Sanctions on Russia

slyfox43 said:One thing doesn't preclude the other.

The EU can, and arguably should, ramp up its own investments in collective security.

The USA remains present, not as a subordinate, but as a formidable ally—and the feeling is mutual.

There are certainly those who preach about "emancipating themselves from US hegemony," but I am fairly certain you are miscategorizing Amanda Allen4. He is aiming for something else entirely (just as you are).

Exactly.

wiredseal7 said:So, Putin's defeated and his economy is trashed. Are we closing this thread or what?

Do you actually have any evidence to back that up? If you do, lay it out for me—I’d love to read it.
Lp

Bryan Booth82 said:That is absolutely not the case—in fact, that’s exactly what Putin wants to hear.
If certain people want to interpret the partnership between the European Union and the USA through some cynical lens... well, frankly, that should be their own damn problem.
After Biden's speech in Washington, D.C., that psychopath in Moscow might actually hesitate before deciding whether he can get away with targeting Poland. But if that same speech had come from some European leader? He’d probably launch a missile just for the hell of it.
I don't see any issue with the cooperation between the European Union and the USA, despite what so many people in the European Union seem to think.
Best regards,

When Americans bomb parts of the Middle East and trigger refugee crises that Europe ends up paying for and managing, can we honestly call that "cooperation," or is it just swallowing American policy whole? Shouldn't Europe focus on its own interests and stop acting like it needs to pick a master and swallow whoever's garbage—be it American, Russian, or anyone else's?

Ronald Chavez2 said:When Americans bomb parts of the Middle East and trigger refugee crises that Europe ends up paying for and managing, can we honestly call that "cooperation," or is it just swallowing American policy whole? Shouldn't Europe focus on its own interests and stop acting like it needs to pick a master and swallow whoever's garbage—be it American, Russian, or anyone else's?

We can never have enough commentary on how the US creates these waves of refugees. Please, keep them coming.

Ronald Chavez2 said:When Americans bomb parts of the Middle East and trigger refugee crises that Europe ends up paying for and managing, can we honestly call that "cooperation," or is it just swallowing American policy whole? Shouldn't Europe focus on its own interests and stop acting like it needs to pick a master and swallow whoever's garbage—be it American, Russian, or anyone else's?

Listen, if you’re someone who actually feels like you're "swallowing crap," you aren't going to fix that feeling just by pretending we're all suddenly independent.
Lp

Is there really any point in even engaging with this?

slyfox43 said:We can never have enough commentary on how the US creates these waves of refugees. Please, keep them coming.

Sure, but who exactly has dropped more bombs over the last twenty years than the rest of the world combined during the last century?

Bryan Booth82 said:Listen, if you’re someone who actually feels like you're "swallowing crap," you aren't going to fix that feeling just by pretending we're all suddenly independent.
Lp

It isn't about emotions; it’s simply about looking at the facts. Whose meddling is actually driving the Middle East into this state of instability that triggered the 2015 crisis in the first place? And more importantly, who really bore the brunt of that fallout—both in terms of the sheer number of people arriving and the massive ransoms paid to Turkey just to keep them from crossing their borders?

Ronald Chavez2 said:When Americans bomb parts of the Middle East and trigger refugee crises that Europe ends up paying for and managing, can we honestly call that "cooperation," or is it just swallowing American policy whole? Shouldn't Europe focus on its own interests and stop acting like it needs to pick a master and swallow whoever's garbage—be it American, Russian, or anyone else's?

Look, when Germany plans to double down on their energy dependence on a specific country right after Russia militarily occupies and annexes another UN member's territory, are we really going to blame the Americans for that too?

maminho said:The whole point for the US was to slap those sanctions on Russia just so they could flip their own oil and gas—which they basically swiped from all over the Middle East.

And the EU would’ve just kept buying Russian gas anyway.
Then the guy in Moscow thought he could just roll into Kyiv in three days flat.

maminho said:The whole point for the Americans was to slap those sanctions on Russia just so they could pivot and sell their own oil and gas—stuff they basically looted from all over the Middle East.

Oh, absolutely! And because they’re clearly masters of deception, they just threw on Russian uniforms and started tearing through Ukraine to make sure everything goes according to plan.
Lp

Ronald Chavez2 said:Is there really any point in even engaging with this?

Sure, but who exactly has dropped more bombs over the last twenty years than the rest of the world combined during the last century?

It isn't about emotions; it’s simply about looking at the facts. Whose meddling is actually driving the Middle East into this state of instability that triggered the 2015 crisis in the first place? And more importantly, who really bore the brunt of that fallout—both in terms of the sheer number of people arriving and the massive ransoms paid to Turkey just to keep them from crossing their borders?

Maybe it’s the Russians, Assad (backed by Russia), Haftar (Russian influence), various Hezbollah groups (Iranian-backed), or the PMF (Iranian-backed), and maybe even Gaddafi (using Russian weaponry)?

Just give it a rest; you're shouting into the void, as nobody is buying that tired old line about millions of refugees fleeing from American bombs anymore.

slyfox43 said:Maybe it’s the Russians, Assad (backed by Russia), Haftar (Russian influence), various Hezbollah groups (Iranian-backed), or the PMF (Iranian-backed), and maybe even Gaddafi (using Russian weaponry)?

Just give it a rest; you're shouting into the void, as nobody is buying that tired old line about millions of refugees fleeing from American bombs anymore.

Unfortunately, it seems like the same old tired mantra is always being chewed on by our neighbors to the east and the right wing across the entire country.
Lp

Richard Wilson4 said:Look, when Germany plans to double down on their energy dependence on a specific country right after Russia militarily occupies and annexes another UN member's territory, are we really going to blame the Americans for that too?

No, the blame lies squarely with Germany and their own policy decisions. There are plenty of factors at play here, but isn't putting all your eggs in one basket—to use a cliché—just a fundamentally foolish strategy?

slyfox43 said:Maybe it’s the Russians, Assad (backed by Russia), Haftar (Russian influence), various Hezbollah groups (Iranian-backed), or the PMF (Iranian-backed), and maybe even Gaddafi (using Russian weaponry)?

Just give it a rest; you're shouting into the void, as nobody is buying that tired old line about millions of refugees fleeing from American bombs anymore.

Oh, sure, it’s always Russia and Assad’s fault, while Americans haven't set foot outside their own borders since 1945, let alone caused instability in the Middle East. I suppose those fairy tales work fine in the USA, which is why non-American lives can be so easily dismissed as mere collateral damage based on such propaganda.

I didn't even bring up Gaddafi, but if we want to add fuel to the fire: following that famous "We came, we saw, he died" operation, Libya is just as much of a mess, and it's that exact chaos that drives migration pressure toward the borders of the European Union—essentially just another instance of an American adventure that leaves Europe to clean up the wreckage.

Ronald Chavez2 said:No, the blame lies squarely with Germany and their own policy decisions. There are plenty of factors at play here, but isn't putting all your eggs in one basket—to use a cliché—just a fundamentally foolish strategy?

Oh, sure, it’s always Russia and Assad’s fault, while Americans haven't set foot outside their own borders since 1945, let alone caused instability in the Middle East. I suppose those fairy tales work fine in the USA, which is why non-American lives can be so easily dismissed as mere collateral damage based on such propaganda.

I didn't even bring up Gaddafi, but if we want to add fuel to the fire: following that famous "We came, we saw, he died" operation, Libya is just as much of a mess, and it's that exact chaos that drives migration pressure toward the borders of the European Union—essentially just another instance of an American adventure that leaves Europe to clean up the wreckage.

You might find an audience for that nonsense with someone who actually cheered for the invasion of Iraq, but I'm not that person. That said, I'm also not the type to let my own blind spots allow me to pin every single grievance on the U.S., nor am I one to ignore the decades of suffering and regional chaos that preceded these events.

Granted, Bashar al-Assad and his backers are responsible for the vast majority of the casualties, destruction, and displacement seen in Syria.

I didn't even bring up Muammar Gaddafi, though he's a perfect addition to this conversation; following that famous "We came, we saw, he died" operation, Libya fell into total chaos, which in turn fuels the migrant pressure hitting the borders of the European Union—just another instance of an American adventure that leaves Europe to clean up the mess.

Yeah, exactly as you put it—it's as if there was zero instability in Libya, Tunisia, or Egypt before the bombs started falling, and certainly nothing happening in Syria. It's all just the Americans' doing. Why stop there? You might as well mention how Americans set up the Taliban only to arm them again later, or how they tore apart the paradise that was America. Oh, and they probably crucified Jesus too, while they were at it.

maminho said:Actually, they've started arming Ukrainian Nazis.

No, please bring some actual facts to the table.

The whole "denazification" of Ukraine takes on a completely different flavor when you realize it's being carried out under the cries of God is Great!

God is Great, my friend!!!

Change of heart—Europe can just pay for gas in Euros

wiredseal7 said:Russia blinked first. But even with that little bluff, they managed to hike up gas prices over the last week—just another way to pad their pockets.
The threat hasn't gone away, either; they’re just moving the goalposts 😁

It probably scared off those sanction supporters who were pushing for escrow accounts to handle gas payments. If that doesn't work, then the whole thing about paying in rubles will likely actually happen.

Doesn't Russia mostly sell its gas through long-term contracts with fixed pricing?

From what I understand, they insist on those terms, so I don't see how a spike in spot market prices would actually net them any extra cash.

Lisa Nelson said:Doesn't Russia mostly sell its gas through long-term contracts with fixed pricing?

From what I understand, they insist on those terms, so I don't see how a spike in spot market prices would actually net them any extra cash.

Yeah. Once that ultimatum was rejected, Putin basically had two moves:

1) Cut off the supply entirely, breach the contract, and just pay the penalties.
2) Stick to the deal and keep delivering at the agreed price.

Our local fifth column seems to think all gas flows at spot prices when things get expensive (making Russia rich) and flips to long-term rates when prices drop (also making Russia rich). It's a funny way to look at math.

wiredseal7 said:Sure, and Europe can just pay for their gas in rubles while they're at it.

They certainly could, but they won't. Is anyone actually naive enough to believe they'll just bow down to these demands?

Germany says Putin agreed to keep payments for gas in euros

https://www.dw.com/en/germany-says-p...ros/a-61310461

Terry Hernandez10 said:Change of heart—Europe can just pay for gas in Euros

Well, shoot, too late for me! I already swapped everything over to rubles.
So much for making a quick buck...
Maybe Putin could start asking for dirhams in a few years or something...

slyfox43 said:Maybe it’s the Russians, Assad (backed by Russia), Haftar (Russian influence), various Hezbollah groups (Iranian-backed), or the PMF (Iranian-backed), and maybe even Gaddafi (using Russian weaponry)?

Just give it a rest; you're shouting into the void, as nobody is buying that tired old line about millions of refugees fleeing from American bombs anymore.

It’s not just the bombs, either—they're running from those aggressive sanctions, too.

Lisa Nelson said:Doesn't Russia mostly sell its gas through long-term contracts with fixed pricing?

From what I understand, they insist on those terms, so I don't see how a spike in spot market prices would actually net them any extra cash.

Russian revenue fluctuations pretty much track gas prices.
https://adamtooze.substack.com/p/cha...0m-per-day?s=r

If I remember right, a lot of the buyer countries used to insist on spot market rates instead of fixed ones. But that was back when gas was cheap...