|
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. |
On November 18 2025 09:26 Manit0u wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2025 07:17 Excludos wrote:I don't think it's a very closed secret that everyone who is "not buying Russian oil" is really just buying it through middle men/countries. Even countries in Europe are doing this. However, as morally bankrupt as this is, it's actually still quite a lot better than them buying it directly. As the oil has to go through other countries, Russia is forced to lower the prices due to the cuts these other countries take. So it's still less profits for them Same with smuggling, obviously. Smugglers are doing more work, and especially more perilous work, to go through blockades. This costs money, which is taken from Russia's cut Buying through middle-men is not always an option though. You run the risk of getting hit by secondary sanctions and there's enough oil being produced worldwide that you can always find alternatives. They might not be as cheap as Russian oil at this point but they come with no additional dangers or hoops. That's why there are now supposedly ~390million barrels of Russian oil stuck on tankers around the world who can't find a place to offload this cargo. So they're running a lot of tankers (each costing ~100k USD/day to operate) that are unable to provide a profit. Edit: And I'm not sure why we're even entertaining Russian pundits with all the discussion about the elections. Anyone living in a free, democratic country knows you can't really hold elections during war time (technically you can but it would be a logistical nightmare and changing your entire government mid-war is not very smart) so no one in the West is actually holding it against Zelensky. It's only the Russians and their sympathizers that are pushing this narrative. If Zelensky doesn't hold elections after the war is over then it becomes a problem, but during war time there's no issue with there being no elections.
Just about how much profit they can get out from it.
Cheaper the russian oil than market price, more profits they can make.
Lots of these firms are going to get sanctioned but not like the nation as a whole is getting sanctioned.
That's how most chips got sneaked into China.
Proxy on top of proxy
I reckon the only difficult piece is how to get the oil out, the "repackaging" is easy, not like they are marked with anything to stand out as russian oil.
|
On November 18 2025 14:17 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2025 09:26 Manit0u wrote:On November 18 2025 07:17 Excludos wrote:I don't think it's a very closed secret that everyone who is "not buying Russian oil" is really just buying it through middle men/countries. Even countries in Europe are doing this. However, as morally bankrupt as this is, it's actually still quite a lot better than them buying it directly. As the oil has to go through other countries, Russia is forced to lower the prices due to the cuts these other countries take. So it's still less profits for them Same with smuggling, obviously. Smugglers are doing more work, and especially more perilous work, to go through blockades. This costs money, which is taken from Russia's cut Buying through middle-men is not always an option though. You run the risk of getting hit by secondary sanctions and there's enough oil being produced worldwide that you can always find alternatives. They might not be as cheap as Russian oil at this point but they come with no additional dangers or hoops. That's why there are now supposedly ~390million barrels of Russian oil stuck on tankers around the world who can't find a place to offload this cargo. So they're running a lot of tankers (each costing ~100k USD/day to operate) that are unable to provide a profit. Edit: And I'm not sure why we're even entertaining Russian pundits with all the discussion about the elections. Anyone living in a free, democratic country knows you can't really hold elections during war time (technically you can but it would be a logistical nightmare and changing your entire government mid-war is not very smart) so no one in the West is actually holding it against Zelensky. It's only the Russians and their sympathizers that are pushing this narrative. If Zelensky doesn't hold elections after the war is over then it becomes a problem, but during war time there's no issue with there being no elections. Just about how much profit they can get out from it. Cheaper the russian oil than market price, more profits they can make. Lots of these firms are going to get sanctioned but not like the nation as a whole is getting sanctioned. That's how most chips got sneaked into China. Proxy on top of proxy I reckon the only difficult piece is how to get the oil out, the "repackaging" is easy, not like they are marked with anything to stand out as russian oil.
Firms being sanctioned is as good as country being sanctioned. When you have a firm that trades oil it's quite often run by the government and even if not it might be a big part of your economy. If such firm gets hit by sanctions and is basically cut off from global trade it means your country by proxy is also cut off from the global trade through those firms.
You can get sanctioned for buying Russian oil or by doing business with Russian companies and individuals. Almost no one wants to touch this with a 10 foot pole.
Even India is basically halting all oil purchases from Russia this last quarter. Their biggest oil companies are switching to buying from the Saudis and 5 of the biggest Indian companies are responsible for 65% of Russian oil purchases by the country.
|
On November 18 2025 14:42 Manit0u wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2025 14:17 ETisME wrote:On November 18 2025 09:26 Manit0u wrote:On November 18 2025 07:17 Excludos wrote:I don't think it's a very closed secret that everyone who is "not buying Russian oil" is really just buying it through middle men/countries. Even countries in Europe are doing this. However, as morally bankrupt as this is, it's actually still quite a lot better than them buying it directly. As the oil has to go through other countries, Russia is forced to lower the prices due to the cuts these other countries take. So it's still less profits for them Same with smuggling, obviously. Smugglers are doing more work, and especially more perilous work, to go through blockades. This costs money, which is taken from Russia's cut Buying through middle-men is not always an option though. You run the risk of getting hit by secondary sanctions and there's enough oil being produced worldwide that you can always find alternatives. They might not be as cheap as Russian oil at this point but they come with no additional dangers or hoops. That's why there are now supposedly ~390million barrels of Russian oil stuck on tankers around the world who can't find a place to offload this cargo. So they're running a lot of tankers (each costing ~100k USD/day to operate) that are unable to provide a profit. Edit: And I'm not sure why we're even entertaining Russian pundits with all the discussion about the elections. Anyone living in a free, democratic country knows you can't really hold elections during war time (technically you can but it would be a logistical nightmare and changing your entire government mid-war is not very smart) so no one in the West is actually holding it against Zelensky. It's only the Russians and their sympathizers that are pushing this narrative. If Zelensky doesn't hold elections after the war is over then it becomes a problem, but during war time there's no issue with there being no elections. Just about how much profit they can get out from it. Cheaper the russian oil than market price, more profits they can make. Lots of these firms are going to get sanctioned but not like the nation as a whole is getting sanctioned. That's how most chips got sneaked into China. Proxy on top of proxy I reckon the only difficult piece is how to get the oil out, the "repackaging" is easy, not like they are marked with anything to stand out as russian oil. Firms being sanctioned is as good as country being sanctioned. When you have a firm that trades oil it's quite often run by the government and even if not it might be a big part of your economy. If such firm gets hit by sanctions and is basically cut off from global trade it means your country by proxy is also cut off from the global trade through those firms. You can get sanctioned for buying Russian oil or by doing business with Russian companies and individuals. Almost no one wants to touch this with a 10 foot pole. Even India is basically halting all oil purchases from Russia this last quarter. Their biggest oil companies are switching to buying from the Saudis and 5 of the biggest Indian companies are responsible for 65% of Russian oil purchases by the country.
We will see because again singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia etc are all still happily sneaking nvidia chips into china
There had been a lot of reports with video evidences already
|
On November 18 2025 15:01 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2025 14:42 Manit0u wrote:On November 18 2025 14:17 ETisME wrote:On November 18 2025 09:26 Manit0u wrote:On November 18 2025 07:17 Excludos wrote:I don't think it's a very closed secret that everyone who is "not buying Russian oil" is really just buying it through middle men/countries. Even countries in Europe are doing this. However, as morally bankrupt as this is, it's actually still quite a lot better than them buying it directly. As the oil has to go through other countries, Russia is forced to lower the prices due to the cuts these other countries take. So it's still less profits for them Same with smuggling, obviously. Smugglers are doing more work, and especially more perilous work, to go through blockades. This costs money, which is taken from Russia's cut Buying through middle-men is not always an option though. You run the risk of getting hit by secondary sanctions and there's enough oil being produced worldwide that you can always find alternatives. They might not be as cheap as Russian oil at this point but they come with no additional dangers or hoops. That's why there are now supposedly ~390million barrels of Russian oil stuck on tankers around the world who can't find a place to offload this cargo. So they're running a lot of tankers (each costing ~100k USD/day to operate) that are unable to provide a profit. Edit: And I'm not sure why we're even entertaining Russian pundits with all the discussion about the elections. Anyone living in a free, democratic country knows you can't really hold elections during war time (technically you can but it would be a logistical nightmare and changing your entire government mid-war is not very smart) so no one in the West is actually holding it against Zelensky. It's only the Russians and their sympathizers that are pushing this narrative. If Zelensky doesn't hold elections after the war is over then it becomes a problem, but during war time there's no issue with there being no elections. Just about how much profit they can get out from it. Cheaper the russian oil than market price, more profits they can make. Lots of these firms are going to get sanctioned but not like the nation as a whole is getting sanctioned. That's how most chips got sneaked into China. Proxy on top of proxy I reckon the only difficult piece is how to get the oil out, the "repackaging" is easy, not like they are marked with anything to stand out as russian oil. Firms being sanctioned is as good as country being sanctioned. When you have a firm that trades oil it's quite often run by the government and even if not it might be a big part of your economy. If such firm gets hit by sanctions and is basically cut off from global trade it means your country by proxy is also cut off from the global trade through those firms. You can get sanctioned for buying Russian oil or by doing business with Russian companies and individuals. Almost no one wants to touch this with a 10 foot pole. Even India is basically halting all oil purchases from Russia this last quarter. Their biggest oil companies are switching to buying from the Saudis and 5 of the biggest Indian companies are responsible for 65% of Russian oil purchases by the country. We will see because again singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia etc are all still happily sneaking nvidia chips into china There had been a lot of reports with video evidences already
But different situation.
1) chips are low volume high value items. If you can sneak just 1 container of microchips into China you can make millions. Running a smuggling operation that can get 1 container into a country entirely unseen is almost trivial. It's incredibly hard to stop. Hard to find actual measurements, but let's be conservative and say 2000 RTC 5090s can be fit in a container. That means 1 container is worth 4m USD. You can probably name your price once you're in China because there are no competitors. So let's assume the same amount of profit.
2) oil is high volume low value. Russian oil is currently at 36 USD. Let's assume the smuggler can sell it at 56 USD (still slightly under market for non-Russian oil). So a smuggler can make 20 USD/barrel. That means that to make roughly the same (4m USD), they need to sell 200k barrels of oil. That is a mid sized tanker ship. It is far harder to hide a tanker ship than it is a container. Not impossible. The Russian shadow fleet exists. But far far harder. It also requires having and operating a tanker ship. A significant cost in and of itself that is lost if your smuggling operation is shut down.
In other words it is far harder and far more expensive to smuggle oil than it is to smuggle microchips (assuming enforcement). So the fact that people are able to smuggle microchips despite sanctions doesn't automatically mean people can also smuggle oil (at meaningful volumes).
|
On November 18 2025 09:26 Manit0u wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2025 07:17 Excludos wrote:I don't think it's a very closed secret that everyone who is "not buying Russian oil" is really just buying it through middle men/countries. Even countries in Europe are doing this. However, as morally bankrupt as this is, it's actually still quite a lot better than them buying it directly. As the oil has to go through other countries, Russia is forced to lower the prices due to the cuts these other countries take. So it's still less profits for them Same with smuggling, obviously. Smugglers are doing more work, and especially more perilous work, to go through blockades. This costs money, which is taken from Russia's cut Buying through middle-men is not always an option though. You run the risk of getting hit by secondary sanctions and there's enough oil being produced worldwide that you can always find alternatives. They might not be as cheap as Russian oil at this point but they come with no additional dangers or hoops.
I don't think anyone is going to sanction Germany over buying second-hand Russian oil any time soon I'm afraid. It's not something they're trying to hide either, expressing they will try to stop doing so by 2028
|
On November 18 2025 10:40 KwarK wrote:
Manit0u you’re still erroneously accepting the completely false premise of the Rusbots. You’re defending a choice by Zelenskyy not to hold elections. That might be completely defensible choice but it’s not what is happening. Zelenskyy hasn’t suspended elections. Zelenskyy is not constitutionally permitted to hold elections at this time. Elections are proceeding per the legally mandated schedule. The next election will happen when the constitutionally defined schedule permits it to happen, with or without Zelenskyy. He’s not holding them and he’s not not holding them, he’s not involved, there isn’t one scheduled.
That’s why the correct response is to demand why Putin isn’t holding a 2025 Presidential election. It puts the Rusbot in the position of explaining that there isn’t an election scheduled per the Russian constitution.
Didn't Russia technically hold an election in 2024? I'm saying technically, because any system that either bans political opponents from running, or straight up assassinates them, isn't really a democratic election (Not that Putin has any reason to do this in the first place, as he's provably tampering with the results anyways. He's literally doing it just to be vain).
The question isn't why Russia isn't holding elections, it's why they're not holding free and fair elections
|
On November 18 2025 10:40 KwarK wrote:
Manit0u you’re still erroneously accepting the completely false premise of the Rusbots. You’re defending a choice by Zelenskyy not to hold elections. That might be completely defensible choice but it’s not what is happening. Zelenskyy hasn’t suspended elections. Zelenskyy is not constitutionally permitted to hold elections at this time. Elections are proceeding per the legally mandated schedule. The next election will happen when the constitutionally defined schedule permits it to happen, with or without Zelenskyy. He’s not holding them and he’s not not holding them, he’s not involved, there isn’t one scheduled.
That’s why the correct response is to demand why Putin isn’t holding a 2025 Presidential election. It puts the Rusbot in the position of explaining that there isn’t an election scheduled per the Russian constitution.
In your defence of Zelensky refusing to give up power after his term ended a year and a half ago you've mentioned the Ukrainian constitution quite a few times. Surely, if anyone in power in any country wishes to know if their actions align with that country's Constitution, they seek advise from the Constitutional/Supreme Court of their country. And that court interprets weather that action is in violation of said country's Constitution. Its why we have division of government.
Its simple, the executive branch of government can't just decide what is constitutional and what isn't. All you would need to convince anyone is a Constitutional court ruling that that action is in accordance with that countries Constitution. So Kwark, show us when the Zelensky's government asked for advise and what the ruling was. Shouldn't be hard.
|
On November 18 2025 19:19 zeo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2025 10:40 KwarK wrote:
Manit0u you’re still erroneously accepting the completely false premise of the Rusbots. You’re defending a choice by Zelenskyy not to hold elections. That might be completely defensible choice but it’s not what is happening. Zelenskyy hasn’t suspended elections. Zelenskyy is not constitutionally permitted to hold elections at this time. Elections are proceeding per the legally mandated schedule. The next election will happen when the constitutionally defined schedule permits it to happen, with or without Zelenskyy. He’s not holding them and he’s not not holding them, he’s not involved, there isn’t one scheduled.
That’s why the correct response is to demand why Putin isn’t holding a 2025 Presidential election. It puts the Rusbot in the position of explaining that there isn’t an election scheduled per the Russian constitution. In your defence of Zelensky refusing to give up power after his term ended a year and a half ago you've mentioned the Ukrainian constitution quite a few times. Surely, if anyone in power in any country wishes to know if their actions align with that country's Constitution, they seek advise from the Constitutional/Supreme Court of their country. And that court interprets weather that action is in violation of said country's Constitution. Its why we have division of government. Its simple, the executive branch of government can't just decide what is constitutional and what isn't. All you would need to convince anyone is a Constitutional court ruling that that action is in accordance with that countries Constitution. So Kwark, show us when the Zelensky's government asked for advise and what the ruling was. Shouldn't be hard.
It's impressive how incapable you are of understanding simple concepts that are being teaspooned in simple words. Zelenskyy isn't "refusing" to give up anything, he literally isn't allowed to hold elections right now. And that is because Russia invaded their country.
If you want a new presidential election in Ukraine, Russia can go home. An election will be held shortly thereafter, in which Zelenskyy isn't even going to participate.
Care to comment about this?
|
Germany11787 Posts
On November 18 2025 19:26 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2025 19:19 zeo wrote:On November 18 2025 10:40 KwarK wrote:
Manit0u you’re still erroneously accepting the completely false premise of the Rusbots. You’re defending a choice by Zelenskyy not to hold elections. That might be completely defensible choice but it’s not what is happening. Zelenskyy hasn’t suspended elections. Zelenskyy is not constitutionally permitted to hold elections at this time. Elections are proceeding per the legally mandated schedule. The next election will happen when the constitutionally defined schedule permits it to happen, with or without Zelenskyy. He’s not holding them and he’s not not holding them, he’s not involved, there isn’t one scheduled.
That’s why the correct response is to demand why Putin isn’t holding a 2025 Presidential election. It puts the Rusbot in the position of explaining that there isn’t an election scheduled per the Russian constitution. In your defence of Zelensky refusing to give up power after his term ended a year and a half ago you've mentioned the Ukrainian constitution quite a few times. Surely, if anyone in power in any country wishes to know if their actions align with that country's Constitution, they seek advise from the Constitutional/Supreme Court of their country. And that court interprets weather that action is in violation of said country's Constitution. Its why we have division of government. Its simple, the executive branch of government can't just decide what is constitutional and what isn't. All you would need to convince anyone is a Constitutional court ruling that that action is in accordance with that countries Constitution. So Kwark, show us when the Zelensky's government asked for advise and what the ruling was. Shouldn't be hard. It's impressive how incapable you are of understanding simple concepts that are being teaspooned in simple words. Zelenskyy isn't "refusing" to give up anything, he literally isn't allowed to hold elections right now. And that is because Russia invaded their country. If you want a new presidential election in Ukraine, Russia can go home. An election will be held shortly thereafter, in which Zelenskyy isn't even going to participate. Care to comment about this?
Also, that is usually not how constitutional courts work. Few countries or governments randomly ask them if what they are doing is okay. They just do stuff, ideally trying to be lawful and adhering to their own constitution. And if you think it is unconstitutional, you can try to sue the government, going through the court system, and eventually the constitutional court will decide if you are correct or not.
|
On November 18 2025 19:26 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2025 19:19 zeo wrote:On November 18 2025 10:40 KwarK wrote:
Manit0u you’re still erroneously accepting the completely false premise of the Rusbots. You’re defending a choice by Zelenskyy not to hold elections. That might be completely defensible choice but it’s not what is happening. Zelenskyy hasn’t suspended elections. Zelenskyy is not constitutionally permitted to hold elections at this time. Elections are proceeding per the legally mandated schedule. The next election will happen when the constitutionally defined schedule permits it to happen, with or without Zelenskyy. He’s not holding them and he’s not not holding them, he’s not involved, there isn’t one scheduled.
That’s why the correct response is to demand why Putin isn’t holding a 2025 Presidential election. It puts the Rusbot in the position of explaining that there isn’t an election scheduled per the Russian constitution. In your defence of Zelensky refusing to give up power after his term ended a year and a half ago you've mentioned the Ukrainian constitution quite a few times. Surely, if anyone in power in any country wishes to know if their actions align with that country's Constitution, they seek advise from the Constitutional/Supreme Court of their country. And that court interprets weather that action is in violation of said country's Constitution. Its why we have division of government. Its simple, the executive branch of government can't just decide what is constitutional and what isn't. All you would need to convince anyone is a Constitutional court ruling that that action is in accordance with that countries Constitution. So Kwark, show us when the Zelensky's government asked for advise and what the ruling was. Shouldn't be hard. It's impressive how incapable you are of understanding simple concepts that are being teaspooned in simple words. Zelenskyy isn't "refusing" to give up anything, he literally isn't allowed to hold elections right now. And that is because Russia invaded their country. If you want a new presidential election in Ukraine, Russia can go home. An election will be held shortly thereafter, in which Zelenskyy isn't even going to participate. Care to comment about this?
How does he know he is not allowed? Did he ask the Constitutional Court of Ukraine if he is allowed or not? You would think a massive decision like that would need all the legitimacy it can get out of all branches of government. Ukraine's Constitution is clear on the incumbency of parliament but much less clear and open to interpretation on the term of presidential incumbency
|
The thing is that these guys come from mafia states so they have trouble understanding constitutional republics, no amount of trying to explain these concepts will work because they have been brought up in systems that are incompatible with rule of law.
They think that this is a weakness of the West and try to bait you into making it about this, mostly because Putin tried this, I mean his buddy Trump regurgitated it and all the republican parrots joined in, then when Zelenskyy clearly stated that if this is a problem he'll step down in exchange for end of war they went fully silent on this topic because for guys like Putin it's unimaginable that someone loves their country more then power, so this line of propaganda was abandoned.
Our guys here are in a bit of a media bubble and are a tad slow generally so they are behind the curve on what they are supposed to push at the moment.
|
On November 18 2025 19:48 zeo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2025 19:26 Excludos wrote:On November 18 2025 19:19 zeo wrote:On November 18 2025 10:40 KwarK wrote:
Manit0u you’re still erroneously accepting the completely false premise of the Rusbots. You’re defending a choice by Zelenskyy not to hold elections. That might be completely defensible choice but it’s not what is happening. Zelenskyy hasn’t suspended elections. Zelenskyy is not constitutionally permitted to hold elections at this time. Elections are proceeding per the legally mandated schedule. The next election will happen when the constitutionally defined schedule permits it to happen, with or without Zelenskyy. He’s not holding them and he’s not not holding them, he’s not involved, there isn’t one scheduled.
That’s why the correct response is to demand why Putin isn’t holding a 2025 Presidential election. It puts the Rusbot in the position of explaining that there isn’t an election scheduled per the Russian constitution. In your defence of Zelensky refusing to give up power after his term ended a year and a half ago you've mentioned the Ukrainian constitution quite a few times. Surely, if anyone in power in any country wishes to know if their actions align with that country's Constitution, they seek advise from the Constitutional/Supreme Court of their country. And that court interprets weather that action is in violation of said country's Constitution. Its why we have division of government. Its simple, the executive branch of government can't just decide what is constitutional and what isn't. All you would need to convince anyone is a Constitutional court ruling that that action is in accordance with that countries Constitution. So Kwark, show us when the Zelensky's government asked for advise and what the ruling was. Shouldn't be hard. It's impressive how incapable you are of understanding simple concepts that are being teaspooned in simple words. Zelenskyy isn't "refusing" to give up anything, he literally isn't allowed to hold elections right now. And that is because Russia invaded their country. If you want a new presidential election in Ukraine, Russia can go home. An election will be held shortly thereafter, in which Zelenskyy isn't even going to participate. Care to comment about this? How does he know he is not allowed? Did he ask the Constitutional Court of Ukraine if he is allowed or not? You would think a massive decision like that would need all the legitimacy it can get out of all branches of government. Ukraine's Constitution is clear on the incumbency of parliament but much less clear and open to interpretation on the term of presidential incumbency
You do realize the sitting president isn't the one initiating the presidential election, right..? That is performed by the Central Election Commission. It's a permanent and independent body that acts purely on the basis of the constitution.
Zelenskyy literally has no say in the matter. I can not spoonfeed this to you in simpler words. Zelenskyy. Does. Not. Control. The. Election
But you didn't reply to my question on whether you agree that Russia should go home so Ukraine can hold a new election or not. It's a very simple solution to all your problems
|
Of course he controls the election, he's the president no? Just like Putin, he controls everything in purely democratic fashion. It just so happens Putin comes out as the best leader time and time again.
|
I think Zeo should check with his country's appropriate body if he's constitutionally allowed to post in this thread, otherwise how can we know if he's not doing so illegally?
|
I think zelensky best bet is to hold elections and when the men turn up to vote, bus them and send to the front. It's the best chance for filling up the army shortages
|
Russian Federation192 Posts
On November 18 2025 17:05 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2025 15:01 ETisME wrote:On November 18 2025 14:42 Manit0u wrote:On November 18 2025 14:17 ETisME wrote:On November 18 2025 09:26 Manit0u wrote:On November 18 2025 07:17 Excludos wrote:I don't think it's a very closed secret that everyone who is "not buying Russian oil" is really just buying it through middle men/countries. Even countries in Europe are doing this. However, as morally bankrupt as this is, it's actually still quite a lot better than them buying it directly. As the oil has to go through other countries, Russia is forced to lower the prices due to the cuts these other countries take. So it's still less profits for them Same with smuggling, obviously. Smugglers are doing more work, and especially more perilous work, to go through blockades. This costs money, which is taken from Russia's cut Buying through middle-men is not always an option though. You run the risk of getting hit by secondary sanctions and there's enough oil being produced worldwide that you can always find alternatives. They might not be as cheap as Russian oil at this point but they come with no additional dangers or hoops. That's why there are now supposedly ~390million barrels of Russian oil stuck on tankers around the world who can't find a place to offload this cargo. So they're running a lot of tankers (each costing ~100k USD/day to operate) that are unable to provide a profit. Edit: And I'm not sure why we're even entertaining Russian pundits with all the discussion about the elections. Anyone living in a free, democratic country knows you can't really hold elections during war time (technically you can but it would be a logistical nightmare and changing your entire government mid-war is not very smart) so no one in the West is actually holding it against Zelensky. It's only the Russians and their sympathizers that are pushing this narrative. If Zelensky doesn't hold elections after the war is over then it becomes a problem, but during war time there's no issue with there being no elections. Just about how much profit they can get out from it. Cheaper the russian oil than market price, more profits they can make. Lots of these firms are going to get sanctioned but not like the nation as a whole is getting sanctioned. That's how most chips got sneaked into China. Proxy on top of proxy I reckon the only difficult piece is how to get the oil out, the "repackaging" is easy, not like they are marked with anything to stand out as russian oil. Firms being sanctioned is as good as country being sanctioned. When you have a firm that trades oil it's quite often run by the government and even if not it might be a big part of your economy. If such firm gets hit by sanctions and is basically cut off from global trade it means your country by proxy is also cut off from the global trade through those firms. You can get sanctioned for buying Russian oil or by doing business with Russian companies and individuals. Almost no one wants to touch this with a 10 foot pole. Even India is basically halting all oil purchases from Russia this last quarter. Their biggest oil companies are switching to buying from the Saudis and 5 of the biggest Indian companies are responsible for 65% of Russian oil purchases by the country. We will see because again singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia etc are all still happily sneaking nvidia chips into china There had been a lot of reports with video evidences already But different situation. 1) chips are low volume high value items. If you can sneak just 1 container of microchips into China you can make millions. Running a smuggling operation that can get 1 container into a country entirely unseen is almost trivial. It's incredibly hard to stop. Hard to find actual measurements, but let's be conservative and say 2000 RTC 5090s can be fit in a container. That means 1 container is worth 4m USD. You can probably name your price once you're in China because there are no competitors. So let's assume the same amount of profit. 2) oil is high volume low value. Russian oil is currently at 36 USD. Let's assume the smuggler can sell it at 56 USD (still slightly under market for non-Russian oil). So a smuggler can make 20 USD/barrel. That means that to make roughly the same (4m USD), they need to sell 200k barrels of oil. That is a mid sized tanker ship. It is far harder to hide a tanker ship than it is a container. Not impossible. The Russian shadow fleet exists. But far far harder. It also requires having and operating a tanker ship. A significant cost in and of itself that is lost if your smuggling operation is shut down. In other words it is far harder and far more expensive to smuggle oil than it is to smuggle microchips (assuming enforcement). So the fact that people are able to smuggle microchips despite sanctions doesn't automatically mean people can also smuggle oil (at meaningful volumes).
There no smuggling, oil is sold via parallel import:
1. sell oil to India or China
2. they put a label "Indian" or "Chinese" on oil
3. this oil is sold to countries who sanctioned Russia
The same mechanism works with China and Singaporian microchips, african diamonds mined by kids, etc
EU has phased out most direct imports of Russian oil and implemented sanctions, but it has also observed schemes where oil is refined or transshipped through third countries, like Turkey, to enter the EU - AI on parallel import
|
And Russia is selling the Oil way cheaper than it could before, therefore the sanctions are still effective.
|
Finland963 Posts
On November 18 2025 19:49 Jankisa wrote:
Our guys here are in a bit of a media bubble and are a tad slow generally so they are behind the curve on what they are supposed to push at the moment.
It's these... let's call them state-approved talking points that keep popping up. From NATO expansion to root causes to the thrust towards Kyiv was just a distraction to now Zelensky's legitimacy. We'll see new versions being trotted out every once in a while, and some of them even try to stick around.
|
Canada11471 Posts
On November 18 2025 19:56 Uldridge wrote:
Of course he controls the election, he's the president no? Just like Putin, he controls everything in purely democratic fashion. It just so happens Putin comes out as the best leader time and time again.
If you stan for Putin, you pretty much have to believe constitutional limitations on the state are meaningless considering how Putin dodged term limits by retaining executive power as prime minister and then changed term limits to mean consecutive term limits. But as long as you white wash your dictatorship in an election, then I guess the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is the most successful and legitimate democracy of all time. They found the best most popular family to rule and kept voting in their Dear Leader and his family for half a century. What a democracy.
But if a country actually follows their constitution. Very suspicious. Now that's illegitimate. That's a dictatorship.
Again. EEk1TwEEk.
Was Churchill the legitimate prime minister of the UK during WWII?
|
On November 19 2025 00:24 hexhaven wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2025 19:49 Jankisa wrote:
Our guys here are in a bit of a media bubble and are a tad slow generally so they are behind the curve on what they are supposed to push at the moment.
It's these... let's call them state-approved talking points that keep popping up. From NATO expansion to root causes to the thrust towards Kyiv was just a distraction to now Zelensky's legitimacy. We'll see new versions being trotted out every once in a while, and some of them even try to stick around.
And whenever the nonsense they're peddling is debunked they always avoid addressing the rebuttals. Then after a few weeks or months they come back are are pushing the same crap, pretending it hadn't been already debunked.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
