Sanctions on Russia

darkdriver said:Honestly, I bet like 90%—maybe even more—of the crews looking at that PDF don't even care about the fuel prices. It could be anything, really... $10As far as they're concerned...

It’s not about Russian aggression. People are just pointing out how much a barrel costs versus what we pay at the pump. Everyone agrees gas prices are climbing way faster than the price of oil itself.

darkdriver said:Honestly, I bet like 90%—maybe even more—of the crews looking at that PDF don't even care about the fuel prices. It could be anything, really... $10As far as they're concerned...

Honestly, Russia has already lost this one. For Russia (and yeah, Ukraine too), the longer this war drags on, the worse it gets for them—and let's face it, this thing is going to last. Even if everything stopped right this second—which, spoiler alert, it won't—and Putin kicks the bucket, Russia is still toast. The only smart move for actual Russians? Pack up and get out of whatever wasteland they're turning into.

Gas prices are gonna stay sky-high for a long, long time.

It’s a shame, really, because I actually care about them as a people, but they've managed to vote for the wrong guy to lead them several times now.

bluerider63 said:Sanctions definitely work. I mean, Russia is pulling in oil money like there's no tomorrow, while back here in the States, we're getting hit with news that gas prices are jumping to $5.25/gal.

Exactly. Russia isn't losing a dime financially—in fact, as you pointed out, they're profiting. And if you factor in the sheer value of the territory they've seized? The gains are massive. In this war, Russia is only losing people, while the West is the one bleeding cash.

Sure, that's the reality right now, but long-term? It'll be a completely different story.

Russia clearly, like, seriously miscalculated how the West would react. Our "special economic operation" was obviously totally unexpected and way more underestimated than they thought—otherwise, they would've pulled all their cash out of the banks and actually prepared themselves. But then again, just doing that would’ve given away our hand without even needing an intelligence agency to tip us off. Long term, they really screwed up, and I mean big time. Now everyone knows that as long as Putin and his crew are in charge, they're stuck dealing with a total idiot flirting with WW3. If they had tried this with China or Turkey, the response would have been incomparable and the whole thing would've escalated by 3 PM. Instead, they're just gonna end up as Chinese puppets... honestly, that might be their only shot at survival, letting the EU or the USA bail them out over the next decade or so just so the Chinese don't take everything over.

bluerider63 said:Sanctions definitely work. I mean, Russia is pulling in oil money like there's no tomorrow, while back here in the States, we're getting hit with news that gas prices are jumping to $5.25/gal.

The sanctions placed on Russia aren't the only ones that have ended up hurting the West.
When we imposed embargoes on Venezuela, it left their oil facilities in such terrible technical shape
that even if Venezuela wanted to ramp up production right now, they simply couldn't—not until the entire system is overhauled and brought back to a state where increasing output is even possible.

We saw the exact same pattern with Iran; under the weight of sanctions, they haven't been able to expand their capacity.
And let's be honest, Trump's unilateral decision to tear up the Iran nuclear deal certainly didn't help Iran find ways to increase production either.
Then there is Biden's ban on selling weapons to the Saudis because of the war in Yemen, which led the Saudi prince Mohammed bin Salman to essentially ignore Biden. They can't even settle on a date for Biden to visit Saudi Arabia to plead with the crown prince to meet the American demand for increased production.

That prince recently remarked that he puts more faith in Putin's word, since he has consistently honored his agreements, whereas he doesn't trust the Americans—even when they sign formal treaties, they seem to look for any loophole to walk away whenever it no longer serves their interests.
Consequently, the chances of increasing production to boost supply and lower crude oil prices are slim to none.
The US is self-sufficient in oil production, and frankly, current prices suit them just fine because they allow them to maintain expensive production through fracking techniques.
The real issue arises when the companies owning these reserves export the oil to Europe if the payoff is better there than it is domestically.
In years past, when prices climbed, these companies would immediately start drilling new wells.
But that practice has stalled; they aren't opening new wells even when prices look favorable.
The reason is simple: drilling requires massive capital investment, and with prices being so volatile, they fear that if oil prices drop, those investments won't ever pay off.

All in all, the outlook isn't exactly bright for the West regarding an increase in oil production that would result in lower market prices.
Nsi that little guy doesn't care about Biden, so I suppose we shouldn't be surprised if he spends his time talking to ghosts instead.

You could have heard all of this today during a ten-minute segment featuring analyst Maria Gatara in conversation with Željko Kardum.
At this point, it feels like sanctions are becoming less of a strategic tool and more of a shot in the foot.

Melissa Rivera5 said:Russia clearly, like, seriously miscalculated how the West would react. Our "special economic operation" was obviously totally unexpected and way more underestimated than they thought—otherwise, they would've pulled all their cash out of the banks and actually prepared themselves. But then again, just doing that would’ve given away our hand without even needing an intelligence agency to tip us off. Long term, they really screwed up, and I mean big time. Now everyone knows that as long as Putin and his crew are in charge, they're stuck dealing with a total idiot flirting with WW3. If they had tried this with China or Turkey, the response would have been incomparable and the whole thing would've escalated by 3 PM. Instead, they're just gonna end up as Chinese puppets... honestly, that might be their only shot at survival, letting the EU or the USA bail them out over the next decade or so just so the Chinese don't take everything over.

Exactly. That’s why Russia needs useful idiots, like Milanović and Orbán, to help—or rather, continue helping—construct the myth that Western sanctions aren't actually hurting Russia, but are instead hurting the West.
Then their massive following of frustrated fanboys will jump on the bandwagon to write about it...
It’s all becoming so incredibly transparent.
LP

hiddeneagle98 said:We keep hearing our leaders claim the gas reserves are at 50% and that they have plans to hit 90% once deliveries arrive... but if I'm reading the situation correctly, those reserves might just be enough to limp through the season.

And while we're on the subject, I don't understand why we don't have adequate grain silos. Is it just that expensive, or is the return on investment not high enough for them? The government should be treating this as a matter of national security, even if it’s essentially a sunk cost. Otherwise, all this talk about banning grain exports is completely pointless... you can't actually enforce an export ban if you don't have the infrastructure to store the stuff.

In this new era, governments—actual administrations—have to step up and handle these fundamental necessities. You can't leave this stuff to profit-driven capitalism to solve. In fact, it's that exact obsession with the bottom line that creates these strategic vulnerabilities in the first place.

fgzcvijetic As stated by:
And why would they? Do you honestly believe anyone in this administration is capable of strategic, long-term thinking?

Just take a look at the prices for flour, bread, and pastries lately. It’s absurd. Meanwhile, they offered farmers a buyout price that barely covers the cost of seeds.$0.70 Per kilogram (currently trading at about $0.37 on the European markets).
Anyone with enough silo capacity will play it smart. They’ll store their harvest, sit tight through the peak of the season, and wait for the dust to settle. Once those market prices skyrocket again? That’s when they strike.

It is worth examining who actually controls the storage infrastructure. For instance, take a look at John Deere—they hold 45,000 tons in their silos under the control of an unknown owner tied to Mitsubishi and King ITC.

Gentlemen and ladies—do you honestly believe that wheat is harvested and corn is gathered all year round, making storage capacity entirely unnecessary?
Of course silos exist. They are almost entirely privately owned, which is a stroke of luck since they have zero connection to the government. History shows that whenever the state manages strategic reserves, those supplies have a funny way of vanishing right when things get tight. One day the silos are brimming with wheat; the next, they’re bone dry. I suppose we should just blame the security guards for pocketing the grain while they walk out the gate. It is the same old story we see with bank bailouts or those massive subsidies for failing shipyards—whenever the government hands out taxpayer money to fix a crisis, that cash inevitably evaporates into thin air.
Wheat is a global commodity. Seriously, walk me through the logic here. As a producer, why on earth would you ever sell your grain below the current market price? It defies all common sense. Unless, of course, you are actively trying to drive yourself into bankruptcy—or perhaps you’re just an executive at someone else's firm, motivated by some "special interest" to dump stock below value. It makes zero sense.
Government-run grain silos won't do a damn thing to drive down wheat prices. It’s a fallacy. You still have to fill those silos in the first place, which means you have to buy the grain from someone else. That requires massive amounts of capital. Suddenly, your liquidity is tied up in bushels of wheat or corn sitting in a bin, and everyone knows the market is a gamble—prices could skyrocket or crater overnight. Then there's the matter of shrinkage; even with perfect storage, you're looking at about a 1% loss in mass annually. But that’s a whole different headache.

Judging by how this thread has spiraled, we should just rename it "Self-Imposed Sanctions."

urbanotter said:The sanctions placed on Russia aren't the only ones that have ended up hurting the West.
When we imposed embargoes on Venezuela, it left their oil facilities in such terrible technical shape
that even if Venezuela wanted to ramp up production right now, they simply couldn't—not until the entire system is overhauled and brought back to a state where increasing output is even possible.

We saw the exact same pattern with Iran; under the weight of sanctions, they haven't been able to expand their capacity.
And let's be honest, Trump's unilateral decision to tear up the Iran nuclear deal certainly didn't help Iran find ways to increase production either.
Then there is Biden's ban on selling weapons to the Saudis because of the war in Yemen, which led the Saudi prince Mohammed bin Salman to essentially ignore Biden. They can't even settle on a date for Biden to visit Saudi Arabia to plead with the crown prince to meet the American demand for increased production.

That prince recently remarked that he puts more faith in Putin's word, since he has consistently honored his agreements, whereas he doesn't trust the Americans—even when they sign formal treaties, they seem to look for any loophole to walk away whenever it no longer serves their interests.
Consequently, the chances of increasing production to boost supply and lower crude oil prices are slim to none.
The US is self-sufficient in oil production, and frankly, current prices suit them just fine because they allow them to maintain expensive production through fracking techniques.
The real issue arises when the companies owning these reserves export the oil to Europe if the payoff is better there than it is domestically.
In years past, when prices climbed, these companies would immediately start drilling new wells.
But that practice has stalled; they aren't opening new wells even when prices look favorable.
The reason is simple: drilling requires massive capital investment, and with prices being so volatile, they fear that if oil prices drop, those investments won't ever pay off.

All in all, the outlook isn't exactly bright for the West regarding an increase in oil production that would result in lower market prices.
Nsi that little guy doesn't care about Biden, so I suppose we shouldn't be surprised if he spends his time talking to ghosts instead.

You could have heard all of this today during a ten-minute segment featuring analyst Maria Gatara in conversation with Željko Kardum.
At this point, it feels like sanctions are becoming less of a strategic tool and more of a shot in the foot.

To really get the issue, you have to put yourself in those shoes. Say I run a shop ten feet away from yours. But for reasons only I know, every single time you walk in, I bring up your wife. 😁Because of that, you aren't going to shop with me anymore; you'll just go to the shop a hundred feet away instead. You wouldn't call that a shot to your own foot, would you?

swiftjackal11 said:To really get the issue, you have to put yourself in those shoes. Say I run a shop ten feet away from yours. But for reasons only I know, every single time you walk in, I bring up your wife. 😁Because of that, you aren't going to shop with me anymore; you'll just go to the shop a hundred feet away instead. You wouldn't call that a shot to your own foot, would you?

That comparison feels a bit weak to me, and honestly, it doesn't really address what we're talking about here.

But let me ask you this: how would you react if you were surrounded by women, and there was one particular woman who meant everything to you,

only to have someone swoop in and take all of them away, eventually setting their sights on your favorite one too?
Would you actually invite me out for a beer to celebrate the fact that I stole your lady, or would you be looking to shoot me in the foot?

Anyway, is there anything new happening on your end regarding those self-imposed sanctions? Maybe we can get back to that topic, provided we don't both catch COVID and end up stuck in total isolation.😉

urbanotter said:That comparison feels a bit weak to me, and honestly, it doesn't really address what we're talking about here.

But let me ask you this: how would you react if you were surrounded by women, and there was one particular woman who meant everything to you,

only to have someone swoop in and take all of them away, eventually setting their sights on your favorite one too?
Would you actually invite me out for a beer to celebrate the fact that I stole your lady, or would you be looking to shoot me in the foot?

Anyway, is there anything new happening on your end regarding those self-imposed sanctions? Maybe we can get back to that topic, provided we don't both catch COVID and end up stuck in total isolation.😉

Why are you so hell-bent on justifying one country's aggression against another?

Grace Phillips25 said:Honestly, Russia has already lost this one. For Russia (and yeah, Ukraine too), the longer this war drags on, the worse it gets for them—and let's face it, this thing is going to last. Even if everything stopped right this second—which, spoiler alert, it won't—and Putin kicks the bucket, Russia is still toast. The only smart move for actual Russians? Pack up and get out of whatever wasteland they're turning into.

Gas prices are gonna stay sky-high for a long, long time.

It’s a shame, really, because I actually care about them as a people, but they've managed to vote for the wrong guy to lead them several times now.

I'm only gonna push back on that bolded part... I agree with the rest, though I don't really feel bad about it either.

It wasn't that Russians chose their leaders—they were chosen for them... maybe those first elections back in '91 were somewhat legit, but after that, it was just rigged deals, unfortunately, with help from the West—especially the USA.
Basically, even Boris Yeltsin became "a friend you can't afford to let slip away," if you want me to put it politely.

Putin is just the logical next step...

Lisa Jackson7 said:I'm only gonna push back on that bolded part... I agree with the rest, though I don't really feel bad about it either.

It wasn't that Russians chose their leaders—they were chosen for them... maybe those first elections back in '91 were somewhat legit, but after that, it was just rigged deals, unfortunately, with help from the West—especially the USA.
Basically, even Boris Yeltsin became "a friend you can't afford to let slip away," if you want me to put it politely.

Putin is just the logical next step...

Honestly, it would have been better for Russia if that ultra-hardline communist Gennady Zyuganov had won instead... but I doubt this guy will even bother reading all that.

Linda Collins3 said:Judging by how this thread has spiraled, we should just rename it "Self-Imposed Sanctions."

It is an obvious fact that sanctions always cause damage to everyone involved. They hurt the ones imposing them just as much as those they are targeted at. It is simply a question of who bears the heavier burden and who suffers more significantly from the fallout. Generally speaking, the smaller, weaker economy takes the harder hit. The greater the disparity in economic power—or even economic dependency—between the parties, the more severe the impact typically becomes, though that depends entirely on the specific measures taken. Whether it was actually worth implementing these sanctions—effectively wounding oneself in the process—is a matter of pure political perspective.
Considering the cost of war, sanctions are a relatively inexpensive tool, provided they can achieve their objective instead of resorting to weaponry.

Christian Torres3 said:Honestly, it would have been better for Russia if that ultra-hardline communist Gennady Zyuganov had won instead... but I doubt this guy will even bother reading all that.

Look, for most regular folks—both in Russia and everywhere else—it would have been way better if there was actual, timely help during that transition period back in late '91 and early '92.
If that had happened, even Zyuganov wouldn't be such a massive threat right now.

That's my two cents—moving on from this thread.

Lisa Jackson7 As stated by:
I will simply reiterate what you have highlighted in bold. As for the rest, I find myself in agreement—not that I am particularly pleased about it.

It wasn't the Russians who voted to put those people in power. They’ve been voted in.The first presidential elections back in '91 were perhaps the only ones that could be considered somewhat legitimate. Everything following that was little more than a staged performance—orchestrated, unfortunately, with heavy involvement from the West, most notably the USA.
So, it seems Boris Yeltsin has already become that "friend you simply can't let hang out to dry"—if I may be so bold as to put it that way.

Putin is simply the logical progression...

I don't view Putin as the logical successor to Boris Yeltsin. The man comes from an entirely different social sphere. One can only wonder why, and under what specific circumstances, Yeltsin "selected" him to take the reins. But then again, that’s a question for the historians.

Nancy Gomez26 said:

Lisa Jackson7 As stated by:
I will simply reiterate what you have highlighted in bold. As for the rest, I find myself in agreement—not that I am particularly pleased about it.

It wasn't the Russians who voted to put those people in power. They’ve been voted in.The first presidential elections back in '91 were perhaps the only ones that could be considered somewhat legitimate. Everything following that was little more than a staged performance—orchestrated, unfortunately, with heavy involvement from the West, most notably the USA.
So, it seems Boris Yeltsin has already become that "friend you simply can't let hang out to dry"—if I may be so bold as to put it that way.

Putin is simply the logical progression...

I don't view Putin as the logical successor to Boris Yeltsin. The man comes from an entirely different social sphere. One can only wonder why, and under what specific circumstances, Yeltsin "selected" him to take the reins. But then again, that’s a question for the historians.

Sure, Putin came from a different background than Yeltsin—true enough—and Yeltsin definitely had his own personal reasons for making a deal with him... basically protecting himself and his family since he made so many enemies back then.
But honestly? The US administration at the time actually welcomed Putin.

Here’s the kicker... with American democracy being gutted right at the start and the "stabilization" focusing strictly on economic market reforms, Putin was the logical next step.
Nobody gave a damn back then that the country was essentially sliding back into an autocracy... nobody thought it mattered.

I'm bringing this up because one day it’s gonna matter... you can't go planting seeds with dictators and expect "world peace."
I mean, sure, you can try—but if you do, war becomes your best friend and your biggest moneymaker.

The whole point is this: instead of dealing with Boris Yeltsin, the US should have just hand-picked some random nobody to run Russia. They could've spent the next twenty years basically babysitting them to make sure they didn't elect the wrong leaders. But since they didn't do that? Now they're blaming everyone else for the war in Ukraine.

🙄

swiftjackal11 said:To really get the issue, you have to put yourself in those shoes. Say I run a shop ten feet away from yours. But for reasons only I know, every single time you walk in, I bring up your wife. 😁Because of that, you aren't going to shop with me anymore; you'll just go to the shop a hundred feet away instead. You wouldn't call that a shot to your own foot, would you?

Honestly, people do this all the time. It happens over tiny things, sometimes bigger ones, and hey, maybe the person bringing up the spouse just has bad luck or something.

Sanctions hurt Russia just as much as they hit Europe. But there really isn't any other way. Europe could have stepped up and said, just like Al Gore once did, "this isn't our fight." If they had, fuel would be $3.25 right now and we wouldn't be seeing so many Ukrainians or even the existence of Ukraine being
.