comment: >
  
  Like a little rat in a cage of his own creation…
context: Nice. The old "you can't sanction me if I sanction myself first" tatic. I like it. Keep it up Russia 👍👍👍 >
  
  He's basically helping us audit our own rule breakers. >
  
  they just enjoy making demands and ultimatums. even if it's something that is already happening anyway. they just want to look tough and important. >
  
  You mean those implementing price caps above the market price? I am confused. >
  
  No, i'm talking about Russia. They like to announce bans on things that are already banned. they like to announce that if you don't stop resisting, they will invade you, when the invasion has already been happening for months, etc. >
  
  "Oh Yeah!? Well, I'll just sanction myself"
  -Putin >
  
  He's playing 10d chess. No one on the planet can comprehend his genius. >
  
  He's definitely pulling out his inner Wiile E Coyote >
  
  Oh no, it hurt itself in it’s confusion. >
  
  I predict this won't last.
  India/China will not buy enough to offset Europe. Even if they did, Russia will have a hard time actually transporting that volume of oil, without having pipelines built.
  So now Russia has three options. 
  Option 1. Keep pumping oil and store it. Where? It will run out of storage capacity very quickly.
  Option 2. Stop pumping oil. Oops, it's winter and the oil wells will freeze/congeal. That's incredibly expensive to fix, and maybe impossible given the equipment sanctions.
  Option 3. Just kidding Europe. Please buy my oil 😊 >
  
  What is to stop Russia from flaring off the oil at the end of the pipe? Keeps the oil in the pipes moving, still spites Europe, and helps to fix the global cooling crisis. >
  
  I've never heard of flaring oil. Flaring typically refers to burning off methane gas, when it's too big a headache to actually process it.
  I suppose they could burn crude but I'm not sure how easily that can be managed and contained, without making the local towns or oil wells uninhabitable. >
  
  A flare tower would manage it quite okay. On the other hand, the towns near the flare would be quite...umm... lets call it unpleasant. Vast quantities of thick, black, oily smoke like what appeared in Kuwait during the Gulf War would be produced as a side-effect. >
  
  They could refill the Baikal lake with oil. >
  
  Hey, if no money is better than some money....so be it Poo-tin. >
  
  Tin poo. Like a still sting been poo that's all pale because you eat nothing but 59 cheese slices. >
  
  Mommy found the poo tin in the piss drawer. >
  
  Mommy made videos of Putin and sold them on the dark web >
  
  “You are lowering the price at which you buy our oil to lower our economy? Well jokes on you I am gonna stop selling completely and tank my economy even further!”
  -Putin apparently >
  
  Hmmm, that might also be a trick to encourage countries that will be affected to buy now in massive volumes and not later - before the ban is actually in effect (which is temporary anyway). Could be a way to artificially buff the economy artificially. >
  
  
  The cap is close to the current price for Russian oil, but well beneath the windfall price Russia was able to sell for this year and that helped offset the impact of financial sanctions on Moscow.
  
  This is the dumbest part to me. Not only did Putin effectively impose sanctions on his own country's economy, but he's throwing a hissy fit about price caps that are pretty much equivalent to the current price of Russian seaborne oil anyway. >
  
  The free market theory says that reducing the amount of potential buyers (aka demand) will result in a price reduction. So he’s still getting boned. >
  
  Putin: you know that feeling when your are checkmated and you wanna toss chess board to the wall, and tell countries that cap your oil prices; No Oil For You! 
  Everyone else: no not really I did not play chess for while. >
  
  How about, the world bans the export of Russian oil. All of it. >
  
  Oh no, he's going to bring greater supply to less demand to avoid price caps? So clever! >
  
  Fuck Putin >
  
  No one needs Russian oil. >
  
  
  This content was produced in Russia where the law restricts coverage of Russian military operations in Ukraine
  
  Can we ban non-free press? I mean, props to Reuters for disclosure but I'd rather be free from Moscow's media manipulation regime. >
  
  The textbook definition of cutting off the nose to spite the face.
  Thanks for helping to enforce the price cap further, Poo Tin. >
  
  Yay, finally! Thanks, bald rat! >
  
  Cutting themselves off even more.  Smart. >
  
  That seems…counterproductive >
  
  So only countries left that pay less anyway >
  
  Moron. 
  Jesus christ, I've never seen anything so stupid. >
  
  so russia is stopping exporting oil and gas to hungary then?
  sounds like our little orban is going to crawl back into the eu fold soon >
  
  "In what some analysts are calling 'a bold move Cotton' - Russia decides to attempt to increase price by removing demand" >
  
  One thing that nobody is mentioning is that while China and India are taking advantage of the situation by grabbing as much oil as they can, they don't have unlimited storage capacity. Putin is going to be hurting when they reach their storage limit and slow their buying to immediate needs. Between that, reduced European consumption, and warm weather approaching Putin is going to be hurting for cash. >
  
  There goes his source of income. Ow! My foot! I just shot it! >
  
  The only ones buying russian oil are china, turkey and india and they are buying way below that (high 20's or 30's the barrel), and will continue to do so. This is just useless talk, no real effect on pipelines, the only immediate issue is shipping, insurance companies wont insure ships that carry oil above 60 the barrel. >
  
  Go to war. Cripple economy . Seems Russian >
  
  I'm sure China, Turkey and India will pay more than $60. Not. >
  
  Well if that’s not the idiot holding a gun and shooting their own foot. >
  
  Imagine the irony if Putin’s actions gets us off oil and he effectively saves the world from climate disaster >
  
  LOL, ok.  More solar please! >
  
  He is making is collapse easier then id hope >
  
  Put in yo ass. >
  
  Hahaha that so funny
  What about taking it a step further,
  put in yo ass hole >
  
  I’m just pissed countries are still buying anything from Russia. >
  
  Make sure you are pissed next time US invades a country and call for sanctions against them too. >
  
  Every post about Russia and Ukraine MUST have references to America being bad.
  Thank you for helping complete the quota, we simply cannot have discussions about Russia and Ukraine without a troll "America bad too!" type post. >
  
  Get an electric vehicle.  Let's stop depending on these tyrannical, barbaric regimes like Russia, Iran and Saudi Arabia.  Defund those fucking tyrants and let them go back to the middle ages where they belong. >
  
  I'm sure india will happily funnel russia money >
  
  India needs to be friendly with the west.  Pakistan and China are not going to play nice, and both are trying to take land from them.  
  Russia can’t help.  If they piss off the West they’re in trouble. >
  
  India hasn't been friendly with the west? There's a difference between being friendly and bending over and opening up your asshole. Now that these other countries are paying more for oil from the other places that India used to purchase where else is India supposed to get their gas? OPEC isn't increasing production so what exactly are they supposed to do? Should they go start to dig enough oil for 1.2 billion people out of the ground now?
  Lol, Pakistan harbored Osama Bin Laden and funded terrorists for years and the US sold them f16s this year. India will be just fine. >
  
  “Fuck off, we’re going to support Putin while he commits genocide on your ally and future NATO member, we want a small discount on oil” is definitely not being friendly with the West.
  Pakistan is also close to some consequences. >
  
  His facts maybe inconvenient to your argument but they are still facts. >
  
  Sounds like allll those other countries just got screwed. >
  
  Poo-tin!! 💩 >
  
  Oh, everything is better now. >
  
  Cutting off your nose to spite your face.  Go ahead and let him make the hard decision for us. >
  
  “and genocides by Christians, but that wouldn't prove Christianity is evil.” It would if Christians could quote their authority, Jesus as God incarnate, as doing the stuff that Muhammad (by Allah's authority) did and preached, even according to universally-recognised Muslim sources. If a Muslim starts killing black people or if they start practicing cannibalism, that of course has nothing to do with Islam, because it’s not part of any scripture or old, widespread tradition. That particular kind of atrocity i.e. not commiting atrocities in line with, or required by, an ideological basis but IMPOSING their ideological (or pragmatic) baggage on a contradictory ideology, is what Christians started doing, only when it became hijacked by imperial authority in the late 4th century. They thus preserved its texts and traditions, but governments twisted their meaning, or arbitrarily used the O.T. paradigm when it was convenient, or just outright ignored the whole thing. Christians at all times contested these de-facto heretical acts and teachings with a solid doctrinal, scriptural basis for pacifism, for example. Islam, by contrast, DOES have different types of atrocities unambiguously justified in its sources, which have exacerbated or directly caused untold misery in the world for centuries. And less violent or hostile interpretations are not only far harder to get from the Quran and Sunnah by nature as compared to the New Testament, but (largely because of this very reason), have been extremely rare. Even in the more mystical interpretations like Sufism, these hostile concepts are still largely kept. These are uncomfortable facts, but facts nonetheless. And please spare our time and don’t try to bring ahadith that nobody recognises as authoritative, or the Old Testament to prove the Bible is violent too... You have to learn the basic theological position that Christians follow a new covenant - indeed this theology of different dispensations for different communities or at different times is also in the Quran (e.g. Sura 3:50). You can disagree with the validity and logic of the Christian’s view of the covenant (and criticise the aforementioned hypocrisy of “Christian” governments in using what you could call a more “Old Testament mentality” inconsistently with the new covenant discussed above, but what you CANNOT do is pretend this distinction doesn’t exist, that it has no scriptural basis, and isn’t recognized by the oldest records of orthodox Christianity!! (Although even by the time of tradition-forming guys like, say, Saint Augustine, it was already arguably different from the views of the N.T. itself in stuff like war. But for the purposes of this discussion, this is only very marginally relevant). >
  
  That has some truth to it, but even then they weren’t really trying to “save the world” from it. They were trying to save the Aryan race from it. They thought it perfectly legitimate to do to the rest of the world (at least outside the ‘higher races’ similar to their own, such as fellow Western Europeans) what they alleged “international Jewry” was doing and plotting against them i.e. death and domination. So in this sense, if we accept Claire’s premise that all Aztecs fully believed in the absolute universal necessity to do it, and they were thus less blameworthy, which is at least a plausible assumption, then the Nazis once again turn out to be unambiguously more evil because of the aforementioned inherent hypocrisy. Other human sacrificing civilizations or tribes (which were many, including the ancient Carthaginians) would also be more evil than the Aztecs in this sense: the scale was smaller and they weren’t so obsessed with it, but they did it for less-than-cosmic motives, such as personal or state fortune from the gods, which could be considered far more selfish than the Aztec’s self-perception. With this being said, as if the Aztec’s “rational madness” or “irrational wisdom” wasn’t a good enough example, we could say the same for, say, the Inquisition, Jihadis and other totalitarian theocracies - they too believe(d) that minimizing to the least extent possible the possibility of humanity going to Hell for eternity is the ultimate end that justifies all means... So we’re back to justifying a large number of some of the worst atrocities for supposedly noble (or evne recognizably) good goals.