4 ms·

Whether a government can do something is a different question of whether a government ought to do something...in any event you seem to be proving OP's point, wh

Whether a government can do something is a different question of whether a government ought to do something...in any event you seem to be proving OP's point, which is that the ability of a government to do something is concerning in and of itself, regardless of whether one might feel an action is justified.

dragontamer 5y ago
Lets just call the debate in terms of their actual terms. Is it a good, or bad, thing that we removed Russia from our collective financial systems? That's really all there is to it. If its a good thing, you need to be happy with the power to do so (and you must keep and protect the power during times of peace). If its a bad thing, then I'm curious why anyone would take Russia's side on this particular conflict. Its clear to me that the Russian economy is already getting pretty hampered due to these sanctions, so no one can really argue against their efficacy anymore.
- pjkundert 5y ago
  So, the "collective punishment" of the civilian populace of an aggressor is what you're proposing as a good thing? This does nothing to harm the "oligarchs". They have plenty of wealth stashed in non-extradition jurisdictions.
  - dragontamer 5y ago
    > This does nothing to harm the "oligarchs" As long as the Moscow Stock Market is closed due to these events, your suggestion is laughable. We're already seeing those oligarchs cave to pressure and start talking about peace. They're clearly hurting from this. We hit Russia where they hurt: their economy. Oligarchs, the literal business leaders of Russia, care about their money, flow of business, their stock exchange, etc. etc. Yes, its a shame that the Russian people are also getting hit over this. But not as much as the shame as the countless Ukrainian neighborhoods that literally don't exist anymore. I'm sure Russian troops don't want to "harm civilians" either, but their actions have consequences. And the counter-actions also have consequences. -------- The only way you change my mind over this, is if YOU explain what kind of deterrence works __better__. I know there were talks about actual military action (no fly zones, US troops, etc. etc.), but presumably direct military action is also off the table, as its a dramatic escalation upwards from simple financial sanctions. ---------- EDIT: Case in point, Russian Oligarch Vagit Alekperov has lost 60% of his networth in the past week. Are you seriously trying to tell me that doesn't hurt him?
    - landemva 5y ago
      ' explain what kind of deterrence works ' Biden withdrew the remaining US troops from Ukraine three weeks ago. That was not deterrence. That was a giant green light for Russia to walk in to Ukraine. https://www.trtworld.com/americas/us-withdraws-nearly-all-remaining-troops-from-ukraine-54676 https://www.trtworld.com/americas/us-withdraws-nearly-all-re...

dragontamer 5y ago

Lets just call the debate in terms of their actual terms. Is it a good, or bad, thing that we removed Russia from our collective financial systems? That's really all there is to it. If its a good thing, you need to be happy with the power to do so (and you must keep and protect the power during times of peace). If its a bad thing, then I'm curious why anyone would take Russia's side on this particular conflict. Its clear to me that the Russian economy is already getting pretty hampered due to these sanctions, so no one can really argue against their efficacy anymore.

pjkundert 5y ago
So, the "collective punishment" of the civilian populace of an aggressor is what you're proposing as a good thing? This does nothing to harm the "oligarchs". They have plenty of wealth stashed in non-extradition jurisdictions.
- dragontamer 5y ago
  > This does nothing to harm the "oligarchs" As long as the Moscow Stock Market is closed due to these events, your suggestion is laughable. We're already seeing those oligarchs cave to pressure and start talking about peace. They're clearly hurting from this. We hit Russia where they hurt: their economy. Oligarchs, the literal business leaders of Russia, care about their money, flow of business, their stock exchange, etc. etc. Yes, its a shame that the Russian people are also getting hit over this. But not as much as the shame as the countless Ukrainian neighborhoods that literally don't exist anymore. I'm sure Russian troops don't want to "harm civilians" either, but their actions have consequences. And the counter-actions also have consequences. -------- The only way you change my mind over this, is if YOU explain what kind of deterrence works __better__. I know there were talks about actual military action (no fly zones, US troops, etc. etc.), but presumably direct military action is also off the table, as its a dramatic escalation upwards from simple financial sanctions. ---------- EDIT: Case in point, Russian Oligarch Vagit Alekperov has lost 60% of his networth in the past week. Are you seriously trying to tell me that doesn't hurt him?
  - landemva 5y ago
    ' explain what kind of deterrence works ' Biden withdrew the remaining US troops from Ukraine three weeks ago. That was not deterrence. That was a giant green light for Russia to walk in to Ukraine. https://www.trtworld.com/americas/us-withdraws-nearly-all-remaining-troops-from-ukraine-54676 https://www.trtworld.com/americas/us-withdraws-nearly-all-re...