10 ms·

The deal is simple: when Russia stops slaughtering Ukrainian civilians, the rest of the world will stop isolating their economy. It's much like the shipping blo

by smt88 5y ago

The deal is simple: when Russia stops slaughtering Ukrainian civilians, the rest of the world will stop isolating their economy. It's much like the shipping blockades that were used against the European Axis countries in WWII. Russian civilians should consider themselves lucky that the war is only economic for them.

BuckRogers 5y ago
- smt88 5y ago
  I don't think it's controversial that Putin deserves to be ousted by a foreign military as much as anyone. He's certainly much more powerful and dangerous than Stalin or Hitler because he can unilaterally end human life on earth at any moment of any day. > Install anyone else that's not insane, say Navalny. Well, we definitely couldn't install anyone. We'd have to administrate an open election. > I read they have 50% of their total combat brigades in Ukraine now. This is a pretty antiquated assessment of military power. Boots on the ground show only that Russia wants to take Ukraine rather than completely destroy it. They can level the entire country with tactical nukes if they want. > Installing a leader that is open to integrating with the west, along with India, we could encircle China and force them into peaceful deescalation. I think it's more likely that we'd make China very dangerous and hostile, and we'd also re-open the world to the possibility of foreign regime change. If we can decapitate Russia, why couldn't someone say, "Hey, this Biden guy stole the election, we should murder him for the good of the American people!" Biden didn't steal the election, but I think you see where I'm going with it.
  - mistrial9 5y ago
    from my understanding of the development of the international oil trade in the 20th century, one of the key advancements by multinational oil in the West was to learn lessons from the British, and do two important things on foreign soil: always back a leader that can hold on with local support; always pay the Nationalist/Military oil interests very well, in addition to making trade rights built-in. Unfortunately, it seems that the "wild west" behavior of the USA in South America, in the wake of the brutal Spanish conquest long ago, made some enemies (that have oil) that are not easy to talk to now.
    - sarma912 5y ago
      Do you have a good book rec around British oil and lessons learnt?
      - BlueTemplar 5y ago
        Oil, Power, and War : A Dark History should be close enough ? https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/42527868-oil-power-and-war https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/42527868-oil-power-and-w...
  - BuckRogers 5y ago
    [flagged]
    - xtian 5y ago
      You probably won’t take this advice, but you should really start making peace with the fact that the US is completely incapable of accomplishing any of these warped fantasies of yours. The vast majority of the world is celebrating the self-evident decline of US-centric unipolarity. But those of us who live here have some hard years ahead.
      - kelnos 5y ago
        That's the thing. Even if we were to suggest that the parent's ideas had merit (big "if"), it's pretty laughable to think that the US is capable of doing this properly. Looking back, it's hard to find American successes in this sort of meddling, all the way back to WWII.
        xtian 5y ago
        True, and the US didn’t even properly defeat the Nazis (see, for instance: Adolf Heusinger, Operation Paperclip, and the many Nazis who happened to find themselves in positions of power in West Germany).
        BuckRogers 5y ago
        [flagged]
    - mistrial9 5y ago
      - BuckRogers 5y ago
        The ideas have to be out there or they'll never get traction. We have major influence recently. The path of the world was changed dramatically with the election of Biden over Trump. I can't imagine how emboldened Putin would be had Trump won. I realize others say everyone was scared of the rich man's son, but I don't see it. He withheld 400 million in military aid from Ukraine, says it all as far as the path we'd be down.
  - waffleiron 5y ago
    >He's certainly much more powerful and dangerous than Stalin or Hitler because he can unilaterally end human life on earth at any moment of any day. This is Biden too. Literally can unilaterally start a nuclear war.
    - dTal 5y ago
      True, it's an extremely dangerous situation for nuclear weapons to exist at all. Biden, however, has not threatened to use them. Nor does he rule over his subordinates on pain of extrajudicial murder, so there's a few checks and balances there. Alas the same cannot be said for Putin.
    - smt88 5y ago
      > This is Biden too. Literally can unilaterally start a nuclear war. So what? What does that have to do with anything? Biden has never threatened nuclear war and has nothing to gain from it. Putin has threatened it repeatedly in the last few weeks. Biden is more powerful than Putin, Stalin, or Hitler, but he is not as dangerous.
      - lmm 5y ago
        Biden frequently misspeaks or gets confused, and refuses to take dementia tests, so if he really can unilaterally launch then I'd actually be pretty worried about that. (I think there are other people in the loop in the case of the US president though? Personally I've always been most worried about the Royal Navy's submarine captains, who really do have the ability to launch unilaterally in a very direct way)
      - waffleiron 5y ago
        >So what? What does that have to do with anything? Because my reply was to: >much more powerful and dangerous than Stalin or Hitler because Note the "because", the exact same argument stands for Biden, but we wouldn't argue he's more powerful and dangerous than Stalin or Hitler. I was pointing out the weakness in the "because".
- roenxi 5y ago
  > ... a fullscale Russian invasion to decapitate their government. > ... encircle China and force them into peaceful deescalation. While you have used the word "peaceful" I suspect a Chinese planner, if by some strange path they read your comment, would start preparing for wild escalations. Because it looks like the strategy is to wait for a moment of weakness then invade. That doesn't sound like a path to peace.
  - BuckRogers 5y ago
    Invading China will likely never be a good idea. I'm for peaceful coexistence of nations unless there's a renegade actor like Putin. I think peace comes from democratic systems. Even the USSR was intended to be democratic. There's almost nothing to stop Putin. This nuclear hostage holding he's doing has generated a lot of ire. It just can't be tolerated and I don't think it will.
- BirAdam 5y ago
  An invasion of Russia would risk the destruction of the entire globe by nuclear weaponry. Ousting Putin and destabilizing Russia would increase the risk of nuclear weaponry making its way to more violent regimes. I do not think either of those is particularly wise.
  - klausjensen 5y ago
    More violent regimes than Russia?? I am not sure they exist right now. Nobody else is threatening nuclear war, while invading a peaceful neighbouring country, slaughtering civilians.
    - smt88 5y ago
      Xi and Kim have killed far more people than Putin has (so far). There may be up to 2 million Uyghurs in camps, and it's not a stretch to assume that at least 10% are going to die of natural causes.
    - vaidhy 5y ago
      Oh!! no.. We will only invade far-off countries who cannot retaliate. Who wants to invade a neighbour, esp. if the refugees come running into our country?? We want our war games played without any consequence to us.
    - ummonk 5y ago
      Ukraine was anything but peaceful. They’ve had neo-Nazi national guard troops fighting communist separatists for 8 years now.
    - leosarev 5y ago
      I understand that you have language barrier and can't, for example, watch Ukrainian TV. Have you ever seen President Poroshenko bragging on national TV about how he will make Donetsk children hide in basement? Have you ever seen Arestovich, current aide to President Zelensky, two years ago, saying on national TV that large scale war with Russia is only possible way for Ukraine? Have you ever seen Ukrainian pupils chanting Moscalaku na gilyaku? Don't take my words for granted, translate this words yourself. I suggest you'll Google that videos before saying Ukrainian government is peaceful next time
- sarma912 5y ago
  - CamperBob2 5y ago
    You're not helping.
    - sarma912 5y ago
      I'm sorry but comments that harken back to ye old Rome are infuriating and it leaves a sour taste in ones mouth. I know this war is bad, but man people need to just own up, otherwise none of us can more forward. Pax Americana is fine, but you don't get to kill people and then turn back and tell me to wave a flag because grand old Europe is having it's "freedom" threatened.
      - CamperBob2 5y ago
        sarma912 5y ago
        CamperBob2 5y ago
        "Pax Americana is fine but you don't get to kill people." I don't think you understand what you're saying.
        sarma912 5y ago
        robocat 5y ago
        I’m also from a former British colony. What have the romans ever done for us? https://yandex.com/search/?text=What+have+the+romans+ever+done+for+us&lr=20873 https://yandex.com/search/?text=What+have+the+romans+ever+do... Perhaps read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- ckp95 5y ago
- kvathupo 5y ago
  Although I occasionally commit the cardinal sin of entertaining political discourse on HN, I think such disturbing statements aren't appropriate for HN. As a fellow American, I encourage you to reassess your comment and consider if it may be guilty of American exceptionalism. I'm particularly confused by the grouping of "Greco-Roman ideals" since Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece were quite different in political structure and philosophy. For the former, Rome definitely wasn't a democracy at times [1], [2], [3]. Even during the Republic, I'm not sure it resembled a democracy as we know it today, but I'll leave it to someone more knowledgeable to answer [4]. Under the assumption, however, that "western civilization" is some unified blob of Enlightenment era thought, you must agree that there has been resistance to such ideas in the US [5]. Such arguments by vagueness remind me of Bezos's management style, which purportedly penalizes such communication approaches: "PowerPoint had become a tool for disguising fuzzy thinking" [6]. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Kingdom [2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principate [3] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominate [4] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_of_the_Roman_Republic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_of_the_Roman_Republic [5] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-intellectualism_in_American_Life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-intellectualism_in_Americ... [6] - https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/11/what-jeff-bezos-wants/598363/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/11/what-je...
- ummonk 5y ago
  Clearly you haven’t interacted with many Indians (particularly regarding the Ukrainian conflict) if you think they’d be on board with your Western Imperialist fantasy.
BirAdam 5y ago
So, by your moral standard, the entire Earth should have isolated the US economy when the US government/military was killing Iraqi and Afghani civilians and destroying non-military targets, right? The entire planet should also be isolating Saudi Arabia for its genocidal war in Yemen? These things are done without the consent of the governed, and these things are often done without even the knowledge of the general public. Economic warfare kills people just as much as bullets and bombs. Poverty is associated with higher death rates and economic warfare creates and worsens poverty.
- dralley 5y ago
  >So, by your moral standard, the entire Earth should have isolated the US economy when the US government/military was killing Iraqi and Afghani civilians and destroying non-military targets, right? The entire planet should also be isolating Saudi Arabia for its genocidal war in Yemen? Probably, yes. That never would have happened, but that would indeed be the logical conclusion. And I'm fine with that.
  - dionian 5y ago
    That's good of you to admit, it means you have a moral consistency here. Interestingly, most of the US politicians supported by the MSM (right and left) were all for the Iraq War and its dubious justifications (Yellowcake), republican or democrat. With a few exceptions such as POTUS 45
    - lalaland1125 5y ago
      > With a few exceptions such as POTUS 45 Trump was for the Iraq war at the time. See https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/29/politics/fact-check-trump-false-claim-opposed-iraq-invasion/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/29/politics/fact-check-trump-fal... Just 6 months before the invasion there is a recording of an interview where he said he was for the war. > "Are you for invading Iraq?" Howard Stern asked him, and Trump answered, "Yeah, I guess so."
- sarma912 5y ago
kubav 5y ago
I do not think that it is that easy. It is more like Russia does not respect international law so they will be cut from world economy as soon as it is possible. Sanctions cannot stop this war unless they will lead to coup or state collapse (both are unlikely in near future). Sanctions put pressure on Russian elites and together with foreign aid also probably will prevent Russian victory in Ukraine. I hope that no one is so stupid to resume business with Russia if they end the war quickly. They need to completely change their mindset from imperialism first. Otherwise it is similar to doing business with North Korea.
ummonk 5y ago
> The deal is simple: when Russia stops slaughtering Ukrainian civilians, the rest of the world will stop isolating their economy. Do you actually believe this is true? Do you think the sanctions and private boycotts will disappear as soon as Russia negotiated a ceasefire?
- smt88 5y ago
  They will disappear as soon as Russia ends its cyberwars and returns to democracy. We saw it happen in Russia in the 90s and we've seen it in other countries.
- chillwaves 5y ago
  Why the fuck would they disappear? Will that bring back the thousands of dead? Russian has committed the crime and they deserve to pay, and so do their defenders.
asabjorn 5y ago
What is actually happening is that Russia has moved onto the Chinese alternative to SWIFT, India&China&Iran&Syria etc are forming an alternative block, and Russia is put into a close relationship with China. This is not a good idea because Russia&Ukrain&Belarus produce 1/3 of all corn, a huge chunk of fertilizer production, and a huge chunk of many commodities essential for the little industry we have left. What will happen if a significant portion of oil is no longer traded in dollars? The dollars value is supported by the large amount of oil trades, and without it the US can't run the deficits its gotten used to. The US has transferred much of the industrial base to China which makes it hard to recover from that. > Russian civilians should consider themselves lucky that the war is only economic for them. Russia is the largest nuclear force in the world, and as Afghanistan and Ukraine shows a conventional war is very resource demanding. If the US went to direct war against russia that would be WWIII, and considering that there are nuclear stakes here that is not a good idea.
MrDisposable 5y ago
> The deal is simple: when Russia stops slaughtering Ukrainian civilians, the rest of the world will stop isolating their economy. The world will not stop isolating Russia while Putin is still in power. And even after he's gone (death from natural causes in 10 to 15 years), it will take another 5 years to partially recover our relationship with the world. The full recovery will never happen.

by smt88 5y ago

BuckRogers 5y ago

smt88 5y ago
I don't think it's controversial that Putin deserves to be ousted by a foreign military as much as anyone. He's certainly much more powerful and dangerous than Stalin or Hitler because he can unilaterally end human life on earth at any moment of any day. > Install anyone else that's not insane, say Navalny. Well, we definitely couldn't install anyone. We'd have to administrate an open election. > I read they have 50% of their total combat brigades in Ukraine now. This is a pretty antiquated assessment of military power. Boots on the ground show only that Russia wants to take Ukraine rather than completely destroy it. They can level the entire country with tactical nukes if they want. > Installing a leader that is open to integrating with the west, along with India, we could encircle China and force them into peaceful deescalation. I think it's more likely that we'd make China very dangerous and hostile, and we'd also re-open the world to the possibility of foreign regime change. If we can decapitate Russia, why couldn't someone say, "Hey, this Biden guy stole the election, we should murder him for the good of the American people!" Biden didn't steal the election, but I think you see where I'm going with it.
- mistrial9 5y ago
  from my understanding of the development of the international oil trade in the 20th century, one of the key advancements by multinational oil in the West was to learn lessons from the British, and do two important things on foreign soil: always back a leader that can hold on with local support; always pay the Nationalist/Military oil interests very well, in addition to making trade rights built-in. Unfortunately, it seems that the "wild west" behavior of the USA in South America, in the wake of the brutal Spanish conquest long ago, made some enemies (that have oil) that are not easy to talk to now.
  - sarma912 5y ago
    Do you have a good book rec around British oil and lessons learnt?
    - BlueTemplar 5y ago
      Oil, Power, and War : A Dark History should be close enough ? https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/42527868-oil-power-and-war https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/42527868-oil-power-and-w...
- BuckRogers 5y ago
  [flagged]
  - xtian 5y ago
    You probably won’t take this advice, but you should really start making peace with the fact that the US is completely incapable of accomplishing any of these warped fantasies of yours. The vast majority of the world is celebrating the self-evident decline of US-centric unipolarity. But those of us who live here have some hard years ahead.
    - kelnos 5y ago
      That's the thing. Even if we were to suggest that the parent's ideas had merit (big "if"), it's pretty laughable to think that the US is capable of doing this properly. Looking back, it's hard to find American successes in this sort of meddling, all the way back to WWII.
      - xtian 5y ago
        True, and the US didn’t even properly defeat the Nazis (see, for instance: Adolf Heusinger, Operation Paperclip, and the many Nazis who happened to find themselves in positions of power in West Germany).
        BuckRogers 5y ago
        [flagged]
  - mistrial9 5y ago
    - BuckRogers 5y ago
      The ideas have to be out there or they'll never get traction. We have major influence recently. The path of the world was changed dramatically with the election of Biden over Trump. I can't imagine how emboldened Putin would be had Trump won. I realize others say everyone was scared of the rich man's son, but I don't see it. He withheld 400 million in military aid from Ukraine, says it all as far as the path we'd be down.
- waffleiron 5y ago
  >He's certainly much more powerful and dangerous than Stalin or Hitler because he can unilaterally end human life on earth at any moment of any day. This is Biden too. Literally can unilaterally start a nuclear war.
  - dTal 5y ago
    True, it's an extremely dangerous situation for nuclear weapons to exist at all. Biden, however, has not threatened to use them. Nor does he rule over his subordinates on pain of extrajudicial murder, so there's a few checks and balances there. Alas the same cannot be said for Putin.
  - smt88 5y ago
    > This is Biden too. Literally can unilaterally start a nuclear war. So what? What does that have to do with anything? Biden has never threatened nuclear war and has nothing to gain from it. Putin has threatened it repeatedly in the last few weeks. Biden is more powerful than Putin, Stalin, or Hitler, but he is not as dangerous.
    - lmm 5y ago
      Biden frequently misspeaks or gets confused, and refuses to take dementia tests, so if he really can unilaterally launch then I'd actually be pretty worried about that. (I think there are other people in the loop in the case of the US president though? Personally I've always been most worried about the Royal Navy's submarine captains, who really do have the ability to launch unilaterally in a very direct way)
    - waffleiron 5y ago
      >So what? What does that have to do with anything? Because my reply was to: >much more powerful and dangerous than Stalin or Hitler because Note the "because", the exact same argument stands for Biden, but we wouldn't argue he's more powerful and dangerous than Stalin or Hitler. I was pointing out the weakness in the "because".
roenxi 5y ago
> ... a fullscale Russian invasion to decapitate their government. > ... encircle China and force them into peaceful deescalation. While you have used the word "peaceful" I suspect a Chinese planner, if by some strange path they read your comment, would start preparing for wild escalations. Because it looks like the strategy is to wait for a moment of weakness then invade. That doesn't sound like a path to peace.
- BuckRogers 5y ago
  Invading China will likely never be a good idea. I'm for peaceful coexistence of nations unless there's a renegade actor like Putin. I think peace comes from democratic systems. Even the USSR was intended to be democratic. There's almost nothing to stop Putin. This nuclear hostage holding he's doing has generated a lot of ire. It just can't be tolerated and I don't think it will.
BirAdam 5y ago
An invasion of Russia would risk the destruction of the entire globe by nuclear weaponry. Ousting Putin and destabilizing Russia would increase the risk of nuclear weaponry making its way to more violent regimes. I do not think either of those is particularly wise.
- klausjensen 5y ago
  More violent regimes than Russia?? I am not sure they exist right now. Nobody else is threatening nuclear war, while invading a peaceful neighbouring country, slaughtering civilians.
  - smt88 5y ago
    Xi and Kim have killed far more people than Putin has (so far). There may be up to 2 million Uyghurs in camps, and it's not a stretch to assume that at least 10% are going to die of natural causes.
  - vaidhy 5y ago
    Oh!! no.. We will only invade far-off countries who cannot retaliate. Who wants to invade a neighbour, esp. if the refugees come running into our country?? We want our war games played without any consequence to us.
  - ummonk 5y ago
    Ukraine was anything but peaceful. They’ve had neo-Nazi national guard troops fighting communist separatists for 8 years now.
  - leosarev 5y ago
    I understand that you have language barrier and can't, for example, watch Ukrainian TV. Have you ever seen President Poroshenko bragging on national TV about how he will make Donetsk children hide in basement? Have you ever seen Arestovich, current aide to President Zelensky, two years ago, saying on national TV that large scale war with Russia is only possible way for Ukraine? Have you ever seen Ukrainian pupils chanting Moscalaku na gilyaku? Don't take my words for granted, translate this words yourself. I suggest you'll Google that videos before saying Ukrainian government is peaceful next time
sarma912 5y ago
- CamperBob2 5y ago
  You're not helping.
  - sarma912 5y ago
    I'm sorry but comments that harken back to ye old Rome are infuriating and it leaves a sour taste in ones mouth. I know this war is bad, but man people need to just own up, otherwise none of us can more forward. Pax Americana is fine, but you don't get to kill people and then turn back and tell me to wave a flag because grand old Europe is having it's "freedom" threatened.
    - CamperBob2 5y ago
      - sarma912 5y ago
        CamperBob2 5y ago
        "Pax Americana is fine but you don't get to kill people." I don't think you understand what you're saying.
        sarma912 5y ago
        robocat 5y ago
        I’m also from a former British colony. What have the romans ever done for us? https://yandex.com/search/?text=What+have+the+romans+ever+done+for+us&lr=20873 https://yandex.com/search/?text=What+have+the+romans+ever+do... Perhaps read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
ckp95 5y ago
kvathupo 5y ago
Although I occasionally commit the cardinal sin of entertaining political discourse on HN, I think such disturbing statements aren't appropriate for HN. As a fellow American, I encourage you to reassess your comment and consider if it may be guilty of American exceptionalism. I'm particularly confused by the grouping of "Greco-Roman ideals" since Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece were quite different in political structure and philosophy. For the former, Rome definitely wasn't a democracy at times [1], [2], [3]. Even during the Republic, I'm not sure it resembled a democracy as we know it today, but I'll leave it to someone more knowledgeable to answer [4]. Under the assumption, however, that "western civilization" is some unified blob of Enlightenment era thought, you must agree that there has been resistance to such ideas in the US [5]. Such arguments by vagueness remind me of Bezos's management style, which purportedly penalizes such communication approaches: "PowerPoint had become a tool for disguising fuzzy thinking" [6]. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Kingdom [2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principate [3] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominate [4] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_of_the_Roman_Republic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_of_the_Roman_Republic [5] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-intellectualism_in_American_Life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-intellectualism_in_Americ... [6] - https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/11/what-jeff-bezos-wants/598363/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/11/what-je...
ummonk 5y ago
Clearly you haven’t interacted with many Indians (particularly regarding the Ukrainian conflict) if you think they’d be on board with your Western Imperialist fantasy.

BirAdam 5y ago

So, by your moral standard, the entire Earth should have isolated the US economy when the US government/military was killing Iraqi and Afghani civilians and destroying non-military targets, right? The entire planet should also be isolating Saudi Arabia for its genocidal war in Yemen? These things are done without the consent of the governed, and these things are often done without even the knowledge of the general public. Economic warfare kills people just as much as bullets and bombs. Poverty is associated with higher death rates and economic warfare creates and worsens poverty.

dralley 5y ago
>So, by your moral standard, the entire Earth should have isolated the US economy when the US government/military was killing Iraqi and Afghani civilians and destroying non-military targets, right? The entire planet should also be isolating Saudi Arabia for its genocidal war in Yemen? Probably, yes. That never would have happened, but that would indeed be the logical conclusion. And I'm fine with that.
- dionian 5y ago
  That's good of you to admit, it means you have a moral consistency here. Interestingly, most of the US politicians supported by the MSM (right and left) were all for the Iraq War and its dubious justifications (Yellowcake), republican or democrat. With a few exceptions such as POTUS 45
  - lalaland1125 5y ago
    > With a few exceptions such as POTUS 45 Trump was for the Iraq war at the time. See https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/29/politics/fact-check-trump-false-claim-opposed-iraq-invasion/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/29/politics/fact-check-trump-fal... Just 6 months before the invasion there is a recording of an interview where he said he was for the war. > "Are you for invading Iraq?" Howard Stern asked him, and Trump answered, "Yeah, I guess so."
sarma912 5y ago

kubav 5y ago

I do not think that it is that easy. It is more like Russia does not respect international law so they will be cut from world economy as soon as it is possible. Sanctions cannot stop this war unless they will lead to coup or state collapse (both are unlikely in near future). Sanctions put pressure on Russian elites and together with foreign aid also probably will prevent Russian victory in Ukraine. I hope that no one is so stupid to resume business with Russia if they end the war quickly. They need to completely change their mindset from imperialism first. Otherwise it is similar to doing business with North Korea.

ummonk 5y ago

> The deal is simple: when Russia stops slaughtering Ukrainian civilians, the rest of the world will stop isolating their economy. Do you actually believe this is true? Do you think the sanctions and private boycotts will disappear as soon as Russia negotiated a ceasefire?

smt88 5y ago
They will disappear as soon as Russia ends its cyberwars and returns to democracy. We saw it happen in Russia in the 90s and we've seen it in other countries.
chillwaves 5y ago
Why the fuck would they disappear? Will that bring back the thousands of dead? Russian has committed the crime and they deserve to pay, and so do their defenders.

asabjorn 5y ago

What is actually happening is that Russia has moved onto the Chinese alternative to SWIFT, India&China&Iran&Syria etc are forming an alternative block, and Russia is put into a close relationship with China. This is not a good idea because Russia&Ukrain&Belarus produce 1/3 of all corn, a huge chunk of fertilizer production, and a huge chunk of many commodities essential for the little industry we have left. What will happen if a significant portion of oil is no longer traded in dollars? The dollars value is supported by the large amount of oil trades, and without it the US can't run the deficits its gotten used to. The US has transferred much of the industrial base to China which makes it hard to recover from that. > Russian civilians should consider themselves lucky that the war is only economic for them. Russia is the largest nuclear force in the world, and as Afghanistan and Ukraine shows a conventional war is very resource demanding. If the US went to direct war against russia that would be WWIII, and considering that there are nuclear stakes here that is not a good idea.

MrDisposable 5y ago

> The deal is simple: when Russia stops slaughtering Ukrainian civilians, the rest of the world will stop isolating their economy. The world will not stop isolating Russia while Putin is still in power. And even after he's gone (death from natural causes in 10 to 15 years), it will take another 5 years to partially recover our relationship with the world. The full recovery will never happen.