Sanctions on Russia

Amanda Flores88 said:They’re only hooked because it’s cheaper—plain and simple. But this whole "dependency" strategy is basically just cornering yourself into a dead end by paying premium prices for energy later on. Why would anyone do that?
It’s not even about swapping one addiction for another at this point—it's just that the choice we used to have, where we could actually pick the cheaper option, basically doesn't exist anymore.

I'd rather pay a premium than have Russ breaking into my house and stealing my wallet.☕

brightheron64 said:They do.
But we also have to deal with the reality of sanctions, which haven't really been lifted just yet:

US moves to ease a few economic sanctions on Venezuela

Venezuela: The limited changes will allow Chevron Corp to negotiate its licence with the state-owned oil company, Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), but not to drill or export any petroleum of Venezuelan origin, two senior US government officials told The Associated Press late Monday. The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity because the formal announcement had not been made.
https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/20...s-on-venezuela

Forget about them being amateurs for a second; the real catch is that everyone else has hiked up their oil prices.

The Saudis have announced there should be enough oil to replace what comes from Russia, but I can't imagine anyone is looking to drop their prices anytime soon.
Just look at the landscape—opportunity is everywhere. You've got three major oil giants—Russia, Iran, and Venezuela—all under embargoes, Syria is still caught in war, and Libya has seen its production slashed in half... Why would anyone be foolish enough to just give away oil for next to nothing?

People are resourceful, though. I bet some legal—and maybe a few "gray area"—ways will pop up so everyone gets their cut. Once things get complicated enough, you can always count on some political "creativity" to smooth things over.

swiftjackal11 said:I'd rather pay a premium than have Russ breaking into my house and stealing my wallet.☕

Look, we all know cheaper isn't always better—it’s usually worse. If we're going to shell out extra cash, let's make sure we're actually getting value for it instead of just paying some massive "idiot tax."

darkdriver said:Man, the classic move—dodging the point by putting words in someone else's mouth or accusing them of stuff they never even said or did.
By the way, isn't it funny how in this modern culture of a thousand little brainwashed commissars rambling all over the internet and watching everyone like a hawk to call out anyone who doesn't think exactly like them, that behavior itself isn't called whataboutism?
Because I guess if someone calls out the USA for its history of aggression, suddenly it's "whataboutism," but when you guys point at China or Iran for their aggressive policies—which, btw, haven't even resulted in a single formal invasion of another territory yet (aside from Tibet)—then it's totally fine and definitely not whataboutism?

Territorial disputes of the USA
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terr...ublic_of_China

Maybe this will help jog your memory.

darkdriver said:Man, the classic move—dodging the point by putting words in someone else's mouth or accusing them of stuff they never even said or did.
By the way, isn't it funny how in this modern culture of a thousand little brainwashed commissars rambling all over the internet and watching everyone like a hawk to call out anyone who doesn't think exactly like them, that behavior itself isn't called whataboutism?
Because I guess if someone calls out the USA for its history of aggression, suddenly it's "whataboutism," but when you guys point at China or Iran for their aggressive policies—which, btw, haven't even resulted in a single formal invasion of another territory yet (aside from Tibet)—then it's totally fine and definitely not whataboutism?

Is that so? And what about China's aggression against Vietnam, similar to what we see with Russia in Ukraine?
Does that just not count because the Chinese got such a massive reality check afterward that they haven't dared attempt any major military aggressions since then?

George Robinson43 said:Is that so? And what about China's aggression against Vietnam, similar to what we see with Russia in Ukraine?
Does that just not count because the Chinese got such a massive reality check afterward that they haven't dared attempt any major military aggressions since then?

Honestly, the Chinese could probably teach the Russians a thing or two.

They should just declare victory and pull out of Ukraine, pretty much like how the Chinese did after that whole disaster in Vietnam... 🤣

Richard Wilson4 said:Honestly, the Chinese could probably teach the Russians a thing or two.

They should just declare victory and pull out of Ukraine, pretty much like how the Chinese did after that whole disaster in Vietnam... 🤣

I mean, true. They basically control the media anyway, so they could just claim the UA lost the war and call it a day. If they were actually smart like the Chinese instead of being, I don't know, historically clueless, they’d probably focus on economic dominance. Instead, they're just using social welfare to fund a war machine, which doesn't really work since the only thing people respect is raw power. People would probably switch sides voluntarily if they weren't being forced or acting out of pure fear.

Christian Torres3 said:Territorial disputes of the USA
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terr...ublic_of_China

Maybe this will help jog your memory.

Erich, seriously, you killed it with this Google search—really, mad respect, no joke
If we’re gonna take the exact same logic people are using for China and apply it to Russia, then I guess this whole Russian military operation is basically just some minor border skirmish or a "border incident," right? Because, like I was saying before, China hasn't actually occupied any of its neighbors except for Tibet—which, let's be real, even the Chinese Republican government didn't recognize sovereignty over anyway—nor have they launched a full-scale invasion, you know, USA style, against any sovereign nation.
So, maybe in the future, you guys won't have any trouble calling this Russia and Ukraine conflict a "border dispute" either?

darkdriver said:Erich, seriously, you killed it with this Google search—really, mad respect, no joke
If we’re gonna take the exact same logic people are using for China and apply it to Russia, then I guess this whole Russian military operation is basically just some minor border skirmish or a "border incident," right? Because, like I was saying before, China hasn't actually occupied any of its neighbors except for Tibet—which, let's be real, even the Chinese Republican government didn't recognize sovereignty over anyway—nor have they launched a full-scale invasion, you know, USA style, against any sovereign nation.
So, maybe in the future, you guys won't have any trouble calling this Russia and Ukraine conflict a "border dispute" either?

China actually had a massive plan to steamroll through and occupy Vietnam to rescue their protégé, Pol Pot, in Cambodia.
They launched an assault with at least 500,000 troops... only to get shut down immediately right outside Hanoi. Following that, the entire conflict was downgraded to minor border shelling and a ten-year period of Chinese inability to break through the lines.
So much for your theory that China hasn't attacked anyone except Tibet.

That lesson learned at Hanoi—that they simply couldn't achieve anything through military force in Southeast Asia—is exactly what drove China toward systemic reforms. They realized that money drills much deeper than artillery shells ever could.

George Robinson43 said:China actually had a massive plan to steamroll through and occupy Vietnam to rescue their protégé, Pol Pot, in Cambodia.
They launched an assault with at least 500,000 troops... only to get shut down immediately right outside Hanoi. Following that, the entire conflict was downgraded to minor border shelling and a ten-year period of Chinese inability to break through the lines.
So much for your theory that China hasn't attacked anyone except Tibet.

That lesson learned at Hanoi—that they simply couldn't achieve anything through military force in Southeast Asia—is exactly what drove China toward systemic reforms. They realized that money drills much deeper than artillery shells ever could.

Lieutenant Pašić iz Karaula had a plan to mess with Vesna Zmijanac

Taiwan, Hong Kong, the South China Sea... honestly, I don't know, maybe China is just the good guy here who isn't actually out to get anyone. Plus, they've got those little border disagreements with their mother country, Russia...

Melissa Rivera5 said:Taiwan, Hong Kong, the South China Sea... honestly, I don't know, maybe China is just the good guy here who isn't actually out to get anyone. Plus, they've got those little border disagreements with their mother country, Russia...

The Florida Keys, the Potomac River, the Mississippi... man, either we Americans are total aggressors and the bad guys here, or everyone around us is out to get us—and honestly, if we've been fighting wars for 25+ years without even realizing it, I don't know what to tell you.
Oh, wait, my bad—those are just territorial disputes, pretty much exactly like the stuff mentioned in that quoted post above.
I guess if someone doesn't understand American English well enough to see the difference between actual aggression/warfare and just disputing (for now) someone's right to a specific territory through diplomatic channels, that's really a failure of our school system rather than the country being called out.

darkdriver said:Erich, seriously, you killed it with this Google search—really, mad respect, no joke
If we’re gonna take the exact same logic people are using for China and apply it to Russia, then I guess this whole Russian military operation is basically just some minor border skirmish or a "border incident," right? Because, like I was saying before, China hasn't actually occupied any of its neighbors except for Tibet—which, let's be real, even the Chinese Republican government didn't recognize sovereignty over anyway—nor have they launched a full-scale invasion, you know, USA style, against any sovereign nation.
So, maybe in the future, you guys won't have any trouble calling this Russia and Ukraine conflict a "border dispute" either?

Thanks for the compliment. Seriously.

If we apply the same logic used for China here to Russia, then this Russian military operation is nothing more than some border skirmish or a minor incident—especially since China hasn't actually occupied any neighbors besides Tibet, as I mentioned before...

Oh, so they "failed" to occupy? Give me a break. So you're saying if you don't succeed, you aren't an aggressor? By that logic, Nazi Germany wasn't an aggressor because they didn't manage to occupy the USSR and all those other countries?

🤣 x5000

Christian Torres3 said:Thanks for the compliment. Seriously.

If we apply the same logic used for China here to Russia, then this Russian military operation is nothing more than some border skirmish or a minor incident—especially since China hasn't actually occupied any neighbors besides Tibet, as I mentioned before...

Oh, so they "failed" to occupy? Give me a break. So you're saying if you don't succeed, you aren't an aggressor? By that logic, Nazi Germany wasn't an aggressor because they didn't manage to occupy the USSR and all those other countries?

🤣 x5000

Excuse me, 👍
I definitely didn't say that—that's just what the Wiki page you linked says, because apparently "dispute" means a disagreement in English.
But hey, I'm not exactly expecting you to be a pro at English—honestly, I don't expect much from you at all, especially after that masterclass in how *not* to speak American.
Anyway, excuse me, I'm gonna go run a few miles while you guys keep arguing about the border dispute between Russia and Ukraine.
See ya!

darkdriver said:Excuse me, 👍
I definitely didn't say that—that's just what the Wiki page you linked says, because apparently "dispute" means a disagreement in English.
But hey, I'm not exactly expecting you to be a pro at English—honestly, I don't expect much from you at all, especially after that masterclass in how *not* to speak American.
Anyway, excuse me, I'm gonna go run a few miles while you guys keep arguing about the border dispute between Russia and Ukraine.
See ya!

...since China, just like I already pointed out, hasn't occupied a single neighbor besides Tibet... #4312

😵

darkdriver said:The Florida Keys, the Potomac River, the Mississippi... man, either we Americans are total aggressors and the bad guys here, or everyone around us is out to get us—and honestly, if we've been fighting wars for 25+ years without even realizing it, I don't know what to tell you.
Oh, wait, my bad—those are just territorial disputes, pretty much exactly like the stuff mentioned in that quoted post above.
I guess if someone doesn't understand American English well enough to see the difference between actual aggression/warfare and just disputing (for now) someone's right to a specific territory through diplomatic channels, that's really a failure of our school system rather than the country being called out.

Give me a break. I guess I just don't "get" American because I don't see how an all-out war with threats of genocide in Ukraine is actually "just" a diplomatic dispute "for now." 🤦🙄😵 You really have to wonder if people like this have any moral compass left or if they're just complete psychopaths.

Christian Torres3 said:Territorial disputes of the USA
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terr...ublic_of_China

Maybe this will help jog your memory.

Good grief, you really are something else!

It’s quite funny, actually, considering how we managed to settle every single one of our border disputes after the dissolution of the USA.🙏

p.s.
I think I'll have to reach out to my colleagues over in Montauk to let them know they're completely off base—those penalties they're facing today are nothing more than a total fantasy and a mirage.🙏

Man, this thread went from zero to chaos way too fast.

Pepper said:Come on, man... You’re acting like Americans just committing minor traffic violations is the big issue. Did you ignore all those times the US invaded UN member states or played the aggressor on the world stage?

The US claims to be defending democracy, yet here we are in Ukraine watching one person of faith kill another.

Christian Torres3 said:Territorial disputes of the USA
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terr...ublic_of_China

Maybe this will help jog your memory.

It’s honestly quite bizarre—you’ve got the Bomb and a massive military at your disposal, yet you claim to have no ambitions? It’s almost as if all that power is just sitting there, completely useless and purely decorative...😬

Even the most remote tribes deep within the jungles of Papua have some sort of territorial ambition... even if it's just wanting to gobble up their neighbors...

swiftjackal11 said:The US claims to be defending democracy, yet here we are in Ukraine watching one person of faith kill another.

They defend a rigid, medieval kingdom and... what else?