7 ms·

Maybe because Ukrainian men don't have the choice to flee. It's not like Russians are moving away during peaceful times. It's a full on war in which one party

Maybe because Ukrainian men don't have the choice to flee. It's not like Russians are moving away during peaceful times. It's a full on war in which one party is bombing the civilians of a democratic country, threatening NATO with nuclear war and Russians are the only ones who can actually stop it.

hutzlibu 5y ago
I still do not see the logic of punishing people who left russia - as they obviously do not support the war. If they stay and get drafted to fight in the war for real, how does this help? And sure, they could try to organize revolts - but would you? That is extremly dangerous and a million times easier said than done. Fleeing the country is a strong peaceful revolt on the other hand. Helping those people will mean helping an opposition that one day maybe wants to go back to russia to build up alternative structures.
- christophilus 5y ago
  You’re right. I like to think that I’d stay and fight / protest if I was single. But as a father with young kids, I’d be getting the hell out of dodge; and I’d hope to find a safe place of refuge. The rest of us need to be supportive of refugees from both countries.
- Mikeb85 5y ago
  >Fleeing the country is a strong peaceful revolt on the other hand No, it just ensures that the only people left in Russia are the ones who support Putin. And like I said, Ukrainians have no choice. Why should Russians? As another poster said, even autocracies need a certain level of support to operate. It's not fair to punish Russians but their country is literally waging a full scale war while threatening the west with nukes. They can stop it. Or we can all wait until Kyiv looks like Grozny, millions have died and we're sacrificing the Baltic states to "prevent nuclear war"...
  - asats 5y ago
    Right, if you were in power people fleeing over the berlin wall would have been shot from both sides, not just by the soviets. Cause they should have stayed inside and overthrown the soviet government. Same goes for north koreans, shoot them and send them back, let them fight the government.
    - Mikeb85 5y ago
      The Soviet Union was ended from within... Thanks for proving my point.
      - hutzlibu 5y ago
        And the people who wanted to flee, played their part in it. It is bad for the morale, if you have to shoot your people for wanting to leave. And they did get shot - but not from the other side, too. They were welcomed once they made it. And still it worked.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - asats 5y ago
        The only reason it didn't fall sooner is because you didn't shoot enough fleeing refugees. Got it.
    - Etherlord87 5y ago
      ^ the above is a nice example of a strawman[1]. Obviously putting sanctions on citizens of an invading country is very far from shooting them, and yet asats decided to portray his debater as a leader who would murder other people, because perhaps it's too exhausting for him to have an actual, substantive conversation. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
      - asats 5y ago
        The argument was not about the imposition of sanctions on the citizens but about punishing the mostly anti-government people that are currently fleeing the country. Also my debater accepted the argument and wrapped himself in that straw.
- Etherlord87 5y ago
  > I still do not see the logic of punishing people who left russia - as they obviously do not support the war. Just an idea: perhaps it's easier to circumvent sanctions if you can move abroad in order to make money transfers. You could also make money transfers for your family and friends while you're there. Or even create some kind of a business, where you're a middleman. Perhaps the sanctions can be improved in a way to not hurt people leaving russia, but obviously as it increases complexity, it also requires more time to prepare. Still, a russian may make money abroad and then return to russia with the money. So "improving" those sanctions would effectively decrease them.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

hutzlibu 5y ago

I still do not see the logic of punishing people who left russia - as they obviously do not support the war. If they stay and get drafted to fight in the war for real, how does this help? And sure, they could try to organize revolts - but would you? That is extremly dangerous and a million times easier said than done. Fleeing the country is a strong peaceful revolt on the other hand. Helping those people will mean helping an opposition that one day maybe wants to go back to russia to build up alternative structures.

christophilus 5y ago
You’re right. I like to think that I’d stay and fight / protest if I was single. But as a father with young kids, I’d be getting the hell out of dodge; and I’d hope to find a safe place of refuge. The rest of us need to be supportive of refugees from both countries.
Mikeb85 5y ago
>Fleeing the country is a strong peaceful revolt on the other hand No, it just ensures that the only people left in Russia are the ones who support Putin. And like I said, Ukrainians have no choice. Why should Russians? As another poster said, even autocracies need a certain level of support to operate. It's not fair to punish Russians but their country is literally waging a full scale war while threatening the west with nukes. They can stop it. Or we can all wait until Kyiv looks like Grozny, millions have died and we're sacrificing the Baltic states to "prevent nuclear war"...
- asats 5y ago
  Right, if you were in power people fleeing over the berlin wall would have been shot from both sides, not just by the soviets. Cause they should have stayed inside and overthrown the soviet government. Same goes for north koreans, shoot them and send them back, let them fight the government.
  - Mikeb85 5y ago
    The Soviet Union was ended from within... Thanks for proving my point.
    - hutzlibu 5y ago
      And the people who wanted to flee, played their part in it. It is bad for the morale, if you have to shoot your people for wanting to leave. And they did get shot - but not from the other side, too. They were welcomed once they made it. And still it worked.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - asats 5y ago
      The only reason it didn't fall sooner is because you didn't shoot enough fleeing refugees. Got it.
  - Etherlord87 5y ago
    ^ the above is a nice example of a strawman[1]. Obviously putting sanctions on citizens of an invading country is very far from shooting them, and yet asats decided to portray his debater as a leader who would murder other people, because perhaps it's too exhausting for him to have an actual, substantive conversation. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
    - asats 5y ago
      The argument was not about the imposition of sanctions on the citizens but about punishing the mostly anti-government people that are currently fleeing the country. Also my debater accepted the argument and wrapped himself in that straw.
Etherlord87 5y ago
> I still do not see the logic of punishing people who left russia - as they obviously do not support the war. Just an idea: perhaps it's easier to circumvent sanctions if you can move abroad in order to make money transfers. You could also make money transfers for your family and friends while you're there. Or even create some kind of a business, where you're a middleman. Perhaps the sanctions can be improved in a way to not hurt people leaving russia, but obviously as it increases complexity, it also requires more time to prepare. Still, a russian may make money abroad and then return to russia with the money. So "improving" those sanctions would effectively decrease them.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]