Isn't blockading ports pretty standard in times of war? That's the 'problem' with most of what Russia is doing - it's just business as usual. How can you criticize something that has been done since time immemorial, including by some of the powers who now whine about Russia.
On the other hand, what the US is doing is pretty extraordinary, trying to cancel an entire country, and engaging in what I see as economic terrorism.
Wars involve blockades of ports. As you well know, these often have devastating impacts on the civilian population.
Is that good? No. Is it business as usual, done by many of the Western powers now yapping the loudest about muh evil Russia? Yes.
This may be about having good intentions for you, but it is not for these Western powers, for whom it is 100% about self-interest. And they'll starve Africa for it. (Russians as well, but this would not surprise you.)
Not quite, not globally since WWII and even then it was localized to conflict zones (India/Bengal included due to the fighting in Burma on the Indian border). Also even Stalin just starved Ukraine while exporting their wheat (to use the money from it to build the Donbas industry among other industrial centers).
Isn't blockading ports pretty standard in times of war? That's the 'problem' with most of what Russia is doing - it's just business as usual. How can you criticize something that has been done since time immemorial, including by some of the powers who now whine about Russia.
On the other hand, what the US is doing is pretty extraordinary, trying to cancel an entire country, and engaging in what I see as economic terrorism.
Just business as usual, canceling an entire continent by mass starvation: https://youtube.com/watch?v=6zRj1dfUbb4
According to this article, Russia has been trying to send/sell grain to those countries, and the US is saying "no, pls starve instead, Russia bad".
America isn't using their navy to enforce it.
But I know, words are violence and war is peace.
America isn't at war, at least in theory.
Wars involve blockades of ports. As you well know, these often have devastating impacts on the civilian population.
Is that good? No. Is it business as usual, done by many of the Western powers now yapping the loudest about muh evil Russia? Yes.
This may be about having good intentions for you, but it is not for these Western powers, for whom it is 100% about self-interest. And they'll starve Africa for it. (Russians as well, but this would not surprise you.)
Oh, so you don't have a problem with Russia starving Africa by force. OK.
Also their war disrupted this year's sowing and will disrupt the harvests too.
Well yeah, that is what war does, and has always done, unfortunately.
Not quite, not globally since WWII and even then it was localized to conflict zones (India/Bengal included due to the fighting in Burma on the Indian border). Also even Stalin just starved Ukraine while exporting their wheat (to use the money from it to build the Donbas industry among other industrial centers).
I am not sure what 'globally' means. I am sure there are other instances. Didn't Nigeria blockade Biafra into starvation, and intentionally so?