U.S. sanctions companies, people over Russia actions in Ukraine

Looks like the U.S. has retaliated again towards Russians !!

Is Obama in "get even" mode again?

A few more (quite a few actually) Russian companies and business people have been added to sanctions.

U.S. sanctions companies, people over Russia actions in Ukraine

The United States on Tuesday targeted more Russian businessmen and companies over Russia's annexation of Crimea and the conflict in Ukraine, slapping them with U.S. sanctions in a move Moscow criticized as hostile.

The measures come a month before U.S. President Barack Obama hands over power to President-elect Donald Trump, who has praised Russian President Vladimir Putin and said it would be good if the two countries could get along.

Trump's nominee for U.S. Secretary of State, Exxon Mobil Corp Chief Executive Officer Rex Tillerson, has opposed U.S. sanctions on Russia, which awarded him a friendship medal in 2013.

_

a reply to: xuenchen

These sanctions are just a vestige of an ending presidency. Simple stroke of a shiny new executive pen in late January will undo this childishness.

a reply to: xuenchen

We should be sanctioning those that do business in Crimea, which was annexed illegally. This is only an expansion of existing sanctions.

He did say he would 'get em back' for the 'hack'.

But it materializes as sanctions behind Ukraine?

Getting harder for the news fakery machine to hold up under internet scrutiny, I guess.

These sanctions placed in support of a Fascist Junta should be lifted first thing on January 21st.

Place some sanctions on the Kiev Government while we're at it. I don't like sanctions but Fascists are bad you know. The world has no place for them. Decided that long ago in 1945.

Certainly not people deserving of America's help

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: xuenchen

We should be sanctioning those that do business in Crimea, which was annexed illegally. This is only an expansion of existing sanctions.

Crimea was already occupied by Russian Navy for centuries at Sevastopol. Congratulations for pinning the tail on the Donkey. The move by NATO to subjugate Ukraine into the European fold was really about blocking access of Russia to its fleet in the Black Sea.

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: xuenchen

We should be sanctioning those that do business in Crimea, which was annexed illegally. This is only an expansion of existing sanctions.

96% of Crimeans voted in favor of Russian annexation... why would any nation which allegedly values democracy and the will of the people support the idea that that annexation was illegal and call for sanctions against fulfillment of the people's wishes?

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: xuenchen

We should be sanctioning those that do business in Crimea, which was annexed illegally. This is only an expansion of existing sanctions.

No.

It's new sanctions started this week.



And remember, the Crimea vote was a popular majority !!!

a reply to: reldra

I wasn't aware you could annex something that is yours, the people who live there are your people, they want to be part of your country again and have been under occupation for 50 odd years thanks to corrupt Ukrainians controlling the Soviet Politburo in the 1950s.

a reply to: reldra

We should be sanctioning those that do business in Crimea, which was annexed illegally.

Could you please find a reference to a pending court case on the subject ?

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: xuenchen

These sanctions are just a vestige of an ending presidency. Simple stroke of a shiny new executive pen in late January will undo this childishness.

That might be kind of difficult don't you think? Trump has just upped the anti on nuclear weaponry, and frankly is all over the shop, whilst kicking NATO into touch a while ago. Do we have to spend four to eight years now, of (as The Guardian says) 'Willy Waving between Putin and Trump? that's more than flesh and blood can stand, more so, it's pathetic.
www.theguardian.com...

originally posted by: smurfy
That might be kind of difficult don't you think?

No, it's not a zero sum game like Obama seems to believe it is. The nation can happily enhance our nuclear armaments, take a "do not screw with us" posture, yet not play footsie with asinine sanctions over things that are NONE of the United States' business.

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: xuenchen

We should be sanctioning those that do business in Crimea, which was annexed illegally. This is only an expansion of existing sanctions.

reldra, while I can agree with you in a lot of the subjects, Crimea is not one.
The people had a referendum, and the result was, unlike the UK one, unanimous. Around 97% of the people voted to join Russia in the federal experiment, and that was their choice. I would defer to the people of Crimea in their case.

As for these sanctions , it's best to refer to the US treasury since they don't have an issue with the Russian federation per se, it seems to be individuals who have been cited.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: smurfy
That might be kind of difficult don't you think?

No, it's not a zero sum game like Obama seems to believe it is. The nation can happily enhance our nuclear armaments, take a "do not screw with us" posture, yet not play footsie with asinine sanctions over things that are NONE of the United States' business.

I already agree that Crimea is not American business said it before, (and not NATO either by default) however this is about individuals named by the US treasury, some who may be very matey with Putin. It might even be a minefield for Donald if he is Acquainted with any one of them or channels.

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: xuenchen

We should be sanctioning those that do business in Crimea, which was annexed illegally. This is only an expansion of existing sanctions.

You always look at things one-sided. If the Russians should be sanctioned for Crimea, the US should be sanctioned for the ENTIRE middle east.

What Russia did was illegal internationally and is still not recognized. Crimea still functions however, unlike the ME that the US has been on a 3 decade long rampant "get yer testosterone out" campaign, which has crippled not only the US economy, but global economies.

Thanks Reldra, I appreciate you being the poster child of "some adults need to grow up"

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: xuenchen

We should be sanctioning those that do business in Crimea, which was annexed illegally. This is only an expansion of existing sanctions.

Just because only a third of Ukraine wanted to switch sides doesn't mean Crimea can't stay with Russia. The West lured the big influential people of the capital to switch sides, that does not mean all the people want to go along with the coup they did.

I put the blame on the west for starting that whole thing. Even though I am from the west, I understand we do have some power hungry people here who want to control everything.. If Crimea voted to stay with the Russians, they should be able to. They do not want to be part of the illegal coup. We would consider the change in leadership of the Ukraine illegal if the tide was turned.