Sanction tit-for-tat: Moscow strikes back against US officials

If someone wants to see how devastating the sanctions will be on the public then I would suggest having a look at Iran .Its been heavily sanctioned by the US for a time now .Consider that they sell oil to China and are paid in gold and not the collapsing USD .We haven't seen any horrific stories coming out of there .Well none different then there was before ....peace

The amount of hypocrisy flowing out of the Obama administration over this Ukraine/Crimea situation has left me flabbergasted, when combined with their current track record this term. They seem to completely forget the history of their own country from the past decade and hold the world to a standard they themselves don't follow. They have lost all credibility and legitimacy on the international stage in my eyes, and is why I am now supportive of Russia solely on a matter of principal.

I don't support Russia regarding the annexation of Crimea, but being financially punished by the United States over aggressions and policies they themselves are guilty of - but were never held to account for - is just too much for me to digest. I applaud Putin for taking a stand against the runaway freight train that is America's disastrous international policy.

Someone has to. It has run rampant for far too long.

reply to post by the2ofusr1


You need to read up on the subject, chap - Iran has been suffering under sanctions with shortages of a wide variety of goods, travel bans and asset freezes.. Yes, they may get some payment, but due to the massive restrictions on them obtaining foreign currency, many prices for food, medicines and other goods have rocketed and plunged their economy into dire straits. Why do you think they were so keen to strike a deal in order to get some of them lifted?

HanzHenry
On a serious side, the people of Crimea voted to join Russia.. ffs, that is democracy being spread. The fact that America is against the democratic intentions of Crimea is VERY telling.

You're incredibly naive to think that the vote was free, fair and in any way democratic.

It was organised on the drop of a hat, had no proper monitoring of the voting process (despite claims to the contrary - all the monitors were private citizens, not recognised observers including leaders of Communist parties around Europe and of pro-Russian/expat groups) and also done under the "watchful eye" of thousands of Russian soldiers....

It was also boycotted by a large section of the electorate - only 60% of the population is of Russian stock, the Ukrainian and Tartars all stayed away from the vote.

ArchAngel_X
I don't support Russia regarding the annexation of Crimea, but being financially punished by the United States over aggressions and policies they themselves are guilty of - but were never held to account for - is just too much for me to digest.

I must have missed it in the news, but when did the US annex another countries territory?

reply to post by stumason


I didn't say there were no effects .Looking at the bigger picture I can see the BRIC nations are going to in all likelihood start to address this .Probably the sanctions might end up clearing the way not having to deal with a waste of time on the west .They do have lots of oil so I am sure that will come in handy ...I think as time progresses the US public is going to suffer more because these crook bankers are going to be cut out of the money they wanted to keep stealing from other countries . time will tell ...peace

reply to post by stumason


There are other reports on the subject that contradict your statements .I guess it comes down which sources you want to believe .

reply to post by stumason

I must have missed it in the news, but when did the US annex another countries territory?

Although the United States has not directly annexed any country in recent times (from what I can remember) they are in the business of invading countries for reasons based on lies, blowing the # out of said country, then help in installing a puppet regime which will bow to their demands and award the lucrative rebuilding contracts to certain companies...most of them are associated with the US political structure directly or indirectly...remember Halliburton?

Also, the US supports Israel who is constantly stealing land from the Palestinians...where are the sanctions on Israel? UN resolutions aren't doing squat.

Even though I don't completely agree with Putin's actions, I understand why he did this. How do you think the USA would react if China or Russia were to annex portions of Mexico or Canada along the US border? My guess is that they would be doing the exact same thing that Russia is doing...at least Russia has a semi-logical reason for their actions.

Please understand that the hypothetical scenario I have provided is not very probable but wanted to provide something to compare to help elaborate that part of my point.

stumason
I must have missed it in the news, but when did the US annex another countries territory?

Hawai'i, Puerto Rico, and many of the southern states. Granted these events took place in the 19th century but were annexations nonetheless and a part of the history of the United States.

reply to post by the2ofusr1


I doubt the fact they "have lots of oil" is really that important. Oil/fuel prices, at least here in the UK, have actually fallen over the last few years, despite the west not buying Iranian oil.

Then you have to factor in the increased oil/gas reserves being discovered in Western countries (US with it's fracking has seen a huge drop in the price and other EU nations are following suit - the EU is now entirely self sufficient on LPG for example).

Then you also have to bear in mind that, in the West at least, there are pushes to wean us off the stuff anyway, at least in Europe where hybrid/electric cars not only becoming more advanced, but much more prevalent.

In the UK, for example, we're about to trial a driverless electric "pod" transport system as well and not to mention that, pretty soon, fast charge systems will be built in major cities making internal combustion engines obsolete and even unwelcome in our towns.

The end of the age of Oil is on the horizon - it is a couple of decades off, but it is coming.

the2ofusr1
reply to post by stumason

 

There are other reports on the subject that contradict your statements .I guess it comes down which sources you want to believe .

And I would be very interested to read these. I bet though that they are all entirely Russian sources which can't even get their stories straight anyway - remember how they claimed 500,000 Russian refugees had fled Ukraine and then showed pictures of the Ukraine/Polish border crossing or how the Russians claimed @ the UN to have a letter from the former President asking for help, but it wasn't even signed and when asked later to hand it over, it mysteriously vanished....

Whereas pretty much every other non-Russian source is singing from the same hymn sheet.

Besides, I am not basing my "opinion" on any media report, just the facts as they are. Namely, the vote was organised in a very rushed manner, which is never good for any vote, it was boycotted by a large swathe of the population and was also done under the eyes of a Russian occupational force. None of these things can be denied.

~Lucidity
Yeah, seriously. What Russian things could the U.S. not live without? On the plus side, this is the first thing that made me giggle today.

The only thing I can think of would be the next mission to the ISS...

en.wikipedia.org...

ArchAngel_X

stumason
I must have missed it in the news, but when did the US annex another countries territory?

Hawai'i, Puerto Rico, and many of the southern states. Granted these events took place in the 19th century but were annexations nonetheless and a part of the history of the United States.

Ahhh, right... We're doing that are we?

Different times - it was quite normal back then for every nation capable to annex whatever it pleased.

Perhaps I should have qualified my question - since the foundation of the UN and the signing of the UN Charter, which expressly forbids any nation annexing another's territory, has any Western nation done so?

I didn't think that needed clearing up as I honestly didn't think you'd go back to the 19th century for an example. Reaching a bit, no?

Corruption Exposed
Although the United States has not directly annexed any country in recent times (from what I can remember) they are in the business of invading countries for reasons based on lies, blowing the # out of said country, then help in installing a puppet regime which will bow to their demands and award the lucrative rebuilding contracts to certain companies...most of them are associated with the US political structure directly or indirectly...remember Halliburton?

It's not annexing territory though, is it? A very important distinction Also, most of those countries had questionable regimes and as human beings, we should take it upon ourselves to rid the world of them.. I alsom wouldn't describe either Afghan or Iraq as "puppets" - they are anything but...

Contracts aside (and I agree with you), Iraq is a better place now than it was under Saddam. At least people can walk the streets without fear of Saddam's secret Police whisking them off, or his sons picking girls up at random to rape, abuse and make "vanish".

Corruption Exposed
Also, the US supports Israel who is constantly stealing land from the Palestinians...where are the sanctions on Israel? UN resolutions aren't doing squat.

I agree - check my posting history, I despise Israel and what it does which is entirely consistent with my feelings on Russia - but the UNSC is as impotent with Israel as it was with Russia in that both concern permanent members with veto power. General Assembly resolutions, however, carry no legal weight and you can find many countries who ignore them, not just Israel.

Corruption Exposed
Even though I don't completely agree with Putin's actions, I understand why he did this. How do you think the USA would react if China or Russia were to annex portions of Mexico or Canada along the US border? My guess is that they would be doing the exact same thing that Russia is doing...at least Russia has a semi-logical reason for their actions.

Your analogy doesn't work. Ukraine was not the US invading and Russia desperate to protects it's assets. The President was impeached, twice, by the elected Parliament as per their Constitution and instead of standing down and facing his accusers, he packed his bags, ran off to Russia and sought their protection, who then seized upon the opportunity to take over the Crimea.

Considering how Americans are very protective of their own Constitution, I find it hard to swallow that they would happily defend another nations having it's own one being dumped all over.

Corruption Exposed
Please understand that the hypothetical scenario I have provided is not very probable but wanted to provide something to compare to help elaborate that part of my point.

I understand what you were doing, but I don't think the analogy even comes close as a comparison.

Soloprotocol
Russia and America are just playing out a game. this game is called "let's pretend we hate each other and carve up the world resources between us".

Like the Jets and the Sharks...one controls the east side one the West. they appear to be enemies, but deep down they have it all under control.

you see the same game going on too and the bad brat's are little kim jong and uncle perv is China just waiting for his chance to take you're innocence away

reply to post by stumason


First your claim of Crimea being occupied is a distortion of the fact that Russia has had up to 25,000 troops there before and have a legal right as per the agreement with Ukraine .Following along the same line ,every western media outlet echoed the same line fed to them that Russia had invaded Ukraine ..Totally false . You are correct that Crimea did have a very quick vote and it is easy to understand why .Now consider the present Govt. in Ukraine that was determined by the US ,as per the phone intercept and what they have now for a Govt is not who they voted for because the west wanted to do it quick . They could have let the opposition in the Govt take the reigns until May at which time the previous leader agreed with the demonstrators to have a election .But as the phone call reveled that wouldn't work because they didn't have enough support to win ...Most of this info comes from the web and gleaned from the phone calls that were made public to the web ....no spin ..no Russians either ...from the US horses mouth ETA ans so you think that going for a evining stroll in Iraq sounds good eh Bush- Blair Legacy Continues As - 37 killed in another bloody day for Iraq: In the city of Fallujah, 60km west of the capital, government-led shelling and fighting between soldiers and gunmen killed 15 people and wounded 40, according to Ahmed Shami, the chief medic at the city's main hospital www.aljazeera.com...

reply to post by stumason

I'll grant you I was reaching a bit, if anything to make a point that the behavior was present in US history. The point of my original post in this thread was regarding the hypocritical behavior of the Obama administration in their reaction to Russia's involvement in Crimea, as I see it. And one needs a more recent example? Okay, I'll use the most recent...

The Unites States, leading a coalition of other nations, invades Iraq on concocted charges of manufacturing and harboring weapons of mass destruction. While armed forces are occupying the country, a new constitution is drafted and elections commenced under the direct supervision of the occupying Coalition army. The validity of these elections are never questioned or challenged by the governments of Coalition forces, nor is the United States ever sanctioned by other nations for their activities.

This was less than 10 years ago.

And the Obama administration has the gall to say the Crimea referendum is invalid because Russian troops were occupying the area? And sanctions private Russian citizens for their country's annexation of Crimea?

I cannot even fathom another situation in world political history worthy of comparison, in order to add emphasis to my viewpoint. The dictionary doesn't even have a word beyond the definition of 'hypocrite' that I could effectively apply to this situation.

www.globalresearch.ca...


Even the Americans were not so stupid as to believe that their neo-Nazi friends in Kiev could somehow pry Russia from its naval base in Crimea. Such was never the plan. Rather, Moscow’s response to the overthrow of Ukraine’s elected government was predictable, as was that of the Russian-speaking Crimean majority.

Washington’s strategy is to permanently ratchet up tensions to “new cold war” levels to justify sanctions against Russian energy exports while exploiting America’s own natural gas “surplus” as an enhanced weapon of global hegemony.

~Lucidity
Yeah, seriously. What Russian things could the U.S. not live without? On the plus side, this is the first thing that made me giggle today.

Let's start with NASA contracting the Russian space agency...

victor7
www.globalresearch.ca...


Even the Americans were not so stupid as to believe that their neo-Nazi friends in Kiev could somehow pry Russia from its naval base in Crimea. Such was never the plan. Rather, Moscow’s response to the overthrow of Ukraine’s elected government was predictable, as was that of the Russian-speaking Crimean majority.

Washington’s strategy is to permanently ratchet up tensions to “new cold war” levels to justify sanctions against Russian energy exports while exploiting America’s own natural gas “surplus” as an enhanced weapon of global hegemony.

You're right. But this will only lead to the formation of a stronger "eastern" bloc alliance. Imagine if Chinese production shifted away from the US, towards a country like Russia. All China really needs is better allies to deal with to abandon its relationship with the US.

stumason

HanzHenry
On a serious side, the people of Crimea voted to join Russia.. ffs, that is democracy being spread. The fact that America is against the democratic intentions of Crimea is VERY telling.

You're incredibly naive to think that the vote was free, fair and in any way democratic.

It was organised on the drop of a hat, had no proper monitoring of the voting process (despite claims to the contrary - all the monitors were private citizens, not recognised observers including leaders of Communist parties around Europe and of pro-Russian/expat groups) and also done under the "watchful eye" of thousands of Russian soldiers....

It was also boycotted by a large section of the electorate - only 60% of the population is of Russian stock, the Ukrainian and Tartars all stayed away from the vote.

And all this was less legitimate than the self-imposed coup in Kiev that held no democratic referendum at all?