Comments by "afcgeo" (@afcgeo882) on "Kyiv Post" channel.

Not really, as the vast majority of oil leaves Russia via pipelines and ports and facilities in its Far East. What it actually does is reduce the supply of fuel (Diesel and gasoline) to Russia’s military fighting in Ukraine.
9
That’s normal Russia.
7
Economies aren’t based on “war”. War burns money.
5
@mindaza0 No. By GDP, Russia is #11 and Spain is #15. It is behind Brazil, Italy and Canada though.
4
Yes, but the prices have fallen because the demand for their oil plunged. In a sense, there are now two distinct grades of oil on the international market: Russian and non-Russian. Because the West stopped buying Russian oil, its value fell. That caused many less developed nations to switch to buying Russian oil, but still at very low prices (they aren’t going to pay more). At the same time, Russia is increasing production to sell more of it, to get more revenue. That, in return, lowers oil prices too. That’s why long-term it’s a failing strategy. Since those nations switched to Russian oil, the demand for all other oil didn’t go up, so the prices have stabilized.
4
@laars0001 They imported gasoline for their troops in Ukraine, because logistics are a bitch. Belarus is literally next door. They’re obviously going to have a fuel shortage in that region due to those strikes, but not an economic collapse across Russia. They imported last August to October as well.
3
@petehowett2854 How? We don’t buy Russian oil.
3
You are correct. They attacked refineries and port facilities that export ready petroleum products (not crude oil).
3
The height of the Cold War arms race was in the 1960’s. By the 1980’s the USSR had already declined enough for them to institute Perestroika and by 1987, they were already reducing nuclear arms via the INF Treaty.
2
@Jon-d6h He did say that was the spending in the 1980’s, not now. During WW2 we were spending 40% of the GDP on the military. Still, the highest year of that decade was 1985, when it ballooned to 6.7% of the GNP due to Raegan’s wild spending. The truth is that the late 1970’s-early 1980’s were the historical low point in defense spending in the US.
2
@Jon-d6h The issue is that Russians, at the time, weren’t interested in the West the way the Chinese were. They were much more introspective, still trying to strengthen their Warsaw Pact empire. This was, of course, after the true Cold War threats of Khruschev. Brezhnev and Andropov were far less interested in a war with the US and far more in their influence in Eastern Europe and the Middle East.
2
@Jon-d6h I was born and raised in the USSR, but immigrated to the US back in 1989. I’m half Ukrainian, 1/4 Belorussian and 1/4 Russian, but I’m ethically 3/4 Jewish and as such I gave ZERO support for Russia, especially in this war. I’m a US citizen, not a Russian one. I’m also a USAF war veteran. You being a troll on here won’t make me someone else. I know history. You do not. That’s all it is. I don’t mention things that have nothing to do with the topic. I leave that to you. I know enough to stay on topic.
2
I disagree on one point. The F-16 isn’t a good Harpoon missile platform. In the US we don’t really train on launching those as we leave that to the Navy.However, the F-16 is EXCELLENT as a close air support platform for the infantry and we train on that most of the time.
2
@1BigBen But what you just said sort of proves my point that the F-16 isn’t really a normal Harpoon platform. I’d like to hear if the Dutch or Belgians regularly deploy Harpoons from their F-16s. The US would be poor trainers of that as USAF F-16s were never equipped with the Harpoon. I’m not even sure the Block 50s ever got the software updates. The Norwegian Vipers used to carry the Penguin anti-ship missile, but that system was removed in their mid-life update. Also, Taiwan doesn’t have the AGM-158 in their inventory. Only the US, Australia, Finland and Poland have it, with Germany, Japan and the Netherlands as future operators. Not to mention that it’s not a Harpoon. Taiwan does employ Harpoon on their Vipers, but they’re not supplying them or training. Could the Ukrainians get kits to use Harpoons on them? Yes. I just don’t know who’s train them.
2
@RealityCheck6969 You can’t grasp it.
2
@PeterLawton Because people keep acting like morons at the drop of a hat, believing that the internet is a place where diarrhea of the brain belongs. Of course to you, that’s not the point. To you, the point of the internet is to troll.
2
@fanfeck2844 Yes, but that has nothing to do with Ukraine’s strikes.
2
@Jon-d6h 1. They WERE occupying. They did not occupy them in the 70’s. In fact, their occupation started to be eased in the late 70’s. 2. Introspective in the USSR means people caring about the USSR and its dealings, not the West. Back then most Russians still couldn’t leave the country and the few that could, couldn’t leave the Communist areas (China, Vietnam, Warsaw Pact, North Korea, Cuba, etc.). You can disagree all you want. Out of the two of us, only one grew up in the USSR. Also, no, Russia didn’t fight in Africa first 70 years. Man you’re misinformed.
1
@Jon-d6h NONE of that is true. 😂 Each one of those countries had their own national language. Russian was taught as the foreign language in all schools, along with others (German, English, Italian, etc.). Albania left the Warsaw Pact in 1968. NONE of it has anything to do with the topic being discussed. Also, “allowing” is a stupid term only a school kid could use. They had communist governments that were very willing and happy to have Soviet troops stationed there, the same way Poland is currently very happy to have American troops there - they thought they might be invaded by the opposing side. The US has its troops all over Europe today for the exact same reason. Every country in Europe teaches English as the foreign language for the exact same reason.
1
@Jon-d6h No, the language was NEVER Russian! Where are you getting that from??? The Warsaw Pact had no official language. It was a treaty, just like NATO. It had multiple languages in writing. As per the countries, the ONLY official languages were their own, so German in GDR, Polish in Poland, Bulgarian in Bulgaria, Hungarian in Hungary, Czech and Slovak in Czechoslovakia, Romanian in Romania, etc.
1
@Jon-d6h That’s not what the conversation is about. It isn’t about you or opposition. This thread is about US military spending during the cold war. Why is that so hard for you to grasp?
1
@donaldclifford5763 GNP. There were no PPP calculations back then.
1
@TenylegMinekez-uc7co He mixed nothing. You forgot to name your account “Russian bot #1346”
1
@1BigBen I think you’re confusing the AGM-88 HARM and what we’re talking about, the AGM-84 Harpoon. One is an anti-radiation missile. The other is a surface-skimming anti-ship missile. They’re not at all the same thing. We’re all talking about the Harpoon, which to my knowledge the F-16 isn’t equipped to launch.
1
Maybe if you were educated…
1
@cruisinguy6024 It doesn’t seem like that’s true, given your comments. They seem to indicate an IQ closer to 75.
1
@PeterLawton If you were standing here… you wouldn’t be standing, but you of course know that, which is why you feel so empowered to engage in NOTHING, but insulting everyone around you, including a person who not inly knows hundreds of times more on the subject, but is also a much better speaker than you’ll ever be, all because you’re hiding behind a computer monitor.
1
@chirawanphung No. There’s a lot more to this.
1
@kevinjennings5153 Actually, the bulk of Russian oil facilities are in the Urals, not the Caucuses.
1
@cantiaci Facilities aren’t the same as refineries.
1
@cantiaci Are you seriously not grasping the point of what I said versus what you said? Are you fucking mental?They are also attacking ports where oil is transported AND the topic is about the impact attacks on these refineries is having on the Russian oil industry, so it’s VERY important to note that most of their oil facilities are far away from where the attacks have taken place. Taking out a couple of minor refineries is a tiny dent in the entire system.
1
@roberttai646 That has nothing to do with war though. It’s just that Russia is cut off from the world market. Yes, it’s a huge long-term issue for them, but stop bringing the war into this. A war economy isn’t propping them up. It brings no additional revenue, creates no additional GDP. It’s just a re-allocation of production. Russia managed almost a century under communism with similar conditions.
1