[tm-guimaraes]

> Absolutely no one in Iraq cares that Americans still had their free speech when they destroyed their country and set them back 30 years

Case in point is "doing business with American/Russian companies" not the evils of war, which are undisputable.

The "freedom" is a very important point when doing any kind of risk assessment of a vendor deal.

> You realize that they did offer to extradite bin Ladin, right?

I did not, thanks for the info.

[mardifoufs]

Yes to be clear I agree that doing business with Russian citizens in russia itself is not something I would do. I was referring to Russian corporations that basically migrated away from Russia but still have a most Russian (by citizenship) staff.

Also, just to provide a source and details on the extradition offer, they offered to extradite him to a third country for trial which I think is more than reasonable, but the US said that there was no need for proof or process.

https://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=80482&page=1

[2Gkashmiri]

>The United States today rejected yet another offer by Afghanistan's ruling Taliban to turn over Osama bin Laden for trial in a third country if the U.S. presents evidence against bin Laden and stops air attacks.

>"There's no need to discuss it," Bush said. "We know he's guilty. Just turn him over. … There's nothing to negotiate about. They're harboring a terrorist and they need to turn him over."

So essentially the US and the rest of the world razed a country to the ground because they wanted a man so badly that when the country offered to give that man a fair trial before a third neutral country, the US found that offensive and destroyed them? democracy much?