• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why Russia isn’t flinching at snowballing US sanctions

After Helsinki, NO ONE ☝️ Questions that #45 is an A$$et of Russia ����

I wouldn't go so far as to say "asset".

Of course some "assets" (regardless of how good they appear at the time that they are acquired) actually have an insignificant (or even negative) value. I have some share certificates which would cost me more to sell than they would fetch as a purchase price. Those share certificates DO have a cash value, but that cash value is insignificant and (once the cost of disposal is factored in) actually have a negative value.
 
Possibly that is because I use thought processes which are difficult to express in "See Spot. See Spot run. Run Spot, run." language.



Please do not confuse sarcasm with rhetoric.

sarcasm is rhetoric, but that explains things...sarcasm rarely makes sense.
 
From The Christian Science Monitor

Why Russia isn’t flinching at snowballing US sanctions

Russians have been living with escalating US sanctions for more than four years. For many, it's become a dismal fact of life, like the Moscow weather.
And this week, a new wave of US sanctions hit Russia, with more in the pipeline. But while there's little sign that the American deluge will abate any time soon, Russia seems to be better prepared than ever before to weather the storm.

Many things have changed since the United States and its Western allies imposed comprehensive economic measures against Russia's Kremlin-friendly oligarchs and state corporations back in 2014. Those were meant to punish Moscow for its annexation of Crimea and force it to change its behavior in Ukraine, and the Europeans remain on board.

But the US is basically going it alone with its new sanctions, which seem aimed at a wide variety of alleged Russian misdeeds. The latest salvo bans certain technology exports to Russia over the attempted nerve gas poisoning of former double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter in England last March. It also promises much tougher measures if Russia doesn't certify that it has stopped using chemical weapons and allow on-the-ground inspections by November.

A more serious battery of measures, which aims to punish Russia for its alleged election interference in the US, is pending. It would block US investments in Russian energy projects and effectively ban major Russian banks from conducting transactions in US dollars. Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev has admitted those measures might really hurt, calling them “a declaration of economic war” against Russia.

COMMENT:-

For some reason "Do what we tell you to do, OR ELSE!" doesn't appear to be working as well these days as it did when the US was (effectively) the world's only economic superpower.

There is no doubt that the Grade Six bully can beat up the individual kids in Grade Three.

On the other hand, ALL of the kids in Grade Three can __[fill in the blank]__ out of the Grade Six bully if they act in concert.

This is why the Grade Six bully prefers "bilateral" relations with the kids in Grade Three rather than "multilateral" ones.

TUC:

The Russian-born but now American-based reporter and critic of the Putin Regime Masha Gessen had this to say about recent international sanctions against Russia:

... I think Putin is perfectly happy with sanctions. Sanctions create a kind of mobilizing point for him and his administration. it bolsters the state of constant war that is essential for the kind of presidency that that he has, right? The kind of regime that has built is very dependent on a sense of being constantly under siege. So sanctions help perpetrate that.

Quote from:

https://theintercept.com/2018/07/25...igence/?campaign=homepage-podcast-intercepted

Ms. Gessen's words are worth reflecting upon before embarking on a meaningful discussion on sanctions vis a vie the Putin Regime.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
I view sanctions as a positive for Russia.

They do all of the following:

1. Make some food more expensive, and a few unavailable. but it's very marginal.
2. Marginalise even further the pro western shrills. It's difficult to be pro west when they're attempting to harm Russia and indeed Russians. Kasparov et al are in a bind.
3. Force Russia to become more self sufficient, develop its strategic industries (electronics, ship-building, IT and micro-processing), focus on defence and infrastructure.
4. Force Russia to develop its strategic alliance with China. Okay, it's not got the stronger hand, but for me the main priority is to ditch the West and its failing systems, and develop an alternative financial, trade and rules based system with China, India, and the CSTO allies.


Not sure how many of those outcomes are considered desirable from a western perspective, and I don't care. I'm grateful for the Russia haters and the madness gripping the West - they're pushing Russia in the direction it needs to go. Thanks.
 
TUC:

The Russian-born but now American-based reporter and critic of the Putin Regime Masha Gessen had this to say about recent international sanctions against Russia:



Quote from:

https://theintercept.com/2018/07/25...igence/?campaign=homepage-podcast-intercepted

Ms. Gessen's words are worth reflecting upon before embarking on a meaningful discussion on sanctions vis a vie the Putin Regime.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

Very good point.

Seems to apply to Iran, the DPRK, and the PRC as well - doesn't it?

PS - An interesting historical point is that China has operated under a "command economy" for most of the past 2,500 years. "Communism" is one type of "command economy". Also, for most of the past 2,500 years, the Chinese culture has placed a higher social value on "helping others" than it has placed on "personal enrichment". "Socialism" tends to place a higher social value on "helping others" than it does on "personal enrichment". I simply cannot understand why the Chinese do not simply toss out 2,500(ish) years of culture, history, and economy and leap into a "self-centred consumer economy" like any "rational" person would do.
 
I view sanctions as a positive for Russia.

They do all of the following:

1. Make some food more expensive, and a few unavailable. but it's very marginal.
2. Marginalise even further the pro western shrills. It's difficult to be pro west when they're attempting to harm Russia and indeed Russians. Kasparov et al are in a bind.
3. Force Russia to become more self sufficient, develop its strategic industries (electronics, ship-building, IT and micro-processing), focus on defence and infrastructure.
4. Force Russia to develop its strategic alliance with China. Okay, it's not got the stronger hand, but for me the main priority is to ditch the West and its failing systems, and develop an alternative financial, trade and rules based system with China, India, and the CSTO allies.


Not sure how many of those outcomes are considered desirable from a western perspective, and I don't care. I'm grateful for the Russia haters and the madness gripping the West - they're pushing Russia in the direction it needs to go. Thanks.

Mr. Trump's "I'm going to make any offer to Canada so insulting that it doesn't have any option but to reject it." and "Any deal with Canada will be completely on my terms." are doing much the same thing in Canada.

The US losing market share in the EU, China, Canada, and Mexico will not be all that felicitous for the US economy (even though there is some possibility that loss of exports will be counterbalanced by a decrease in imports so that the net US balance of trade doesn't actually shift that much from its current negative position).
 
Sanctions against russia were never going to have a major negative effect on their economy, but rather a positive one. It has just forced russia to move closer to china and india, it has forced them to produce more locally, to build their own advanced tech centers instead of importing cheaper tech already made by the western world. A saying I have seen a lot involving russia is that when sanctions limit putin from importing apples, he starts importing apple trees, meaning if they can not rely on foreign trade, they will make due on their own and produce it themselves.


Sanctions are used to punish nations and often used to force them to do another nations will with threats to their economy, problem is it does little good when that nation has no fear of such threats, and the eu who has major trade with russia has no intention of abiding by those sanctions, nor does china kazahkstan india etc.
 
Very good point.

Seems to apply to Iran, the DPRK, and the PRC as well - doesn't it?

PS - An interesting historical point is that China has operated under a "command economy" for most of the past 2,500 years. "Communism" is one type of "command economy". Also, for most of the past 2,500 years, the Chinese culture has placed a higher social value on "helping others" than it has placed on "personal enrichment". "Socialism" tends to place a higher social value on "helping others" than it does on "personal enrichment". I simply cannot understand why the Chinese do not simply toss out 2,500(ish) years of culture, history, and economy and leap into a "self-centred consumer economy" like any "rational" person would do.

TUC:

Sentence #1 and 2 - Yup, agree with you. Sentence #3 - I'm not so sure that altruism and a sense of social justice or equality drove the various iterations of Chinese command economies over the last three and a half millennia. Greed and power-lust among rulers and personal ambition among civil servants were far stronger motives for Chinese statism than altruistic notions of a collective good. Sentence #4 - Likewise the broader notions of Socialism were not as altruistic as some might think; as personal greed and ambition among leaders or blocs of leaders coupled with other very human drives tended to corrupt ideal socialist models into statist engines for serving the interests of the few at the expense of the many. This was often achieved by the imposition of coercive and brutal authoritarianism and exploitation upon the very people whom socialism was supposed to help in theory. The problem with utopian idealism is it must be executed by humans who have dystopian drives and appetites.

I chuckled at that last sentence! Well done!

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
Sanctions against russia were never going to have a major negative effect on their economy, but rather a positive one. It has just forced russia to move closer to china and india, it has forced them to produce more locally, to build their own advanced tech centers instead of importing cheaper tech already made by the western world. A saying I have seen a lot involving russia is that when sanctions limit putin from importing apples, he starts importing apple trees, meaning if they can not rely on foreign trade, they will make due on their own and produce it themselves.


Sanctions are used to punish nations and often used to force them to do another nations will with threats to their economy, problem is it does little good when that nation has no fear of such threats, and the eu who has major trade with russia has no intention of abiding by those sanctions, nor does china kazahkstan india etc.

Genuinely I thank the West for its sanctions. I don't like globalism and was uncomfortable with its impact on strategic Russian economic sectors. I also don't like the West's current obsession with individualism and its abandonment of Christian and family values.

The West's foolish unilateral attempt to isolate Russia has re-focused Russia inwards and eastwards. Just what we needed to overcome the westward focused elements of the Russian elite.

As with much work of the US, it has been totally counter-productive. Sometimes I think the neo-cons are working for Moscow.
 
So tell me...is Trump a Putin puppet? Or, is Trump a bully?

The ever-changing rhetoric confuses me.
Yes I have noticed that the obvious does continually escape you.

He is obviously both...
 
Have you ever considered the possibility of "A" encouraging "B" to take an action against "A" which "A" knows will fail and end up making "B" look like a fool?

On the other hand **T*H*E** **T*R*U*T*H** is that Crooked Hillary and Barack HUSSEIN Obama are behind the whole thing (they are operating through Deep State Inc.) so that they can so discredit Mr. Trump that they will be able to impose Sherry Law on America and fluoridate the drinking water so that everyone engages in inter-racial and same-sex marriages because all of the Cheerleaders are wearing Burke Hats.

I like you, I think you would be a good guy to fish with. Ever fish spring creeks in Wisconsin?
 
Yes I have noticed that the obvious does continually escape you.

He is obviously both...

LOL!!

He's a puppet to Putin and a bully to Putin.

Well, damn...that's a good trick.
 
I like you, I think you would be a good guy to fish with. Ever fish spring creeks in Wisconsin?

I was once married to a woman from Wisconsin - does that count?

PS - You teach me to fish, and I'll teach you how to drink beer. (Admittedly there are some really good "craft/micro breweries" in Wisconsin now.)
 
LOL!!

He's a puppet to Putin and a bully to Putin.

Well, damn...that's a good trick.

Obviously the correct use of the conjunction "and" was something that was taught on one of those days when you skipped school.
 
Obviously the correct use of the conjunction "and" was something that was taught on one of those days when you skipped school.

I used the word correctly.
 
I used the word correctly.

Your use was correct.

However your understanding of what "a puppet to Putin and a bully" actually means is sadly lacking.

I won't waste my time attempting to teach you how to write grammatically correct, coherent English because I think that your time would be better spent trying to get a refund on the school taxes that your parents paid in response to the fraudulent promise to provide you with an education that would render you functionally literate.
 
Your use was correct.

However your understanding of what "a puppet to Putin and a bully" actually means is sadly lacking.

I won't waste my time attempting to teach you how to write grammatically correct, coherent English because I think that your time would be better spent trying to get a refund on the school taxes that your parents paid in response to the fraudulent promise to provide you with an education that would render you functionally literate.

Good.

Nobody likes a Grammar Nazi, you know.
 
Good.

Nobody likes a Grammar Nazi, you know.

Especially those English speakers who are unable to read and comprehend the English language.

Now, I could, I suppose, assume that you had actually read and understood correctly what was actually written and had then chosen to deliberately distort it for your own ends.

I'd prefer to believe that your education was deficient rather than that your morals were, but if you would prefer me to go with the second option, I'm willing to accommodate your desires.
 
Back
Top Bottom