|
Typo posted:It wouldn't, but it might rally the people around the flag a bit longer. Good analysis, but the west can respond at this moment by further crushing Russia's economy.
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 02:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 19:03 |
|
|
Vladimir Putin posted:Good analysis, but the west can respond at this moment by further crushing Russia's economy. They could neglect to help, but I actually doubt the west was "crashing" the economy in the first place unless you think the myriad financial instruments attached to oil were all a secret plan to begin with. Also, the European Union isn't really too interested in destroying Russia to "teach them a lesson." Also they would have to blow up some terminals in SA to get a panic going, but that is easier said than done.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 02:30
|
|
|
Enact more sanctions. Bar Russia from SWIFT. Strike while the iron is hot 
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 02:31
|
|
|
Sanctions short term, provide economic incentives for oil exploration and production in the long run. Also build ties with Europe for energy export. Also crushing the Russia economy is what international sanctions are all about. You can use the threat of further economic pain as a check against retaliation via Russia's traditional ties with revolutionary groups in the mid-east.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 02:37
|
|
|
Vladimir Putin posted:Sanctions short term, provide economic incentives for oil exploration and production in the long run. Also build ties with Europe for energy export. The question is exactly how do you pick up the pieces when you do that. Also, at this point, Obama doesn't seem to have an active strategy to get rid of Assad which means smashing the Russians isn't necessarily going to fit policy. Radio Prune posted:Enact more sanctions. Bar Russia from SWIFT. I get it "Kill'em all, every last dirty Russki dog?" So what do you do with Russia if they withdrawal from Ukraine, and now you have a completely economically destabilized and if not politically destabilized region? Ardennes fucked around with this message at 02:46 on Dec 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 02:40
|
|
|
So, Russia, you've got hosed by the big strong man again, like you have always done. Have you tried homonazism? I hear you don't starve in the winter with homonazism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 02:53
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:I get it "Kill'em all, every last dirty Russki dog?" So what do you do with Russia if they withdrawal from Ukraine, and now you have a completely economically destabilized and if not politically destabilized region? By not hysterically misrepresenting his point? Your flailing about poor little Russia has become a bit desperate and sad these last few days.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 02:56
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:I get it "Kill'em all, every last dirty Russki dog?" So what do you do with Russia if they withdrawal from Ukraine, and now you have a completely economically destabilized and if not politically destabilized region? Don't forget that thousands of Ukrainians have been murdered and displaced by Russian aggression and terrorism, and we'll be getting more victims every day until Russia withdraws from its illegal war. Would you say that the lives of Ukrainians are worth less than Russia's economic growth and Putin's ego?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 02:57
|
|
|
Finlander posted:Don't forget that thousands of Ukrainians have been murdered and displaced by Russian aggression and terrorism, and we'll be getting more victims every day until Russia withdraws from its illegal war. Would you say that the lives of Ukrainians are worth less than Russia's economic growth and Putin's ego? Ardennes actually makes a good point. An unstable Russia is not going to be to the benefit of the former Soviet Union region on the long run, if Putin is actually replaced by someone more fascistic it's going to be to the detriment of everybody. Remember Putin's current presidency has a lot to do with 1998.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:00
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:So, Russia, you've got hosed by the big strong man again, like you have always done. Have you tried homonazism? I hear you don't starve in the winter with homonazism. NatBols should rebrand as Gay Nazis.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:01
|
|
|
Actions have consequences and sanctions are one of them. Russia has no one to blame but itself for those. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:02
|
|
|
Bro Dad posted:By not hysterically misrepresenting his point? Your flailing about poor little Russia has become a bit desperate and sad these last few days. Actually, I am not considering how disastrous cutting Russia off from SWIFT would be to the Russian economy at this point. It is going to starve people. El Scortch posted:Actions have consequences and sanctions are one of them. Russia has no one to blame but itself for those. Actually, this cause and effect is rather mixed up here, because the Ruble falling wasn't directly the result of Russian foreign policy but ending SWIFT would be the direct result of whatever country that is pushing for it. You can say the Russian population "morally deserved it" but that is it's own metaphysical argument. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 03:09 on Dec 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:06
|
|
|
El Scotch posted:Actions have consequences and sanctions are one of them. Russia has no one to blame but itself for those. You could blame NATO by forcing all those Eastern European nations into its sphere to which Russia had to inevitably defend against by trying to annex half of Ukraine. This is clearly America's fault 
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:07
|
|
|
Bro Dad posted:You could blame NATO by forcing all those Eastern European nations into its sphere to which Russia had to inevitably defend against by trying to annex half of Ukraine. This is clearly America's fault Solution: NATO forces Russia to meet its requirements to join.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:09
|
|
|
Typo posted:Ardennes actually makes a good point. There is also an economic argument also make simply because much of the former Soviet Union still trades with Russia and has financial connections to Russia.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:11
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Solution: NATO forces Russia to meet its requirements to join. And in an ironic twist becomes the only nation in Europe to regularly exceed its military budget requirements, thus becoming America's strongest ally 
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:12
|
|
|
Bro Dad posted:By not hysterically misrepresenting his point? Your flailing about poor little Russia has become a bit desperate and sad these last few days. Ardennes is one of the few guys in this thread who tries to keep things sane and direct discussions away from crushing, tearing and eating the flesh of the Slavic subhumans. Holy poo poo, how can people not understand that there is more than black and white in this world? You are an American, right? Do you deserve to starve for your governments decision to illegally invade Iraq? Do your children deserve it?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
waitwhatno posted:Ardennes is one of the few guys in this thread who tries to keep things sane and direct discussions away from crushing, tearing and eating the flesh of the Slavic subhumans. Nothing says sane like equating sanctions to being pro-genocide. Also "tearing and eating the flesh of the Slavic subhumans"? The only people refusing to argue in good faith are you guys and your histrionics and insults.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:26
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Actually, this cause and effect is rather mixed up here, because the Ruble falling wasn't directly the result of Russian foreign policy but ending SWIFT would be the direct result of whatever country that is pushing for it. You can say the Russian population "morally deserved it" but that is it's own metaphysical argument. Sanctions didn't cause it, but they're making it significantly worse. I don't think the Russian population 'morally deserves' anything, other than good governance. Sadly, the nature of nationalist, autocratic states is that misery of the general population is unlikely to change the government and it's policies internationally.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:26
|
|
|
The whole "Putin bad, but punishing Russia is punishing the millions of everyday people who've done nothing wrong or are dupes" quandry kind of puts me in mind of medieval politics. To use a familiar pop-culture example, Game of Thrones is a series where a particular noble family might be good people and be bitterly wronged by a different noble family as part of politics, but exacting revenge for that requires thousands of innocent, no-name peasants on both sides to fight a war for something that doesn't involve them. Plus, toppling a regime means not just killing the noble responsible but also their family and heirs, even children who had no choice in the matter. The nature of politics, especially with tyrannies, is that the citizens of a nation are practically the hostages of the government. Only a handful of people are truly, completely responsible for what's happened in Ukraine but holding them accountable for that involves putting hardship on millions, many of whom don't support the government's actions or are simply completely powerless like children. But they can't just be allowed to have their own way, either, there has to be a check on those ambitions. It's a delicate balancing act. A Russian economic collapse is dangerous, and probably isn't even coming about by the West's design, but of all the ways to check Putin's regime and limit their ambitions it might be the least bad of several terrible options.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:27
|
|
|
waitwhatno posted:Ardennes is one of the few guys in this thread who tries to keep things sane and direct discussions away from crushing, tearing and eating the flesh of the Slavic subhumans. Also my point was "not to let Putin to whatever" and if anything I haven't said the sanctions were even the issue here, quite the opposite. I think Russia should withdrawal from Eastern Ukraine and there needs to be a durable peace there, but you need to have some type of plan for the region after that rather than "crash and burn." Ending SWIFT at this point is directly targeting the population. Dolash posted:A Russian economic collapse is dangerous, and probably isn't even coming about by the West's design, but of all the ways to check Putin's regime and limit their ambitions it might be the least bad of several terrible options. That is the thing though there actually might be a way to limit his ambitions and bring at least some local stability, without having Russia itself fall into complete chaos or at least trying to throw Russia into complete chaos. Bro Dad posted:Nothing says sane like equating sanctions to being pro-genocide. Ending SWIFT access is directly targeting the general population in a period of already increasing chaos. It brings up some questions about motive. Putin is a hateful little crook of a man that has cynically manipulated a myriad of dysfunctions in Russian society to keep power. However, this is a discussion that has become much much larger than Putin. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 03:39 on Dec 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:33
|
|
|
Bro Dad posted:Nothing says sane like equating sanctions to being pro-genocide. Well, what are further sanctions going to achieve except create more misery and suffering for a lot of people? Do you think sanctions will force Russian troops out of Ukraine? Or is it only about petty revenge and schadenfreude? Almost no one denies how hosed up and disgusting the behaviour of the Russian government is in Ukraine. But the solution is a serious, long term attempt to integrate Ukraine economically and militarily into Europe. How is loving up Russia and destabilizing it going to helping anyone?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:44
|
|
|
waitwhatno posted:Ardennes is one of the few guys in this thread who tries to keep things sane and direct discussions away from crushing, tearing and eating the flesh of the Slavic subhumans. Enough with the goddamn Iraq comparisons.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:45
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Ending SWIFT access is directly targeting the general population in a period of already increasing chaos. It brings up some questions about motive. Oh I agree that SWIFT is stupid and probably off the table. Nevertheless, America's one-two punch today of sanctions, while probably not financially damaging at this point (as the building is already on fire) , does signal to any final holdout investors that America is still serious about Russian aggression. Ultimately its up to Putin. He can withdraw from Ukraine, get sanctions lifted, and then probably lose his job/life because he will be seen as both an idiot and a coward. Or he just ride this whole lovely situation out in office and become Yeltsin 2.0, continuing a proud Russian tradition of poo poo rolling downhill.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:47
|
|
|
pizza combos posted:Enough with the goddamn Iraq comparisons. Might makes right, no matter how much the politicians say otherwise. The invasion of Iraq set the tone for the foreseeable future. But armies aren't the only kind of power - the Saudis are exercising their might by dumping oil reserves. Chaos Reigns
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:55
|
|
|
waitwhatno posted:Almost no one denies how hosed up and disgusting the behaviour of the Russian government is in Ukraine. But the solution is a serious, long term attempt to integrate Ukraine economically and militarily into Europe. Well they tried that and Russia responded by annexing half the country, including its most valuable economic areas. Now with the Russian market in freefall due to falling oil prices, Russia actually needs sanctions lifted to secure international loans and financing so all they need to do is withdraw from Ukraine. Refusing to accept the lifeboat out of spite does not make America the bad guy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:56
|
|
|
pizza combos posted:Enough with the goddamn Iraq comparisons. Nah, it's the perfect illustration of how stupid the idea of collective guilt and punishment is on a national scale. More goddamn Iraq comparisons please.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:56
|
|
|
Bro Dad posted:Oh I agree that SWIFT is stupid and probably off the table. Nevertheless, America's one-two punch today of sanctions, while probably not financially damaging at this point (as the building is already on fire) , does signal to any final holdout investors that America is still serious about Russian aggression. We've placed the power for future sanctiond into the President's hands in order to be able to rapidly react to any Russian developments which may occur as a result of internal Russian power struggles. Clearly, this is a signal that US policy assesses the Crimean annexation as occuring to appease Russian oligarchs while also shoring up domestic support for Putin in Russia. It should be understood to mean, "Don't you loving dare attempt a Crimea anywhere else. That crosses an American redline, and we have the power and authority in addition to the willingness to make it hurt for you." Congress does not ascede unilateral authority to the President easily, especially not this Congress. Russia's stuck in Ukraine; if they begin an all-out invasion from Belarus and an annexation of Transnistria, it goes too far and America will react SWIFT'ly. The hope is that Russian policymakers understand this and request to be brought to the negotiation table to discuss a final settlement on Ukraine. Even that won't restore high oil prices, however, it may prevent a collapse of Russia into civil war. And really, the Russians should take the offer. Bro Dad posted:Well they tried that and Russia responded by annexing half the country, including its most valuable economic areas. Now with the Russian market in freefall due to falling oil prices, Russia actually needs sanctions lifted to secure international loans and financing so all they need to do is withdraw from Ukraine. Refusing to accept the lifeboat out of spite does not make America the bad guy. Lifting the limited sanctions we've put in place won't do much to ease the Russian economic tailspin. Russians need to life their self-imposed sanctions and allow food imports directly, without the added prices from the middlemen. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 04:03 on Dec 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 04:00
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:We've placed the power for future sanctiond into the President's hands in order to be able to rapidly react to any Russian developments which may occur as a result of internal Russian power struggles. Clearly, this is a signal that US policy assesses the Crimean annexation as occuring to appease Russian oligarchs while also shoring up domestic support for Putin in Russia. That is the big question. If Putin accepts American demands his days in office are numbered, yet if he stiffs them at worst he's just a sober, depressing version of Russia's favorite 90s comedian/head of state.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 04:03
|
|
|
Bro Dad posted:That is the big question. If Putin accepts American demands his days in office are numbered, yet if he stiffs them at worst he's just a sober, depressing version of Russia's favorite 90s comedian/head of state. Yes, his days in office are limited. That's the point: they can be limited and he can ensure a peaceful transition, admit that mistakes have been made, or go full USSR.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 04:04
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Yes, his days in office are limited. That's the point: they can be limited and he can ensure a peaceful transition, admit that mistakes have been made, or go full USSR. Eh should be "or go full Yeltsin with more fireworks."
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 04:09
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Eh should be "or go full Yeltsin with more fireworks."  Gorbachev it is!
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 04:11
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Yes, his days in office are limited. That's the point: they can be limited and he can ensure a peaceful transition, admit that mistakes have been made, or go full USSR. You seem obsessed with peaceful transitions. Civil wars often produce more effective leadership as their leaders have weathered a crisis before, whereas peaceful transitions bring about imbeciles.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 04:12
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Yes, his days in office are limited. That's the point: they can be limited and he can ensure a peaceful transition, admit that mistakes have been made, or go full USSR. Considering Lavrov's statements earlier today it seems that Russia might try extending an olive branch in the the coming days. The only problem is what do they negotiate on? Russia will never give up Crimea at this point, and even negotiating the re-integration of the east is going to be difficult between the shelling, propaganda, and porous borders.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 04:12
|
|
|
Bro Dad posted:Considering Lavrov's statements earlier today it seems that Russia might try extending an olive branch in the the coming days. The only problem is what do they negotiate on? Russia will never give up Crimea at this point, and even negotiating the re-integration of the east is going to be will be difficult between the shelling, propaganda, and porous borders. Georgian territorial integrity, Ukranian and Romanian access to the Black Sea, sale of the Kurils or Kaliningrad, reduction in or elimination of ICBMs, ascention to an independent Kurdistan, an extremely great deal on Iran, an understanding of Ukraine's right to self determination even if that means their application to join NATO, American LNG exports and new field liscencing. We'll gladly have the President take a stand on Keystone XL for Russia, for the right price. There are plenty of ways to force management of Crimea onto Russia while negating all major impact of such upon Ukraine. Russia isn't going to get a good deal out of Ukraine. The question is, do they want a deal which allows a single Russia to exist, or do they want to deal with the sale of Siberia to the Chinese?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 04:17
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Georgian territorial integrity, Ukranian and Romanian access to the Black Sea, sale of the Kurils or Kaliningrad, reduction in or elimination of ICBMs, ascention to an independent Kurdistan, an extremely great deal on Iran, an understanding of Ukraine's right to self determination even if that means their application to join NATO, American LNG exports and new field liscencing. We'll gladly have the President take a stand on Keystone XL for Russia, for the right price. Considering what a high priority the current Russian government places on territorial integrity I doubt any land trades will take place if only to save Moscow some face. Your point about the Kurds and Iran is very interesting though, do you think they could bundle that with abandoning Assad and get Russia to adopt a pro-US Syria/Middle East policy in exchange for Ukraine agreeing to an unofficial fait accompli on Crimea?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 04:25
|
|
|
Bro Dad posted:Considering what a high priority the current Russian government places on territorial integrity I doubt any land trades will take place if only to save Moscow some face. Your point about the Kurds and Iran is very interesting though, do you think they could bundle that with abandoning Assad and get Russia to adopt a pro-US Syria/Middle East policy in exchange for Ukraine agreeing to an unofficial fait accompli on Crimea? I don't see that happening either, since Assad and Iran, via proxy, has always been ways to exert pressure on the rest of OPEC and U.S. ally Israel. A Syria without Assad is literally a Syria without Russia's influence in the region.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 04:30
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:You seem obsessed with peaceful transitions. Civil wars often produce more effective leadership as their leaders have weathered a crisis before, whereas peaceful transitions bring about imbeciles. Peaceful transitions are a hallmark of modern, stable society. "Whomever has the most soldiers gets to lead the country" is really something that should be left in the middle ages, ideally.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 04:35
|
|
|
Bro Dad posted:Considering what a high priority the current Russian government places on territorial integrity I doubt any land trades will take place if only to save Moscow some face. Your point about the Kurds and Iran is very interesting though, do you think they could bundle that with abandoning Assad and get Russia to adopt a pro-US Syria/Middle East policy in exchange for Ukraine agreeing to an unofficial fait accompli on Crimea? Well, Syria is an expense that Russia can ill afford with declines in energy prices. Russia doesn't give a poo poo about who runs Syria, they give a poo poo about making money in their Med operations. Iran may have overplayed their hand in nuclear negotiations. Now, Kerry can go back to them and say, "Look, we had a deal that was lose for us, win for you, which you balked at for a deal that was a bigger win for you. Our Congress thinks its too much a lose for us and is a no-go. We wish you took the win-for-you offer while it was on the table; now, what concessions will you offer us to make this bad deal win us, lose you?" Low energy prices gently caress Iran over just like they gently caress Russia over. With the powerplays Erdogan has been making, it'd only be wise to secure recognition of a Kurdish buffer state with Iranian, Iraq, and Syrian territorial concessions. Turkey'd be forced to go alone, or get really hosed. Is that something America would trade for acceptance of Crimean annexation and a guarantee of no further sanctions so long as Russia signs an agreement with Ukraine over shared custodialship of Crimean territorial waters, plus a long-term settlement on water issues and a redrawing of borders with Romanian annexation of Moldovia? Well, Russia isn't going to get a good deal here. What are their alternatives, they continue to bleed while propping up Assad and the Iranians begin to collapse? Cuntpunch posted:Peaceful transitions are a hallmark of modern, stable society. "Whomever has the most soldiers gets to lead the country" is really something that should be left in the middle ages, ideally. Bing-loving-o. Peaceful transitions of power are what separates your local warlord from Bismark. A non-peaceful transition of power would absolutely gently caress the Russians, more than it does Americans. Yeah, they clamour about their nukes; if you're not going to use them, or are willing to bargain them away, then we don't give a poo poo. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 04:52 on Dec 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 04:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 19:03 |
|
|
Panzeh posted:You seem obsessed with peaceful transitions. Civil wars often produce more effective leadership as their leaders have weathered a crisis before, whereas peaceful transitions bring about imbeciles. Oh boy this sounds like a really fun and cool idea.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 04:55
|
|