SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Papas Fritas writes:
"James B. Stewart writes in the NYT that there's one major difference between now and the last time Russia invaded a neighbor (Czechoslovakia in 1968): Now Moscow has a stock market that provides a minute-by-minute referendum on Putin's military and diplomatic actions.
On Monday, the Russian stock market index (RTSI) fell more than 12 percent, in what a Russian official called panic selling and the ruble plunged on currency markets, forcing the Russian central bank to raise interest rates by one and a half percentage points to defend the currency. On Tuesday, as soon as Mr. Putin said he saw no need for further Russian military intervention, the Russian market rebounded by 6 percent. With tensions on the rise once more on Friday, the Russian market may again gyrate when it opens on Monday. Russia is far more exposed to market fluctuations than many countries, since the Russian government owns a majority stake in a number of the country's largest companies and many Russian companies and banks are fully integrated into the global financial system.
The old Soviet Union, in stark contrast, was all but impervious to foreign economic or business pressure, thanks in part to an ideological commitment to self-sufficiency. By contrast, today "Russia is too weak and vulnerable economically to go to war," says Anders Aslund. "The Kremlin's fundamental mistake has been to ignore its economic weakness and dependence on Europe." Almost half of Russia's exports go to Europe, and three-quarters of its total exports consist of oil and gas. The energy boom is over, and Europe can turn the tables on Russia after its prior gas supply cuts in 2006 and 2009 replacing this gas with liquefied natural gas, gas from Norway and shale gas.
If the European Union sanctioned Russia's gas supply to Europe, Russia would lose $100 billion or one-fifth of its export revenues, and the Russian economy would be in rampant crisis. Other penalties might include asset freezes and the billionaire Russian elite who are pretty much synonymous with Mr. Putin's friends and allies are the ones who are being severely affected by visa bans, which were imposed by President Obama on Thursday. "The recent events were completely irrational, angering the West for no reason," says one Russian economist. "This is what is most scary, especially for businesses. Instead of reforming the stagnating economy, Putin scared everybody for no reason and with no gain in sight. So it is hard to predict his next actions. But I think a real Cold War is unlikely.""
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday March 09 2014, @01:58AM
So you see, we're not gonna blow each other up with nukes. We're probably not even going to fire a single bullet at each other. The future of war is economic war, and both of us are too weakened to damage each other in that fashion. It would be mutually-assured destruction, modern-style.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by jt on Sunday March 09 2014, @02:44AM
Financial and economic MAD, although undesirable, still sounds a much better outcome than the bullets/nukes option.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by b on Sunday March 09 2014, @03:23AM
From the summary, "the Russian government owns a majority stake in a number of the country's largest companies."
In the US, a number of the country's largest companies own a majority stake in the government. Especially military companies.
(Score: 0, Offtopic) by captain normal on Sunday March 09 2014, @04:47AM
I think I've heard all these talking points on Faux News (Yes I actually do check in from time to time to see what they're up to). May I suggest that you also broaden your access to information and check in with other sources, even if you think they do not affirm your beliefs.
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"- --Daniel Patrick Moynihan--
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday March 09 2014, @05:34AM
You're one dumb son of a bitch. Ha, you moron.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by frojack on Sunday March 09 2014, @05:16AM
America has virtually zero influence in this situation.
It has little to do with the wars in the middle east. It has to do with the track record of this administration.
It is totally disrespected in virtually every capital of the world.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by goody on Sunday March 09 2014, @05:23AM
The reasons for the runs on guns and ammo aren't quite that complex or due to some noble patriotic cause. It's from this: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=oba ma%20derangement%20syndrome [urbandictionary.com]
(Score: 0, Troll) by beckett on Sunday March 09 2014, @04:20PM
don't need to some up with some fancy syndrome for what's happening: 6 years on and people still can't wrap their heads around a black president.
(Score: 1) by Ken_g6 on Sunday March 09 2014, @05:36AM
I heard another argument for economic warfare the other day. The US could release oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, dropping the price of oil around the world for awhile. Although the US is producing more oil from fracking lately, I think the Russian economy is still much more dependent on oil prices.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by khchung on Sunday March 09 2014, @05:41AM
So that China can take the opportunity to build up some strategic reserve of its own for cheap? Umm....
The game is quite a bit more complicated when there are more than just two players.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 09 2014, @05:38AM
I think there have been calculations on the likely outcomes of all possible interventions already and Russia is confident that this one is the best for them. The economy of Ukraine is on its knees, so it was an easy choice for the population of Crimea to side with the local cultural and economic power. This isn't the fault Ukrainians who are themselves a quite civilised and culturally rich people, but over the past hundred years have been persecuted most severely, only to be corrupted by Western cultural and financial influences on gaining "independence", so they are in the same boat economically of being fleeced, only now they don't experience quite the same totalitarian rule as they did under the Soviet occupation. Ukraine faces more austerity and sadly the population will suffer once again from the effects of external influences. Many will regret dishing Russia, at least this is the hope of Poutine.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Maow on Sunday March 09 2014, @05:39AM
Don't forget Central America.
And South East Asia.
And... well, you're correct and my point was simply that, for most of the world, this lack of "Street Cred" is not, in fact, anything new.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Taco Cowboy on Sunday March 09 2014, @06:32AM
As an American living in Asia I can attest to the lack of credibility of the United States of America among many countries in Asia.
If you were to talk to people in Asia, most will tell you that they believe Putin more than they believe Obama.
America is no longer the America 30 years ago. When Ronald Reagan was in charge of the Oval Office, Asia truly believed in America, even Deng Xiao Ping had tacit respect for President Reagan.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by hb253 on Sunday March 09 2014, @03:04PM
You must be young. I've been hearing the same criticisms of the US since the 1970's. The US can never win the world opinion game because it is truly damned if it does, damned if it doesn't. If Asians believed in the US back in Reagan's days, the Europeans and Central Americans didn't. If the US tries diplopmatic and peaceful means, people ask why it isn't more muscular. If the US projects power, people complain about the US acting as the world police. It's hopeless and there is no solution.
The firings and offshore outsourcing will not stop until morale improves.
(Score: 1) by Angry Jesus on Sunday March 09 2014, @05:35PM
1000x this. This sort of simplistic, situational criticism is old, tired and completely useless in a critical examination of events. All it does is reveal the ignorance of the critics and says nothing about the US itself.
(Score: 1) by anubi on Sunday March 09 2014, @08:12AM
My take is that international bankers rule the world. These people are international, giving allegiance to no nation, but supporting the United States because we have both controllable politicians and the biggest guns.
The bankers need these guns to enforce their ownership claims on hard assets bought with dollars printed from thin air and loaned at interest. Its in their best interests to "work with" the people who operate the biggest guns.
The United States leads the world in the ability to build anything. We also lead the world in the ability to destroy it.
Would anyone take a banker seriously if he could not enforce his ownership of anything purchased with dollars he created out of thin air? Only by "working with" governments can the banker arrange for tax to be paid in their currency, thus mandating the acceptance of their printed scrip as something of value. Once in, they can now arrange stuff like "fractional banking" so that they can continue to extort usury on scrip which they print with no backing whatsoever. "Full faith of the US Government" my ass!.
This last financial thing we had about six years ago? Look it up! [stlouisfed.org]
It was deliberate!
The banks have been dropping the rates for years trying to get everyone in debt to pay back future dollars which they control the availability of. All they have to do is get people to sign on for loans, then throttle the money supply back ( just as they did ) then foreclose on that which they had printed money out of thin air for purchase. Year after year, merchants like to report year-over-year sales increases. Yes, the banks made it happen by flooding us with dollars, which are then readily sapped up by taxation authorities every time they change hands. We are now against the bottom stop. Zero. Have been for some time now.. and still we are in economic doldrums. We are now at the point that either Congress needs to start passing law rewarding creating employment and reducing rent-seeking behaviour, or we are going to find ourselves re-doing a French Revolution to get rid of the overwhelming load of Marie Antoinettes our Congress, via the tax law pouring from their pens, has created.
Every war I have ever heard of was a banker's war. Oh yes, some like to blame it on God, but the bottom line always drops to who has the "rights" to extort taxes/tithes from the sheep. Hitler, Al Capone, Goldman Sachs... they are all in it trying to get us to drink the kool-aid with their loans, then reel us in.
At any time, a FedHead can appear in front of a microphone and everyone who has drank the kool-aid by signing for one of their loans loses whatever he bought with that loan. Watch these guys.. same MO every time. Loans! Loans! Loans! Buy Now while Rates are Low!.. then they raise the rates ... money supply dries up .. no-one can buy your house for what you paid for it. You can't pay your bills! You lose your home - and all the equity you had. Rinse, lather, repeat when you think the people will trust you. Microphones work wonders for this, as a lot of people seem to think anything spoken through a microphone is the truth.
Incidentally, I wonder how the US would have taken it if the Chinese or Soviets decided to meddle in our Waco thing?
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]