Strange history with political parties in Russia since... there has been much political chaos before things normalized. Like the communist party was banned for awhile. xD
The goals for the communist party is to create the best most modern socialist state in the world. While some among them support full communism their actual policy is a mixed economic model focusing on nationalising bigger industry needed to keep the country alive while allowing medium and small industry tax free capitalist things and support to become competitive in the world market. They don't support raid realization and rather have a slow process through then next century.
On creating new political parties first what I see on new before and know. Which be that laws used to be set up that were a bit to stringent and out of date. This made it very hard for new parties to be actualy put through the process. A few did though they have had almost no impact at all in goverment. Abosulty 0 in the duma, and only a handful in the parliments. You need at least 7% of votes to be in the duma. There ar e only 4 parties in the duma and that shows how really little other people care about them. If you look at them and I have seen new parties try to come as well but almost all new or smaller parties are social liberal parties.
So yes it used to be harder to make parties but the laws where recently changed a few years ago and since then many more parties are here but it is quite safe to say that there getting rejected most likely for being poorly organize and such. The parties people are creating just aren't doing new things, and isn't that the way it is in most countries? It isn't common for a new political party to spring up with a bunch of new support unless there is something wrong I would think.
o7
You're right. Having a new political party rise to prominence is difficult in any democracy. Take the US for instance. I doubt that they will ever have a real 3rd party any time soon. That said, I think the presence of a credible/sizable opposition is a sign of a healthy democracy. If the same party (and especially the leader) is in place for a long time, that is a cause for concern. I would think that the need for a legitimate political alternative outweighs the need for stability (often used as an excuse to dismiss these concerns). Also, when there is only one viable option, many people will feel that it is useless to participate in elections.
Interesting stuff about the new communist party. I didn't know much about them. Also encouraging that new laws have been passed to make it easier to form an opposition. I think United Russia needs a real opposition if only to establish it's own credibility and to improve public perception of the state of democracy in Russia. The 80% approval ratings that Tito cites look dangerously close to those of some totalitarian states. People like him don't understand that ridiculously high public approval ratings are not really positive. On the contrary, they are signs for worry in that they suggest fraud, repression or indoctrination.
Tarafından yazıldı Skanderbeg, 24.03.2014 at 04:11
Why do you have a need to indicate your sexuality, fav sex positions and what you like people to do to you so you can cum in public?
We dont care what sex position and partner you like to have sex with.
In public you have to be decent and behave yourself. Gays rallied and were almost naked with only leather belts on. Nudity is against the law of public peace and order.
I do like to recieve a blowjob from hot blondes but i do not go around telling that in public and forcing people to listen, and if they gtfo me i dont say ''omg they so ignorant, they dont tolerate my sexuality''.
Again, you're changing the issue. The issue is not public nudity/indecency. It is about the right to organize or speak publicly about gay issues.
Tarafından yazıldı Skanderbeg, 24.03.2014 at 04:11
Michael Moore is special example as he made a movie which is easier to distribute and learn about America from it. Everyone watch movies. But there are more qualified critics like Chossudovsky or Parenti, which zombie said they are ''anonymous'' and their opinion invalid although they have PhDs and mastered US situation.
Michael Moore is a special case only because he is one of the most successful documentary makers. There are countless other examples of popular America journalists and documentary makers that criticize the US and it's corporations. Though I'm fairly well aware of most of the mainstream American media (and some independents), I'm also not aware of the two you mentioned. There are countless other critics that still pursue active & successful careers to this day. They are not being charged with false crimes like you allege. If you are interested, I can give you some names. Just name your preference: film/documentary, journalists, comedy/satire, intellectuals
Tarafından yazıldı Skanderbeg, 24.03.2014 at 04:11
Indeed, why bother. Duma changed presidential mandate to last from 4 to 6 years now and president can have 3 mandates instead 2 from now on(im not 100% sure about last one). So Putin can rule legitimately until 2030.
Senate(Federation Council) also changed senators mandate to indefinite so some senators mandates are longer and someones shorter, depends on skill and popularity.
Point is: if leader is good, why replace it. If team is winning, why change it.
Indeed. Who needs democracy if you can just "win" instead. If you repress political opponents and critics and then make everyone believe they were in fact criminals, you "win". If you make people scared to oppose you and make everyone believe that you are hugely popular, you also "win". If you successfully replace free press with propaganda (disguised as free press) and make your citizens believe all foreign press is propaganda, you "win" yet again. I guess you mean that a good leader is one that can win. So good = winning. Winning by any means necessary?
Tarafından yazıldı Skanderbeg, 24.03.2014 at 04:11
More than 6 is anarchy. There are only 3 ideologies that can be combined in 3 ways: communists, capitalists, nationalists combined(or not) with liberalism, socialism, conservativism. Therefore you can have communist party, nationalist pary, socialistist, socialdemocratic, liberal democratic.
This is a bit simplistic. But I was referring on laws stopping the main opposition from organizing. Not #4 and +. The main opposition! But anyway, who needs an opposition when the current leader is a winner, right?
Tarafından yazıldı Skanderbeg, 24.03.2014 at 04:11
That supposed to be fun as we know how american movies present KGB and their ''victims''. KGB did torture, and killed, thats truth. But i think you dont understand the meaning and ways of torturing. I think when i said torturing you guessed it was japanese thing of stabbing needles in eyes or impaling on wooden stake like turks do. No, thats not torturing, thats perversion. KGB torturing was not letting you to sleep (they wake you up every 2 hours until you tell them infos they want), or few slaps to scared suspects because they usually talk. Though infiltrated CIA agents did got executed.
OK, I understand now. You enjoy only moderate forms of torture.
Tarafından yazıldı Skanderbeg, 24.03.2014 at 06:32
You learned to make molotov in 14? Damn i must matured early. Anyway if russians kids get molested by fascist then this world is really gone crazy. I doubt slavs will let be molested by fascism ever again. I know from my example. Fascists and nazis keep low profile in slavic lands, because they are slavs as well and know what horror awaits them if we find out. Though its true every russian have atleast 1 kalash and few hand-grenades streets are pretty safe to walk and enjoy the beauty of russian renesaince cities. Unlike Greece where i had to fight my way through albanian hordes, not a single greek on the greek streets, they all drive cars because they are scared of albanian mafia. And instead imprisoning criminals and deporting them back to Albania you give them more freedom. Well done. When you wake up in great albania and be forced to sell albanian drugs or organs from albanian victims and your wife is taken as prostitute slave i will ask you again about your freedom.
I tried setting your rants to a beat. How'd I do?
Working Title: Don't H8 the H8R, Play the Motherfuckin' Game
To Big Daddy Kane No Half Steppin'
(cue at :20)
You learned to make a Molotov at 14?
Damn, I musta growed up early.
Nazis keep it low in Slavic lands.
'Cause if we find out, they'll die by Slavic hands.
Every Russian has grenades and an AK,
Making Russian streets safe to walk every day.
Don't hate the hater, play the muthafuckin' game
My name is Tito, this is my refrain
Slavs can't be fascists ... you know why?
Give me two good reasons, on the third you're gonna die.
We never invade, we only liberate.
Want to protest? Well, you're too late.
I was in Crimea and I held a vote;
Join Me or Join Me, that's all I wrote.
Don't hate the hater, hate the mutherfuckin' game
My name is Tito, this is my refrain
Went to Greece to take a look-see
At the home of Russ De-mock-ra-cy.
Like Tirana South, or old Kosovo,
Albanians, 'banians where'd the Greeks go?
So unsafe, they can't walk their own streets.
That's an A-B problem and you can call me T.
Don't hate the hater, What's my Name?
My name is Tito, this is the refrain
Counted my loot, sold the same gas twice.
Got Merkel pregnant, put 'bama's nuts in a vice
Killed some journalists cause I was bored
Changed the law so you will call me Lord.
At the end of the day, thought I'd run for re-election.
I can't lose, was there ever any question?
Don't hate the hater, don't place the blame
My name is Tito, this is the refrain
Truth and history, myth and fact.
Nothing wins a battle like a knife in the back.
When it comes to people there's four kinds, in my head.
South Slav, West Slav, East Slav, and dead.
I'm not a racist, as you'll soon see
I just need a world fully non-Slav-free
Don't hate the hater, put out the flame
My name is Tito, this is the refrain
Edit: My favorite so far just didn't flow properly. The 'drink whiskey, ride the blue train, talk to my friend Selassie' -- or maybe I just gotta work at it more.
Edit 2: In retrospect, I can't find one line I 'bit' (copied) from traditional hip-hop, which is a must in this expressive style. Then again, the subject matter is so limited and topical, maybe 20 people in the entire world understand.
Edit 3: This started off as 'Slav Life' - a take on the well known Thug Life, but the narrative style used by 2Pac didn't fit well with your ... exposition.
Tarafından yazıldı Skanderbeg, 24.03.2014 at 06:32
Golden Dawn. taking power in Greece. Country where democracy was born becomes Nazi Greece. gg.
And what is wrong with the Social Nationalist party platform? Are you even aware of the positive relationship between Russia and the Golden Dawn? Golden Dawn have been overwhelmingly supportive of Russia and your typical reaction is to decry them?
Oh wait, thats your Anti-Greek Albanian heritage overcoming your Russian nationalism. Proving yet again, you are not a proper Russian. If you were, you would support the Golden Dawn which grows Russian influence.
Do you even know how supportive the BNP is of Russia? No. Youll call them Nazis too. Geo politics is a game of intertwining interests and you should only act in favour if there is something to gain. Acting in a negative is a greater gamble and should only be made when the gain is certain. You act in a negative against groups which support your interests. There is no gain to that.
It further proves my other point Ive always said about you. You are a child who cant grasp the most basic social and economic functions of how a state runs or what is and isnt in its interests.
There is an old phrase.
Dont bite the hand that feeds.
In this situation, you are alienating your supporting group. Its retarded.
Also the overuse of Fascism in this thread is reaching critical levels. Few states today can be described as Fascist. The USA and Russia are not Fascist though Russia has some Fascist social values. Oligarchs would not rule in a Fascist society.
If you are going to continue to use that word as a code for Authoritarianism then you are an idiot who doesnt understand polital ideologies.
And the Crimeans had two choice, become independent or join Russia. That is not a proper referendum and a 95% claim that they voted to join Russia is bull when you understand the Anti-Russian Tatars refused to even vote.
I understand why Russia invaded Crimea, its a legitimate and fantastic reaction to Western meddling in the area but Russian annexation of Ukranian military equipment is disgusting. Furthermore, the Russians have illegally forced the the significant majority of Ukranian soldiers to remain in Crimea on the bogus claim that they dont want to go back to Ukraine. Absolute rubbish. The Russians are lying and imprisoning Ukranian troops to prevent Ukraine having more troops when Russia eventually invades the East.
I understand why Russia invaded Crimea, its a legitimate and fantastic reaction to Western meddling in the area but Russian annexation of Ukranian military equipment is disgusting. Furthermore, the Russians have illegally forced the the significant majority of Ukranian soldiers to remain in Crimea on the bogus claim that they dont want to go back to Ukraine. Absolute rubbish. The Russians are lying and imprisoning Ukranian troops to prevent Ukraine having more troops when Russia eventually invades the East.
Also the overuse of Fascism in this thread is reaching critical levels. Few states today can be described as Fascist. The USA and Russia are not Fascist though Russia has some Fascist social values. Oligarchs would not rule in a Fascist society.
If you are going to continue to use that word as a code for Authoritarianism then you are an idiot who doesnt understand polital ideologies.
General agreement, except for the oligarchical power in Fascist states. Historically, oligarchs wielded significant power in Fascist Italy, Spain and Germany, and theoretically, the economic aspects of fascism are completely compatible with various forms of private ownership for oligarchs. The State maintains a complete monopoly of power, not wealth.
And the Crimeans had two choice, become independent or join Russia. That is not a proper referendum and a 95% claim that they voted to join Russia is bull when you understand the Anti-Russian Tatars refused to even vote.
I understand why Russia invaded Crimea, its a legitimate and fantastic reaction to Western meddling in the area but Russian annexation of Ukranian military equipment is disgusting. Furthermore, the Russians have illegally forced the the significant majority of Ukranian soldiers to remain in Crimea on the bogus claim that they dont want to go back to Ukraine. Absolute rubbish. The Russians are lying and imprisoning Ukranian troops to prevent Ukraine having more troops when Russia eventually invades the East.
Obama is also a giant pussy.
What would be a non-vaginal reaction to Putin's actions, something that doesn't break the Big-Boy-Grown-Up-Mature-Nation Clubhouse rules?
Read a nice description in one column on the internet:
"I see a nation and dictator that suffered a humiliation when the pro-Russian government in Kiev fell, and has sought to recover it through a quick, illegal annexation, abetted by a rigged referendum."
I also read a nice description on the InterWebz
''The Internet is full of shit, it's can be hard to know whats the truth''.
Read a nice description in one column on the internet:
"I see a nation and dictator that suffered a humiliation when the pro-Russian government in Kiev fell, and has sought to recover it through a quick, illegal annexation, abetted by a rigged referendum."
I also read a nice description on the InterWebz
''The Internet is full of shit, it's can be hard to know whats the truth''.
Then you have to admit that your version of the "truth" is possible bullshit. Thank you.
But what you quoted is also bullshit. Although Yanakouvich was no good President, possible deserves impeachment, but OSHA I think sent observers and approved the referedum.
Also the overuse of Fascism in this thread is reaching critical levels. Few states today can be described as Fascist. The USA and Russia are not Fascist though Russia has some Fascist social values. Oligarchs would not rule in a Fascist society.
If you are going to continue to use that word as a code for Authoritarianism then you are an idiot who doesnt understand polital ideologies.
General agreement, except for the oligarchical power in Fascist states. Historically, oligarchs wielded significant power in Fascist Italy, Spain and Germany, and theoretically, the economic aspects of fascism are completely compatible with various forms of private ownership for oligarchs. The State maintains a complete monopoly of power, not wealth.
Germany was not a Fascist state. He had Fascist leanings. Oligarchs in Germany had almost no power. They could barely lobby. Most of the Anti-German ones had been purged and the others merely ran the systems while the state told them what to produce and how much of it.
Oligarchs in Germany were under control of the state and worked exceptionally hard to gain the Fuhrers favour.In Russia, Putin might wield enormous power but the Oligarchs do as they please with minor oversight.
Tarafından yazıldı zombieyeti, 24.03.2014 at 16:38
What would be a non-vaginal reaction to Putin's actions, something that doesn't break the Big-Boy-Grown-Up-Mature-Nation Clubhouse rules?
NATO should have put boots on the ground. Russia only understands force. If Donetsk, Kharkov and the Crimea border had NATO presence, Russia would have backed off. Before the referendum, Russian troops were a milita in Crimea. They couldnt admit or defend those troops. If Ukraine actually attacked these troops, Russia could do nothing and they would lose due to lack of support and supply lines.
Russia would have backed off. They would piss and moan like the US is doing now but they would understand the use of force and wouldnt dare escalate it.
Russia gambled by placing unbacked militia in Crimea. Ukraine didnt call them out on the bluff so now Russia has the momentum and US is still not acting, so Russia will continue pushing until NATO puts troops on the ground.
United Russia does have opposition. They just don't have a united opposition. They are the leading big conservative party while the other three top parties have similar agendas to each other but have certain issues which divide them into.. 3 leftist parties. Even if I don't support said party I can see that they are the party getting stuff done and that knows how to run the government. While agreeing with other parties goals and ideals they are divided and bicker much. That is why I don't vote for them because even if I want what they want they are somewhat incompetent at the moment to fufill them and id rather have conservatives build a stronger foundation in the meantime. I don't think they are inviable, just not the best choice at the moment. That why I vote Putin. o7
Thats perfectly ok with me.Your explanation is just perfect and i fully understand.Also reminded me why i lova ya
Tarafından yazıldı Skanderbeg, 24.03.2014 at 06:32
Golden Dawn. taking power in Greece. Country where democracy was born becomes Nazi Greece. gg.
Since you are best west hater im surprised u dont know that Golden Dawn was a puppet funded by the West.Anti-government and anarchist moovements in Greece were growing really strong (like always before a revolution) and threatened West lobby plans to easily take control of us and steal our natural resources.Thats why they created the Golden Dawn phenomenon,to split people in half,confuse them and make them fight each other.Divide and conquer stron.
The West provided the Golden dawn with money,the best lawers,economists and journalists and created a masterplan of continuous propaganda.Lower class and less educated Greeks like farmers,heavy workers or even unemployed and recently harassed by the government businessmen,started voting for G.D. for revenge and thats why Golden Dawn accumulated such support.That is how a right wing criminal gang composed of poor,low iq,army trained fascists managed to gain so much power and enter the parliament.
Needless to say Golden Dawn got greedy with all the support that became a threat to its own creators in the end.End result?Half the Golden Dawn is illegaly imprisoned without any evidence whatsoever lol.Fascism beaten by fascism how bout that?
Tarafından yazıldı Skanderbeg, 24.03.2014 at 06:32
Anyway if russians kids get molested by fascist then this world is really gone crazy. I doubt slavs will let be molested by fascism ever again. I know from my example. Fascists and nazis keep low profile in slavic lands, because they are slavs as well and know what horror awaits them if we find out.
what the hell are you talking about."fascists" are not a seperate mystical entity,they are not a special graphic figure with huge muscles shaved head and tatoos.They are normal everyday people in Russia,who just have a "hobby" of hunting down and beating minorities and opposers on a daily basis.I would say you are a wannabe too.
Tarafından yazıldı Skanderbeg, 24.03.2014 at 06:32
Unlike Greece where i had to fight my way through albanian hordes, not a single greek on the greek streets, they all drive cars because they are scared of albanian mafia. And instead imprisoning criminals and deporting them back to Albania you give them more freedom. Well done. When you wake up in great albania and be forced to sell albanian drugs or organs from albanian victims and your wife is taken as prostitute slave i will ask you again about your freedom.
This sound like a hollywood moovie or a propaganda tale by Golden dawn website.Yes we have an albania mafia but i doubt u will ever see them.Albania mafia is even stronger in Italy where in certain places it has overthrown even the local mafias.So?All the rest is bullshit,we have many immigrants in certain places on the center because we signed some treaties and we get all the garbage west europe dosnt want,other than that our legal imigrants are fine,normal,working people.Well yeah if you go to a ghetto its probabely dangerous but thats a universal thing i think.
Tarafından yazıldı Skanderbeg, 25.03.2014 at 09:36
Tarafından yazıldı zombieyeti, 24.03.2014 at 15:02
I tried setting your rants to a beat. How'd I do?
Well you missed to add 3 most imporant things in Tito's life, Galeb(tito's yacht), tito's fav drink whiskey and friend selassie, but damn you got some talent there :-D
I love the whole 'blue train .... Selassie' thing -- i just couldn't work that into a hip-hop ballad.
Also the overuse of Fascism in this thread is reaching critical levels. Few states today can be described as Fascist. The USA and Russia are not Fascist though Russia has some Fascist social values. Oligarchs would not rule in a Fascist society.
If you are going to continue to use that word as a code for Authoritarianism then you are an idiot who doesnt understand polital ideologies.
General agreement, except for the oligarchical power in Fascist states. Historically, oligarchs wielded significant power in Fascist Italy, Spain and Germany, and theoretically, the economic aspects of fascism are completely compatible with various forms of private ownership for oligarchs. The State maintains a complete monopoly of power, not wealth.
Germany was not a Fascist state. He had Fascist leanings. Oligarchs in Germany had almost no power. They could barely lobby. Most of the Anti-German ones had been purged and the others merely ran the systems while the state told them what to produce and how much of it.
Oligarchs in Germany were under control of the state and worked exceptionally hard to gain the Fuhrers favour.In Russia, Putin might wield enormous power but the Oligarchs do as they please with minor oversight.
Good points.
I definitely agree the Oligarchs in Germany worked hard to please Hitler/The Party, because The State controlled all the big spending. That being said, even in the USA 2014, corporations don't run the government, except where their selfish interests intersect and at least part of the population acquieses.
I guess I disagree about the level of power and independence possessed by oligarchs in the corporatist economy of Nazi Germany.
Absolutely the government had most of the 'money', so in that sense the government wielded power, but Krupps, Thyssen and Hoesch fiercely competed for government business, as did Porsche and Damlier. The USA, from 1942 until early 1945 was, for intents and purposes, the same.
In both cases, companies fought for contracts which would allow them to receive resources to fulfill these contacts.
Both sets of corporations were paid very well in government paper, and had an incentive to help their side win. Paper dollars and reichsmarks weren't worth much until victory, and would be worthless at defeat.
===
What form of government would you characterize Nazi Germany as, if not fascist?
Tarafından yazıldı zombieyeti, 24.03.2014 at 16:38
What would be a non-vaginal reaction to Putin's actions, something that doesn't break the Big-Boy-Grown-Up-Mature-Nation Clubhouse rules?
NATO should have put boots on the ground. Russia only understands force. If Donetsk, Kharkov and the Crimea border had NATO presence, Russia would have backed off. Before the referendum, Russian troops were a milita in Crimea. They couldnt admit or defend those troops. If Ukraine actually attacked these troops, Russia could do nothing and they would lose due to lack of support and supply lines.
Russia would have backed off. They would piss and moan like the US is doing now but they would understand the use of force and wouldnt dare escalate it.
Russia gambled by placing unbacked militia in Crimea. Ukraine didnt call them out on the bluff so now Russia has the momentum and US is still not acting, so Russia will continue pushing until NATO puts troops on the ground.
A show of force by NATO would have certainly been less vaginal, but probably would conclude in America's BigBoy Club Card being fined 20 points.
Plus it wouldn't have worked. The fight NATO (or at least the USA) wants to have with Russia won't be where NATO can say no.
Militarily, I have no doubt that Russia would lose in an all-out-conventional confrontation, and they know this.
I'm sure the EU and US military planners are at least as aware as I with the shifting geopolitics and exhaustion of Putin's efforts. Why fight Putin in Ukraine, over a semi-legitimate claim? After this is fulfilled, Russia has no credible extra-territorial claims that aren't under 'negotiation'.
Lack of NATO action justly puts the consequences on the nation that tried to 'Yugoslavia' the West: Ukraine. Ukraine's people and government tried to play both ends against the middle, and lost. There will be no more pretense of Russia becoming Civilized or Mature, the G8 goes back to the G7, and no more need to pacify Russia. In this sense, a bit of restraint on the US side means that they will have all the standing they need to confront Putin in the future. Russia moves more towards China, EU moves more towards the USA.
Really, only the Ukrainian people lose, and the learn that democracy isn't just counting noses, it is about international accountability as well.
Do I think the Ukrainian people deserve this? No. But if anyone deserves the blame, it's them.
===
NATO/USA couldn't really legally counter Russia in Ukraine unless Ukraine was willing to fight, too. And they weren't.
NATO/USA can't just go occupy Crimea, because of the nature of the agreement between Russia and Ukraine, for the Russian Navy - after all, America has a similar agreement, with an even more tenuous legal standing, in Guantanamo Bay, Okinawa etc.
Assuming Ukraine was willing to, and NATO was willing to assist, this gives Putin the choice to back off or fight. I'd written at length, earlier about Putin's Choice, how it was risky (little gain for much chance of problems). The argument, which I accept, is that the chance that the West would intercede is near zero, because Ukraine wouldn't stand up and fight, so while he gained little, he risked almost nothing to get it.
Ultimately, if there was a fight, Ukraine cries for NATO to leave anyway. NATO would win, if it went all out.
And NATO wouldn't go all out, not over Ukraine, not yet.
Putin saw an opportunity due to the vacuum in Kiev and took it.
Yükleniyor...
Yükleniyor...
Black Shark Hesap silindi
25.03.2014 - 14:37
Black Shark Hesap silindi
*ahem* You people seem to have forgot that Russia supplies Europe quite some gas. In fact, the UK started directly buying Russian gas. And Russia can also bomb OPEC countries, therefore can cut off 2 important sources of oil which means NATO would have a hard time. What's an army without oil? Targets.
Tarafından yazıldı Skanderbeg, 25.03.2014 at 14:59
Tarafından yazıldı Guest, 25.03.2014 at 14:37
*ahem* You people seem to have forgot that Russia supplies Europe quite some gas. In fact, the UK started directly buying Russian gas. And Russia can also bomb OPEC countries, therefore can cut off 2 important sources of oil which means NATO would have a hard time. What's an army without oil? Targets.
What about US and EU industry without oil? If i was american and there is no fuel i would rage badly. Because i wont be able to go to work 20km away, will lose atleast 500$ i could earn that day. I wont be able to drive my kid to the game, my wife to the mall and go with my friends fishing. And all that because US government is messing with some Russia 20,000km away.
There will be collapse in USA/EU if oil and gas supplies run off.
In theory you are correct, except that this is the case anywhere.
In Russia, 'oil and gas' is called 'food and euros'.
The EU can get its oil from other places, they just have to pay a premium.
If Russia doesn't get its food from the USA or EU, where does it get it from?
Yükleniyor...
Yükleniyor...
Black Shark Hesap silindi
27.03.2014 - 04:17
Black Shark Hesap silindi
Tarafından yazıldı zombieyeti, 26.03.2014 at 21:10
Tarafından yazıldı Skanderbeg, 25.03.2014 at 14:59
Tarafından yazıldı Guest, 25.03.2014 at 14:37
*ahem* You people seem to have forgot that Russia supplies Europe quite some gas. In fact, the UK started directly buying Russian gas. And Russia can also bomb OPEC countries, therefore can cut off 2 important sources of oil which means NATO would have a hard time. What's an army without oil? Targets.
What about US and EU industry without oil? If i was american and there is no fuel i would rage badly. Because i wont be able to go to work 20km away, will lose atleast 500$ i could earn that day. I wont be able to drive my kid to the game, my wife to the mall and go with my friends fishing. And all that because US government is messing with some Russia 20,000km away.
There will be collapse in USA/EU if oil and gas supplies run off. And in a war, where is EU ging to get it's oil?
In theory you are correct, except that this is the case anywhere.
In Russia, 'oil and gas' is called 'food and euros'.
The EU can get its oil from other places, they just have to pay a premium.
If Russia doesn't get its food from the USA or EU, where does it get it from?
Tarafından yazıldı zombieyeti, 26.03.2014 at 21:10
Tarafından yazıldı Skanderbeg, 25.03.2014 at 14:59
Tarafından yazıldı Guest, 25.03.2014 at 14:37
*ahem* You people seem to have forgot that Russia supplies Europe quite some gas. In fact, the UK started directly buying Russian gas. And Russia can also bomb OPEC countries, therefore can cut off 2 important sources of oil which means NATO would have a hard time. What's an army without oil? Targets.
What about US and EU industry without oil? If i was american and there is no fuel i would rage badly. Because i wont be able to go to work 20km away, will lose atleast 500$ i could earn that day. I wont be able to drive my kid to the game, my wife to the mall and go with my friends fishing. And all that because US government is messing with some Russia 20,000km away.
There will be collapse in USA/EU if oil and gas supplies run off. And in a war, where is EU ging to get it's oil?
In theory you are correct, except that this is the case anywhere.
In Russia, 'oil and gas' is called 'food and euros'.
The EU can get its oil from other places, they just have to pay a premium.
If Russia doesn't get its food from the USA or EU, where does it get it from?
China and India are some choices.
True, China and India both export food (as does Russia) but neither of the three are food self-sufficient, all three import much more food (in calories) than they export. Both (generally) import commodity staples and export finished foodstuffs or exotic fare.
India has food riots at least annually, China has given up ever being food self-sufficient (and now looks to buy not just food, but farmland). In any given period, recently, the largest single category of Russia's imports by USD$ are food, followed by cars/trains/trucks.
This is not necessarily a 'bad thing'. Those familiar with economic history will remember UK revoking the 'Corn Laws' - labor migrated from the fields to the factories, and the UK became wealthy. Many EU countries are not food self-sufficient, but the EU as a whole is - just as some American states and Canadian provinces are not, but their nations, are.
The food shortages in 2007 weren't even caused by a bad harvest; earlier, the USA unwisely moved some agricultural subsidies from the 'pay not to grow' category to 'biofuel'. While the corn for biofuel and food is grown and harvested the same, biofuel corn is not a valued foodstuff.
The corn crop was larger than usual, but 1/3 of it was turned to biofuel. Replacement was rife. Soybeans, for livestock feed, became cheaper than corn. The ripple effect was that this tiny change, never meant to cause violence, caused increased food prices worldwide. In OECD countries, people just paid a bit more for food. In other places, riots broke out.
Big-boy countries use food as a weapon of next-to-last-resort. The USA withheld food from the USSR rarely (the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan being a rare exception) and doesn't even withhold food from North Korea.
Tarafından yazıldı Skanderbeg, 27.03.2014 at 05:58
Tarafından yazıldı zombieyeti, 26.03.2014 at 21:10
In theory you are correct, except that this is the case anywhere.
In Russia, 'oil and gas' is called 'food and euros'.
The EU can get its oil from other places, they just have to pay a premium.
If Russia doesn't get its food from the USA or EU, where does it get it from?
Russia import food from Italy, Greece and Turkey alot. If EU/USA impose sanctions on Russia Turkey will still export food to Russia as they are no EU so Eu laws and orders doesnt apply for them. Greece has suffered much lately from USA and EU(though its their own fault they collapsed, EU didnt had right to use their collapse and ruin their country) so they wont listen to USA/EU again as they didnt listen in the 70' 80' 90'. Italy is 7th strong economy, im pretty sure they can do business without EU/USA, why would they stop exporting food to Russia just because USA is messing with them? I doubt italians will cut money supplies that comes from Russia in exchange for food, thats pretty big money. Anyhow, only UK and France will follow USA, others will stay neutral. Even Germany will stay neutral as their economy and industry need energy to keep going and spam money. If Russia cut oil and gas to Germany, german industry will reduce its daily output for 80% because no energy to fuel car factories, shipyards, tool machines.
Again, out of context, again, you obfuscate the point.
The US/EU would 'collapse' without Russias Oil and Gas.
I reply, Russia's 'oil and gas' are 'food and euros'.
I also reminded everyone that the USA and EU don't withhold food shipments except for the most dire of circumstances.
Even if the EU/US were so dependent on Russian oil and gas that they would 'collapse' without it, how long would Russia last without food and euros?
Putin enjoys a high approval rating because there are jobs and bread.
If Russia 'cuts off' fuel to the EU, do you think the EU will just continue shipping food? Food production is *energy intensive*. Logically, the first things to cut off would be agricultural fuel and transport-food-to-Russia-fuel.
EU and USA can get their energy from other places. Where else can Russia get its food, in the vast quantities it needs?
Turkey isn't EU, but Turkey is NATO.
To disrupt food shipments from Turkey would only require the United States to live up to its obligations to "guarantee the territorial sovereignty of the Ukraine".
Yükleniyor...
Yükleniyor...
Black Shark Hesap silindi
27.03.2014 - 08:13
Black Shark Hesap silindi
Tarafından yazıldı zombieyeti, 27.03.2014 at 05:14
Tarafından yazıldı Guest, 27.03.2014 at 04:17
Tarafından yazıldı zombieyeti, 26.03.2014 at 21:10
Tarafından yazıldı Skanderbeg, 25.03.2014 at 14:59
Tarafından yazıldı Guest, 25.03.2014 at 14:37
*ahem* You people seem to have forgot that Russia supplies Europe quite some gas. In fact, the UK started directly buying Russian gas. And Russia can also bomb OPEC countries, therefore can cut off 2 important sources of oil which means NATO would have a hard time. What's an army without oil? Targets.
What about US and EU industry without oil? If i was american and there is no fuel i would rage badly. Because i wont be able to go to work 20km away, will lose atleast 500$ i could earn that day. I wont be able to drive my kid to the game, my wife to the mall and go with my friends fishing. And all that because US government is messing with some Russia 20,000km away.
There will be collapse in USA/EU if oil and gas supplies run off. And in a war, where is EU ging to get it's oil?
In theory you are correct, except that this is the case anywhere.
In Russia, 'oil and gas' is called 'food and euros'.
The EU can get its oil from other places, they just have to pay a premium.
If Russia doesn't get its food from the USA or EU, where does it get it from?
China and India are some choices.
True, China and India both export food (as does Russia) but neither of the three are food self-sufficient, all three import much more food (in calories) than they export. Both (generally) import commodity staples and export finished foodstuffs or exotic fare.
India has food riots at least annually, China has given up ever being food self-sufficient (and now looks to buy not just food, but farmland). In any given period, recently, the largest single category of Russia's imports by USD$ are food, followed by cars/trains/trucks.
This is not necessarily a 'bad thing'. Those familiar with economic history will remember UK revoking the 'Corn Laws' - labor migrated from the fields to the factories, and the UK became wealthy. Many EU countries are not food self-sufficient, but the EU as a whole is - just as some American states and Canadian provinces are not, but their nations, are.
The food shortages in 2007 weren't even caused by a bad harvest; earlier, the USA unwisely moved some agricultural subsidies from the 'pay not to grow' category to 'biofuel'. While the corn for biofuel and food is grown and harvested the same, biofuel corn is not a valued foodstuff.
The corn crop was larger than usual, but 1/3 of it was turned to biofuel. Replacement was rife. Soybeans, for livestock feed, became cheaper than corn. The ripple effect was that this tiny change, never meant to cause violence, caused increased food prices worldwide. In OECD countries, people just paid a bit more for food. In other places, riots broke out.
Big-boy countries use food as a weapon of next-to-last-resort. The USA withheld food from the USSR rarely (the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan being a rare exception) and doesn't even withhold food from North Korea.
You said food? I thought countries that Russia can sell gas to. Now, Belarus and Kazakh can provide food, and Russia also has fields of it's own. In fact, I've heard that Kazkh and Russia combined grow more food than the US. Sorry for wasting your time with such a large post due to my mistake.
Tarafından yazıldı zombieyeti, 27.03.2014 at 05:14
Tarafından yazıldı Guest, 27.03.2014 at 04:17
Tarafından yazıldı zombieyeti, 26.03.2014 at 21:10
Tarafından yazıldı Skanderbeg, 25.03.2014 at 14:59
Tarafından yazıldı Guest, 25.03.2014 at 14:37
*ahem* You people seem to have forgot that Russia supplies Europe quite some gas. In fact, the UK started directly buying Russian gas. And Russia can also bomb OPEC countries, therefore can cut off 2 important sources of oil which means NATO would have a hard time. What's an army without oil? Targets.
What about US and EU industry without oil? If i was american and there is no fuel i would rage badly. Because i wont be able to go to work 20km away, will lose atleast 500$ i could earn that day. I wont be able to drive my kid to the game, my wife to the mall and go with my friends fishing. And all that because US government is messing with some Russia 20,000km away.
There will be collapse in USA/EU if oil and gas supplies run off. And in a war, where is EU ging to get it's oil?
In theory you are correct, except that this is the case anywhere.
In Russia, 'oil and gas' is called 'food and euros'.
The EU can get its oil from other places, they just have to pay a premium.
If Russia doesn't get its food from the USA or EU, where does it get it from?
China and India are some choices.
True, China and India both export food (as does Russia) but neither of the three are food self-sufficient, all three import much more food (in calories) than they export. Both (generally) import commodity staples and export finished foodstuffs or exotic fare.
India has food riots at least annually, China has given up ever being food self-sufficient (and now looks to buy not just food, but farmland). In any given period, recently, the largest single category of Russia's imports by USD$ are food, followed by cars/trains/trucks.
This is not necessarily a 'bad thing'. Those familiar with economic history will remember UK revoking the 'Corn Laws' - labor migrated from the fields to the factories, and the UK became wealthy. Many EU countries are not food self-sufficient, but the EU as a whole is - just as some American states and Canadian provinces are not, but their nations, are.
The food shortages in 2007 weren't even caused by a bad harvest; earlier, the USA unwisely moved some agricultural subsidies from the 'pay not to grow' category to 'biofuel'. While the corn for biofuel and food is grown and harvested the same, biofuel corn is not a valued foodstuff.
The corn crop was larger than usual, but 1/3 of it was turned to biofuel. Replacement was rife. Soybeans, for livestock feed, became cheaper than corn. The ripple effect was that this tiny change, never meant to cause violence, caused increased food prices worldwide. In OECD countries, people just paid a bit more for food. In other places, riots broke out.
Big-boy countries use food as a weapon of next-to-last-resort. The USA withheld food from the USSR rarely (the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan being a rare exception) and doesn't even withhold food from North Korea.
You said food? I thought countries that Russia can sell gas to. Now, Belarus and Kazakh can provide food, and Russia also has fields of it's own. In fact, I've heard that Kazkh and Russia combined grow more food than the US. Sorry for wasting your time with such a large post due to my mistake.
No apologies necessary, but thank you.
My point is that Russia can't get its food many places because it has a large population (9th largest nation) and all the nations with larger populations, except USA and Brazil, are net importers of food. So, outside of the USA and EU, there are few choices that can provide what it needs. Food is Russia's largest category of import: 13% of its imports by $ is food.
The combined agricultural output of the top 20 agricultural products of each of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan is 248,331,685 metric tons. Includes wheat to watermelons.
For the USA, the total agricultural output is 628,736,249 metric tons, with maize/corn topping the list. The USA produces 273,832,130 metric tons of corn/maize, more corn, by MT, than all of the agricultural products of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan.
The EU produces 709,755,299 MT of food.
China 1,182,881,254 MT of food - 4 times the population of the USA, and not even 2 times the food.
India 901,787,593 MT of food - 2 times the population of the EU, and not even 30% more food.
Tarafından yazıldı Skanderbeg, 27.03.2014 at 11:41
Tarafından yazıldı zombieyeti, 27.03.2014 at 09:12
For the USA, the total agricultural output is 628,736,249 metric tons, with maize/corn topping the list. The USA produces 273,832,130 metric tons of corn/maize, more corn, by MT, than all of the agricultural products of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan.
The EU produces 709,755,299 MT of food.
China 1,182,881,254 MT of food - 4 times the population of the USA, and not even 2 times the food.
India 901,787,593 MT of food - 2 times the population of the EU, and not even 30% more food.
But will Italy, Greece and Turkey obey EU/USA order to sanction Russia?
Will Germany obey UK/US order to sanction Russia?
Greece is in debts, collapse, nazis on sight, Germany blackmailing, will they obey EU order, can the afford to lose russian market?
Turkey is in crisis, some 15y/o died after 300 days in come because police officer hit him in the head, women wants more rights, govt ban twitter and youtube, there are riots and demonstrations every single day. Can they afford to lose russian market?
Italy is in crisis as well, provinces want to secede, second assasination on Sardinias mayor was pulled out. Will they risk to lose large market like russian where they have steady income from?
I was only speaking to the 'food' vs. 'energy' question. If trade would continue as normal and the US were to unilaterally call for sanctions, there is certainly no guarantee anyone will honor these. That being said, the UK and USA are much larger export markets for EU goods and services than Russia is. USA is the largest, Russia is 4th. I am unaware of any EU nation exporting more to Russia than they do to the USA/UK. If the USA calls for sanctions, and a country doesn't comply, that country faces losing exports to the USA (I am not sure the UK can cut off exports with another EU nation, legally)
If you're referencing the Budapest Memorandum (reference to UK/US), I am concerned about the 'worming out' of this obligation (moral, if not legal), because the US and UK has similar agreements with 'screwturn' countries like Japan, South Korea, Australia, and all of NATO.
If these nations can no longer be confident that their territorial sovereignty is guaranteed by the USA, they should talk to their scientists and industrialists, make their plans, and leave the NNPT.
Russia and the USA have a balance of powers based on the number of warheads each actively deployed.
This already-precarious balance gets tossed out the window if (as I have already stated) the rest of the EU, and OECD Asia become weapons states. They don't need to build ICBMs, though they have the capability. They only need to have the capability to hit Moscow, and Beijing, respectively. Once this begins, states like Turkey and Brazil will develop-or-buy capability.
All the wheat in Ukraine is not worth risking a nuclear-armed Berlin, not while East Germans with long memories are running the government and military.
