It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Putin Pausing as Russia Volatility Kills Trade-to-Invest

page: 1
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 11:59 PM
link   
Putin Pausing as Russia Volatility Kills Trade-to-Invest



Vladimir Putin’s territorial
ambitions are bumping up against financial markets.
As the Russian president plots his next move on Ukraine, investors are giving his inner circle pause for thought. Since Putin annexed Crimea in March in the teeth of international outrage, Russian stocks have become the most volatile since 2009. Swings in the ruble against the euro are now the most extreme on record while expectations for fluctuations in the currency against its emerging-market peers are at the highest in two years.

That’s making investors more reluctant to gamble on a country that is already close to a recession and dependent on natural resources to lead economic growth. While Putin is motivated more by the desire to assert his nation’s power in the world, invading eastern Ukraine would have provoked harsher international sanctions and risked accelerating the flow of money out of Russia.

“We got to the point where the market speaks and politicians are forced to listen and adjust,” Mansur Mammadov, a money manager at Kazimir Partners Ltd. in Moscow, which oversees $300 million in emerging-market equities, said by phone on May 29. “The volatility was like a tsunami and it would be just logical to assume that it made the politicians realize the cost of Russian expansion in Ukraine was too much for the slowing economy.”

A gauge of price swings in Russian stocks jumped to a more than four-year high compared to shares of developing nations. Historical volatility for the benchmark Micex index (INDEXCF) in Moscow reached 29.7 percent on May 30, almost three times the level of the MSCI Emerging Markets Index and up from 12.7 percent at the end of February, based on three-month data compiled by Bloomberg.



Some key points -

Ruble Swings -

* - currency’s three-month historical volatility rose to 11.3 percent from 7 percent at the end of 2013, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. That compares with 4.4 percent for the euro as the gap between the two gauges reached 6.92 percentage points on May 30, the widest since Europe’s common currency was introduced in 1999.




Capital Flight -

The increased volatility threatens to intensify the slide in the economy.
* - Russia faces stagnation this year
* - The probability of a recession in the next 12 months is 50 percent
* - Gross domestic product grew 0.9 percent in the first quarter from the same period of 2013, the slowest pace in a year
* - Fixed-capital investment slumped for a fourth month in April while inflation jumped to an 11-month high of 7.3 percent as the ruble’s slide drove up the cost of imports.
* - The country posted capital outflows of about $55 billion in the first four months of the year, approaching the $63 billion lost in all of 2013




’No Benefit’ -

Russia said it respects the outcome and is ready to negotiate with the new leader. A pullback of troops from the Ukrainian border continued, with the U.S. reporting that the majority of forces had been withdrawn as of May 29.

“Putin very clearly got the signal that sanctions had sent,” Vadim Bit-Avragim, who helps oversee about $4.1 billion at Kapital Asset Management LLC in Moscow, said by phone last week. “He realized that it’s better not to aggravate the rest of the world and turn the country into a pariah and lead it to isolation. This won’t benefit him at all.”




Market Gains -

The reduced threat of tougher sanctions has helped Russian assets rebound to levels seen before Putin’s incursion into Crimea. The Micex stock index had its best month since 2011, gaining 9.7 percent in May and leaving it 0.9 percent below its Feb. 28 level. The ruble advanced 2.2 percent against the dollar in the period after plunging 7.8 percent in the first four months of the year. It has advanced 2.8 percent since the end of February.

Russia’s financial and energy resources have helped contain losses during the crisis. The country’s $468 billion of international reserves are the fifth highest in the world. The country sought to strengthen its status as the world’s largest energy exporter by signing a long-term gas-supply deal with China last month that will reduce its dependence on buyers in the EU.

In what Putin called an “epochal event” capping more than a decade of negotiations, state-run energy exporter OAO Gazprom signed the agreement on May 21 to supply fuel to China for 30 years.

At the same time, Putin is more reliant on global markets than his Soviet predecessors ever were.




Global Bonds -

Russia has been turning to international debt markets since its default on domestic debt in 1998. Companies raised $42.5 billion through foreign-currency bond sales last year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The Ukraine conflict halted that borrowing. Not a single Russian company has sold foreign-currency bonds since March, leaving offerings this year at just $6.4 billion.

* - Currency traders and analysts are showing no confidence in the ruble’s rebound. The currency will slump about 3.9 percent versus the dollar by September
* - “Eastern Ukraine became an expensive idea and it seems Russia doesn’t want it anymore,” Ilya Kravets, the New York-based director of investment research at Daniloff Capital LLC, said in a May 30 phone interview. “There would be serious sanctions if Russia were to annex more territories from Ukraine, and the market reaction to that would be even more severe.”


Click link for remainder / full info from article.

As has been stated time and again... The Russian invasion of Ukraine and annexation of Ukrainian territory has and still is taking its toll. Putin's decision to back of is based on preservation of the Russian economy. Their reliance on its energy sector to pay for the things Putin wants is forcing Russia into a position of reliance on foreign interests and poses a threat to Russia's national security should those external purchasers move their business elsewhere - IE im referring to China and the EU/West looking elsewhere for energy needs.

Looking at the economy question Putin has very much made the same mistake that Hitler did. They both came to power after years of massive economic problems. New policies are put into place which show positive results. Those positive results are then used to justify foreign excursions. They failed to take into account how shaky the economic condition was which soon bit both leaders in the ass.

Currently the only thing Putin seems to be understanding is to quit while he is ahead (which he's not), something Hitler failed to do. The outflow of capital investment, the money its going to take to bring Crimea "into the Russian fold", trying to find new sources of water, electricity and transportation links will compound the issues, the damage Russia has done to its image in the world and how that viewpoint will affect current and future investment / joint investment projects (China pulling out of the Crimea projects it agreed to with Ukraine).

Putin lost more than he gained and this is only the beginning.




posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 03:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Very interesting read thank you. I do wonder though as Putin is a very long standing leader whether he would n ot have factored into his activities the reaction of the Western world to his actions. After all, he has 'rebounded back to where he was since the shaking of his country's finances by the financial elite.

I suspect that with China and her other allies there will be plenty of trade to be had and of course an emerging huge market that the US$, Euro and Sterling will have little say over for that.

I do think that to write Russia off may be a mistake in that history shows she is one of the most innovative country's in the world and allied with the Chinese has her hands on technology that equally matches the USA's.

Technology today is moving so fast that unless a country is at the forefront investment can be almost a thing of the past so. It has shown Putin the hands of the Financial elite and what their tactics will be again if felt needed, so I wonder whether Russia might not be more able to sidestep the West's efforts if it wishes to in the future. Iran is a country that has had hard sanctions and these have only really impacted on its families who probably now hate the West even more for the hardship inflicted on their lives, as they won't see their right to nuclear power as something they have done wrong, only been excluded from. There is an awful lot of dead wood in the elite, its financers and rulers of the West and it will be interesting once their aged tentackles have been prized off what we will all be left with.



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 04:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Shiloh7
Im not writing Russia / Putin off. What I am saying is they created a scenario that effectively set Russia back both politically / world stage and economically.

Of course Russia can rebound and eventually will however I think the recovery time frame has been pushed back 3-5 years.

As for Putin looking at all possibilities I think he ignored one possibility possibly because he didn't think it could happen. Everything Putin has done in Ukraine was mapped out however when it kicked off with Crimea the response by Ukraine might have thrown a wrench in the gears.

In Georgia their government engaged Russia militarily and lost. In Ukraine his justifications were based on a predictable reaction that he assumed would have occurred. He thought Ukraine would engage them militarily instead of doing what they did.

A military response by Ukraine would have set the stage for Russia to move beyond Crimea and push into the 2 other regions involved. When Ukraine did not fight back it put Putin in a pickle, forcing him to modify the plan. Plan B was constantly calling for elections in the 2 areas, which Ukraine kept refusing. That would have set the stage again for Russia to move in.

When Ukraine, out of the blue, agreed to elections Putin once again had the carpet yanked out from under him. It removed the argument that Ukraine treats the ethnic Russians differently in those areas. He then moved on to the federal government idea for Ukraine. Putin's inconsistencies created the public image issue where Lavrov and Churkin were giving statements that were opposite of what Putin was saying.

Putin banked on Germany now going along with sanctions.

When sanctions occurred it again forced Russia to modify its plans. instead of a quick intervention / annexation of those parts of Ukraine Putin found himself arguing with the West / EU and the UN over his actions / justifications in Ukraine, the annexation of Crimea, while the Russian economy was taking hits Putin did not think would occur.

Annexation of Crimea
Major policy shift by NATO
United Nations condemnation / statement
Loss of exports (goods / services / oil) to Europe
Investments being pulled out of Russia
Crimea infrastructure improvements
Forced to sell China oil at a price lower than Gazprom wanted.

Essentially a domino affect.

All because of Ukraine's unexpected response to Putin's game plan. I honestly believe Putin thought Ukraine would engage militarily.

Putin managed to do nothing but cause a response from the EU / West into the very actions he railed against. Russia could not survive another cold war and I think that's why we see Putin constantly noting there is not a new cold war occurring.


edit on 2-6-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 04:29 AM
link   
For once I hear a distinct lack of heel-clicking and "Heil Putins". It was only a matter of time before the teeth of the sanctions' bite started to draw blood. Money talks. IMO Putin made an irreversible error in judgment. The russian economy will suffer for many years. The ruble may never regain stabilization.



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 04:44 AM
link   
To be fair it's not just Russia who created this mess.

WIth giving the option to let Ukraine join the NATO&the EU, this created the split up in Ukraine where you have 2 sides, that is the main reason and who's behind that? Russia before they secured Crimea since it's of great security/military importance, already knew long before this was in the making.

They know from experience they are on their own, that so called friends (US/EU (mainly the US), will try to stop Russian economical progress/power. Which already started with the goal of the US trying to build a nuclear missile defence system in country's in Europe which are close to Russia.
The EU being played as as expected doing the US wishes & having no clue the EU will get hurt. Better be friends with your neighbour (Russia >which supplies big portion of EU energy + other trade) then being good friends with someone far far away (the US which only cares about her own interest/power).
Of course Russia isn't holy but they never wanted this but they knew this would be the result when giving Ukraine the option joining NATO/EU > cival war and probaly a collapse of Ukraine economic. SO Russia now is trying to get off the Dollar controlled international market and take care of herself with getting strong ties with the EAST economical which of course will hurt first but probaly the only option for Russia now..

That said you better have posted this in the main Ukraine topic.

And of course everyone his own belief about the ''truth''.
edit on 2-6-2014 by Plugin because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 04:46 AM
link   


The Russian invasion of Ukraine and annexation of Ukrainian territory


I think we already have a thread for that hoax thats on about page 650 just now but dealing with the markets you say



That’s making investors more reluctant to gamble on a country that is already close to a recession and dependent on natural resources to lead economic growth


natural resources are better than bits of paper to base ones future on when said markets are fixed and close to crashing the $1000tr credit default swap fiat market. Gas / Oil / Gold / Silver are all good when the USA has banks that are above the law and the last I knew was Russia did not have a tenth of the debt that the USA has.

Europe is not doing any better with all its regulations and the only one holding the show togeather are the germans and most of them now want out and are not happy with the USA for starting trouble in the Ukraine.

Whats upsetting both Russia and China is that the fiat $USD they hold are being printed at an ever faster rate and with recessions in other parts of the world the chances to export more goods are being cut.



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 04:52 AM
link   
I would imagine that any creative economist could take parts of the whole and make the numbers say what you want them to . We see it all the time with reports from our own Govt's. I read this cute tale

Two Keynesian economists, John Maynard Keynes and Paul Krugman, were walking down the street one day when they passed two large piles of dog #.

Keynes said to Krugman, "I'll pay you $20,000 to eat one of those piles of #." Krugman agrees and chooses one of the piles and eats it. Keynes pays him his $20,000.

Then Krugman, feeling richer, says, "I'll pay you $20,000 to eat the other pile of #." Keynes, feeling bad about the money he lost says okay, and eats the #. Krugman pays him the $20,000.

They resume walking down the street.

After a while, Krugman says, "You know, I don't feel very good. We both have the same amount of money as when we started. The only difference is we've both eaten #."

Keynes says: "Ah, but you're ignoring the fact that we've increased the GDP by $40,000.


Word has it that bildibergers are scared what the China/Russia partnership will do to the UDS .There are a lot of smaller countries moving away from the USD .Russia and China may have some struggles to overcome but they are must be ready to do it .Time will tell and I don't know how it might effect us in the west .It looks sad from here now .



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 05:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Plugin

WIth giving the option to let Ukraine join the NATO&the EU, this created the split up in Ukraine where you have 2 sides, that is the main reason and who's behind that? Russia before they secured Crimea since it's of great security/military importance, already knew long before this was in the making.


* - NATO - Ukraine could have joined back in 2010 and opted not to.
* - If Russia was so concerned with what was going on in Kiev why did they invade Crimea?
* - Russia invaded Ukraine, not the EU / NATO.




originally posted by: Plugin
They know from experience they are on their own, that so called friends (US/EU (mainly the US), will try to stop Russian economical progress/power.

An economically strong Russia, hell any country, is a positive and not a negative.
What has the US done to stop Russian progress/power? I see this comment a lot yet no one can explain it.



originally posted by: Plugin
Which already started with the goal of the US trying to build a nuclear missile defence system in country's in Europe which are close to Russia.

An argument made by some who are not familiar with the entire picture. The defense shield we have cannot counter the Russian nuclear arsenal. Secondly the shield has a limited range meaning the shield cannot be applied to the bulk of Russian nukes / ICBM's.

Finally, and this is something everyone overlooks, is the ABM treaty signed by the US and Soviet Union. That treaty allowed the US and the Soviet Union to build 1 missile defense complex each. When the Soviet Union collapsed the treaty was continued with the individual former SSR's and Russia.

The US pulled out of the treaty in 2002 per treaty stipulations.

The NMD argument by Russia seems hypocritical, or at the very least one sided. Russia has made it clear what its military does in its own country is their own business and no one else's. That is a 2 way street which makes it all the more bizarre when Russia demands answers / explanations about other nations / alliances military movements while refusing the same.




originally posted by: Plugin
The EU being played as as expected doing the US wishes.

Maybe the EU took the lead position since they have more economic ties with Russia than the US does. Maybe they took lead because its occurring in Europe.

There is nothing in our agreements that requires the US to take the lead in any scenario. People are fond of complaining about the US taking unilateral action. When we go through allies people complain about manipulation. The issue was taken to the UN after direct talk between the EU / West and Russia failed to reach an understanding.

Why would Europe not take the lead?




originally posted by: Plugin
Of course Russia isn't holy but they never wanted this but they knew this would be the result when giving Ukraine the option joining NATO/EU > cival war and probaly a collapse of Ukraine economic.

Respectfully I don't agree with this at all. Having an option to do something and doing something are not the same. Russia had the option to join NATO at one point and declined, just as Ukraine did in 2010.

Everything we have seen from Russia relating to Ukraine looks planned out to me.




originally posted by: Plugin
That said you better have posted this in the main Ukraine topic.

And of course everyone his own belief about the ''truth''.

How do I take that comment(Ukraine topic)? A threat? request?
I posted it in the current events forum.

As for truth there is side A, there is side B and somewhere in the middle is C and the truth.

Some questions -
* - Where is Yanukovych?
* - Why did Putin recognize the new government in Ukraine as valid / lawful?
* - How can Putin state Yanukovych is the legitimate leader and pushed to reinstate him while at the same time he is recognizing the new government?
* - How can Putin claim he is protecting Ethnic Russians when he stopped in Crimea? Are Crimean Russians more important than those in the other 2 regions in Ukraine.
* - Did Russia bother to try and rally support from her allies to place sanctions on the EU members and the US / West / NATO? Why not?

Putin used the removal of Yanukovych to pull a land grab during the internal chaos. Had there been no internal chaos I doubt Russia would have gone down this road. Had Putin not underestimated Ukraine Russia might have pulled this off with little damage to their economy.

Instead in turned into operation out of the frying pan.



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 05:17 AM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1

The fiat US$ does not need to be backed by gold/silver/oil when it's backed by the gun and the threat of attack but that little game is coming to an end and the USA can keep going on about all out war and nukes being MAD but the record is geting old and can be played both ways.

As i see it the USA is pissing so many people off around the world that I won't know if a mini nuke going off in the USA is an attack or one of the usual false flags like 9/11.

The longer this conflict goes on the more it looks like my theory about Putin doing a deal with the USA to push oil prices up is true but we will see.



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 05:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

You've made a long repetitive tirade full of racist hatred toward Russians.

Here's something a bit simpler:

You support a fascist regime in bankrupt, gas-thieving Ukraine.

Simple. Should be ashamed.



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 05:21 AM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1


Putin’s Shift on Ukraine Result of His Visit to Beijing, Kazan Editor Says



Staunton, May 24 – Vladimir Putin began pulling Russian forces back from the Ukrainian border and distancing himself from the secessionists in east Ukraine after his visit to Beijing convinced him that China, however useful tactically, is a long-term threat to Russia and that Moscow needs the West as a counterbalance to Chinese power, according to Ra# Akhmetov.



In the lead article in the current issue of Zvezda Povolzhya, the Kazan editor argues that Putin has begun to recognize that Russia is not quite as much a Eurasian country as he has suggested and that “an alliance with China” will lead to “the Sinification” of Russia and “the slow liquidation of Russian civilization” (no. 18 (698), May 22-28, 2014, p. 1).

Indeed, Akhmetov suggests, given the gas price concessions he had to make to China and the expansion of the Chinese presence in Russia he had to agree to, Putin may now wish he had purchased Crimea from Ukraine rather than seized it because in that event he would not have alienated Europe and the United States nearly as much.

Putin’s plan to “re-orient” the Russian economy away from Europe toward China was “condemned to failure from the outset,” the Kazan editor says, because it quickly became obvious during the Kremlin leader’s visit to the Chinese capital that “Russia is not Eurasia, but rather a completely European country.”

China is, Ahmetov says Putin became aware during his visit, “too distinctive and alien for the Russian world.” If Russians are now upset by the arrival of ten million gastarbeiters from Central Asia, many of whom were already adapted to Russia beforehand, “what will happen when ten million Chinese” or even more – “arrive in the course of the next few decades?”



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 05:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Blister
a reply to: Xcathdra

You've made a long repetitive tirade full of racist hatred toward Russians.

Here's something a bit simpler:

You support a fascist regime in bankrupt, gas-thieving Ukraine.

Simple. Should be ashamed.



Pot meet kettle

As I have pointed out my Issues are with the Russian government, not her people so stop putting words in others peoples mouth.

Secondly at what point will you actually engage in these types of threads in a productive manner? Instead of refuting the info you go for the personal attack while being hypocritical in the process.

As an example your hate filled / racist tirade against the Ukraine government.

Certainly you can see the irony in your statement.

Now - do you have anything to add to the thread?

Maybe facts to refute the info in the OP?



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 05:31 AM
link   
a reply to: VirusGuard

So Russia and China aren't imposing a "new order" currency by threat of attack?

Do you follow the news? Namely
* - Chinas actions in the Pacific towards her neighbors?
* - Russia's actions in East Europe?

As for the feeling countries have towards the US -
If It were that bad why have those nations not placed sanctions on the US?
Why have those nations not taken the US to task on Ukraine?

Russia's economic issues are a result of Putin's actions in Ukraine.



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 05:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

* - NATO - Ukraine could have joined back in 2010 and opted not to.
* - If Russia was so concerned with what was going on in Kiev why did they invade Crimea?
* - Russia invaded Ukraine, not the EU / NATO.


In leaked wikileaks cables you can read: /plusd/cables/08MOSCOW265_a.html ( < put wikileaks . org before the ''/" ! impossible to link here!?) that Russia was full aware of the results when Ukraine giving the option joining NATO.
Doesn't matter if it would have happened in 2010 or in 2016.
But fact is with previous government in Ukraine (with which the US messed with ans so basicly replaced it!, just some proof of that here:
www.bbc.com...

So after it was possible to let the Ukraine join NATO but it went in total chaos and probaly won't succeed since when the country goes broke, nobody wants Ukraine. Still the game can be played .. (to weak Russia and Europe, US is on her last legs (economical) and just goes in full scale crazy mode IMO).


Russia did invade (but without shooting 1 bullet!) Crimea (not the whole Ukraine), to secure it, the whole Ukraine is total chaos now! but at least Russia secured important part which is very important for Russia's defence/fleet.




An economically strong Russia, hell any country, is a positive and not a negative.
What has the US done to stop Russian progress/power? I see this comment a lot yet no one can explain it.


Sure its positive in essense but you really think the US want a strong Russia again where they even may compete military? we all know the previous cold war, a power game.
Iraq has quit with dollar (wanted to use euro's), Libya as well (1 of the reasons for war).
The US wants to control the energy market (one world order they often call it!), even supplying the EU instead of Russia with gas/oil.
With making other country's weaker other country's see america as strong and safe, a place to buy debts! so they can maintain low interest rates on her debts!

Have no time to respond on the rest for now..
edit on 2-6-2014 by Plugin because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-6-2014 by Plugin because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 05:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

First, by criticising the Russian Federal government, you are by default, criticising the collective people of Russia. I call that as I see it, and after reading all your repetitive claims and hyperbole on matters related to anything-Russia, that is essentially encouragement to hate and physically attack Russia and Russians.

Secondly, I do not have the time to rebut all the cr*p you espouse in these hate-themed threads and posts. How you have the time to post these things is amazing... I have to work and that leaves me little time. You? I suspect that you are paid to write these pseudo-fascist-friendly tracts. I assume you are European, from a former eastern-bloc state, that is now split? Correct me if I am wrong on that, and I may be, but spouting-off this garbage full-time must be tiring.

PS. I see you have stopped using that Nazi slogan in your posts.


edit on 2-6-2014 by Blister because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 06:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Blister


First, by criticising the Russian Federal government, you are by default, criticising the collective people of Russia. I call that as I see it, and after reading all your repetitive claims and hyperbole on matters related to anything-Russia, that is essentially encouragement to hate and physically attack Russia and Russians.


So you think all Ukrainians are Neo Nazi Fascists? Using your logic above that is what you just admitted to. As for the remainder of your comment you have once again demonstrated that you are incapable of refuting facts and instead rely on personal attacks and spin. I have advocated the use of force to remove Russia from Ukrainian territory. I have stated there should be investigations into what occurred in Ukraine.

Please stop lying about what I say. I have never advocated an attack on Russia or all Russians.

I live in a country where I am allowed to voice my opinion on anything I want, including Putin and his actions. I have no idea where you live however I am going to guess its from a country with restrictions on any information / independent thought that runs counter to the government?

Essentially you just did exactly what you accused me of. You want the ability to tell me off while demanding I don't respond and just take what you say and move on. That is what Putin does.. I am sorry if you and Putin don't like that but since I don't live in Russia I could not care less if you or he finds it offensive.




originally posted by: Blister

Secondly,...snipped since noting of interest was stated....be tiring.


You don't even have time to post sources to back your claims. As for the rest its once again a personal attack while containing absolutely nothing that is on topic.


originally posted by: Blister
PS. I see you have stopped using that Nazi slogan in your posts.


Yet you completely fail to understand the comment let alone applying it to the posts I was responding to.

The term "Arbeit macht frei" was used by Nazi Germany in one of their death camps. It means work will set you free and was designed to give a false sense of hope, just as Putin has done. He is appealing to the people in Ukraine to revolt on his behalf all in an effort to pull a land grab that benefits no one but Putin/Russia.

If you dont understand its meaning let alone significance in relation to what occurred in Nazi Germany and what we are seeing now with Putin then you should take the time to research it before opening your mouth and trying to insinuate something towards my character that is blatantly false.

Last attempt -

Please debate the topic and refute the op information. If you are unable to do that then please move on to another thread instead of derailing this one.

Do you have information that refutes the op article?
edit on 2-6-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-6-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 06:59 AM
link   
You may be correct on the price of oil but there is reason to believe that the keystone pipe line would cause the price to fall in the US and so there is a move to have it not happen .The Ukraine thing may be a play by the US to cause gas shortages in Europe as well .I just think there are way too many big business that will go along with it .The EU has bigger political issues coming to the for with the last election results .Seems that every one is broke and things are not moving in a direction to fix the issues .Getting the price of gas to increase has never been much of a problem within my life time .It used to be 28 cents a gallon and now it's $ 1.35 a liter .It goes up and then drops to a higher price then it was before it rose . a reply to: VirusGuard



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 07:05 AM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1

Question -
How would the US cause a shortage for Europe? Russia has been the one that has held Europe hostage because of their issues with Ukraine.

As pro Russians have pointed out the US cannot replace what Russia supplied.

I am unclear on the info to support the claim. Can you elaborate?



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 07:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Plugin

The US messed with the government of Ukraine as much as Russian messed with the government of Ukraine. The difference being the US did not invade where as Russia did.

Putin's stated justification was to protect Ethnic Russians. What you are suggesting about Crimea not only runs counter to what Putin stated, it goes further and supports my argument that every justification Putin used was a lie. This would be where Blisters argument runs off the tracks because it means Putin did what Nazi Germany did with the death camp. Coercing people to do something that benefits Russia and then getting rid of them when you get the item.

In this case Crimea.

Again a strong economic Russia would be beneficial. As I stated before and in other threads, developing economic ties with other nations serves the vital function of forcing those nations to communicate their issues instead of attacking each other. We saw this with Germany and their position on Russia.

Nations who have strong economies can offer better living conditions / opportunities to their citizens. It provides a solid base for that country to redirect currency into areas that are not revenue producing and are purely scientific in nature. A strong economy allows a nation to take on large projects, like the ISS. A nation with a strong economy is able to provide security by having a professional military. It translates into citizens being able to go about their business instead of worrying about the intention of other nations.

A strong economy is not a military threat unless its used as such. If we look at WWII we can see Germany and Japan as having strong economies compared to other nations at the time. They used those economies to wage war, forcing other nations to develop their economies.

When the war ended the US and the bulk of allied nations involved assisted to rebuild those countries. Germany and Japan are allies today and both have strong economies.

A nation with a strong economy is a good thing and not bad.

The US does not want to control the energy market. There really is nothing to control when we are importing to meet energy needs. Name other nations who have the ability to project a military presence in the Persian gulf / Med on a constant basis.

Our presence is not to control energy. Its to ensure the ability of nations to export their energy resources and by extension provide some stability to the energy market. If the US was not present what would stop Iran from closing down the gulf?

A presence of a 3rd party can actually decrease the possibility of a war breaking out by allowing the countries involved to complain to each other without following that up with military action which would spark a war.

As for no time no worries. Whenever you get around to it.



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 07:43 AM
link   
If the information in the op is accurate, and so far I have not seen anything to refute it, Putin caused Russia's economic issues we are seeing. If the info is accurate then Putin has admitted to that fact and its supported by their most recent actions.

* - recognizing Ukraine's new government.
* - withdrawing troops from the border with Ukraine.
* - removing assets that were in the East / South of Ukraine.
* - The moves to stabilize their currency while remaining silent as opposed to them trying to stabilize their economy while complaining about the US / EU sanctions.
etc etc etc

Everything Putin is doing now is meant to mitigate the economic damage that he caused with regards to Russia only.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join