. What exactly were you thinking? Did you honestly believe you could just storm into a Western zone of interest like Ukraine without them freezing every cent and seizing all the gold? Give me a break—what absolute idiots. Honestly, just based on this alone, you’d want to see Putin dragged out to Red Square and hanged. He’s the one responsible for this entire collapse, essentially handing over the wealth and gold belonging to Russian citizens on a silver platter to the West instead of actually securing it in Russian vaults as hard foreign currency.

God, what a disaster. Even a toddler in preschool wouldn't have made the kind of mess this lunatic Putin has managed to create. Honestly, the worst part isn't even how much NATO hasn't pushed back against him—it's how he’s absolutely sabotaged himself. He's basically spent all this time shooting himself in the foot, acting with such naive, reckless stupidity that he's practically doing his own destruction for us.

It honestly pains me to see what’s happening to them. I’ve always viewed them as kin—people with deep roots and shared heritage. To be perfectly honest, I feel more a sense of kinship with a Russian guy whose last name ends in "-ov" than I ever will with some arrogant, imperialist global policeman from the US. But look, if you want to play the game the Americans are forcing on everyone, you can't do that if you actually intend to stand as a global superpower.

They basically destroyed themselves with this war. You could have screwed over Ukraine and NATO in a hundred different ways without ever picking up a weapon.

Our leadership is completely screwing us over. Now we’re stuck watching the collapse of our entire cultural sphere, all while Westerners swoop in to profit from the chaos. They’ll always look down on us as nothing more than subhuman. Instead of Russia serving as the cornerstone of our heritage and a powerhouse for economic and technological prosperity, we're being led straight into the dirt. That whole setup acts as a global stabilizer, preventing American and British imperialists from just running the entire world and doing whatever they damn well please.

But now, the Russians have basically handed them the golden ticket to total global dominance on a silver platter. It’s pure self-destruction on their part... honestly, it’s tragic to watch. This nation, which stood as a sovereign power long before the USA was even a glimmer in anyone's eye, is watching itself crumble this cheaply...

The Chinese have everything they need. The real question is what happens to the West if China decides to cut them off for any reason? Take Taiwan, for instance; that’s bound to become a flashpoint sooner rather than later.

In all honesty, Russia and China could potentially outperform the West on almost every level. The catch is that Russia and China have been eyeing each other through a scope for a long time now. They'll eventually have to swallow their pride and run into the Chinese embrace. While that might look like a winning move, I suspect it will turn out to be a massive mistake for Russia.

Brenda Murphy3 said:I don't think anyone would even agree with that point, because frankly, it's just plain wrong.

Look, "NATO weaponry" includes thousands of supersonic fighters, bombers, cruisers, aircraft carriers, submarines, ballistic missiles, and an insane amount of high-tech gear that isn't even being used in Ukraine against Russia...

Sure, some NATO countries are sending weapons over to Ukraine, but that is nowhere near a complete arsenal. Saying Ukraine is "armed with NATO weapons" is a massive stretch... they've only got a tiny fraction of it.

Look, I never claimed they had the whole damn arsenal. Besides, you can't just hand someone modern tech without months of training. You think someone can just jump into an F-16 or a submarine and start operating it without specialized instruction?

That’s why most of what the Ukrainians receive is legacy Soviet-era equipment (aside from small arms)—because they can actually use it immediately. The catch is that those stockpiles are incredibly limited.

Amanda Allen4 said:Look, it doesn't matter how the war is being fought or who is pulling the strings behind the scenes—what matters is who the aggressor is and who is defending themselves. For any rational person, there shouldn't be even a shred of doubt about that.

So what is there actually to argue about? You have a sovereign nation with internationally recognized borders being invaded by a foreign military. No matter which angle you take, the identity of the aggressor is obvious.

It’s funny how when Americans invade other countries, they use all sorts of logical gymnastics to label themselves "liberators"—but that's a whole different conversation. 😁

Brenda Murphy3 said:Sure, you can argue that there are various kinds of conflicts, and people love to play semantics by saying not every skirmish is a "war"... but you can't flip that logic around. A war is a war. We all know what actual warfare looks like, period.

Right now? This isn't a war between Russia and the US—that's just a straight-up fact.

That’s 19th or 20th-century thinking. Modern warfare has evolved; it spans everything from economic warfare to cyber strikes.

In reality, we can all agree that the actual war is being fought between Russia and Ukraine—a nation armed with NATO equipment and receiving every possible bit of NATO support, just without the boots on the ground. Even the training for Ukrainian soldiers is happening within NATO countries.

Brenda Murphy3 said:Look, no, we aren't in a war with Russia, because if we were, it would mean NATO is in direct conflict with them. And if that were actually true, there are really only two ways this plays out:

1) The Russians would be wiped out of all of Ukraine within a few weeks, and Putin would have been kicked out by his own people.

2) The Russian regime would have already dropped an A-bomb on us.

So, nope—we aren't in a conflict with Russia. Sending military aid and stuff doesn't mean you're in a war... not even close.

Now, you still gotta push back against the Russians whenever you have to... sure, the standard of living might dip in Europe, but Europe can handle that. It's way better than letting idiots like Putin think they can just do whatever they want. That's a much worse long-term problem than dealing with a potential recession for two or three years (which probably won't even happen) or paying more at the pump.

Things aren't actually that complicated... it really just comes down to which side you're on.😁 .

There are different kinds of wars. Not every conflict is a fight to the death. Even so, this NATO-Russia tension escalates to a new level every single year.

analogbear5 said:Look, you can't take down Russia without some collateral damage. What's the alternative here? You'd rather just go straight to war with them?

How exactly would you stick it to them without anyone getting hurt—besides Russia, obviously?

We are already at war with Russia. It’s just that nobody bothered to tell you.

analogbear5 said:Look, you can't take down Russia without some collateral damage. What's the alternative here? You'd rather just go straight to war with them?

How exactly would you stick it to them without anyone getting hurt—besides Russia, obviously?

That's like me asking you: how would you jump off a thirty-story skyscraper without a parachute and expect to walk away fine? You wouldn't... there is no way.

Arthur Watson4 said:Exactly. We just need to shrug our shoulders, say "well, it is what it is," acknowledge that Vlad is being a bit blunt, and then do absolutely nothing at all.

Not quite, dinosaur. This is more like shooting yourself in the foot. It’s a brilliant strategy if the goal is to completely wreck Russia.

velvetbadger11 said:My personal theory is that Qatar might sell their resources to Asia at a lower rate, then pivot to supply Europe at a slightly higher premium; meanwhile, the Russians could focus on selling to Asia, allowing Europe to eventually strengthen its ties with Ukraine and permanently sideline Russia from the equation.

Brilliant plan! We'll probably need about ten years to pull that off, so in the meantime, I suggest you try sun gazing. You won't even need food, water, or heat—just stare at the sun and hope for the best.🎉

Nancy Howard4 said:These sanctions are basically just a bullet to the knee for the European Union, but honestly, that’s pretty expected when you consider the folks sitting in Brussels have some serious "special needs" going on. Even the way Ursula reacted was just pure comedy after Putin cut off the gas to Poland and Bulgaria; she actually looked personally offended, which was wild to watch.😂

A shot to the head for Russia, and a shot to the knee for themselves. As long as they don't mix them up.😁

rustywalker82 said:So, where’s the plan to ramp up production to make up for it?

Hitting them with oil sanctions without having a backup plan to boost supply means prices are gonna spike. That basically turns into direct funding for the genocide happening over in Yemen.
You can already smell the excuses coming once the atrocities in the Middle East keep rolling. It'll be some nonsense like, "Oh, sorry, we had no idea." 😁

The bottom line? They don't give a damn. The world is a hypocritical place, plain and simple. That’s why I’m skeptical that the European Union will ever impose sanctions on Russia that actually hurt their own skin. You guys die, but we're staying warm—and we hate being cold. So, either crush Russia quickly or let everyone go down together just so we can get back to cheap heating, fuel, skiing trips, summer vacations, reality TV, and pride parades.

Rachel Richardson said:Even Josip Broz Marshall was a Stalinist once, before he eventually switched sides.

I don't see how Canada can survive long-term as an ally of Putin.

Canada will try to play both sides as long as the cowboys in Washington let them. They're clearly irrelevant, just like the Mexicans, so they're being tolerated for now. Eventually, the Americans will lose patience and crush them like bugs under a boot.

fadedjackal8 said:They’ve got nukes ☕

Right, because you just mash a few buttons and suddenly you've got functional nukes ready to go in three days. 🤦

I assume you're hiring the staff from a liberal arts college or some other useless institution.

Carl Lee27 said:What exactly "makes sense" there? Thinking that pipelines running through Ukraine are going to stay operational for the next 5, 10, or even 15 years?
Almost every single pipeline heading toward Europe—aside from those tiny little branches reaching out to Latvia and Finland—runs right through Ukraine or stays incredibly close to the Ukrainian border. It seems like Orbán is the only one who hasn't realized that the US is giving Europe a very short window to diversify their energy sources before the Ukrainians get the green light to just blow those pipelines sky-high.
All that Russian oil exports headed West is basically living on borrowed time, and that goes for the pipelines and the ports on both the Black Sea and the Baltic Sea too.

It's going to be a struggle for Germany to pivot that quickly. If they could, this whole situation would have been resolved long ago.

dustyowl29 said:But what does "victory" even look like? Is it just ousting Zelensky and installing some pro-Russian puppet regime that nobody outside of Moscow will ever recognize?

There is no such thing as victory here. If they had managed to topple the Ukrainian government at the very start, things would be looking a lot different right now. As it stands, they might grab the Donbas, but they’ll likely stall out somewhere halfway through—unless they decide to go nuclear on Ukraine, though I doubt they'd go that far...
If they settle for a chunk of territory and call it a win, it won't stay quiet for long. With Western backing, the Ukrainians are eventually going to try to take back what was lost—maybe even all of it. It'll be like those intense counter-offensives we see in history books.

I wouldn't bet on that. First, they grab a chunk of Eastern Ukraine and set up some pathetic little republic. Then comes the "peace talks," then a ceasefire, then a rigged referendum in those garbage republics (just like what happened in Crimea), and voilà—suddenly it's Russia.

Meanwhile, they'll launch another five or six Sarmat missiles toward Alaska, and anyone daring enough to touch Russia gets hit with a Sarmat. Think about it. You can attack the Luhansk Republic or the Donetsk Republic—those little joke states. But once it becomes officially Russia? I'm not so sure.

It might be a Russian victory, but it's a Pyrrhic one. They haven't pushed NATO away from their borders, nor have they gained any significant land, yet they've completely severed ties with the West. And what exactly is the benefit? What kind of connection do Russians even have with Indians, Chinese, or Mongols?