So you think, it is better to destroy Ukraine now in order to destroy Russia later? Or it is better to help Ukraine now so Russia will recover from its regime? Sounds like the 1st option is better for you in both short run (economy, investments) and long run (Russia is still weak, and West looks strong)aster wrote:Russia is obviously running the show there from the start. The problem with them is that they have the mentality of a clown on steroids, always trying to flex muscles but never able to do so without making fools of themselves.
The west is playing this game quite well, even though most people don't realise that the only way to counter Russia is to go after the elites and NEVER endanger their current economic model. If you target the top people, you are hitting them where it hurts. After all, does the Russian so-called "government" care about anyone else but themselves? Of course not.
If we were to hurt them economically we could in fact help them out and harm ourselves. Currently Russia is an extremely primitive economy that sells raw materials like oil to the West and then spends huge amounts of cash in imports. Why would we want to change that? It is in our interest not to alter the status quo. Strong sanctions would do just that, forcing the Russian economy to develop and move forward to survive.
The French really are a law unto themselves.....zzm9980 wrote:And this is why so many Americans (and others) can't stand the French:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/15/world ... es-us.html
They're one of the primary pro/an-tagnonists of the EU which was pushing Ukraine to join which started all of this shit, yet here they are being Russia's bitches.
Well that'll be the French for you.Sergei82 wrote:Selling warships to Russia, add the EU moratorium on selling weapons to Ukraine at the same time and you will see how much hypocrisy is there.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests