this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2026
223 points (97.0% liked)

World News

57284 readers
1713 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Photonic@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

First, I help you see why Von der Leyen’s quote is nonsense (the third package was indeed in fact, not draining the economy, since 17 more were needed after that). And the obviously ultimate goal of the sanctions, aka ending the war is still not in sight…

or do you really think just making things a little more shitty for ordinary Russians while the war continues to take Ukrainian lives is the goal? (Really, answer this question, I have answered yours).

you've been called out on your bullshit

I said I have seen things like this said before, and I show you literally multiple times when these things have been said before. Whether that’s an official report or a news article is irrelevant. They have been said before in a public place.

And the point is: I don’t believe them. I don’t believe the clickbait titles. That’s the entire fucking point, you dumbass. I literally said I’ll believe it when I see it. And in your head you have made that into that I somehow believe the clickbait? You’re even dumber than I thought.

please do link the Kiel institute articles from the past

And I never said it was the Kiel Institute who said such things in the past. I was obviously talking about this one. How’s that flying pink elephant doing up there?

[–] Vergissmeinnicht@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Ok, let's start from the very very beginning.

Our sanctions and the self-sanctioning by companies themselves are draining Russia’s economy and thus draining the Kremlin’s war machine.

"are draining" is in the present progressive. It denotes an action in progress, not a completed action. Meaning the sanctions were in the process of draining the economy. Von der Leyen's claim was not that the draining had completed but that it was in progress.

next is your complete lack of understanding of how sanctions work.

the third package was indeed in fact, not draining the economy, since 17 more were needed after that

The very first sanctions package was immediately called "first sanctions package" at the time

https://www.noerr.com/en/insights/eu-imposes-a-first-package-of-new-sanctions-against-russia-in-the-ukrainian-crisis

The understanding, from the very first sanctions package, was that this would be a continuous process, with sanctions package after sanctions package, not a one and done deal that then needs to haphazardly be amended as you seem to think.

Sanctions need to be amended as the economic reality shifts and loopholes need to be plugged as the target of sanctions finds ways to evade them.

The 17 packages after the third were always going to happen because that is fundamentally how sanctions work.

And let's look at numbers. European sanctions have reduced Russian fossil fuel export revenues by about $300-500 million per day. Not sure how you would describe this, other than "draining the economy". And this does not include any other sanctions affecting other parts of the economy.

In your favourite metric, ballistic missiles, that is worth about 750-1000 Iskanders per day given the $400-500k unit production cost. Now of course money isn't the biggest limiting factor in Russia's ability to manufacture those, it's largely parts availability that leads to big fluctuations in production quantities. Parts availabilities, which, surprise, are limited due to sanctions.

or do you really think just making things a little more shitty for ordinary Russians

Strawman. "draining the economy" is not about making things a little more shitty for ordinary Russians. It's about reducing Russia's ability to finance the war, which takes time considering Russia had a $600 billion war chest, half of which is frozen in mostly European banks, thanks to the sanctions, and the other half is now, thanks to the sanctions, that were draining the economy, mostly drained. And it is about reducing Russia's ability to source industrial machines and components to reduce their ability to manufacture weapons, like your favourite one, the ballistic missile. Where production quantities, as mentioned above, are fluctuating due to sanctions.

As I have stated before, it was constantly repeated all the way back in 2022 that sanctions would not defeat Russia on their own, and certainly not immediately, and would take years. The point was, from the very beginning, to make it increasingly difficult for Russia to finance the war and to produce weapons, so Ukraine could gain the upper hand, which is now manifesting on the battlefield, after years, as predicted.

People like you were told in at the very start in 2022 that the real world doesn't work like TikTok instant gratification, and here you are more than 4 years later still not having gotten the point.

[–] Photonic@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

an action in progress

Indeed present progressive.

As in the sanctions that we have applied in the present are working to progressively drain the economy.

If the three sanctions packages were already draining the economy why oh why did she need 17 more? She didn’t say will be draining after we implement 17 more. If you say “are draining” you’re talking about what you have already done to set a process in motion and not what you’re planning to do. How hard is it? You really keep swinging and missing.

And if you had actually read this article from 2024, which we talked about extensively, you would have known that the Russian economy was in fact not being drained at all.

It also has nothing to do with the fact that I don’t understand how sanctions work. Everyone knows that loopholes have to be closed. I don’t need a mansplainy “explanation” of something that is completely obvious.

European sanctions have reduced Russian fossil fuel export revenues by about $300-500 million per day

For the umpteenth time, that was not the three sanctions packages. Learn the meaning of the word “are”.

Strawman. "draining the economy" is not about making things a little more shitty for ordinary Russians.

Maybe quote the entire sentence if you’re gonna cry strawman. Now you’ve created one of your own.

It's about reducing Russia's ability to finance the war

Just let the war keep festering then for longer? You still can’t answer the question because you know you’re wrong.

People like you were told in at the very start in 2022 that the real world doesn't work like TikTok instant gratification, and here you are more than 4 years later still not having gotten the point.

Dumbass still doesn’t understand what “I’ll believe it when I see it” means... Maybe look up a phrase before you start commenting if you don’t understand it? What I’m saying is the opposite of instant gratification, you dunce. And I’ve never been on TikTok.

[–] Vergissmeinnicht@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

If the three sanctions packages were already draining the economy why oh why did she need 17 more? She didn’t say will be draining after we implement 17 more. If

1 hole in a bucket drains the bucket 3 drain it faster, so why do you need 17 more? because holes can be plugged and 20 drain it faster than 3. Are you really this fucking stupid?

[–] Photonic@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Are you really this fucking stupid?

Questions are forbidden, as I’ve heard. But to answer your question, I’m very positive I’m far more intelligent than you.

So how do you explain this: https://www.russiamatters.org/node/35164 ?

And you don’t need to ask me whether I’m stupid if you really think the first three packages were sufficient to drain the Russian economy, you naive fool.

[–] Vergissmeinnicht@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

So how do you explain this: https://www.russiamatters.org/node/35164 ?

Then where did their $300 billion war chest drain to dumbass? Already addressed in previous comments. But you're too illiterate to read.

if you really think the first three packages were sufficient to drain the Russian economy,

You just don't fucking know what "drain" means.

You assume drain must mean drain completely to 0 so Russia completely starves.

The first package was already draining, the next were draining more. Already explained to you by others at the very beginning of the thread, and by me multiple times. That's how sanctions work.

I’m very positive I’m far more intelligent than you.

You certainly think so, yes, that is very obvious. That is your biggest problem really.

[–] Photonic@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Okay, I didn’t want to ask anymore questions because I’m trying to to be nice.

But…

Do you know what an economy is?

And

Do you know what GDP is?

And

Do you know that if the percentage of GDP is above 0% it generally means that an economy is growing?

And

Do you know that draining and growing are opposites?

You certainly think so, yes, that is very obvious. That is your biggest problem really.

Some things you don’t think, some you just know.

[–] Vergissmeinnicht@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Do you know that if the percentage of GDP is above 0% it generally means that an economy is growing?

Ok buddy, you have got the spirit, but you really need to tackle topics in your wheelhouse.

The percentage of GDP being above 0% is meaningless. >0% of what?

If the GDP growth rate is >0 then the economy is growing. That would be the amount of additional GDP in relation to existing GDP over a given timeframe or (ΔGDP/GDP)/Δt, usually over one year (Δt = 1 annum) or annualized for ease of comparison. Usually expressed as (ΔGDP/GDP)*100% where the Δt is implied.

here is a more in depth explatation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_growth

Once you've digested that, look at Stimulus and Quantitative Easing

That will explain where the $300 billion of the NWF that weren't frozen disappeared to. And why the Russian banks now experience such a dire liquidity crisis.

And once you understand all of that you can put 2 and 2 together, and understand WHY the Russian economy had such low growth rates despite such a gargantuan stimulus effort.

There is a massive hole in the economy, through which an enormous amount of money has been draining, which is the aforementioned sanctions. And Russia had to pump almost the entirety of their remaining NWF into the economy and also do an enormous amount of QE to keep the economy at a slightly elevated growth rate. Although since late last year that's no longer working and the economy has been in a recession.

And we've come full circle. (Or rather we will have come full circle once you've done your required reading to understand the subject matter)

[–] Photonic@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

LOL a lot of words to tell me that I am right.

Nice copy pasting from ChatGPT too.

You still can’t admit it huh? Stupidity and pride are a hell of a combination.

Early in the war, the broad consensus was that the new sanctions would devastate the Russian economy. By some metrics, though, Russia’s economy has proved resilient to date.

From the US government

Following Russia’s full-fledged invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Western countries imposed unprecedented economic sanctions. Yet there is limited evidence that these measures have inflicted substantial economic pain on Russia, as the recent slowdown has largely reflected factors unrelated to sanctions.

From the ESCP geopolitics institute

And you still claim I don’t understand the topic…

low growth

So it was growth. Thank you. You could have been a lot shorter with that.

And we've come full circle. (Or rather we will have come full circle once you've done your required reading to understand the subject matter)

Full circle indeed. We’ve once again arrived at the point where it is completely obvious to anyone that I’m completely right, but you’re too obtuse to admit it. This entire discussion could have been avoided if you would just have reacted like a normal person who gets shown they’re wrong about something.

If I you claim I don’t understand it, and I’m schooling you, where does that leave you?

[–] Vergissmeinnicht@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

So you didn't read, nor understand. Which shouldn't be surprising given that having basic understanding of simple math can only mean copying from an LLM to you. You too can learn what the scary triangles mean, it's not that difficult.

Why did the $300 billion from the NWF plus whatever hundreds of billions of QE drain out of the economy?

You keep ignoring that part for some odd reason.

[–] Photonic@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I read, but the only thing I don’t understand is your stupidity and stubbornness.

And sure, they used up their NWF. War is expensive. Who would have thought? Does that prove anything about sanctions?

And a 300B+ (rubles not USD) expense is not the same as an economy being ruined. Especially when the GDP of that country is about 200 trillion rubles. And you’re trying to tell me I don’t understand how this works? Riiiiiight…

And talk about ignoring:

Early in the war, the broad consensus was that the new sanctions would devastate the Russian economy. By some metrics, though, Russia’s economy has proved resilient to date.

From the US government

Following Russia’s full-fledged invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Western countries imposed unprecedented economic sanctions. Yet there is limited evidence that these measures have inflicted substantial economic pain on Russia, as the recent slowdown has largely reflected factors unrelated to sanctions.

From the ESCP geopolitics institute

Why are you ignoring this?

Edit to your edit: yes the “triangle” –which is actually not a triangle but a Greek capital letter delta, the more you know– symbol gave you away. A human commenting online would just spell out delta. So did the language that is completely different to your other comments.

[–] Vergissmeinnicht@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

War is expensive. Who would have thought? Does that prove anything about sanctions?

Yes, because war spending is still spending, and acts as a stimulus, increasing GDP. The amount of increased spending accounts for a bigger share of GDP than their GDP growth figures account for, so without this extra spending their GDP growth would be negative, due to sanctions.

And a 300B+ (rubles not USD)

You're right, I had my numbers mixed up. The NWF spending accounted only for $70B (5.3T Rubles)

It's the gutting of the liquidity of Russia's banks that accounted for the majority of the stimulus and was even higher than the $300B that I remembered, at $446B (36.6T Rubles) by early 2025 https://navigatingrussia.substack.com/p/russias-hidden-war-debt-full-report

This plus the NWF spending accounts for 20% of GDP, or roughly 5% per year over 4 years. Russia's growth numbers were significantly lower than that at between -2.1% and + 4.3%. So on average, without the stimulus spending not a single year since the beginning of the war would have been positive economic growth.

A human commenting online would just spell out delta.

Admit you don't know calculus without telling me you don't know calculus. You write the letter, you don't spell it out.

And the non-monetary consequences of sanctions, that you also keep ignoring. From your own source:

Russia’s military has difficulty procuring key components

Which is why the Iskander production figures are fluctuating for example, and are much lower than they would be without sanctions. To come back to your favourite weapon, the ballistic missile.

[–] Photonic@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Yes

That’s funny, because:

Yet there is **limited evidence** that these measures have **inflicted substantial economic pain** on Russia, as the recent slowdown has largely reflected factors **unrelated to sanctions**.

And I never claimed the sanctions were having no effect at all. So another bad faith argument by you. So let’s stick to the discussion. The thing we are discussing is:

My claim, (in other words) that:

Early in the war, the broad consensus was that the new sanctions would devastate the Russian economy.

But that (and again, I quote, not my exact words, but VERY similar):

there is limited evidence that these measures have inflicted substantial economic pain on Russia, as the recent slowdown has largely reflected factors unrelated to sanctions.

So that now (this is a self-quote):

I’ll believe it when I see it.

So you don’t have to try to make a case against something I never claimed, which is that the sanctions are not having any effect at all on the Russian economy. They are and I never claimed the contrary.

They just weren’t draining the economy in 2022, like Von der Leyen (and many others) claimed. For this I have provided ample evidence, against your: “nah uh!” without any evidence to back it up and endless straw man arguments.

You write the letter, you don't spell it out.

Yeah in a work document, paper or math assignment. Nobody does in an online discussion with some other guy. Also the entire language was completely different from the rest of your comments. It was clear it was LLM output. Stop embarrassing yourself, triangle boy.

the non-monetary consequences of sanctions, that you also keep ignoring.

I have not been ignoring it. It’s just that I never claimed anything about it, nor that it is part of a discussion about draining the economy. You’re just making another straw man. This discussion is entirely about the economy draining in 2022, or have you forgotten that in all your wisdom?

Why is it so hard for you to say: “yeah, okay, with all this evidence, I see that you’re right. Von der Leyen and many others have indeed been claiming similar things about the Russian economy since 2022 and they haven’t come true, so let’s indeed wait and see before we believe another such message.” ?

And maybe apologise for acting like a jerk right off the bat too, Mr. “asking questions“.

That would get you way more respect than this mindless rambling, this pathetic whining, this narcissistic behaviour, trying strawman after another that all fail miserably.

[–] Photonic@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Nothing more to say to embarrass yourself? Or simply admit you were wrong?

And you had the audacity to accuse me of arguing in bad faith…

[–] Vergissmeinnicht@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

wow, living rent free in your head, eh?

don't worry, I'm just caught up with a thing called "responsibilities"

[–] Photonic@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Come on, do a little better… you were soooo funny! With your little straw man arguments and thinking you actually had a real argument