What good does sanctioning Russia do?

danmand said:

More sanctions is a good. It will create a stronger and more independent Europe.

Click to expand...

Butler1000 said:

Where will they get their gas?

Click to expand...

danmand said:

From Russia. Europe gets its gas from Russia now, and that is what the new sanctions are targeting. USA would rather supply Europe with (much more expensive) LNG.

Click to expand...

Senior national security officials said McMaster was dismayed that his recommendations, backed by his senior director for Russia, Fiona Hill, about taking a tough stance with Russian President Vladimir Putin, had been ignored.

Trump has questioned the U.S. intelligence community's conclusion that Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election to try to help him defeat Democrat Hillary Clinton.

Click to expand...

Butler1000 said:

Right. That's a neat circular argument there. Actions speak. If he signs the bill and no blackmail appears what then? Does this mean there is no leverage?

Click to expand...

Butler1000 said:

How is this incompetence?

Click to expand...

Anbarandy said:

Your so-called 'savages' from 45 years ago now wear expensive suits, are chauffeured in expensive scars, are billionaires and belong to a ruling elite controlled by and taking their orders, like they did in the Trump/Russia collusion, from their $200+billion killer KGB-ruler Putin who has by all accounts has financially raped the mass of Russians of the wealth that should have been theirs, not his and his cronies.

The 'sanctions bill' in addition to the Magintsky Act is intended to target those financial and thus political levers of power and control resting in the hands of Putin. The outcry of rage and indignation expressed by Putin reinforces this.

Those most opposed to the sanctions are Putin and Trump and none need not wonder why.

Also companies from the oil, energy, banking, aerospace, auto and heavy manufacturing industries have all raised concerns with the details of the sanctions measure. While the corporations insist they're not against new sanctions on Russia and not seeking to kill the bill, they have argued that the legislation has unintended consequences that will ultimately harm their businesses, rather than Russia.

European countries have also objected to the bill, saying it will disadvantage their energy companies.



So any reasonable person is able to conclude those who complain the loudest against the sanctions are those who are most financially well off and politically compromised/vested/criminally culpable.

Now please tell us how this waiting for The Don sanctions bill hurts ALL RUSSIANS?

Click to expand...

oagre said:

Why would they have changed? What's so special about the last 30 years? Russia is still an authoritarian state with close control on its media. Opposition media is forcibly closed often, including websites. TV is a state monopoly. Neighbours are encouraged to rat out their "disloyal" acquaintances, just like under Stalin. My own experience of Russians is that they are as brainwashed by Putin as you are by Trump.

Unlike you, I know a lot of Russians and "knew" a lot more before they turned on me over the Invasion of Crimea and Eastern Ukraine when they called me an American spy and blocked me from their pages. Russians are basically nuts.

Click to expand...

slowandeasy said:

Your lack of understanding is astounding. I picture you as a guy in his 70s but either you have become senile or lost your memory if you do not see a vast change in Russians today vs 30 or 40 years ago. Hint: there was this thing called the soviet union a long time ago.

And yes, russians are a bit crazy.

Click to expand...

slowandeasy said:

Your lack of understanding is astounding. I picture you as a guy in his 70s but either you have become senile or lost your memory if you do not see a vast change in Russians today vs 30 or 40 years ago. Hint: there was this thing called the soviet union a long time ago.

And yes, russians are a bit crazy.

Click to expand...

The House on Tuesday voted overwhelmingly to advance new financial sanctions against key U.S. adversaries and deliver a foreign-policy brushback to President Trump by limiting his ability to waive many of them.

Included in the package, which passed 419 to 3, are new measures targeting key Russian officials in retaliation for that country’s alleged interference in the 2016 presidential election, as well as sanctions against Iran and North Korea in response to those nations’ weapons programs.

Members of the Trump administration, including Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, have resisted the congressional push — in particular a provision attached to the Russian and Iranian measures that would require Congress to sign off on any move to relieve those sanctions.

The legislation was revised last week to address some administration concerns, including its potential effect on overseas oil-and-gas projects that include Russian partners. But the bill passed Tuesday retains the congressional review requirement.

“These three regimes in different parts of the world are threatening vital U.S. interests, and they are destabilizing their neighbors,” House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Edward R. Royce (R-Calif.) said Tuesday. “It is well past time that we forcefully respond.”

White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders declined to say Monday whether Trump would sign or veto the bill, adding that the president “has been very vocal about his support for continuing sanctions on those three countries.” The administration did not issue a formal statement laying out its position, as is customary for major bills.

“He has no intention of getting rid of them, but he wants to make sure we get the best deal for the American people possible,” Sanders said. “Congress does not have the best record on that … He’s going to study that legislation and see what the final product looks like.”


But the administration’s posture toward Russia has emerged as one of the few areas where congressional Republicans have been willing to openly buck the White House’s wishes.

An initial Senate bill targeting Iran and Russia passed in June on a vote of 98 to 2, with only Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) opposed.

That bill hit a procedural snag over claims that it ran afoul of the constitutional requirement that revenue bills originate in the House. The roadblock came as Trump administration officials stepped up a lobbying campaign against it, prompting Democrats to accuse House GOP leaders of stalling on Trump’s behalf.

New obstacles emerged earlier this month. House Democrats objected to Senate changes to the bill that could freeze out the House minority’s ability to block sanctions relief. The energy industry also raised concerns that U.S. companies could be frozen out of projects with Russian partners.

House leaders agreed to vote on an expanded version of the bill last week after adding sanctions aimed at freezing North Korea’s nuclear program and targeting banks that provide revenue to its government. The measures against Pyongyang, which passed the House 419 to 1 as a stand-alone bill in May, were inserted at the request of House Republican leaders.

Democrats were more aggressive during floor debate Tuesday than Republicans in casting the bill — and its congressional review requirement — as a rebuke of Trump’s foreign policy.

“This is critical at a moment when our allies are uncertain about where this administration stands with respect to Russian aggression,” said House Minority Whip Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.), who brokered a deal on the bill with GOP House leaders. He said that Congress could pursue additional sanctions targeting the Russian energy industry if Russian President Vladi**mir V. Putin and allies “fail to heed the message of this bill that their business as usual cannot and must not continue.”

The House voted under special procedures for noncontroversial bills expected to pass with a two-thirds majority. The near-unanimity means the House could override a presidential veto.

The Senate has not yet had the chance to vet the sanctions against Pyongyang, but Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told reporters Monday that he expects the House bill to pass the Senate, with “minor details” about procedure still to be worked out.

Corker said he was exploring ways to ensure the bill would be sent to Trump before the end of the week, when House members are set to leave Washington for a five-week recess. “We’d like to get this thing passed and into law,” he said.

“It seems we may be on the floor before we ironed out all the differences with the other body,” said Rep. Eliot L. Engel (D-N.Y.), the top Democrat on the Foreign Affairs panel, pointing to differences on the North Korean provisions. “I hope that’s not the case.”

The version of the bill passed by the House Tuesday addresses concerns about in which chamber the bill would originate, removes the provision that blacklists energy companies from entering into oil development projects if any Russian firm is involved, and delays defense and intelligence sector sanctions while asking the administration to clarify which Russian entities would fall within those sectors.

The bill also protects a 30-day window for Congress to take steps to block the president if he tries to roll back any sanctions imposed against Russia — signaling that lawmakers were unmoved by the Trump administration’s lobbying effort to get them to scale back the congressional review power in the bill.

Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) issued a statement Saturday praising the bill and calling for swift passage.

“Given the many transgressions of Russia, and President Trump’s seeming inability to deal with them, a strong sanctions bill such as the one Democrats and Republicans have just agreed to is essential,” he said.

Click to expand...

fuji said:

The name has changed, the aggressive imperialist behavior has not.

Click to expand...

oagre said:

Why would I bother responding to you?

Click to expand...

Insidious Von said:

Trump is in an impossible predicament.

It will be easier for him to veto the new sanctions rather than have Putin turn on him. If he vetoes the sanctions, his supporters will take up arms to defend him against the swamp.

Click to expand...

slowandeasy said:

Nice to see that you have no issue discriminating against certain people because you don't like the actions of a few.

BTW, using some of the logic from other threads, on North American soil, more people have been killed by muslim terrorists than aggressive imperialist Russians. In fact I would says that the odds of getting killed by a Muslim terrorist in North America are 1000% more likely than getting killed by
an aggressive imperialist Russian.

I know some of you boneheads are going to miss my point, so let me spell it out clearly for you:
Russians, Muslims, Black people (is it derogatory to say "Blacks"), Chinese, Aboriginals, East Indians, etc are just people. It is not their fault that certain factions of their group
hijack the rest. Painting Russians with the same brush is as idiotic as people who vilify all Muslims because of terrorism.

Click to expand...

slowandeasy said:

Then stop posting nonsense. To say that Russia of 30 or 40 years ago is the same as today is silly. ....

Click to expand...

Baller Time said:

House passed the Veto-Proof sanctions bill (Russia, NK and IRan) 419-3. Other than Dana Rohrabacher, it would be interesting to see who those other 2 were.

Click to expand...