AP, Reuters, DW if you want.So no idea then ok thanks
He won the last elections with 104% of the vote mate! lol
AP, Reuters, DW if you want.So no idea then ok thanks
he is not in NATO, Turkey is. Also why did you edit your post after I replied to it?What do you mean "end of". That makes human rights abuses fine then.
I'm glad you've clarified you are happy to support human rights abuses to get what you want. Dont go taking any moral high ground moving forward though.
Oh and do you think the fact hes in Nato either:
1) Means that human rights abuses are good?
2) Means Nato is bad?
So no idea then ok thanks
My position has never been that all of that is "small". It's that the central bank reserves issue is probably a lot more manageable than the trade implications, which are more of a medium and long-term problem.Im amazed at the viewpoint that this is "small". Cut off the central banks reserves, cut off trade and FX capability and there is no way this is "small".
Explosion in Odesa, air raid sirens and call to go to the bomb sheltets in Kiev.
Dreading it.
Well, yes, NOT Russian sources which are questionable at the best of times let alone when getting battered by a second rate armySo no idea then ok thanks
That’s what they saidNo ceasefire until the peace talks finish?
AP, Reuters, DW if you want.
He won the last elections with 104% of the vote mate! lol
In fact, the more I read this the more absurd it sounds. You don’t honestly believe it do you?!70% approval rating Domestically which has risen on the back of the invasion
Military advantages maybe not - diplomatically maybe they doLots of fear being struck regarding Russia’s increase in nuclear readiness. Irresponsible from POOtin - YES….but credible - NO. It’s just posturing, and unconvincing at that.
He has no need for nuclear weapons in Ukraine. He could level the city’s with artillery, missiles, and conventional air strikes over a few weeks if he wanted to go all in.
Nuclear weapons have no military advantage other than to deter an enemy from using them against you. The very meaning of “Mutual assured destruction“
Ceasefire or no ceasefire?That’s what they said
He does have a lot of domestic supportIn fact, the more I read this the more absurd it sounds. You don’t honestly believe it do you?!
No ceasefireCeasefire or no ceasefire?
Reported that this will be the case, yes.No ceasefire until the peace talks finish?
My position has never been that all of that is "small". It's that the central bank reserves issue is probably a lot more manageable than the trade implications, which are more of a medium and long-term problem.
With a little creativity, Putin can probably finagle a way out of the immediate problems the sanctions create. What will surely be a problem is the implications for government revenues via taxation that will result from a dip in the sale of oil and gas, and the potential inability of those employers to avoid massive layoffs on the production side.
What may also be a problem is difficulty in repairing existing equipment, and producing enough stuff to redirect oil and gas production to plug the hole in revenues. I don't have data that would address that question, and it's way too focused a question to Google. We would need a well-connected area specialist to give us that answer.
Connection to the international banking system won't much matter to most individuals in Russia, as long as alternatives to settling payment can be found. Oligarchs not under sanctions are functionally multinationals that will be inconvenienced. Export and import businesses, and those that depend upon them in order to function, are going to take a hit. The relevant question is how big that punch will be, and what Putin and his economic team have up their sleeves for dealing with it.
Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.