How would Russia react to EU economic blockade?

[EnlightenmentHK]

Some parts of that rant are true, yet most of it can be applied to China and the US, yet they get about a quarter as many negative threads as Russia does.

I could give you an equally vitriolic and accurate China rant if you'd like. There are a number of things they do that one can be legitimately irritated by. If there happens to be a dearth of negative China vs. Russia threads I can only assume its coincidence. They both deserve them equally.

The US is another matter entirely though. We actually are a legitimately democratic country with extensive due process and rule of law, with respect for civil liberties and the ideal of national self-determination. We actually do champion human rights, not as part of a separate agenda, but as an agenda unto itself. We don't always live up to our rhetoric and there are times when we are indeed the thug and belligerent. But there is no mistaking that even under our worst leaders, those 'virtues' (civil liberties, human rights, democracy, etc) are treated as self-evident 'goods' to be pursued due to their own merits, even if we often sideline or ignore them in the pursuit of more selfish or even sinister interests.

It may not make much different to the family in 3rd world nowhere that has a US bomb dropped on their head, but China barely knows what a human right is and Russia simply doesn't care. They do not see their role to be a positive influence on the world nor do they in any way attempt to pursue that. They are amoral at best. The US despite its many flaws genuinely believes itself to be a moral country and at times actively pushes for a more moral world even while often at the same time committing acts that are by any reasonable measure selfish, destructive, and/or immoral. I'm not trying to excuse our many flaws and crimes, but simply trying to distinguish us from countries like Russia and China who, quite frankly, just don't give a damn.

 

[Snorrius]

Why? Baltic countries have land connection with the rest of the EU, they'd not be isolated. Besides, Baltic sea would be controlled by the EU.

By being blockaded I meant that they will actually be cut off any activity with Russia. A significant part of their economy depends on transit of goods, part of population have various business in Russia. Economy blockade of Russia will seriously hit Baltic states. It is also true for some other countries: Finland which already suffered once after collapse of SU, Germany which will lose a big market and so on.

Good point, but don't forget the US is neutral in this dispute. They'd probably force Pakistan to offer some bases.

Yes, but it will be still a problem. You also should consider that economy blockade of Russia will also mean that any transit Europe via Russia and Central Asia may also stop.

Impossible. And even if you somehow managed to build a nuclear programme from scratch in less that 3 years (remember that Russian economy would be destroyed by then)

Actually, they only need ready to use nukes. That will be more than enough.

You also overstimate the crash of economy. Of course, consumer economy will be devastated, but it is not an only option for Russia. After all, it did not take such deep roots like in Western countries, and current crisis already hit it seriously.

why should it interest the EU?

Well, who knows? Suddenly opponents of such blockade may arise among EU members .

Again, impossible - why would Iceland join blockaded Russia and its collapsing economy?

I let my fantasy to roam freely here. After all, if you managed to get EU to blockade Russia somehow secured energy routes, why Iceland do not join Union of Russia and Belarus?

 

[Camikaze]

Well, my general thoughts are that Russia would be absolutely screwed, as any nation in the world would be. But, there are options that they would be more likely to pursue in this event.

The problem with military solution in this case is that it wouldn't bring any results - Russia would still be blockaded, it's navy doesn't stand a chance against EU fleets combined.

So, even if the Russian somehow managed to get their ships out of Baltic/Black seas, they'd be destroyed in the Atlantic/Mediterranean.

Geographic isolation has always been a source of discomfort for Russia - they lack solid sea connections with major trade partners. This weakness has always motivated Russia to expand more and more to secure more connections with other powers.

I don't argue that Russia would lose horribly and convincingly, but they may put up a half-decent fight, and would try to, probably.

It would either be that or retreat back into their Soviet-style shell. This, of course, would be disastrous for their economy and people, but would probably allow them to continue existing.

I don't quite follow your logic here.

Well, the horrendous logistical problems imposed on Russia would also be imposed on China. They would have all this trade coming in where it hasn't before, and so their would be no Chinese capability to deal with it. It would put pressure on China in the same way that a ship will sink if you fill it with too much gold, or in the same way that a door frame will bust if five hefty men try and walk through it at the same time. The logistical problems would be shared by China.

But does China see the West as one entity? This is how the Russians see it, always assuming that the Americans are behind everything that happens. China, on the other hand, might see Europe as being quite different from the US. Besides, this would be a great opportunity for the Chinese to puppetize Russia or drive it off its "sphere of influence" in Central Asia (China has interest in this region too).

I'm not saying they see the West as one entity (although they do, more so than, say, the West sees itself). But they don't seem presently inclined to help out the West in military and aggressive action at this point of time. Perhaps some time in the distant future, but it is probably in China's best interests to maintain some sort of world balance of power, more than European and American hegemony, which would be created with the removal of Russia, possibly.

I still don't see how could China help preventing Russia's economic collapse (and I mean REAL collapse) if the EU didn't lift its embargo.

They wouldn't be able to stop it, but they could slow it, and use it to their advantage as much as possible. They could take control of Russia either through the potentially difficult invasion of huge tracts of land (), or through the friendly manipulation of the inevitably collapsing Russia.

 

[Snorrius]

They are amoral at best. The US despite its many flaws genuinely believes itself to be a moral country and at times actively pushes for a more moral world even while often at the same time committing acts that are by any reasonable measure selfish, destructive, and/or immoral. I'm not trying to excuse our many flaws and crimes, but simply trying to distinguish us from countries like Russia and China who, quite frankly, just don't give a damn.

Amoral, you say? Do you know that one of the traditional Russian mottos is "Spirituality, Sobornost, Orthodoxy"? And everyone knows that US is actually modern Babylon soaked with sin .

 

[EnlightenmentHK]

Amoral, you say? Do you know that one of the traditional Russian mottos is "Spirituality, Sobornost, Orthodoxy"? And everyone knows that US is actually modern Babylon soaked with sin .

No idea what I'm supposed to get from this, but ok.

 

[Snorrius]

No idea what I'm supposed to get from this, but ok.

I just found funny your talk about being moral and all, and Russia and China are not. To your information, quite a few Russians consider Russia as a center of world spirituality and US as modern Babylon full of sin. I just found you talk very similar to them.

As for China, as far as I know one of national themes from the oldest times is that China is in the center of the world, and other countries are just barbarian states.

Your thoughts about US being moral and others are not were so funny similar to such views that I could not help but laugh out loud .

 

[EnlightenmentHK]

I just found funny your talk about being moral and all, and Russia and China are not. To your information, quite a few Russians consider Russia as a center of world spirituality and US as modern Babylon full of sin. I just found you talk very similar to them.

As for China, as far as I know one of national themes from the oldest times is that China is in the center of the world, and other countries are just barbarian states.

Your thoughts about US being moral and others are not were so funny similar to such views that I could not help but laugh out loud .

Morality has nothing to do with spirituality. They're not mutually exclusive of course, but one does not need the other to exist. Believing you're the center of the world while the rest are barbarians, or believing you're the center of spirituality while other places are havens of decadent sin are not modern, enlightened, or moral mentalities. In fact they're quite backwater and childish.

Also I did not say 'others are not' moral, I said Russia and China are not. Which isn't exactly a hard viewpoint to justify, but it is a difficult one to discount. Russia and China are self-interested thugs and regional bullies who have never (that I'm aware of) in their recent history pursued an objective for primarily virtuous reasons.

 

[Hehehe]

Threaten Europe? And Russia is accused of being stuck in the cold war?

I said that Egypt, Saudi Arabia or Columbia don't really threathen Europe. I didn't say Russia treathens Europe.

Russia has neither the desire or the ability to go to war with Europe

I don't really think that Russia would go to war against Europe (as I said in my earlier post).

this is all in your head. Jesus Christ.

Yeah, that's me, always making things up.

All I'm saying that Russia's recent behaviour has me a little bit worried (still, personally I don't think Russia really threatens Europe), and that some posters might see Russia more of a threat than the aforementioned Egypt, Saudi Arabia or Columbia.

 

[RedRalph]

Well, Iran and Pakisrtan supposedly pose a very real threat to Europe (enough that a missile shield is apparently warranted against one), yet how many threads do you see about Iran?

 

[Richard Cribb]

The US is another matter entirely though. We actually are a legitimately democratic country with extensive due process and rule of law, with respect for civil liberties and the ideal of national self-determination. We actually do champion human rights, not as part of a separate agenda, but as an agenda unto itself. We don't always live up to our rhetoric and there are times when we are indeed the thug and belligerent. But there is no mistaking that even under our worst leaders, those 'virtues' (civil liberties, human rights, democracy, etc) are treated as self-evident 'goods' to be pursued due to their own merits, even if we often sideline or ignore them in the pursuit of more selfish or even sinister interests.

It may not make much different to the family in 3rd world nowhere that has a US bomb dropped on their head, but China barely knows what a human right is and Russia simply doesn't care. They do not see their role to be a positive influence on the world nor do they in any way attempt to pursue that. They are amoral at best. The US despite its many flaws genuinely believes itself to be a moral country and at times actively pushes for a more moral world even while often at the same time committing acts that are by any reasonable measure selfish, destructive, and/or immoral. I'm not trying to excuse our many flaws and crimes, but simply trying to distinguish us from countries like Russia and China who, quite frankly, just don't give a damn.

Balderdash.
Your country never cared a fig about human rights and morality. Your morality is the right of the divine capital and for that you have propped up or even brought to power some of the worst regimes in history while always been in the front to fight progressive forces everywhere.
But by all means, if it makes you happy, lull yourself to sleep with fine phrases and the belief in your non-existent superiority. Only don't accuse other of childishness and selfrighteousness. Have a good look in the mirror instead.
On topic I agree with RRW, this mesalliance between reactionaries across the Atlantic is peculair and depressing.

 

[Hehehe]

Well, Iran and Pakisrtan supposedly pose a very real threat to Europe (enough that a missile shield is apparently warranted against one), yet how many threads do you see about Iran?

Well what is there to discuss about Iran? Does someone really think Iran is the good guy?

 

[RedRalph]

Well what is there to discuss about Iran? Does someone really think Iran is the good guy?

What is there to discuss? Judging by the amount the media covers them, plenty

 

[EnlightenmentHK]

Balderdash.
Your country never cared a fig about human rights and morality. Your morality is the right of the divine capital and for that you have propped up or even brought to power some of the worst regimes in history while always been in the front to fight progressive forces everywhere.
But by all means, if it makes you happy, lull yourself to sleep with fine phrases and the belief in your non-existent superiority. Only don't accuse other of childishness and selfrighteousness. Have a good look in the mirror instead.
On topic I agree with RRW, this mesalliance between reactionaries across the Atlantic is peculair and depressing.

WTH? The US has been a significant (and at times the single most significant) force in the global push for national self-determination, democratic government, the establishment of and respect for international law, free trade, civil liberties, and yes, human rights. The US was pushing for most of these things a generation before Europe was ready to take it seriously. And the US was amongst the earliest to champion the rest of them that didn't make it in Wilson's 'initial cut'.

That doesn't mean we haven't selfishly pursued our own interests at times to the detriment of other peoples. But we have almost always advocated these things in rhetoric, and sometimes even in deed. (though certainly not always) When was the last time Russia or China spoke loudly and boldly about human rights for any reason other than to distract from their own violations or to justify some primarily self-interested action of their own? The US understands that these are virtues to be pursued for their own sake and they speak as if that is the case. You may say action trumps words and that probably is the case, but words keeps them front and center. Words help to enshrine this mentality as law and fact.

I'd prefer we move beyond words to deed and in many cases we have. In many others we've let self-interest trump, often unjustifiably. But in the sum total of our actions over the last 100 years, America has been a positive force and influence in the world. I can't really say the same for Russia or China.

 

[RedRalph]

But we have almost always advocated these things in rhetoric, and sometimes even in deed. (though certainly not always)

Considering this, why the hell are you holding up the US as the paragon of morality? These arent end in their selves to the US, they are means to an end, and when it dosent suit them, they drop them instantly, as is the case with Saudi Arabia etc... the only big difference in rhetoric between the USA and most of the rest of the world is that the US is utterly hypocritical. Of course human rights are bad in China, but they dont lecture the rest of the world while propping up the likes of SA and Egypt

 

[EnlightenmentHK]

Considering this, why the hell are you holding up the US as the paragon of morality? These arent end in their selves to the US, they are means to an end, and when it dosent suit them, they drop them instantly, as is the case with Saudi Arabia etc... the only big difference in rhetoric between the USA and most of the rest of the world is that the US is utterly hypocritical. Of course human rights are bad in China, but they dont lecture the rest of the world while propping up the likes of SA and Egypt

I don't believe I was holding up the US as a paragon of morality. Though we have been a force for it at times. However lobbing them in with patently immoral or amoral nations like Russia or China misses the mark by a mile and that's where this debate initially started.

 

[RedRalph]

I don't believe I was holding up the US as a paragon of morality. Though we have been a force for it at times. However lobbing them in with patently immoral or amoral nations like Russia or China misses the mark by a mile and that's where this debate initially started.

In the time since Russia has existed in its present form, how exactly has it been so much worse for the world when compared to the US? Likewise China in the same period? I'm well aware of both countries shortcomings, and they have many of them (main one being that they are both capitalist and China is particularly brutal), but what specifically do you think makes the US so much better?

 

[EnlightenmentHK]

Considering this, why the hell are you holding up the US as the paragon of morality? These arent end in their selves to the US, they are means to an end, and when it dosent suit them, they drop them instantly, as is the case with Saudi Arabia etc... the only big difference in rhetoric between the USA and most of the rest of the world is that the US is utterly hypocritical. Of course human rights are bad in China, but they dont lecture the rest of the world while propping up the likes of SA and Egypt

On the second part, who cares if its hypocritical? Where is it written that one cannot advocate for human rights or criticize human rights abuses if you've got some skeletons in your own closet? If it is written, despite my zealous advocacy of free speech, that's a book that needs to be burned. Human rights are a self-evident good that should be the pursuit of all civilized nations. It should be shouted from the rooftops by everyone. Major violations criticized from the halls of power in every capitol throughout the world.

Our own violations don't make China's any more excusable or forgivable. We should both be put up on a pedestal to be mocked and shamed, hell we should do it to eachother to the extent that our crimes merit. Bringing to light human rights abuses and applying diplomatic pressure because of them is the moral obligation of every nation in the world. And the nations with clean hands and dirty should all take part. Looking or even being hypocritical while doing it should not be a concern.

 

[EnlightenmentHK]

In the time since Russia has existed in its present form, how exactly has it been so much worse for the world when compared to the US? Likewise China in the same period? I'm well aware of both countries shortcomings, and they have many of them (main one being that they are both capitalist and China is particularly brutal), but what specifically do you think makes the US so much better?

Well Russia has pretty much decided to ignore Democracy and rule of law. Its suppressed the free press, persecuted political dissidents, and outright bullied half the nations near it while wielding its natural gas and oil reserves as a tool of economic extortion. Oh yeah, than Chechnya...and Georgia.

China has helped to sponsor an active genocide in Darfur, the well publicized Tibet stuff, rampant persecution of political and religious dissidents, second class (that's being generous, the actual treatment is pretty horrific) citizen status for rural inhabitants, rampant corruption, absent democracy, no real due process or rule of law, etc, etc.

And all throughout this recent history they have not once advocated human rights primarily for its own sake. They have not sought international cooperation as anything other than a means to their own ends. They've played UN road block to several just and necessary international interventions. Outside of resources and economics, I can't point to any positive contribution they've made to the world in the last couple decades.

No, the US at her worst is not in their class. These are thug states.

 

[Patroklos]

Threaten Europe? And Russia is accused of being stuck in the cold war? Russia has neither the desire or the ability to go to war with Europe, this is all in your head. Jesus Christ. Russia didn't even start the war with Georgia... funny thing is, certain posters here would have been cheerleading Russia if Georgia had happened to be a Muslim country

Except most did support Russia agains Chechnya until they started fuel air bombing cities.

Well, Iran and Pakisrtan supposedly pose a very real threat to Europe (enough that a missile shield is apparently warranted against one), yet how many threads do you see about Iran?

Are you honestly trying to say there are no threads about Iran or Pakistan?

 

[red_elk]

The US has been a significant (and at times the single most significant) force in the global push for national self-determination, democratic government, the establishment of and respect for international law, free trade, civil liberties, and yes, human rights. The US was pushing for most of these things a generation before Europe was ready to take it seriously. And the US was amongst the earliest to champion the rest of them that didn't make it in Wilson's 'initial cut'.

Remind me please, the years when slavery and racial segregation was cancelled in the US. What was the situation with similar rights in Europe and "amoral" Russia at the same time?