1

Topic: New sanctions

we wait for input of a new packet of sanctions with a substantiation "that is why that". Washington roughly enters on August, 22nd new sanctions against Russia, informs Reuters. In State department explained that as a result of application of poison gas "Beginner" in the British Salisbury Moscow broke international law. According to the law of 1991 application by any country of the biological and chemical weapon attracts limitative measures from the USA. More in detail on RBC: https://www.rbc.ru/politics/08/08/2018/ … ?from=main

2

Re: New sanctions

K>  we wait for input of a new packet of sanctions with a substantiation "that is why that". Is not present any "because". Enter because can. And enter gradually because something all the same is fastened on the Russian economy. And will proceed:  will press outside, the Batch and To to disorganize from within.

3

Re: New sanctions

Hello, Kaifa, you wrote: K>  we wait for input of a new packet of sanctions with a substantiation "that is why that". About, and  still fell. Well ,   on  tells, how sanctions are useful and is good feeble , it is necessary to rally, tighten only more tightly belts and to undergo, well and the pension age lifts at the same time to 75.

4

Re: New sanctions

Hello, AlexRK, you wrote: ARK> About, and  still fell. Well ,   on  tells, how sanctions are useful and is good feeble , it is necessary to rally, tighten only more tightly belts and to undergo, well and the pension age lifts at the same time to 75. And how it was necessary?... <<RSDN@Home 1.3.17 alpha 5 rev. 62>>

5

Re: New sanctions

Hello, Night Looking, you wrote: NANOSECOND> And how it was necessary? Late to drink  when kidneys refused. But even in this situation it "was necessary" to shake oligarchs at first.

6

Re: New sanctions

Hello, Kaifa, you wrote: K>  we wait for input of a new packet of sanctions with a substantiation "that is why that". These are their echoes   where the subject of Russia is only the lever of pressure upon the president. We in all this history do not play any role.

7

Re: New sanctions

All it is registered in the law of 1991 which was applied till now only twice - concerning Syria in 2013 and Democratic People's Republic of Korea during the current year. , neither Syria in 2013, nor Democratic People's Republic of Korea in 2018 chemical weapon did not apply.

8

Re: New sanctions

Hello, Hobbes, you wrote: H> , neither Syria in 2013, nor Democratic People's Republic of Korea in 2018 chemical weapon did not apply. And "law" at all 1991. And not the law at all. Though can in the USA what there is an internal law of 1991

9

Re: New sanctions

Hello, AlexRK, you wrote: ARK> Late to drink  when kidneys refused. But even in this situation it "was necessary" to shake oligarchs at first. Late that?  Crimea? To pay to states compensation for impudence? And at what here oligarchs?

10

Re: New sanctions

Hello, pagid, you wrote: P> Though can in the USA what there is an internal law of 1991 In the notice there is a link: https://www.congress.gov/bill/102nd-con … /3409/text

11

Re: New sanctions

Hello, copypaste, you wrote: ARK>> Late to drink  when kidneys refused. But even in this situation it "was necessary" to shake oligarchs at first. A C> Late that?  Crimea? To pay to states compensation for impudence? Late to drink , I told. The person from height, and in two meters from the earth when it already broke almost, asked a question falls: And WHAT to DO? This question is silly, everything, the train left. Putin for decades of the board  Ukraine (as consequence there was an ass with Crimea), bent down in front of caucasus,  economy, and now we ask a question - oh and what to do. A C> And at what here oligarchs? It to a question of increase of pension age.

12

Re: New sanctions

Hello, Hobbes, you wrote: H> In the notice there is a link: https://www.congress.gov/bill/102nd-con … /3409/text Laughter on a stick.

13

Re: New sanctions

In the USA the prohibition of flights is interesting to Aeroflot. They the sizes of Russia on a card saw? And if Russia enters the prohibition of flight and run of their planes, already there were such sentences. It to you not Monaco.))

14

Re: New sanctions

Hello, AlexRK, you wrote: ARK> About, and  still fell. Well ,   on  tells, how sanctions are useful and is good feeble , it is necessary to rally, tighten only more tightly belts and to undergo, well and the pension age lifts at the same time to 75. Change  on "Katz". To you goes.

15

Re: New sanctions

ARK>  on  tells, how sanctions are useful and is good feeble  Stop... After all it to us permanently is told qwertyuiop, and by him after all the economic expert and . Strange...

16

Re: New sanctions

Hello, Patsak, you wrote: the USA it  - to Europe they perfectly reach through Atlantic, in  - through Pacific ocean. And the scanty share of flights in the countries like Pakistan can be made and with change - whom there  convenience of these ... Yes in general and for Americans.

17

Re: New sanctions

Hello, Serpuh, you wrote: S> in the USA the prohibition of flights Is interesting to Aeroflot. The main thing the sense is not clear - well there will be no aircraft service of Russia from the USA and what to whom make, Abalakam everyone is worse? And a horse-radish as though with them.

18

Re: New sanctions

Hello, AlexRK, you wrote: ARK> Late to drink , I told. The person from height, and in two meters from the earth when it already broke almost, asked a question falls: And WHAT to DO? This question is silly, everything, the train left. Putin for decades of the board  Ukraine (as consequence there was an ass with Crimea), bent down in front of caucasus,  economy, and now we ask a question - oh and what to do. Oh, so you precisely know that it is necessary to make that it was good? Why you not Putin?

19

Re: New sanctions

Hello, Sheridan, you wrote: S> Hello, AlexRK, you wrote: ARK>> Late to drink , I told. The person from height, and in two meters from the earth when it already broke almost, asked a question falls: And WHAT to DO? This question is silly, everything, the train left. Putin for decades of the board  Ukraine (as consequence there was an ass with Crimea), bent down in front of caucasus,  economy, and now we ask a question - oh and what to do. S> oh, so you precisely know that it is necessary to make that it was good? S> why you not Putin? Because not   still in 90?

20

Re: New sanctions

The Main thing the sense is not clear - well there will be no aircraft service of Russia from the USA and what to whom make, Abalakam everyone is worse? And a horse-radish as though with them. Here  porridge in a head. Airlines the aerofleet badly becomes. Which by the way fell in price for 11 percent already this morning. These flights it is money.

21

Re: New sanctions

ZB> here  porridge in a head. Airlines the aerofleet badly becomes.  do not fly Aeroflot?

22

Re: New sanctions

Hello, Sheridan, you wrote: S> Oh, so you precisely know that it is necessary to make that it was good? And how you drew this powerful output? S> why you not Putin? Why I should them be?

23

Re: New sanctions

24

Re: New sanctions

Hello, AlexRK, you wrote: S>> Oh, so you precisely know that it is necessary to make that it was good? ARK> and how you drew this powerful output? Well time you criticize, means you see that  not so. Time you see that  not so - means you know about "so". S>> Why you not Putin? ARK> why I should them be? Because you know as better?

25

Re: New sanctions

S> Well time you criticize, means you see that  not so. It is true. S> time you see that  not so - means you know about "so". And it is bosh. Goebbels read? You can not to have, for example, absolutely any representation about technology of building of houses, but thus all the same have a just cause to criticize builders for curve walls and a flowing roof