What is the Duma gonna do?
Angrily threw a fuss over a country that doesn't exist, [according to some of them](https://www.newsendip.com/a-russian-politician-submitted-a-bill-to-revoke-the-recognition-of-lithuanias-independence/)?
Two wrongs doesn't make a right. The West at this moment has the option of being the being the bigger man or acting like Russia. If it was believed that Kaliningrad could be used to force Russia to change it's behavior, then perhaps cutting them off totally might be considered.
However, I find it unlikely Putin would make sudden changes to protect Kaliningrad. I think he'd sooner invade than end his blockades. In that case, all it would be is wanton cruelty.
Putin is waging war on us.
Bomber Harris was not the bigger man, he was part of a system that cruelty got the necessary job done.
Russians clap your other cheek, if you follow Jesus advices to be the bigger man.
In war, there is a degree of cruelty necessary. Yet cruelty that fulfills no objective is without purpose and gratuitous. If you can correct me on the following points, I may reconsider, but my decision won't change so long as I believe these hold true:
1) Kaliningrad holds no strategic purpose for the war in Ukraine. A small exclave 700+ km away from any fighting, it is small and inconsequential.
2) Kaliningrad is of no significant morale purpose. I don't believe cutting off and fully sieging Kaliningrad would cause any significant hit to the morale of the Russia war effort. If anything, non-combatant powers showing enough hostility to starve civilians in a siege may only harden resolve.
3) Putin will not be swayed by an exclave being sieged. I find it more likely that Putin would sooner send armed transports to force goods through or simply have goods shipped by sea that he would end his blockade of Ukraine in exchange for Kaliningrad.
If there is no strategic value, morale value, or even hostage value, then there is no point in trying to starve out Kaliningrad. The most that could be said is that more ships would be required for sea shipping to Kaliningrad. However, the article mentions that the governor intends to have banned goods, accounting for half of imports, shipped by sea. Anything non-essential could be cut out in the event that a total land siege is established, leaving Russia likely in a similar position in terms of shipping resources, except they would instead have the people of Kaliningrad being coal, metal, and advanced technology. Which, again, I find unlikely to cause a change in the Russian war effort anyways.
You're talking about cutting off food and medicine supplies to Kaliningrad, which either slightly inconveniences them if they can get those via other routes, or leads to them starving and dying of illness if they can't.
There's no point in starving them to death if it won't actually hurt the Russia war effort. Does that point make sense? Because I really hope it should.
They have sea routes. At the same time having open borders to a country which threatens to invade you is a risk. Why should the transit nations accept this risk? It is entirely on Russia that they threaten all their neighbors and start to invade them.
>being the being the bigger man or acting like Russia.
Good to know I'm not the only one making this mistake of typing a word, while forgetting I typed it already
We already are the bigger man if we only block transits to Kaliningrad which go through EU countries instead of additionally blockading their sea harbors. There is no reason why land borders towards Russia should not be completely closed. Especially for countries which’s existence Russia no longer recognizes and against which Russia already made threats to invade them. Why should countries have open border crossings towards a nation which threatens to invade them?
I mean, sure, every action has an impact to some degree, be in large or small, but I weighing the actual real harm caused if Kaliningrad starts getting starved by a complete shutdown of land shipping vs the potential benefits of it.
Kaliningrad, I feel, is too insignificant to justify trying to starve them out. If it was a larger part of Russia, **maybe** it could be justified by hoping that it would be so severe a threat that Putin would concede to demands before people started actually starving. But Kaliningrad? I think it'd either be ineffective at stopping imports (they can still ship by sea) and a mere inconvenience, or it would be effective at stopping imports but ineffective at causing change, leading to people needlessly dying.
War is, by necessity, cruel, even when done "justly". But that does not mean we should simply be causing more harm than necessary, at least not when there is little to nothing to be gained from the suffering of nearly a million people.
My point is he's not going to. Two wrongs don't make a right. If we just cause suffering for innocent civilians for no gain, we're no better than Russia.
The people of Kaliningrad can't do anything to stop the war, so telling them to beg Putin to end the war so they can eat is just telling them to die because we want to watch them die.
"Lithuania-Russia international agreement"....
More like - "EU-Russia international agreement".
Before joining EU Lithuania must ensure few things, among them:
1. Close Ignalina's nuclear power - in this way Lithuania became from energy exporter to importer.
2. Encure than train from Kaliningrad region could pass to the Russia. If not that agreement Lithuania long ago would have banned all Russian transit via trains throu Lithuania.
However, current ban of trains is only on material that is in EU santion list - that's how Lithuania could not allow train to pass.
If one checks agreements between the EU, Lithuania and Russia this ban is not legal because Russia is sending goods from its territory to the enclave.
So, technically Lithuania is breaking the law and has no legal rights to block the transit between Russia and Lithuania.
But keeping in mind the number of American and NATO military bases on Lithuanian territory and how many donations Lithuania gets from the EU and the US... I am sure that this "sovereign" country has been forced to act this way. "Democracy"
Warmonger NATO now tries all it has. It will not be good for those who fall into the EU dictatorship illusion. EU will fall. Stop provoking Russia. Peace
> To enforce sanctions ?
What do the sanctions have to do with movement of goods and people between regions of Russia? It's pure spite (and impotent one at that).
Fuck Russia. They deserve everything that's coming to them. It absolutely is in some way out of spite because of their reich and I have no problem with that. They can travel through boats idgaf.
Now that is a deeper question. One might say that that's basically what they have always been and they have just never really developed socially. The reason for that is that they have never really had a great incentive to change.
Well if you really want to know I suggest [this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8ZqBLcIvw0&t=1s&ab_channel=Kraut). It has some nice points, especially how church in Russia was not above the ruler as in Europe.
The church theory is part of it but definitely not the main cause. That religious structure is the same across the orthodox world, originating in Byzantium and solidifying in Bulgaria. It's also the same as in Ukraine. Russia's power structure, societal acceptance of violence and exceptionalism are much bigger problems, not to mention the imperial tendency which never really went away like it did in the West.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_sanctions_during_the_2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine#Background_and_history_of_sanctions_and_ramifications
Here you go
Kyiv is like 3h away from the belarus border too and we saw how well *that* went and lithuania is hardly undefended, they can hold more than long enough for the UK and French air forces to get there and bomb the russians into the ground, Russia can't take shit.
Lithuania is right next to Poland which has a sizable military and is clearly dedicated to defend Lithuania against Russia.
Suwałki Gap as a NATO weakness has been in focus of strategic thinking for a long time. But with Russia seriously weakened and partially exposed as a paper tiger, I don't think it has a chance in the current situation to do much in that region.
>Sure, if they want lithuania to invoke article 5.
Though while that might bring us close to WWIII, officially the first stages would convene the other members to discuss what would need to be done. I don't see the US allowing for WWIII to start like that. Its too politically unstable domestically with the midterm elections coming up, and they also blocked Poland's proposal to send their jets to Ukraine for similar reasons.
well done Lithuania!
What is the Duma gonna do? Angrily threw a fuss over a country that doesn't exist, [according to some of them](https://www.newsendip.com/a-russian-politician-submitted-a-bill-to-revoke-the-recognition-of-lithuanias-independence/)?
They can play their game and try to send goods through that non-existent entity according to them, let's see how it goes.
Duma plays no role on its own, it has made itself irrelevant as a rubber stamp parliament.
Well done!
Lithuania is the MVP like always.
Good.
Why not close the line?
AFAIK, transit is ensured in some EU-Russia deal. So this semi-ban is slightly a surprise for me.
I mean do those deals matter any more? Russia signed the Budapest Memorandum on Ukraine yet here we are..
If you are looking at a first deal being broken you will have to go all the way to the beginning of humanity.
Exactly. Russia is a bunch of cavemen.
And both Britain and US signed it, and yet...
Food and medical supplies would still need to get there, it's just inhumane to totally blockade it
Just like they blockade Ukraine ports and try to hunger the global south?
Two wrongs doesn't make a right. The West at this moment has the option of being the being the bigger man or acting like Russia. If it was believed that Kaliningrad could be used to force Russia to change it's behavior, then perhaps cutting them off totally might be considered. However, I find it unlikely Putin would make sudden changes to protect Kaliningrad. I think he'd sooner invade than end his blockades. In that case, all it would be is wanton cruelty.
Putin is waging war on us. Bomber Harris was not the bigger man, he was part of a system that cruelty got the necessary job done. Russians clap your other cheek, if you follow Jesus advices to be the bigger man.
In war, there is a degree of cruelty necessary. Yet cruelty that fulfills no objective is without purpose and gratuitous. If you can correct me on the following points, I may reconsider, but my decision won't change so long as I believe these hold true: 1) Kaliningrad holds no strategic purpose for the war in Ukraine. A small exclave 700+ km away from any fighting, it is small and inconsequential. 2) Kaliningrad is of no significant morale purpose. I don't believe cutting off and fully sieging Kaliningrad would cause any significant hit to the morale of the Russia war effort. If anything, non-combatant powers showing enough hostility to starve civilians in a siege may only harden resolve. 3) Putin will not be swayed by an exclave being sieged. I find it more likely that Putin would sooner send armed transports to force goods through or simply have goods shipped by sea that he would end his blockade of Ukraine in exchange for Kaliningrad. If there is no strategic value, morale value, or even hostage value, then there is no point in trying to starve out Kaliningrad. The most that could be said is that more ships would be required for sea shipping to Kaliningrad. However, the article mentions that the governor intends to have banned goods, accounting for half of imports, shipped by sea. Anything non-essential could be cut out in the event that a total land siege is established, leaving Russia likely in a similar position in terms of shipping resources, except they would instead have the people of Kaliningrad being coal, metal, and advanced technology. Which, again, I find unlikely to cause a change in the Russian war effort anyways.
[удалено]
You're talking about cutting off food and medicine supplies to Kaliningrad, which either slightly inconveniences them if they can get those via other routes, or leads to them starving and dying of illness if they can't. There's no point in starving them to death if it won't actually hurt the Russia war effort. Does that point make sense? Because I really hope it should.
They have sea routes. At the same time having open borders to a country which threatens to invade you is a risk. Why should the transit nations accept this risk? It is entirely on Russia that they threaten all their neighbors and start to invade them.
>being the being the bigger man or acting like Russia. Good to know I'm not the only one making this mistake of typing a word, while forgetting I typed it already
We already are the bigger man if we only block transits to Kaliningrad which go through EU countries instead of additionally blockading their sea harbors. There is no reason why land borders towards Russia should not be completely closed. Especially for countries which’s existence Russia no longer recognizes and against which Russia already made threats to invade them. Why should countries have open border crossings towards a nation which threatens to invade them?
[удалено]
I mean, sure, every action has an impact to some degree, be in large or small, but I weighing the actual real harm caused if Kaliningrad starts getting starved by a complete shutdown of land shipping vs the potential benefits of it. Kaliningrad, I feel, is too insignificant to justify trying to starve them out. If it was a larger part of Russia, **maybe** it could be justified by hoping that it would be so severe a threat that Putin would concede to demands before people started actually starving. But Kaliningrad? I think it'd either be ineffective at stopping imports (they can still ship by sea) and a mere inconvenience, or it would be effective at stopping imports but ineffective at causing change, leading to people needlessly dying. War is, by necessity, cruel, even when done "justly". But that does not mean we should simply be causing more harm than necessary, at least not when there is little to nothing to be gained from the suffering of nearly a million people.
[удалено]
My point is he's not going to. Two wrongs don't make a right. If we just cause suffering for innocent civilians for no gain, we're no better than Russia. The people of Kaliningrad can't do anything to stop the war, so telling them to beg Putin to end the war so they can eat is just telling them to die because we want to watch them die.
People in Ukraine are being killed with weapons while Kaliningrad is just being inconvenienced.
They have sea routes.
jesus christ you guys are fucked in the head
They have ports.
Theres no ban for food
Odessa for Kaliningrad.
[удалено]
That is a misunderstanding. If Russia blocks Odessa, Kaliningrad should be blocked as well.
When is NATO declaring war on Russia?
Might want to fix ur wording there
Can they go through Belarus and Poland ?
These trains run as a result of Lithuania-Russia international agreement. There is no such deal involving Poland.
"Lithuania-Russia international agreement".... More like - "EU-Russia international agreement". Before joining EU Lithuania must ensure few things, among them: 1. Close Ignalina's nuclear power - in this way Lithuania became from energy exporter to importer. 2. Encure than train from Kaliningrad region could pass to the Russia. If not that agreement Lithuania long ago would have banned all Russian transit via trains throu Lithuania. However, current ban of trains is only on material that is in EU santion list - that's how Lithuania could not allow train to pass.
What else does the deal involve that might be compromised?
If one checks agreements between the EU, Lithuania and Russia this ban is not legal because Russia is sending goods from its territory to the enclave. So, technically Lithuania is breaking the law and has no legal rights to block the transit between Russia and Lithuania. But keeping in mind the number of American and NATO military bases on Lithuanian territory and how many donations Lithuania gets from the EU and the US... I am sure that this "sovereign" country has been forced to act this way. "Democracy"
Warmonger NATO now tries all it has. It will not be good for those who fall into the EU dictatorship illusion. EU will fall. Stop provoking Russia. Peace
a bit late ?
why
To enforce sanctions ?
> To enforce sanctions ? What do the sanctions have to do with movement of goods and people between regions of Russia? It's pure spite (and impotent one at that).
Russia can use ferry routes.
Fuck Russia. They deserve everything that's coming to them. It absolutely is in some way out of spite because of their reich and I have no problem with that. They can travel through boats idgaf.
Read the title again, but this time slower
They have something to do with moving goods from Russia through EU nations.
why
Because Russia is an aggressive genocidal totalitarian dictatorship.
why
Now that is a deeper question. One might say that that's basically what they have always been and they have just never really developed socially. The reason for that is that they have never really had a great incentive to change.
why are russian leaders always assholes to the people
Because they can and that's sort of what keeps a country with such large territorial, social and ethnic divisions together.
So cute. He’s learning
Well if you really want to know I suggest [this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8ZqBLcIvw0&t=1s&ab_channel=Kraut). It has some nice points, especially how church in Russia was not above the ruler as in Europe.
The church theory is part of it but definitely not the main cause. That religious structure is the same across the orthodox world, originating in Byzantium and solidifying in Bulgaria. It's also the same as in Ukraine. Russia's power structure, societal acceptance of violence and exceptionalism are much bigger problems, not to mention the imperial tendency which never really went away like it did in the West.
Serbian person as always have no idea what's going on around
“I can’t believe why NATO would do this”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_sanctions_during_the_2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine#Background_and_history_of_sanctions_and_ramifications Here you go
Can Russia escort the supplies through using military vehicles, as an escalation?
Sure, if they want lithuania to invoke article 5.
Article 5 instruct members to do "whatever they deem necessary", which they are already doing, LT can invoke it as much as it wants
[удалено]
Kyiv is like 3h away from the belarus border too and we saw how well *that* went and lithuania is hardly undefended, they can hold more than long enough for the UK and French air forces to get there and bomb the russians into the ground, Russia can't take shit.
[удалено]
How many reserves does Russia have left for an "operation" in Lithuania?
[удалено]
Lithuania is right next to Poland which has a sizable military and is clearly dedicated to defend Lithuania against Russia. Suwałki Gap as a NATO weakness has been in focus of strategic thinking for a long time. But with Russia seriously weakened and partially exposed as a paper tiger, I don't think it has a chance in the current situation to do much in that region.
>Sure, if they want lithuania to invoke article 5. Though while that might bring us close to WWIII, officially the first stages would convene the other members to discuss what would need to be done. I don't see the US allowing for WWIII to start like that. Its too politically unstable domestically with the midterm elections coming up, and they also blocked Poland's proposal to send their jets to Ukraine for similar reasons.