Russia, US, the West vs ??? WWIII! (Part I)

[Moontanman]

It all sounds like children on a play ground bullying each other...

[michel123456]

 

No, Russia has a sphere of influence. So does the USA. Russia wishes to restore its sphere of influence, while the US has been actively chipping away at it, absorbing parts into its own influence, such as the Baltic, East and Central Europe, Georgia and more recently Ukraine. The behavior of the US (and its allies) pushes Russia into a defensive aggression. The situation where Russia acts as an aggressor is a logical development from the last decade. The question is now how Russia plays its cards. Will it use military force, or its covert ops (as it is doing now) or only political? It seems that Russia is playing a relatively safe game, without direct military involvement (other than the covery ops its does in Ukraine, with some 'green men' without official insignia).

 

Anyway, the situation that Russia tries to create is no different from what the USA already created: The US have lots of influence in Europe. For example, they have a military presence in Europe. That is no occupation force, and it does not mean that the USA owns Europe. But it does show that the US have influence in Europe. Obviously, the opinion of Washington also matters in other, non-military issues.

I have heard there are a lot of U.S. interests in Kazakstan also.

[DimaMazin]

It all sounds like children on a play ground bullying each other...

Something sounds like that "we should stop science development because it can damage religious belief of believing people" . Should we stop propagation of west development because it can damage trust in Russia?

[Roamer]

 

well, while it may have been a pain in the butt, i think we should have done a bit more directly after the dissolution of the USSR. While it would have been quite a task to remove all of them, i think we should have used the support of other countries to remove at least some of the potential threat to the world.

But that's precisely what they did, the Ukraïne was one of those former USSR-countries :\

[CaptainPanic]

But that's precisely what they did, the Ukraïne was one of those former USSR-countries :\

 

Agreed.

This whole conflict started already in 2004 with the Orange revolution, and Europe has been pulling on Ukraine for a long time. While the success in Ukraine was not complete (although there is a western-oriented government in Kiev, the Crimea is now Russian), other countries were absorbed into the EU/NATO sphere of influence completely: the Baltics and Eastern Europe.

 

Actually, the success of the West is exactly why Putin is doing what he's doing now: he has to put an end to the deconstruction of Russian influence. If it would continue a little longer, there wouldn't be anything left.

[Moontanman]

 

Agreed.

This whole conflict started already in 2004 with the Orange revolution, and Europe has been pulling on Ukraine for a long time. While the success in Ukraine was not complete (although there is a western-oriented government in Kiev, the Crimea is now Russian), other countries were absorbed into the EU/NATO sphere of influence completely: the Baltics and Eastern Europe.

 

Actually, the success of the West is exactly why Putin is doing what he's doing now: he has to put an end to the deconstruction of Russian influence. If it would continue a little longer, there wouldn't be anything left.

 

 

I guess the idea of Russia allying it's self with the west is too difficult to comprehend?

[Dekan]

Suppose President Putin orders his Russian army to invade eastern Ukraine. He will get away with it. Because he has nuclear weapons that he can fire at America and destroy it.

 

America won't commit suicide by starting a nuclear war with Russia, and everyone knows that. All this American posturing about "economic sanctions" is horse-manure.

 

So isn't it remarkable that Putin has not yet sent his troops in?

Edited May 9, 2014 by Dekan

[john5746]

Suppose President Putin orders his Russian army to invade eastern Ukraine. He will get away with it. Because he has nuclear weapons that he can fire at America and destroy it.

That's assuming Putin is a psychopath, hell bent on taking all of Ukraine, no matter the cost.

 

America won't commit suicide by starting a nuclear war with Russia, and everyone knows that. All this American posturing about "economic sanctions" is horse-manure.

I really don't think that's the current issue. Ukraine is much more important to Russia and Europe. The US isn't responding militarily to much of anything anymore. It ain't worth it.

 

Sanctions is a better option than sending our young people to kill their young people, don't you think?

 

So isn't it remarkable that Putin has not yet sent his troops in?

Not really, they still remember how painful it can be to occupy countries that don't want them. If Ukraine implodes and some of it sways his way voluntarily, that is a much easier and popular outcome.

[Dekan]

If Putin sends troops into East Ukraine, will Obama declare war on Russia?

[Roamer]

 

 

I guess the idea of Russia allying it's self with the west is too difficult to comprehend?

 

I don't see this happening anytime soon.

But if it did, i doubt it would be a good thing for the world;

too much power would be concentrated in one mega-alliance and the powerfull would no longer keep each other in balance,

it'd take them some ~40 years to raid most resourcerich and strategic locations on this planet.

[Lightmeow]

If Putin sends troops into East Ukraine, will Obama declare war on Russia?

 

Why does the United States care about other peoples wars?

[imatfaal]

 

Why does the United States care about other peoples wars?

 

 

Well Russia's actions could well be described as a breach of the Budapest Memorandum of Nuclear Assurances signed by the United States in 1994. The USA (along with the other Nuclear powers - Russia et al.) were concerned to remove Nuclear Weapons from Nation States they felt might sell or misuse them (Q - How do you actually use them properly?) and they agreed to assure Ukraine's territorial integrity in return for Ukraine becoming a non-nuclear state. There are no strong treaty obligations - merely an agreement to agree; but as Ukraine gave up the world's 3rd largest nuclear arsenal, those that persuaded them to do so and reassured them to regarding their safety might be feeling a modicum of responsibility to act.

[jduff]

That's assuming Putin is a psychopath, hell bent on taking all of Ukraine, no matter the cost.

 

 

 

Heh, John that is the majority of leaders. Psychopaths seem to run the majority of countries world wide. Also Psychopath is a very broad definition to stereotype with. We may even have a few who frequent here.

[swansont]

Heh, John that is the majority of leaders. Psychopaths seem to run the majority of countries world wide. Also Psychopath is a very broad definition to stereotype with. We may even have a few who frequent here.

 

We have world leaders frequenting SFN?

[imatfaal]

 

We have world leaders frequenting SFN?

 

Other than Phi?

[swansont]

 

Other than Phi?

 

Sorry, I should have been more specific. We have world leaders who haven't been deposed by populist movements frequenting SFN?

[jduff]

Just a update. Russia has the green light with its partners(China, Iran)to de-dollar trade with its partners. Instead they will be using rubles and yuan. Considering Russia is the number one natural gas exporter and the number 2 oil exporter for the world. This plays a significant factor in the future economies of all countries. You can fine the details here: http://voiceofrussia.com/2014_05_13/Russia-strives-to-exclude-the-dollar-from-energy-trading-5138/

 

Looks like those sanctions are working! Just gave Russia a excuse to change the economics of the world. Of course China warned both the U.S and Europe about sanctions against Russia. here: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/13/us-ukraine-crisis-china-idUSBREA2C0PB20140313

 

Get to watch this play out. Already see expensive food prices. Can only imagine the cost when this takes affect!

 

And to think. People in the U.S believe China would never side with Russia. It owns too much U.S debt. The reality is BRIC's*(China) is the number 1 economic group in the world. They can drop us like a bad habit! Wonder what would happen if Russia and or China announced that the currency they use is now backed up by a gold standard.

 

As to how friendly our trade partner China is, you better wake up! http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-31/why-did-brics-back-russia-crimea

Edited May 15, 2014 by jduff

[DimaMazin]

Just a update. Russia has the green light with its partners(China, Iran)to de-dollar trade with its partners. Instead they will be using rubles and yuan. Considering Russia is the number one natural gas exporter and the number 2 oil exporter for the world. This plays a significant factor in the future economies of all countries. You can fine the details here: http://voiceofrussia.com/2014_05_13/Russia-strives-to-exclude-the-dollar-from-energy-trading-5138/

 

Looks like those sanctions are working! Just gave Russia a excuse to change the economics of the world. Of course China warned both the U.S and Europe about sanctions against Russia. here: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/13/us-ukraine-crisis-china-idUSBREA2C0PB20140313

 

Get to watch this play out. Already see expensive food prices. Can only imagine the cost when this takes affect!

 

And to think. People in the U.S believe China would never side with Russia. It owns too much U.S debt. The reality is BRIC's*(China) is the number 1 economic group in the world. They can drop us like a bad habit! Wonder what would happen if Russia and or China announced that the currency they use is now backed up by a gold standard.

 

As to how friendly our trade partner China is, you better wake up! http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-31/why-did-brics-back-russia-crimea

Isolated economic cooperation of Russia with China is dangerous to Russia.

[Roamer]

Isolated economic cooperation of Russia with China is dangerous to Russia.

Do you have any argument of why/how coöperation with China would be dangerous for Russia ?

Also why "isolated" ?

[CaptainPanic]

Do you have any argument of why/how coöperation with China would be dangerous for Russia ?

Also why "isolated" ?

 

I think it is quite straightforward: It is a big risk for any nation to rely on the cooperation of 1 country that is outside your sphere of influence. In the current global economy, almost all large trade blocks spread their risks by trading with many partners. If relations go sour with 1 partner, you still have others to trade with. For Russia therefore, it is unfavorable to trade with only China, especially since they do not control China, and would therefore be dependent on the decisions taken in Beijing, with little room to move.

 

I think that DimaMazin used the word "isolated" because jduff seems to suggest that the BRIC(S) nations can develop completely independent from the EU/USA. Since China is the only major economy in the BRICS nations (it has over 50% of the GDP of the BRICS nations), this would effectively mean that Russia would trade only with China. Also, it is worth mentioning that jduff was factually incorrect about the size of their economy: BRICS total GDP is around 15 billion, while the USA has 16 billion all by itself, and the EU is even larger, with around 17 billion, so the size of the economy of the BRICS countries is not even half of the size of the Western economy, and that is excluding all the smaller nations that are depending on the Western nations for trade.

[Roamer]

Ah, i get it, the guy i responded to thought Russia 's trade was being isolated to China.

Russia is stil buying weapons from Europe, and selling gas to Europe including the Ukraïne though.

I also have doubts a country the size of Russia realy does need to trade with others.

[CaptainPanic]

Ah, i get it, the guy i responded to thought Russia 's trade was being isolated to China.

Russia is stil buying weapons from Europe, and selling gas to Europe including the Ukraïne though.

I also have doubts a country the size of Russia realy does need to trade with others.

 

Russia has (relatively speaking) very little industry. In the last decades, Russia's economy has been transformed into a resource economy. From wikipedia:

"Of Russian exports, more than 80% are oil, natural gas, metals and timber."

 

They actually rely very heavily on imports of goods, in exchange for raw materials.

[john5746]

Looks like Obama did the right thing http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/ukraine-crisis-vladimir-putin-orders-troops-to-return-1.2647181

 

Not sure if Putin is really reacting to sanctions, but important point is he can pull back and save face. If we had shown some military bluster, he would look like a coward pulling back. The pro-Russian groups would also be more energetic and the Ukrainians would probably be pissed that it was escalated.

[jduff]

 

I think it is quite straightforward: It is a big risk for any nation to rely on the cooperation of 1 country that is outside your sphere of influence. In the current global economy, almost all large trade blocks spread their risks by trading with many partners. If relations go sour with 1 partner, you still have others to trade with. For Russia therefore, it is unfavorable to trade with only China, especially since they do not control China, and would therefore be dependent on the decisions taken in Beijing, with little room to move.

 

I think that DimaMazin used the word "isolated" because jduff seems to suggest that the BRIC(S) nations can develop completely independent from the EU/USA. Since China is the only major economy in the BRICS nations (it has over 50% of the GDP of the BRICS nations), this would effectively mean that Russia would trade only with China. Also, it is worth mentioning that jduff was factually incorrect about the size of their economy: BRICS total GDP is around 15 billion, while the USA has 16 billion all by itself, and the EU is even larger, with around 17 billion, so the size of the economy of the BRICS countries is not even half of the size of the Western economy, and that is excluding all the smaller nations that are depending on the Western nations for trade.

Had to respond because I really do not like the use of Wikpedia on some subjects. As it is quite dated. As to factually incorrect. Captain, all I can say is you either need to google better or get up with the times. As your post represents what is considered outdated data. In fact the Wikpedia figures are from 2011 not 2014. China is to surpass the U.S this summer economically. http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/d79ffff8-cfb7-11e3-9b2b-00144feabdc0.html

 

Also wanted to give you some additional links. Since you are going on limited information. Especially when GDP is not used anymore for a accurate accounting of a countries economic growth. But only in part!

 

Here are the additional links:

 

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/apr/30/china-overtake-us-worlds-largest-economy

 

In PDF: http://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/files/Lin.pdf

 

As to the isolation question. Ill just give you this: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-05-19/putin-seeks-400-billion-gas-deal-as-ukraine-speeds-china-pivot.html

 

Like I said and make the assertion again. BRIC's countries are breaking out and away from the U.S dollar and the wests monetary system. 4 of the 5 BRIC's member nations are in the top 10 economies of the world. With China positioned to replace the U.S. My factual assertions remain that.

 

Like I said, less google, more research. Everyone can google. But sometimes it is better to data mine on your own. Instead of expecting a service to do it for you!

 

Also you should be watching China very closely. Some big events coming out this week if not next from that country.

 

And most of it has to do with Obama. The timing is right. Considering the weak president we have in office.

Edited May 20, 2014 by jduff

[CaptainPanic]

At this moment, as well as in 2011, China's economy is smaller than the USA, and BRICS is not the largest economic block in the world if you take the Western world as a single block, as you should (EU + USA is more integrated economically than the BRICS countries are).

 

Also, a comparison on purchasing power is not relevant when talking international trade. We are discussing international trade. A Chinese person has a very low price level, and hence almost the same purchasing power, but if they want to buy an American product, they still have to pay the American price, which is a lot higher. Likewise, if Russia wants to buy goods in China, or China wants oil and gas from Russia, they buy it at market price, not at a price compensated for their national purchasing power.

 

I read your other links with interest, but I am still not convinced that BRICS can thrive economically without the Western economies. As it says in the last link you posted, about the gas new pipeline to China, scheduled to open in 2020: "For Gazprom, it is about 20 percent of gas sales in Europe, the company’s largest export market.". Or, as I would say, only 20%.

 

But at least we can agree that the Chinese economy is going to be huge in the future.