Sanctions on Russia

analogbear5 said:Your little "text correction" didn't really save you anything.

Do you have a link?😉

Thanks 😁

brightheron64 said:Maybe now we can actually hope that gas prices don't jump up another 30 cents this Tuesday like everyone is predicting—though when they asked Marić about it just now, he couldn't give a straight answer...

brightheron64 Look, it doesn't matter if a gallon of oil costs $33, what matters is that we need total sanctions against Nazi Russia. We should be blocking every single ship entering Russian ports and cutting off trade with any country that deals with them. It's simple: you're either with us or you're with the Russian Nazis. Make a choice.

Joshua Myers432 said:Taiwan.
Honestly, whenever I look at what I'm paying for fuel and gas, I have to wonder who is actually imposing sanctions on whom. 😁

Ehh... if things really kick off over there, we are all going to be even more screwed.
It is a struggle between the first and second superpowers of the world... I don't really associate Russia with being a major power anymore... they only stay relevant because of their nukes.

wearytrucker22 said:brightheron64 Look, it doesn't matter if a gallon of oil costs $33, what matters is that we need total sanctions against Nazi Russia. We should be blocking every single ship entering Russian ports and cutting off trade with any country that deals with them. It's simple: you're either with us or you're with the Russian Nazis. Make a choice.

Can't do it like that—we wouldn't even have enough grease for the gears, let alone anything else. You can't just wish it all away, Mr. Citizen. Just magic a perfect world into existence and suddenly everyone's happy.

wearytrucker22 said:brightheron64 Look, it doesn't matter if a gallon of oil costs $33, what matters is that we need total sanctions against Nazi Russia. We should be blocking every single ship entering Russian ports and cutting off trade with any country that deals with them. It's simple: you're either with us or you're with the Russian Nazis. Make a choice.

People who view everything in strictly black and white are the biggest fools of all.

wearytrucker22 said:brightheron64 Look, it doesn't matter if a gallon of oil costs $33, what matters is that we need total sanctions against Nazi Russia. We should be blocking every single ship entering Russian ports and cutting off trade with any country that deals with them. It's simple: you're either with us or you're with the Russian Nazis. Make a choice.

Exactly, and it honestly provides me a little bit of comfort knowing that because of this sacrifice, the Saudi royals will finally be able to afford more than just the bare essentials... they might even have enough left over for some butter on their toast next time...

Gerald Torres84 said:Ehh... if things really kick off over there, we are all going to be even more screwed.
It is a struggle between the first and second superpowers of the world... I don't really associate Russia with being a major power anymore... they only stay relevant because of their nukes.

But let's not forget—they are still an absolute powerhouse when it comes to energy.

Amanda Flores88 said:Nah, I'm good. There's enough analysis floating around the web to go around—plenty of big shots have already tried to sell that angle, and I'm definitely not looking to be convinced.

But, have you caught the latest interview with the renowned economist Jeffrey Sachs?
I am referring to this one:


This other one—which is a week older—is particularly compelling, given that he discusses (i) his firsthand experiences working with Gorbachev and his tenure during the era of the USSR/Russia:

dustyowl29 said:But let's not forget—they are still an absolute powerhouse when it comes to energy.

There’s more to consider here too.

Russia and Ukraine control a vast array of raw materials, meaning any breaks in the supply chain could trigger some pretty far-reaching consequences.

Christian Torres3 said:Extremely likely. I just have one question: is that worth it to you personally, given the cost to the survival of the Ukrainian people and their nation?

And just so we're clear, my answer to that same question is yes.

In this conflict, there is far more at stake than just the existence of Ukraine as a state and a people. Naturally, the survival of Ukraine matters, but what matters equally is demonstrating that the global order is shifting for the better—that we have finally reached a point where such aggression is deemed unacceptable, at least within Europe. A new standard of conduct is being established. Perhaps one day this principle will apply to the entire world, but it stands to reason that such a precedent should first be set in the most developed and advanced parts of the planet.

Noah Sullivan said:But, have you caught the latest interview with the renowned economist Jeffrey Sachs?
I am referring to this one:

This other one—which is a week older—is particularly compelling, given that he discusses (i) his firsthand experiences working with Gorbachev and his tenure during the era of the USSR/Russia:

Sachs is talking absolute nonsense. This war isn't going to wrap up anytime soon. It’s gonna drag on—unfortunately.

Nancy Gomez26 said:In this conflict, there is far more at stake than just the existence of Ukraine as a state and a people. Naturally, the survival of Ukraine matters, but what matters equally is demonstrating that the global order is shifting for the better—that we have finally reached a point where such aggression is deemed unacceptable, at least within Europe. A new standard of conduct is being established. Perhaps one day this principle will apply to the entire world, but it stands to reason that such a precedent should first be set in the most developed and advanced parts of the planet.

Why should Europe be treated as more important than the rest of the planet?
Did everyone just stay quiet while the USA was tearing apart the rest of the world over the last 70 years?
Is Europe just staying silent because they're an ally of the USA?

Nancy Gomez26 said:In this conflict, there is far more at stake than just the existence of Ukraine as a state and a people. Naturally, the survival of Ukraine matters, but what matters equally is demonstrating that the global order is shifting for the better—that we have finally reached a point where such aggression is deemed unacceptable, at least within Europe. A new standard of conduct is being established. Perhaps one day this principle will apply to the entire world, but it stands to reason that such a precedent should first be set in the most developed and advanced parts of the planet.

Precisely! It is the duty of those who inherit the legacy of ancient civilization to spread its values and achievements across the globe. That is what globalization truly is—the byproduct of universalism in spreading the triumphs of the human mind.

The world is a global village.

Given his sheer idealism, you could argue that Sachs is somewhat naive—a trait that likely amplified the effect of Gorbachev's own statesmanlike innocence during their interactions.
But you can't exactly pin this specific criticism on him:

Grace Phillips25 said:Sachs is talking absolute nonsense. This war isn't going to wrap up anytime soon. It’s gonna drag on—unfortunately.

The thing is, he didn't actually claim to be certain the war would wrap up anytime soon.
He simply laid out his proposal for how one might bring it to an end more rapidly.
It was essentially a case of "I've said my piece and saved my conscience," because
his suggestions have already been debated and negotiated extensively during the relatively "low-intensity" phase of the conflict between 2014 and 2021 (when we were looking at "only" a few thousand deaths a year).
If those paths had actually been taken, the situation wouldn't have escalated into this high-intensity war we see now in 2022.

dustyowl29 said:But let's not forget—they are still an absolute powerhouse when it comes to energy.

It’s all pointless if their GDP per capita is lower than that of a country like the US.

bluebison8 said:Why should Europe be treated as more important than the rest of the planet?
Did everyone just stay quiet while the USA was tearing apart the rest of the world over the last 70 years?
Is Europe just staying silent because they're an ally of the USA?

It’s still a massive hub for both brainpower and economic muscle. Especially when you look at those high-tech democracies.

Is that why everyone kept their mouths shut while the USA was tearing up the rest of the planet over the last 70 years?

They were just trying to fix things where Russia messed up, or maybe they're just giving an inch to terrorists and other backward types.

Europe is basically just an ally of the USA. Just shut the hell up.?

You think I'm a Putin supporter? 🙄

Gerald Torres84 said:Ehh... if things really kick off over there, we are all going to be even more screwed.
It is a struggle between the first and second superpowers of the world... I don't really associate Russia with being a major power anymore... they only stay relevant because of their nukes.

I’d say it was inevitable, just like what happened in Ukraine. It’s like a pitcher throwing a ball toward a glass vase—eventually, it's going to hit and shatter. That's just how it works.

bluebison8 said:Why should Europe be treated as more important than the rest of the planet?
Did everyone just stay quiet while the USA was tearing apart the rest of the world over the last 70 years?
Is Europe just staying silent because they're an ally of the USA?

Ukraine is a textbook case of Nazi aggression and the occupation of a sovereign democratic nation.
Europe can't just sit there and do nothing—if they did, they’d be spitting on every single value that made them one of the most advanced and free parts of the world in the first place.
Isn't that just basic logic?

Noah Sullivan said:Given his sheer idealism, you could argue that Sachs is somewhat naive—a trait that likely amplified the effect of Gorbachev's own statesmanlike innocence during their interactions.
But you can't exactly pin this specific criticism on him:

The thing is, he didn't actually claim to be certain the war would wrap up anytime soon.
He simply laid out his proposal for how one might bring it to an end more rapidly.
It was essentially a case of "I've said my piece and saved my conscience," because
his suggestions have already been debated and negotiated extensively during the relatively "low-intensity" phase of the conflict between 2014 and 2021 (when we were looking at "only" a few thousand deaths a year).
If those paths had actually been taken, the situation wouldn't have escalated into this high-intensity war we see now in 2022.

Technically, Sachs is wrong because he didn't start from the Wolfowitz doctrine of the 90s. If the focus back then had been on bringing Yeltsin's Russia closer to NATO—maybe even getting them to join—we wouldn't be in this mess today. The West would have had Russia on its side against their actual biggest rival, China.

Anyway, I'm not going down that rabbit hole. With this username, I'm just here to mess around. This forum isn't worth some Op-Ed style deep dives or wasting precious time on.

Just Sports and Music for me! 😁