3 ms·

If the sanctions didn’t work before, I don’t know why they would work now. I don’t have the answers, but certainly any move toward more militarization of the w

If the sanctions didn’t work before, I don’t know why they would work now. I don’t have the answers, but certainly any move toward more militarization of the world is usually a bad thing.

adriancr 5y ago
> If the sanctions didn’t work before, I don’t know why they would work now. Just look at short term effects: Ruble is down 30%, Russian banks in EU are going bankrupt, interest rate jumped to 20% so anyone with a loan in Russia is screwed... There's talk of seizing people's savings... Nobody can buy foreign currency... Perhaps they'll go back to trading with Kent cigar packs like in former USSR. Longer term, it's assumptions, it's doubtful sanctions will go away any time soon, I'd look at Iran and Cuba for possible effects. It also decouples EU and everyone else from Russia and it grants some immunity to Russian influence. (harder to do election meddling if you're cut off and everyone is against you) > I don’t have the answers, but certainly any move toward more militarization of the world is usually a bad thing. Proper defense does tend to prevent invasions. It's a bitter pill to swallow for a lot of folk that Russia will invade at any opportune time and it's best to be prepared.
- ssijak 5y ago
  Do we really want biggest nuclear power in the world totally alienated long term?
  - adriancr 5y ago
    If you meant Russia, there has to be consequences for its actions, so yes. Nobody wanted the war or to have to impose sanctions. If you meant it as a praise, biggest nuclear power, after some point it doesn't matter anymore, both US and Russia can destroy the world by themselves. (also note that warheads on wikipedia doesn't track MIRVs, each of those can split off in space and target multiple cities on reentry) In NATO there's also France/UK that can destroy Russia by themselves.
    - ssijak 5y ago
      No praise, just a fact. There should be consequences, I agree 100%, I am just afraid that some kind of consequences could provoke even worse outcome in mid-long run.
      - adriancr 5y ago
        At some point you have to call a bluff or you'll slowly lose everything
CRConrad 5y ago
> If the sanctions didn’t work before, I don’t know why they would work now. Because these are different and harsher sanctions. That's why people are complaining more about them now, and why they might might perhaps finally work. > I don’t have the answers, Yeah, that's becoming abundantly clear. > but ...you like to bloviate? > certainly any move toward more militarization of the world is usually a bad thing. "Every country has an army. Its own, or someone else's." (Can't recall where the quote is from, but that doesn't make it any the less true.)
- ceilingcorner 5y ago
  Judging from your other comments, you haven’t bothered to educate yourself very much on this situation. Please, be trollish elsewhere and waste someone else’s time.
  - CRConrad 5y ago
    "Be trollish"? I'm not the one spouting the Kremlin's talking points.

If the sanctions didn’t work before, I don’t know why they would work now. I don’t have the answers, but certainly any move toward more militarization of the world is usually a bad thing.

adriancr 5y ago

> If the sanctions didn’t work before, I don’t know why they would work now. Just look at short term effects: Ruble is down 30%, Russian banks in EU are going bankrupt, interest rate jumped to 20% so anyone with a loan in Russia is screwed... There's talk of seizing people's savings... Nobody can buy foreign currency... Perhaps they'll go back to trading with Kent cigar packs like in former USSR. Longer term, it's assumptions, it's doubtful sanctions will go away any time soon, I'd look at Iran and Cuba for possible effects. It also decouples EU and everyone else from Russia and it grants some immunity to Russian influence. (harder to do election meddling if you're cut off and everyone is against you) > I don’t have the answers, but certainly any move toward more militarization of the world is usually a bad thing. Proper defense does tend to prevent invasions. It's a bitter pill to swallow for a lot of folk that Russia will invade at any opportune time and it's best to be prepared.

ssijak 5y ago
Do we really want biggest nuclear power in the world totally alienated long term?
- adriancr 5y ago
  If you meant Russia, there has to be consequences for its actions, so yes. Nobody wanted the war or to have to impose sanctions. If you meant it as a praise, biggest nuclear power, after some point it doesn't matter anymore, both US and Russia can destroy the world by themselves. (also note that warheads on wikipedia doesn't track MIRVs, each of those can split off in space and target multiple cities on reentry) In NATO there's also France/UK that can destroy Russia by themselves.
  - ssijak 5y ago
    No praise, just a fact. There should be consequences, I agree 100%, I am just afraid that some kind of consequences could provoke even worse outcome in mid-long run.
    - adriancr 5y ago
      At some point you have to call a bluff or you'll slowly lose everything

CRConrad 5y ago

> If the sanctions didn’t work before, I don’t know why they would work now. Because these are different and harsher sanctions. That's why people are complaining more about them now, and why they might might perhaps finally work. > I don’t have the answers, Yeah, that's becoming abundantly clear. > but ...you like to bloviate? > certainly any move toward more militarization of the world is usually a bad thing. "Every country has an army. Its own, or someone else's." (Can't recall where the quote is from, but that doesn't make it any the less true.)

ceilingcorner 5y ago
Judging from your other comments, you haven’t bothered to educate yourself very much on this situation. Please, be trollish elsewhere and waste someone else’s time.
- CRConrad 5y ago
  "Be trollish"? I'm not the one spouting the Kremlin's talking points.