Much of the trade surplus is driven by grain exports. Russia produces almost 12% of the world’s wheat, all non-GMO. Total world wheat production for this period is estimated at about 781 million tons. — yebiga
Having said all that, if I was the Russians I would be very very nervous because, in the immortal words from the opening scene in Patton : "Americans are winners, we hate to lose and love to win" And in this instance winning is going to require something from left field. — yebiga
That graph has the unique attributes of being both correct and irrelevant. Much, if not quite all, Russian resources continue to reach the EU via third party countries. The really significant difference is that the Europeans are paying more for the same resources to pay for the additional layers of middle men and shipping.
But even if that were not the case, the EU and the USA is not the world. It is merely 12% of the world's population. There are new market opportunities for Russia. India is 17% of the world's population. China is another 17% and China has every reason to shift its trading relationship in Russia's favour - as has already happened during this period.. — yebiga
Humans can live without Prada Bags, French Champagne and German Cars. It is more difficult to live without fuel for your transportation systems, very uncomfortable without heating and impossible without food. — yebiga
The Russian population is barely 2% of the world, but its borders constitute 20% of the world's land mass. Only chronic indolence, corruption, and incompetence can explain why a country possessing this fundamental advantage would be incapable of sustaining a robust economy. Those three attributes have riddled Russia throughout its history. But not only have those riches not gone away but with the advance of technology there are even more unparalleled stretches of previously inaccessible and unexploited territory beckoning. — yebiga
The popular Western description echoing that Russia is a gas station impersonating a country is entirely a product of envy. And it is the manifestation of this envy, not Ukraine sovereignty, that drives this conflict. — yebiga
I remember this bothering Streetlight X, the US getting off now because the actions of Putin are so clear obvious.For once in America's recent history, it's realpolitik goals and the morality of the situation happen to intersect: helping the Ukrainians is the right thing to do. — RogueAI
The Russian army went into Ukraine with at the very most a 190,000 troops. There is absolutely no way the Russian army, comprised of a 190,000 troops, could conquer all of Ukraine. — John J. Mearsheimer
Unless someone wants to argue the 190,000 figure is false, we can essentially dismiss the entire western narrative of the Ukraine war. I hope people realise that. — Tzeentch
I'd just like to point out how absolutely pivotal a piece of information like this is to deciphering the actual goings-on vis-à-vis Ukraine.
For many months now I have defended the position (leaning quite often on Mearsheimer's arguments, I will admit) that the Russians never intended to take over all of Ukraine.
Unless someone wants to argue the 190,000 figure is false, we can essentially dismiss the entire western narrative of the Ukraine war. I hope people realise that. — Tzeentch
The plan was to take Kiev, Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson and Odessa, possibly Dnipro. If it suceeded, there would be little to no resistance, as the entire government structure would collapse (with Lviv being the only remaining bigger center). Ukrainians would have no choice but to accept peace on very unfavorable terms, most likely with puppet Russian government installed. How exactly does that 'dismiss the entire western narrative of the Ukraine war'? — Jabberwock
The plan was to take Kiev, Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson and Odessa, possibly Dnipro — Jabberwock
Lol.Ironically, this describes Washington equally well. — Tzeentch
Yes, because it was to be ruled by Ukrainian Quislings preferable to Moscow. And because it was going to be a short war. The main objective has been to get Novorossiya into Russia. That nearly came to be, except the collapse of the Ukrainian army. And the strategic strike into Kyiv was again a great plan on paper. Assuming that Ukrainians wouldn't fight back. But why would they?I'd just like to point out how absolutely pivotal a piece of information like this (that has been public knowledge for a while) is to deciphering the actual goings-on vis-à-vis Ukraine.
For many months now I have defended the position (leaning quite often on Mearsheimer's arguments, I will admit) that the Russians never intended to take over all of Ukraine with their initial invasion. — Tzeentch
Something on the same lines:I prefer your sense of humor over your interpretation of the facts. — Tzeentch
To assume that the fight of Hostomel/Antonov Airport and the whole fight for Kyiv was a distraction is a laughable fantasy. Sorry, but it can't be put in any other way.The Russians hoping to take Kiev with 20,000 troops is a laughable fantasy.
Sorry. but it can't be put in any other way.
It's pretty obvious that the Russians in terms of territory aimed for south eastern Ukraine. — Tzeentch
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.