Deranged Rhino Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 More interesting will be the Russian response. One wonders if Russia can do without Euros better than the EU can do without energy. Well, if they squeeze the oligarch's cash -- all of which is in London, especially the illicit ones with mob ties -- and freeze visas into London I bet there will be more than a handful of people who helped put Putin in power that will be more than upset. And from my experience, those are the sorts of guys who don't bother with diplomacy. I think this might be the fastest way to end the crisis, and it's also the one that can allow Putin to save face to the people he needs to save face to. Well, Europe wants what Russia has and Russia wants what Europe has. It could get ugly. Now if we also had what Europe wants, then we would be the country with the final say. What country in this world do you want having the final say? It absolutely could get ugly and I don't disagree with your long term strategy at all. I'm all for that. I just think it's too slow to deal with this immediate issue whereas locking down the dirty money in the west will put more pressure on Putin than anything else we could possibly do that doesn't involve military action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 (edited) Well, if they squeeze the oligarch's cash -- all of which is in London, especially the illicit ones with mob ties -- and freeze visas into London I bet there will be more than a handful of people who helped put Putin in power that will be more than upset. And from my experience, those are the sorts of guys who don't bother with diplomacy. I think this might be the fastest way to end the crisis, and it's also the one that can allow Putin to save face to the people he needs to save face to. It absolutely could get ugly and I don't disagree with your long term strategy at all. I'm all for that. I just think it's too slow to deal with this immediate issue whereas locking down the dirty money in the west will put more pressure on Putin than anything else we could possibly do that doesn't involve military action. I sincerely hope you are right, but this strategy has been out there for more than the ten years we are talking about. Just think, it could have been there for the Crimeria crisis if the a-holes hadn't poo-poo it by saying "it will take 10 years". Edited March 16, 2014 by 3rdnlng Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Well, if they squeeze the oligarch's cash -- all of which is in London, especially the illicit ones with mob ties -- and freeze visas into London I bet there will be more than a handful of people who helped put Putin in power that will be more than upset. And from my experience, those are the sorts of guys who don't bother with diplomacy. I think this might be the fastest way to end the crisis, and it's also the one that can allow Putin to save face to the people he needs to save face to. What makes you think the pressure will be put on Putin instead of London bankers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 (edited) What makes you think the pressure will be put on Putin instead of London bankers Because London bankers are willing business partners for the dirty-money folks. They make a fortune profiting off of the illegal cash that flows through and is held in London banks, money that the oligarchs (many of them ex-KGB who turned their state connections into control of the oil fields or criminal activities that were once kept in check by the Soviet state) keep there. If the Russians are angry about their money being frozen, the anger won't be directed at London Bankers, it will be directed at their old chum Putin who will be the one blamed. It was Putin's move into Crimea that put that money at risk, not the London bankers. If the West squeezes those accounts it will be to try to get those men to put pressure on Putin to pull back so they can get to their money. Putting the pressure on the bankers does nothing to end Putin's drive west or get the dirty money back. Edited March 16, 2014 by GreggyT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted March 16, 2014 Author Share Posted March 16, 2014 Because London bankers are willing business partners for the dirty-money folks. They make a fortune profiting off of the illegal cash that flows through and is held in London banks, money that the oligarchs (many of them ex-KGB who turned their state connections into control of the oil fields or criminal activities that were once kept in check by the Soviet state) keep there. If the Russians are angry about their money being frozen, the anger won't be directed at London Bankers, it will be directed at their old chum Putin who will be the one blamed. It was Putin's move into Crimea that put that money at risk, not the London bankers. If the West squeezes those accounts it will be to try to get those men to put pressure on Putin to pull back so they can get to their money. Putting the pressure on the bankers does nothing to end Putin's drive west or get the dirty money back. And we all know how people who put pressure on Putin end up doing. http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-04-04/the-mysterious-death-of-russian-oligarch-boris-berezovsky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 And we all know how people who put pressure on Putin end up doing. http://www.businessw...oris-berezovsky That was one man going against Putin -- one man without mob ties. The mobbed up thugs Putin helped make billionaires play by different rules. If they all lose their money at once and have their visa's suspended, that's a different situation than a mere one on one problem with a former supporter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Because London bankers are willing business partners for the dirty-money folks. They make a fortune profiting off of the illegal cash that flows through and is held in London banks, money that the oligarchs (many of them ex-KGB who turned their state connections into control of the oil fields or criminal activities that were once kept in check by the Soviet state) keep there. If the Russians are angry about their money being frozen, the anger won't be directed at London Bankers, it will be directed at their old chum Putin who will be the one blamed. It was Putin's move into Crimea that put that money at risk, not the London bankers. If the West squeezes those accounts it will be to try to get those men to put pressure on Putin to pull back so they can get to their money. Putting the pressure on the bankers does nothing to end Putin's drive west or get the dirty money back. The Russian oligarchs know that the UK is run by the London bankers just like Washington is run by Wall Street and will apply pressure accordingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 The Russian oligarchs know that the UK is run by the London bankers just like Washington is run by Wall Street and will apply pressure accordingly. It will be very difficult to do that if they have no visas to get to London. And the bankers do not control who gets visas. Don't make the mistake of thinking the oligarchs are communists in waiting who share Putin's desires to reconstitute the old Soviet Bloc -- the majority of these guys are the most die hard capitalists in all of Russia. They don't care about international politics or restoring the Soviet Union (even the ones who came from KGB). They care about the only thing that matters to them: money. If Putin's territory grabs interfere with their ability to access their source of their power, which in turn will interfere with their vast criminal enterprises, these oligarchs (the mobbed up ones) most assuredly will not be speaking to London bankers to remedy the problem. They will be speaking to their close friend who depends on them more than they depend on him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 50% of the vote in, 95.5% of the Crimea supports unification with Russia. Yeah, that sounds like an honest referendum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 The Russian oligarchs know that the UK is run by the London bankers just like Washington is run by Wall Street and will apply pressure accordingly. You're so predicable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 (edited) Don't worry........................... John Kerry's Monday ultimatum is about to hit. . Russians March against Putin By Robert Zubrin On March 15, there were two demonstrations in Moscow, one for and one against Russian intervention in Ukraine. A friend of mine in Russia sent me a link to an amateur video taken of both marches. Here it is: The first half of the video shows the “March for Peace,” opposing intervention. The banner leading the march reads “Hands off Ukraine”; another banner further back reads “bring the Russian forces home.” The demonstrators are chanting “Russia without Putin!” In addition to Ukrainian and Russian flags, the protesters carry flags reading “Solidarity” and “Party of Progress.” A rough estimate would place the size of the demonstration at about 50,000 people. The second half of the video shows the pro-Putin demonstration. It is led by red-jacketed members of a paramilitary organization. These appear to have been bused in for the occasion, as some of their banners indicate that they represent the Volga or other distant regions. They are carrying Russian and Soviet flags. The size of the demonstration appears to be on the order of a few thousand. Two things stand out. First, it is remarkable, given its total control of the media and the advantage of being able to employ a simple nationalist appeal, that the regime was not able to mobilize a genuine mass demonstration in its support. Second, given the risks that they face opposing the regime at any time, but most especially under current circumstances, the anti-Putin demonstrators’ turnout was truly impressive. The state media has responded by hysterically denouncing the peace marchers as “traitors.” It would appear that the thought police have reason to be concerned. Edited March 17, 2014 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Has an ultimatum ever worked in any capacity? I am not talking my parents using it on me to clean my room or I could not go outside, or when it is clear one side is not going to abide by the other. All they do is make pretty headlines and allow for the weaker of the two to attempt a negotiation. But, the one who is given the ultimatum ultimately gets the W. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 You're so predicable well this is certainly predictable http://sploid.gizmodo.com/heres-a-map-that-shows-which-states-have-the-longest-a-1526564070 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Our country has the energy reserves that the world needs. We are too stupid to exploit that. We could solve our geopolitical problems along with our financial problems with becoming the world's energy store. We don't even have to lift a gun. Phucking libs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 well this is certainly predictable http://sploid.gizmod...st-a-1526564070 What a twisted dick head Got the new rape stats yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 What a twisted dick head Got the new rape stats yet? yep Alaska still #1 in rapes but only 3rd in overall violent crimes losing to Tennessee and Nevada It may seem incongruous that Alaska, which has a low poverty rate and high levels of high school and college graduates, would be among the states with the worst crime rates. It has among the worst violent crime rates in part because of its forcible rape rate: 79.7 per 100,000 residents, the nation’s highest rate. (Next is South Dakota, with a rate of 70.2 per 100,000.) Also disturbing, a 2010 study suggests that 37% of women who live in Alaska say they’ve “suffered some form of sexual assault in their lives,” the Anchorage Daily News reported. Alaska is also second in aggravated assaults. While rape and assault rates are high, other crime levels are average. http://247wallst.com/special-report/2013/10/04/the-most-dangerous-states-in-america/3/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 (edited) yep Alaska still #1 in rapes but only 3rd in overall violent crimes losing to Tennessee and Nevada http://247wallst.com/special-report/2013/10/04/the-most-dangerous-states-in-america/3/ The reason for this is more than likely the massive concentration of Native Americans living in Alaska (15% of the Alaskan population as compared with 1.2% nationally). For whatever reason, rapes are far more common in that subset of the population, accounting for some 61% of all rapes in the state. Edited March 17, 2014 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Saw this on Reddit Conspiracies (so... that should tell you all you need to know about its authenticity) and thought it would be worth a chuckle here: "I am using multiple proxies to deliver this message. I cannot say and you would not understand the nature of my business, but you must spread this information. Everything you know or think you know about the Ukrainian crisis is wrong. The US and Russia are working TOGETHER on this project, their public arguments are to conceal the nature of the true plan. Tomorrow at 13:00 UTC, Russia will make a move into Eastern Ukraine. It will be very, very bloody should the Ukrainian army resist. Hours later Obama will announce NATO moving troops into Western Ukraine. Shots will not be fired between NATO and Russia, and an agreement of sorts will be made between Obama and Putin. This agreement will be the downfall of the free world. I cannot describe to you why, you would not understand, but you must watch for these events to unfold and you must help stop the agreement. Sadly, WWIII is the only thing that can save us, given where we are right now. At 12:00 UTC CNN will report troop movements of Russian soldiers staging in Crimea and Western Russia. One hour later the invasion begins, watch for it. I am using multiple proxies to deliver this message. I cannot say and you would not understand the nature of my business, but you must spread this information. Everything you know or think you know about the Ukrainian crisis is wrong. The US and Russia are working TOGETHER on this project, their public arguments are to conceal the nature of the true plan. Tomorrow at 13:00 UTC, Russia will make a move into Eastern Ukraine. It will be very, very bloody should the Ukrainian army resist. Hours later Obama will announce NATO moving troops into Western Ukraine. Shots will not be fired between NATO and Russia, and an agreement of sorts will be made between Obama and Putin. This agreement will be the downfall of the free world. I cannot describe to you why, you would not understand, but you must watch for these events to unfold and you must help stop the agreement. Sadly, WWIII is the only thing that can save us, given where we are right now. At 12:00 UTC CNN will report troop movements of Russian soldiers staging in Crimea and Western Russia. One hour later the invasion begins, watch for it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 The reason for this is more than likely the massive concentration of Native Americans living in Alaska (15% of the Alaskan population as compared with 1.2% nationally). For whatever reason, rapes are far more common in that subset of the population, accounting for some 61% of all rapes in the state. yep 61% of the rapes happen to Native American women In more than 80 percent of cases, the perpetrator is a non-native male against a native or Alaskan female. This differs from rapes against white and black females, which are largely interracial. This statistic poses a huge problem because non-native people cannot be persecuted in tribal courts, and it is often very difficult for Native American and Alaskan women to access the resources necessary to persecute the non-native perpetrator in a non-native court, and thus impunity is abundant. http://www.worldette.com/make-a-difference/care/2012/native-american-alaskan-women/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 yep 61% of the rapes happen to Native American women http://www.worldette.com/make-a-difference/care/2012/native-american-alaskan-women/ I'm not saying that the 80%+ figure is inaccurate; but given the lack of data sourcing within the link you posted, I'm going to say it's a bit dubious, given that I haven't seen that figure elsewhere. Do you have any other sources? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts