Ukraine Discussion

[BruceVC]

Its not true because... you have a better grasp on EU politics than the Austrian chancellor? 

 

If the Austrian chancellor truly thinks that the intentions of sanctions are to destroy the Russian economy then yes I do 

[obyknven]

professional Jewish "Ukrainian-Nazi".

 

 

 

 

 

All modern Nazi movements controlled by Zionists  IRL ( blah-blah White race must fight against Muslims, Russians, Asians, Africans and other enemies of ZOG).

\

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[213374U]

Reasons not to block you: your random pic posting sprees sometimes contain hot Eastern women.

 

Reasons to block you: they also sometimes contain disturbing pics of our new lizard overlords.

 

Decisions, decisions...

[BruceVC]

Reasons not to block you: your random pic posting sprees sometimes contain hot Eastern women.

 

Reasons to block you: they also sometimes contain disturbing pics of our new lizard overlords.

 

Decisions, decisions...

 

 

Thats funny

[Gromnir]

Altogether too much is made of the Russian crisis, as if the Russians haven't been through far worse. Serbia is a tiny country but it endured years of western sanctions, while fighting a war, without any of the considerable advantages the Russians have in natural resources, reserves, alternative trade partners - anything really. One adjusts and gets by. Its not even worth discussing.

 

 

Yesterday the Austrian chancellor spoke against a new round of sanctions:

 

 

"I cannot approve of the euphoria of many in the EU over the success of sanctions against Russia. I see absolutely no cause for celebration. I do not know why we should be pleased if the Russian economy collapses," Faymann told the Oesterreich newspaper.

"We would be sawing off the branch we are sitting on if we erected a new wall to Russia's economy," the Social Democrat who heads Austria's coalition government said in remarks released ahead of publication on Sunday.

 

Common sense really. At least someone in the EU has it.

 

you don't even see what you did there, do you? russian crisis is no big deal, but at least one guy in the west isn't happy about russian collapse and he is the one with common sense.

 

...

 

...

 

*shrug* 

 

maybe you will figure it out.

 

regardless, as we noted earlier, few folks is happy about a possible russian collapse, even if such a thing were predictable. am not certain why you honestly believe that folks in the west is happy 'bout russia economic collapse. as noted above, food sanctions by russia were a joke as far as hurting the west, but collapse o' russian economy and the plummeting ruble is cause for concern. example: volkswagen does big business in russia. the plummeting russian currency makes it extreme difficult for russians to buy foreign goods such as german autos. volkswagen has taken a serious hit this year, and the russian crisis is partial the cause. russia attempted to halt/slow the slide of the ruble by raising interest rates to SEVENTEEN freaking percent, but not even that slowed the fall. russians will have considerable difficulty buying many foreign goods for the foreseeable future, and a serious and enduring russian recession is now a forgone conclusion. 

 

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/fault-for-the-rubles-collapse-lies-with-mr-putin/2014/12/16/3f9a8a1a-8548-11e4-a702-fa31ff4ae98e_story.html?tid=gravity_1.0_strip_2

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/12/15/russias-economy-is-doomed-its-that-simple/

 

we prefer wsj as the audience o' that periodical is business folks, so the editorializing is kept to a minimum... in spite o' number's amusement. nevertheless, the washington post articles is helpful... even got graphs for those o' you visual learners who clear ain't getting a clear picture from text explanations.

 

the problem with faymann's comments is that he didn't offer an alternative. he made a general appeal for peace negotiations and a neutral role... the stuff that has been attempted with putin many times in the past. putin predation and intransigence has made so that many in the west is no longer willing to waste efforts on faymann pleas. 

 

nobody other than a few investors who is waiting for crisis to bottom out before they swoop in to pluck the russian carcass is wanting a russian collapse, but putin miscalculations (stupidity) and earlier western enabling has created a situation in which even tougher sanctions may be the only viable option available.  however, we will once again note that Gromnir were never pleased with sanctions as this situation were so complete and utter predictable.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited December 21, 2014 by Gromnir

[obyknven]

Reasons not to block you: your random pic posting sprees sometimes contain hot Eastern women.

 

Reasons to block you: they also sometimes contain disturbing pics of our new lizard overlords.

 

Decisions, decisions...

 

 

[Drowsy Emperor]

 

Altogether too much is made of the Russian crisis, as if the Russians haven't been through far worse. Serbia is a tiny country but it endured years of western sanctions, while fighting a war, without any of the considerable advantages the Russians have in natural resources, reserves, alternative trade partners - anything really. One adjusts and gets by. Its not even worth discussing.

 

 

Yesterday the Austrian chancellor spoke against a new round of sanctions:

 

 

"I cannot approve of the euphoria of many in the EU over the success of sanctions against Russia. I see absolutely no cause for celebration. I do not know why we should be pleased if the Russian economy collapses," Faymann told the Oesterreich newspaper.

"We would be sawing off the branch we are sitting on if we erected a new wall to Russia's economy," the Social Democrat who heads Austria's coalition government said in remarks released ahead of publication on Sunday.

 

Common sense really. At least someone in the EU has it.

 

you don't even see what you did there, do you? russian crisis is no big deal, but at least one guy in the west isn't happy about russian collapse and he is the one with common sense.

 

...

 

...

 

*shrug* 

 

maybe you will figure it out.

 

regardless, as we noted earlier, few folks is happy about a possible russian collapse, even if such a thing were predictable. am not certain why you honestly believe that folks in the west is happy 'bout russia economic collapse. as noted above, food sanctions by russia were a joke as far as hurting the west, but collapse o' russian economy and the plummeting ruble is cause for concern. example: volkswagen does big business in russia. the plummeting russian currency makes it extreme difficult for russians to buy foreign goods such as german autos. volkswagen has taken a serious hit this year, and the russian crisis is partial the cause. russia attempted to halt/slow the slide of the ruble by raising interest rates to SEVENTEEN freaking percent, but not even that slowed the fall. russians will have considerable difficulty buying many foreign goods for the foreseeable future, and a serious and enduring russian recession is now a forgone conclusion. 

 

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/fault-for-the-rubles-collapse-lies-with-mr-putin/2014/12/16/3f9a8a1a-8548-11e4-a702-fa31ff4ae98e_story.html?tid=gravity_1.0_strip_2

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/12/15/russias-economy-is-doomed-its-that-simple/

 

we prefer wsj as the audience o' that periodical is business folks, so the editorializing is kept to a minimum... in spite o' number's amusement. nevertheless, the washington post articles is helpful... even got graphs for those o' you visual learners who clear ain't getting a clear picture from text explanations.

 

the problem with faymann's comments is that he didn't offer an alternative. he made a general appeal for peace negotiations and a neutral role... the stuff that has been attempted with putin many times in the past. putin predation and intransigence has made so that many in the west is no longer willing to waste efforts on faymann pleas. 

 

nobody other than a few investors who is waiting for crisis to bottom out before they swoop in to pluck the russian carcass is wanting a russian collapse, but putin miscalculations (stupidity) and earlier western enabling has created a situation in which even tougher sanctions may be the only viable option available.  however, we will once again note that Gromnir were never pleased with sanctions as this situation were so complete and utter predictable.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

Unlike you I have direct experience with debilitating sanctions and I know for a fact its not a big deal as people make it out to be, and that's in a state that was both very poor and poorly led compared to Russia in 2014. Russia can weather these sanctions for years if necessary, although I expect them to be over much sooner due to pressure from inside the EU.

 

Business circles in Austria have ties to Russia, as do many in Germany and across the EU and they are losing a lot of money in this process. It was their concerns that the Austrian chancellor was voicing in general. Austria in particular can't possibly be happy about losing millions they could have made through South Stream and that's what the chancellor is talking about. 

 

The insistence on "putin's predation" or intransigence means you don't have the basic grasp of the chronology of events that led to the current situation and your insistence of turning a blind eye to the geopolitical aspect of everything that happens in Ukraine and the US/EU role (at this point documented and proven) in it means you're too biased to offer a sensible point of view in this discussion.

 

You fail to grasp that Russian interests in Ukraine are so vital as to trump any economic pressure the west can put in place, as the possibility of losing the effectiveness of their nuclear weapons is more important than all the money in the world, what the common Russian can and cannot buy and any other mundane concern. There is nothing that the sanctions can do that's worse than having Ukraine as a NATO forward base, and the sooner you grasp this basic fact the sooner you can put your thoughts in order and start making sense.

[Gromnir]

you genuine don't read your own posts.

 

*sigh*

 

repeat that faymann's concern's is related to lost revenue AFTER Gromnir mentioned lost revenue in the west has a point?

 

also, tell us that the overriding strategic concerns for russia is greater than any amount o' economic damage (HA!) makes your comments about common sense o' faymann utter ridiculous. faymann noted that the initial sanctions were a matter o' self-defense. those concerns has not changed whether you think they is valid or not... though you did note that faymann has common sense, so...

 

regardless, if the ukraine situation is "so vital as to trump any economic pressure," then clear you is advocating  a tougher stance from the west perspective. even faymann, your common sense guy, sees a genuine self defense concern. you is telling us that no amount o' economic pressure is sufficient to alter putin/russian behavior. so, in point o' fact you is complete refuting faymann position.

 

and we is mighty amused by your dismissal o' the impact o' the current economic crisis on russia. am not thinking you understand just what a desperation move the raising o' interest rate to 17% were, but if you don't get that, then we will have great difficulty explaining just how serious the russian problem is for russians.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited December 21, 2014 by Gromnir

[Malcador]

Would help if we had Russians in Russia here.

[Gromnir]

well, alexei kudrin is russian, and the russians didn't wanna listen to him either.  am thinking that long-term, the best thing for the russian economy would be fewer russians in russia... though that actual is part o' the current problem as the actual folks with money in russia is doing their best rat-on-a-sinking-ship impersonation.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[obyknven]

Western expectations about suffered Russians looks totally crazy for me. Probably it's some sort of Western supermacism "Russian monkeys certainly die without help of godlike Europeans,  The White Man’s Burden blah-blah". 

 
 
Meanwhile IRL
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/viewing-russia-inside#axzz3M3SomPkg

Last week I flew into Moscow, arriving at 4:30 p.m. on Dec. 8. It gets dark in Moscow around that time, and the sun doesn't rise until about 10 a.m. at this time of the year — the so-called Black Days versus White Nights. For anyone used to life closer to the equator, this is unsettling. It is the first sign that you are not only in a foreign country, which I am used to, but also in a foreign environment.
 
I thought the economic problems of Russia would be foremost on people's minds. The plunge of the ruble, the decline in oil prices, a general slowdown in the economy and the effect of Western sanctions all appear in the West to be hammering the Russian economy. Yet this was not the conversation I was having. The decline in the ruble has affected foreign travel plans, but the public has only recently begun feeling the real impact of these factors, particularly through inflation.

If this is so, then the Americans and Europeans are deluding themselves on the effects of sanctions. In general, I personally have little confidence in the use of sanctions. That being said, the Russians gave me another prism to look through. Sanctions reflect European and American thresholds of pain. They are designed to cause pain that the West could not withstand. Applied to others, the effects may vary.

My sense is that the Russians were serious. It would explain why the increased sanctions, plus oil price drops, economic downturns and the rest simply have not caused the erosion of confidence that would be expected. Reliable polling numbers show that President Vladimir Putin is still enormously popular. Whether he remains popular as the decline sets in, and whether the elite being hurt financially are equally sanguine, is another matter. But for me the most important lesson I might have learned in Russia — "might" being the operative term — is that Russians don't respond to economic pressure as Westerners do, and that the idea made famous in a presidential campaign slogan, "It's the economy, stupid," may not apply the same way in Russia.

 

http://vimeo.com/108137376

[Drowsy Emperor]

Actually, the solution to the crisis is very simple. Forcing Poroshenko to the negotiating table to accept the inevitable division by threatening to cut financial help to Ukraine after which both sides could just proclaim their own "victory", tap themselves on the back for "achieving peace" to save face and lift the sanctions and that will be the end of it.

 

This is the only outcome simply because:

1. the Ukrainian army cannot defeat the east as long as it enjoys Russian support

2. Russia will not stop supporting the east at this point regardless of what the west demands. They've invested too much in it already. If push comes to shove the regular Russian army will enter and roll over Ukraine. That was in fact discussed in the Duma a few days ago. That is how much the Russians value Ukraine and those are the lengths they're willing to go.

3. sanctions are not going to change anything

 

So its either the above (a), which means that the US/EU get to keep their puppet government in Kiev or

 

wasting time in the current mutually destructive economic war (b) which could ultimately leave them without a puppet in Kiev

 

or simply full out nuclear war over Ukraine ©, which will leave most of us dead over nothing

[Drowsy Emperor]

And Friedman agrees:

 

Friedman is a political scientist, who founded Stratfor in 1996. He accepts that “Ukraine is of fundamental importance to Russia,” and will continue to be alarmed about further Western encroachment.

“As difficult as this is for Westerners to fathom, Russian history is a tale of buffers. Buffer states save Russia from Western invaders. Russia wants an arrangement that leaves Ukraine at least neutral.”

Sanctions not working

Friedman, who was born in Hungary before emigrating with his parents to the US, says Russia has the ability to emerge from US led sanctions and the recent drop in the ruble due to falling oil prices.

“Russians' strength is that they can endure things that would break other nations. It was also pointed out that they tend to support the government regardless of its competence when Russia feels threatened.”

Friedman believes that the implementation of sanctions will not have the desired effect the US and EU hope. He points to the fact that President Vladimir Putin is “still enormously popular.” Also he has learned that the Russian mindset is different to that of those in the West, partly because the population has become accustomed to political and economic upheaval over the last century.

“The most important lesson I might have learned in Russia — ‘might’ being the operative term — is that Russians don't respond to economic pressure as Westerners do, and that the idea made famous in a presidential campaign slogan, ‘It's the economy, stupid,’ may not apply the same way in Russia.”

[obyknven]

Meanwhile in China

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-12-22/china-offers-russia-help-with-suggestion-of-wider-currency-swap.html

 

China will provide help if needed and is confident Russia can overcome its economic difficulties, Foreign Minister Wang Yi was cited as saying in Bangkok in a Dec. 20 report by Hong Kong-based Phoenix TV. Commerce Minister Gao Hucheng said expanding a currency swap between the two nations and making increased use of yuan for bilateral trade would have the greatest impact in aiding Russia, according to the broadcaster.

  

 

[Rostere]

If anything, the prelude to WWII is an example of foreign powers applying economic pressure on a country which did not not prevent war or serve to significantly hinder a command economy's ability to assemble a massive war machine. Conditions imposed by the Treaty of Versailles were so much harsher than anything that can be applied against Russia today, that they ensured that Germany would be doomed to poverty in Keynes' opinion, and unlike Russia's present state, they were imposed on an economy already exhausted after WWI.

 

No, no, no. The treaty of Versailles is an entirely different story. That was imposed on the Weimar Republic BEFORE they had done anything at all.

 

As for economic pressure and war preparations, I bet the UK and France would have wished in hindsight that they have been more clear already in 1938, when Hitler annexed the Sudetenland region. It is said that Hitler was surprised and upset when the UK and France declared war on him after invading Poland (read this, and also this which is kind of relevant when Russia is shouting about "EU imperialism" when Eastern European countries want to join NATO).

 

 

Taking the lesson that chauvinistic nationalism must be crushed from the interbellum period doesn't really work because chauvinistic nationalism in the Third Reich was the heir of chauvinistic nationalism in the German Empire, and that had been crushed already 20 years before. So much so, that the Second Reich ceased to exist politically, though the economic infrastructure and resources of the country were left intact. WWII can only be understood as a continuation of WWI and that was the inevitable outcome of the incompatible ambitions of newly industrial empires and countries walking in lockstep towards war due to pre-existing alliances. Chauvinistic nationalism was a factor, but not the factor, I think.

 

Which brings me to my other point. When WW1 had been won, the entente power proceeded to humiliate Germany, firstly by not immediately lifting the trade blockade, secondly by the Versailles agreement. In diplomacy, you should wear a smile and have one outstretched hand, and the other one behind your back, holding a sledgehammer and be prepared to switch immediately between the two. The faster you can switch, the better diplomat you are.

 

When you have already won against someone, then it's time for the outstretched hand. After WW1, the entente powers should have initiated something similar to the Marshall Aid for the countries which had suffered the worst, among them obviously Germany. Only at the point where the new regime start invading neighbouring countries at will should the outstretched hand turn into the sledgehammer.

 

 

What did work to destroy the German ability to sustain the war effort was carpet bombing Germany into the stone age. That does indeed qualify as "crushing", but I doubt it's what you're proposing for Russia. A case could be made that Britain and especially France which had, at the time, the most powerful army in the world, should have declared war on Germany as soon as they started violating the Treaty in 1935 and perhaps the war would have been over sooner and with less bloodshed, and from there draw a parallel with current events, but who knows.

 

I don't think that the Versailles treaty was useful for creating lasting peace. But with regards to war, I think that Hitler should have been recognized from the very onset of his rule as a huge threat to the European peace. The UK should have started re-arming in 1933, and war should have been declared perhaps as early as in 1938.

 

 

On the other hand you have Iraq, whose military had effectively been emasculated by 2003 as a result of economic strangulation, and Cuba, which after the fall of the Soviet Union has basically been forced to autarky. Russia isn't Iraq or Cuba, though.

 

Sanctions are very useful when you want to diminish the economic power of a country. Obviously they only work for regime change when you are sanctioning a market liberal economy.

 

When its Russians doing it its chavunistic nationalism but when european heads of state are giving financial and literal support to an armed rebellion (full of extreme right types) then that's what? Spreading freedom and democracy? 

 

There's no denying that there were far-right elements in the recent revolution. But you miss the point about what nationalism is. If, say Germany had supported German nationalists in Ukraine who wanted to make Ukraine a part of Germany, that would be a different thing. Right now, the only nationalists who were given support (by association...) were the ones who wanted Ukraine to be independent. That is the opposite of chauvinistic nationalism, when you want to annex parts of other nations.

 

 

The difference between outright annexing a part of a country (and Crimea has never, historically, belonged to Ukraine) and controlling it by proxy through a puppet government is purely one of form. Russia took Crimea from Ukraine? Boo hoo. The US and the EU took Ukraine from Ukrainians, only they're far too much under the influence of war propaganda to see it now. The end of Yanukovich was the end of Ukrainian independence and came about, ironically, precisely because he wanted to make an independent move and accept Putin's credit.

 

You see the world too much in black and white. Just because you have given somebody your financial support does not make them your puppet. Lenin's entry into Russia was bankrolled by the Germans, that hardly made him their puppet. Financial support is merely an indicator that the interests of two parties align. Take for example the surprising loan from a Russian bank to Le Pen's Front Nationale. It hardly makes her Putin's puppet, but it's a strong indicator their interests align.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again, Yanukovich was overthrown because he was completely corrupt. The fact that the opposition consisted in part of EU-friendly groups was merely a coincidence. Of course they were supported by the US, but if you think that is a problem you should also think about how Yanokovich was supported by Russia. Every party has their allegiances.

 

Putin should have condemned Yanukovich, continued friendship with Ukraine, and just waited for the next elections. The pattern of voting in Ukraine seems to oscillate between Russian and Ukrainian-aligned leaders. (Opinion polls suggest that the recent trend of the EU becoming more popular in Ukraine began only in 2012 - before that, there was a negative trend) What really matters is the hearts and minds of the Ukrainians. Instead Putin opted to steal what he could get his little grubby fingers on, alienating all Ukrainians in the process.

 

 

The US and the EU took Ukraine from Ukrainians

 

Wow, this is just so stupid I almost can't believe you wrote it.

 

 

I fail to see how Russia's nationalism in their own "back yard" is worse than EU's/US's colonialism in eastern europe.

 

There is no such thing as EU colonialism. Who has been forced to join the EU? Same goes for NATO. I would like to see you in Estonia, talking to people and saying that they are a "colony" of the EU and that they would be more prosperous and enjoy more freedom as a Russian republic.

 

 

What WW1 has taught us is that aggressive expansion with disregard for the interests of large countries will lead to them using aggressive measures to protect those same interests (European empires > Germany WW1, US> Japan WW2). What WW2 has taught us is that attempting to crush and humiliate a major player in world politics will lead to even worse backlash than the first time around. 

Was critical thinking at such a premium that you had to take at face value the shallow explanations of high school history classes?

 

WW1 was caused by Austo-Hungarian chauvinistic imperialism, when they tried to incorporate Serbia into their empire. WW2 was caused by Germany and the Soviet Union invading Poland in the same way. Both (especially the latter) look hauntingly similar to what Russia is doing in Ukraine and Georgia today.

 

Remember that before the invasion of Poland, this happened. Even though we agree that Crimea is more Russian than Ukrainian, the idea of using force to reach your goals is dangerous. If history is any lesson, the world must now react in the most powerful way possible before Putin decides that the entirety of Ukraine is really Russian.

 

 

Finally, the point of the sanctions is to pressure the mondialist (as opposed to patriotic) and amoral financial elite in Russia. To ruin their business is a way to undermine Putin's support until they flip and start scheming to bring him down. They don't care who is in power (unlike the populace) and would probably like another Yeltsin best whose door they used to kick in whenever they needed anything.

 

Well, you forget the purpose of sanctions to drain the Russian economy so that they can't afford the current level of militarization, which is the most important point. I'm sure Obama has though of the path to regime change you describe, but that would be a long shot. I don't think anyone with knowledge of history thinks regime change is a viable goal for sanctions in this case. For that to be viable, private companies must be far more independent and more powerful than they are in Russia.

 

Again, you look at the world in black/white. I'm sure the rest of the world is happy with a Russian leader which does not invade foreign countries at will... Which is just what we require of an American leader, right?

[obyknven]

http://youtu.be/4j1QpuXCJ80

 

 

http://vimeo.com/111793879

 

 

[213374U]

No, no, no. The treaty of Versailles is an entirely different story. That was imposed on the Weimar Republic BEFORE they had done anything at all.

 

 

I was referring specifically to how the economic effect of the Treaty of Versailles, while being devastating both on paper (per Keynes) and in practice (huge unemployment, hyperinflation, large budget deficit), did not prevent Germany from rearming and rising to challenge all the major European powers (+ the US) 20 years later. Thus casting doubt on the usefulness of economic pressure as a means to strip the material means to wage war from a country. Russia has more in common with Germany than with Iraq or Cuba.

 

If sanctions don't seem to be hurting Putin's popularity and they don't seriously hinder his ability to wage war... what do they accomplish?

Edited December 25, 2014 by 213374U

[Walsingham]

The only time I've ever seen sanctions do any bloody good is South Africa.

 

Russia seems set on the same course as Zimbabwe. Tinpot comedy halfwit takes charge, and ****s his country into a wooden ****house, resulting merely in the ordinary people being too poor to do squat about him.

 

The main reason for sanctions is that the most powerful countries in the World will do almost anything rather than declare war.

 

I honestly don't know if that's really really cool, or freakishly cowardly.

[obyknven]

We have fun from this in difference with greatest Brits. Actually Westlings chose wrong time for sanctions, we too busy by celebrating of New Year (everyone begin partying 1 week ago and these Bacchic orgies must be ended only after 11 January, sorry, we too busy now ). Also western sanctions considered in Russia as minor problem in comparison with everyday life (sanctions against Baator looks like waste of time for me, nobody can impress Baatezu by this way).

But main reason why Russians stay calm is Black market. And Westlings can't ban Black Market more than this is banned in present time

 

 

http://www.deepdotweb.co/2014/12/18/russia-emerging-black-market-bitcoin/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-chrismer/real-punishment-get-rid-o_b_5694572.html

 

 

 In order to effectively implement sanctions against Russia as punishment for its destabilizing actions in Ukraine, the West must first address Russian black markets through tougher enforcement of transparency standards within their own borders and beyond. 

 

[Agiel]

...and Yes, Minister stays relevant to this day:

 

[Malcador]

Indeed, first they fiddle with East Ukraine, next they will have tanks on the Channel.

[Rostere]

I was referring specifically to how the economic effect of the Treaty of Versailles, while being devastating both on paper (per Keynes) and in practice (huge unemployment, hyperinflation, large budget deficit), did not prevent Germany from rearming and rising to challenge all the major European powers (+ the US) 20 years later. Thus casting doubt on the usefulness of economic pressure as a means to strip the material means to wage war from a country. Russia has more in common with Germany than with Iraq or Cuba.

 

First a conceptual error in your thinking: You can dodge the effects of war reparations simply by not paying them, while sanctions are impossible to dodge for the party which is being subjected to them. For sanctions not to work, you require collaboration between the object of sanctions and the sanctioning agent. War reparations require good relations between the involved countries. So war reparations and sanctions are very different things - apples and oranges.

 

Secondly, a historical misunderstanding on your part (the manifestation of the above error): Germany stopped paying war reparations in 1931. So during the entire time that Germany were increasing militarization (under Hitler) they were not subjected to a penny of war reparations. There is zero doubt that if they would have paid war reparations, they would have had less money to pay for tanks. That is a question of simple mathematics. I also think there is no doubt that Germany's war reparations did wreck the German economy, during the time that they were actually being paid.

 

Thirdly, a difference between current Russia and Germany: the Germany which actually paid the war reparations was a completely different Germany to the Germany which had participated in the war. It makes no sense to punish a different entity. The Weimar Republic should have been given support, not punishment. This is a typical case of bad diplomacy. On the other hand, the Russia which is guilty of military aggression in Ukraine is the same as today's Russia.

 

 

If sanctions don't seem to be hurting Putin's popularity and they don't seriously hinder his ability to wage war... what do they accomplish?

 

Now, as I've stated before I believe the Versailles treaty was extremely harmful for world peace, the way it forced the German people to collectively take the blame for the entire war. Germany was hardly a democracy at the time, as was Austria-Hungary, the real instigator of the war. I think punishing the new German democracy which rose out of WW1 Germany was the exact opposite to what should have been done.

 

Sanctions are very likely not affecting Putin's popularity in either direction. But in the end, there will be less money to buy arms for. That is why sanctions is a normal response for a larger economy with a low level of militarization (the EU) against aggression from a small economy with a higher level of militarization (Russia).

[obyknven]

Meanwhile Square Enix do want doing business in "isolated" Russia.

 

 

 

[Russia and Brazil] are also home to many talented developers, which are justifications to consider Russia in many options, including sourcing for development studios,” company president Yosuke Matsuda said. “In brief, the Company is expected to reach out to wider regions in its efforts to expand the business outside of the domestic market.”

 

Сapitalism  .

[Walsingham]

Square Enix are doing business in Russia?

 

Call off the sanctions!

 

~~

 

The sanctions are designed to hurt Putin's extensive crony empire of business interests. Of which software is a bit marginal.

[Rostere]

Okay, first some articles from the weird side of the Internet, just so you know the stuff other people are being subjected to:

 

Pravda: USA harbors plans to decapitate Russia within minutes

 

"Centre for Research on Globalization": Russia is Selling Oil and Gas in Exchange for Physical Gold

 

With the notable exception that Russia would do well to trade as little as possible in dollars (which makes perfect sense for Russia to do if they want to hurt the US), it's pretty much all crackpotism.

 

Let's talk about this. It's extraordinarily stupid - I'm actually surprised I'm surprised at the stupidity of some of the reactions. But really. Russian troops annex part of Ukraine, and Russia gives direct military support to rebels in other parts. And then, Russia is surprised and angry that Ukraine wants to join NATO?

 

I mean, think about it. What if you were Ukraine, and was being subjected to this by your neighbour. You would stand first in line to join the "League of Fruitcakes", the "Conspiracy of the Dunces" or whatever organization would serve as a defensive alliance.

 

(Of course Ukraine will not be allowed to join NATO (they will likely want to avoid another Georgia) until the situation looks much more stable.)

 

All that was required was the overthrowing of a completely corrupt leader, which happened to be slightly more leaning towards Russia than to the EU. Then Russia immediately proceeded to annex Crimea and give their military support to other separatists. Russia has managed to completely alienate Ukraine's population, and annex a crucial province where people could be counted on to vote for Russian-aligned leaders, thus changing Ukraine's demographics to give certain victories for the EU-aligned faction in the future. Good job Poot-Poot, you've been played like a mandolin. Maybe later you will realize that more important than scraps of land changing ownership is the hearts and minds of people.