|
|
Community Lounge General chit chat and everyday conversations... come on in |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
04-02-18, 11:04 PM | #1 | |
Community Founder
Top 5 Community Sponsor Join Date: Jan 2018
Last Online: 22-05-24 09:05 AM
Total Donations: £299 (2/29)
Posts: 859
|
Quote:
Well other than that, have only got IBAN as an option right now. I will look into the webmoney option and let you know
__________________
|SOG|Matt Group Founder |
|
05-02-18, 03:34 AM | #2 | |
Community Member
Former |SOG| Member Join Date: Jan 2018
Last Online: 24-10-18 06:42 PM
Total Donations: £0
Posts: 139
|
Quote:
Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk |
|
06-02-18, 05:17 PM | #3 |
Group Manager
Discord Server Manager Join Date: Jan 2018
Last Online: 14-05-20 06:42 AM
Total Donations: £0
Posts: 166
|
It's one of those things, that I think you have to be a top level politician to understand. You probably recall the Ukrainian Revolution that took place in February of 2014, and then the Russian annexation of Crimea that followed? That was derrived from a controversial referendum, of which the official result was a majority support for joining Russia. The referendum was controversial because it was held after unmarked Russian forces with local militias took over the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and Sevestopol, as well as other localities in the region. The issue at its core is, that following this referendum, Putin signed a treaty of accession, essentially annexing Crimea. Russia thus considers Crimea to be Russian and according to the Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev, Crimea has been fully integrated into Russia. This statement also stands to reason; rubles are the only legal tender, and a revision version of the Russian Constitution included Crimea and Sevestopol in the list of federal subjects of the Russian Federation, already two months after the Ukrainian Revolution. On the other side of the dispute stands Ukraine, who disputes the annexation, considering it illegal. The United Nations share this view, asking states not to recognise changes to the integrity of Ukraine. As a result, the EU collectively, USA, Canada, Norway, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and a host of other countries have imposed sanctions on Russia. Of course, this has prompted Russia to implement various sanctions such as the ban on food imports from the EU, USA, Norway, Canada and Australia. So far, everything makes fairly decent sense, in that disconnected, big-politics kinda way. But then this is where my chain falls off; Canada, USA, EU and some other European countries have imposed economic sanctions specifically targetting Crimea. These sanctions prohibit the sale, supply, transfer or export of goods and technology in several sectors. For example, VISA and MasterCard ceased service in Crimea for half a year. Many of these sanctions are still in place. The companies, who ceased service in Crimea during the crisis include such companies as Apple (app store, retail), VISA, Mastercard, Google (Chrome, Play, Adsense), Dell, HP, Valve (Steam), McDonalds, Blizzard Entertainment, Paypal, eBay, Amazon.com. The consequense remain, that a vast array of services have been unavailable in Crimea, and that many services still are, as a result of sanctions that targets Crimea specifically, rather than "just" Russia as a whole. This is the explaination, why something may not be banned in Russia, yet it's banned in Crimea. |
06-02-18, 06:04 PM | #4 | |
Group Inactive Member
Community Sponsor Join Date: Jan 2018
Last Online: 11-06-22 09:35 PM
Total Donations: £25 (16/29)
Posts: 154
|
Quote:
|
|
06-02-18, 08:24 PM | #5 | ||
Group Manager
Discord Server Manager Join Date: Jan 2018
Last Online: 14-05-20 06:42 AM
Total Donations: £0
Posts: 166
|
Quote:
The EU had this to say, when they extended the sanctions till July 2018 (my emphasis): Quote:
You'll probably note the complete absense of any reasoning or justification. At the bottom of the page, they placed a link reading "Is there something wrong with this page?" and I'm tempted to click it and write "IT EXPLAINS NOTHING!!!" |
||
06-02-18, 08:49 PM | #6 | |
Group Inactive Member
Community Sponsor Join Date: Jan 2018
Last Online: 11-06-22 09:35 PM
Total Donations: £25 (16/29)
Posts: 154
|
Quote:
I've heard that Crimea is a strategically and economically important location to Russia due to the naval ports and military bases located there, so I'd speculate that these sanctions weaken the region and put a larger burden on Russia to support it. Maybe they decided that extending those sanctions to the whole of Russia might not be feasible in some way or another? I have no idea why though. Perhaps some of the information is even classified. Foreign policy is such a complicated field, and often with little to no transparency. It's interesting to think about how the whole conflict might develop, and if there will ever be a resolution to it. It seems sort of frozen right now. I haven't even checked how the military situation is in Eastern Ukraine. International/Mainstream media doesn't report on it anymore, from what I have seen, compared to when it all began. |
|
07-02-18, 03:08 PM | #7 | |
Group Manager
Discord Server Manager Join Date: Jan 2018
Last Online: 14-05-20 06:42 AM
Total Donations: £0
Posts: 166
|
Quote:
At the same time, it's important to understand that the goal of sanctions is to "win an argument" and get current conditions fulfilled. The goal isn't to defeat an adversary. For this reason, one must also take care not to cause instability in excess of what would be proportionate to the object of the dispute - or (because again; sanctions work both ways) yourself! For these reasons, I imagine that the applied reasoning could be such as; if we impose these sanctions on the entirety of Russia, rather than "only" Crimea and Sevastopol, then...
Finally, sanctions will also have to produce a tolerable outcome for both sides. That is to say; while sanctions may be imposed, noone wishes for that to turn into a war. The Japaneese Attack on Pearl Harbor, December 7th, 1941 is a good example on the consequences of sanctions, that were (intentionally or not) too strong to "work". Russia was already struggling with macroeconomic challenges, particularly caused by a decline in oil prices in the later 2014. The sanctions combined with the decline in oil prices essentially sent Russia into recession with a GDP growth of -2,2% in Q1 2015. When Russia responded by banning the import of "western" food, in combination with the decline of the Rouble, the prices of food rose, and essentially the inflation was worsened. I don't think the sanctions are at all related to military strategic value. While it's true that Russia has and have had naval bases in the region, sanctions would be largely ineffective against that. |
|
07-02-18, 03:33 PM | #8 | |
Group Inactive Member
Community Sponsor Join Date: Jan 2018
Last Online: 11-06-22 09:35 PM
Total Donations: £25 (16/29)
Posts: 154
|
Quote:
It's funny that we've managed to completely derail this nice thread on the .com domain, though |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|