6 ms·

No. Economic sanctions are an act of war. Just like blockading a port is an act of war. War doesn't necessarily mean killing human beings. You could bomb an emp

by qiskit 5y ago

No. Economic sanctions are an act of war. Just like blockading a port is an act of war. War doesn't necessarily mean killing human beings. You could bomb an empty munitions factory and it would be an act of war. Economic sanctions is the rich nations' weapon. It's a weapon that only a wealthy nation can wield. It's why there is so much support for it amongst rich nations. Certainly if anyone destabilized the american or european economies with sanctions, we'd definitely call it an act of war. > From a schoolyard perspective, economic sanctions are like giving a peer the silent treatment. No. It would be like Bezos saying if anyone does business with you, they'll be cut off from amazon. It's saying anyone who does business with russia is going to get attacked. It's why china was attacked for trading with iran when china doesn't have any economic sanctions on iran. It's saying the whole world can't do business with russia. All wars are fundamentally economic wars. But we usually cloak it around noble virtues like 'freedom, god, democracy, 'kill nazis', etc' because it's so tacky and shameful to be attacking each other for money. Makes you no better than common criminal. A lousy thief at that. Surely, the leaders of Russia, US, NATO, etc are better than some lousy neighborhood thief. Right?

erdos4d 5y ago
> Economic sanctions are an act of war. This 100%. I'm seriously wondering how all these people supporting heavy sanctions will feel when Putin realizes he can't win via conventional means and his economy is destroyed, so he starts nuking things.
- InsaneOstrich 5y ago
  What's the alternative? Doing nothing while Russia invades countries in Eastern Europe one after the other?
  - coldtea 5y ago
    Ensuring Ukraine's neutrality instead of sacrificing it as a pawn?
    - InsaneOstrich 5y ago
      Ukraine is a democracy. It's not up to us or anyone else to "ensure their neutrality" if that's not what they want. We already refused to allow them into NATO under the guise of "ensuring their neutrality" and look how that turned out.
      - coldtea 5y ago
        >Ukraine is a democracy. It's a country similarly corrupt as Russia (oligarch wise), that's used as a puppet to pressure it. They have big foreign involvement, and even had their democratically elected leader toppled just 8 years ago. Nominal democracy and huge foreign influence are not contradictory, rather they are the norm.
    - egman_ekki 5y ago
      How do you ensure Ukraine's neutrality as another country? If they pick your side, you start with sanctions against them?
      - coldtea 5y ago
        Doing the opposite of how you ensure their non-neutrality as another country. Don't use them as pawns against Russia, don't get them into NATO, and have Russia sign and respect that - and ensure their borders from Russia and everybody else, fighting for them if necessary (not merely with hypocritical sanctions and condemnations after you've sacrificed them).
  - klyrs 5y ago
    Or, put boots in Ukraine or Russia, and get nuked. Or, nuke Russia, and get nuked. Our options are very limited and these alternatives are all terrible.
  - oceanplexian 5y ago
    Russia, France, Germany, and Ukraine held Normandy peace talks back in January, some of the things the Russians asked for (paraphrased): Russian-speaking regions of Donetsk and Luhansk would be granted special status within Ukraine, security guarantees from NATO, a limitation of the number of troops stationed in Eastern Ukraine, and Ukraine restoring the fresh water supply that they cut off from Crimea. Conceding on some of those things might have been a good alternative to war.
- DennisP 5y ago
  When both sides have nukes, you can't win by nuking things either.
- Hendrikto 5y ago
  It is always easy to criticize. What do you think should happen? Just yield Ukraine to Putin? Did not work with Germany and Elsass-Lothringen, did not work with Russia and the Crimea, won’t work now. What happens if you give in to a dictator’s demands isn’t that he is satisfied and stops. Instead he will realize that he got away with it, then try something bigger next time. There are countless examples of this in history.
  - erdos4d 5y ago
    Absent evidence to the contrary, my take on Putin's actions are that he wishes to reestablish the buffer region Russia has historically maintained around itself to absorb invaders. He controls every state near him except Ukraine, so I would let him have it and then he will have his buffer and hopefully be happy. He has nowhere else to go after that except actually attack NATO, after which there is world war, so the appeasement that is possible in this case is rather limited, it really can't go further than this. Anyway, I get the argument that you should stand up to the bully, but this guy gives me the vibe that he's actually all-in and will (literally) lose his head if he loses this war. I think if this continues and he gets into a losing spot, he will gamble that his nuclear forces will win. I don't see any other option for him actually.
    - stephen999 5y ago
      Really he controls NATO member Latvia? He controls Finland? He controls Poland? All these countries are only a few hundred miles away.
belorn 5y ago
Not buying Russian oil and gas is not an act of war. Any nation has a right to decide if they want to buy a product, how much, by whom, and at what price they are willing to accept (tariffs and import tax, up to infinitive). Calling sanctions war is like calling boycotts theft. Vegetarians are not stealing money from beef producers. What boycotts and sanctions can be is passive aggressiveness. It harms people on a social level, and since humans are social creatures, it feel like violence. The problem of comparing violence with social violence is that not being invited to a party hurt, but it hurts in a different way from getting knifed. Our brain interpret social pain as physical phantom pain, but we must be able to distinguish between real and non-real pain. Society depend on it. The reason blocking a port is a act of war is that the nation blocking that port is also blocking it for other nations who might be willing to trade. That is like a vegetarian going out during the night and killing off the beef productions herd of cows.
- coldtea 5y ago
  Sanctions are not independent country decisions for "not buying X". In real life they work by throwing a huge economy's and diplomatic power's might against lesser countries they don't like, and in pressuring satellite countries and global organizations a side controls to stop trading, sending supplies, even food and health kits, to other countries.
  - belorn 5y ago
    People are not exclusively operating on an independent basis. They form societies, like countries, and abide to democratic elections. People who work together occasionally achieves more than what each independently would. Same occurs with nations. Small nations joins together to form large collection of nations, voting democratically on rules and decisions. EU is an union of European countries. If a country want to be in EU they will have to follow the decisions on the democratic process. We can eval this further and say that independent individuals can choose to form nations, and those independent nations can choose to form unions, and those unions can form global trade agreements, each however limited to the democratic process which dictate conditions, rules and laws. Individuals can also choose to leave their countries, countries can leave unions, and unions can leave the global trade agreements. It is a choice. They do however loose the ability to achieve those things that is only possible when people work together.
MattGaiser 5y ago
> War doesn't necessarily mean killing human beings. You could bomb an empty munitions factory and it would be an act of war. But it does require attacking or destroying. We aren’t engaging Russia at all. This is like calling a boycott theft. > It's saying anyone who does business with russia is going to get attacked. It's why china was attacked for trading with iran when china doesn't have any economic sanctions on iran. It's saying the whole world can't do business with russia. Sanctions are telling people that they must pick a side. We will not be friends with X and if you are friends with them, we will not be friends with you. China was not attacked. It was just told that it can be only with one group.
oceanplexian 5y ago
I think we are all slinging mud over the same reason, but money is only a part of it, it's really about geopolitical domination. The EU wants to dominate the cultural and political landscape in Eastern Europe. The West have their ideals of human rights, democracy, climate change, migration, etc. Russia has different views. Even if Ukraine were to become a part of the EU and NATO, all that happens is the problem is postponed. At some point the West will impose sanctions on Russia anyway, regardless of an invasion, because Russia is an obstacle to Globalization. I think that Putin saw the writing on the wall and that's why he made a move. I certainly don't agree with it, I don't agree with the war, but what did the EU think was going to happen? They and the US smugly admitted to tampering with the internal affairs Ukraine over the last several decades, and and have made their designs on Eastern Europe obvious. Now that they are implementing extreme sanctions on the Russian people, it is only confirmation bias for the Russians and more reason for them to double down on the direction they are headed in.
- paulryanrogers 5y ago
  > Even if Ukraine were to become a part of the EU and NATO, all that happens is the problem is postponed. At some point the West will impose sanctions on Russia anyway, regardless of an invasion, because Russia is an obstacle to Globalization. Yet Russia hasn't just been self isolating. It has demonstrated a thirst for influence outside its borders. And has been behaving much like the USSR before it, just with less success and the appearance of some democratic process like elections. EU and NATO countries are trying to strike a different balance between nation sovereignty and economic power. At one point Putin apparently wanted to join NATO. Though I doubt because of shared values or mutual defense against aggression.
anikan_vader 5y ago
Blockading a port is only achievable by destroying vessels and people attempting to access that port. Similar to establishing a no-fly zone, it is an action that almost always involves shooting at people. I simply don't understand the moral argument for why people and countries are required to engage in trades that produce economic surplus if they dislike the person or country with whom they are trading.

by qiskit 5y ago

erdos4d 5y ago

> Economic sanctions are an act of war. This 100%. I'm seriously wondering how all these people supporting heavy sanctions will feel when Putin realizes he can't win via conventional means and his economy is destroyed, so he starts nuking things.

InsaneOstrich 5y ago
What's the alternative? Doing nothing while Russia invades countries in Eastern Europe one after the other?
- coldtea 5y ago
  Ensuring Ukraine's neutrality instead of sacrificing it as a pawn?
  - InsaneOstrich 5y ago
    Ukraine is a democracy. It's not up to us or anyone else to "ensure their neutrality" if that's not what they want. We already refused to allow them into NATO under the guise of "ensuring their neutrality" and look how that turned out.
    - coldtea 5y ago
      >Ukraine is a democracy. It's a country similarly corrupt as Russia (oligarch wise), that's used as a puppet to pressure it. They have big foreign involvement, and even had their democratically elected leader toppled just 8 years ago. Nominal democracy and huge foreign influence are not contradictory, rather they are the norm.
  - egman_ekki 5y ago
    How do you ensure Ukraine's neutrality as another country? If they pick your side, you start with sanctions against them?
    - coldtea 5y ago
      Doing the opposite of how you ensure their non-neutrality as another country. Don't use them as pawns against Russia, don't get them into NATO, and have Russia sign and respect that - and ensure their borders from Russia and everybody else, fighting for them if necessary (not merely with hypocritical sanctions and condemnations after you've sacrificed them).
- klyrs 5y ago
  Or, put boots in Ukraine or Russia, and get nuked. Or, nuke Russia, and get nuked. Our options are very limited and these alternatives are all terrible.
- oceanplexian 5y ago
  Russia, France, Germany, and Ukraine held Normandy peace talks back in January, some of the things the Russians asked for (paraphrased): Russian-speaking regions of Donetsk and Luhansk would be granted special status within Ukraine, security guarantees from NATO, a limitation of the number of troops stationed in Eastern Ukraine, and Ukraine restoring the fresh water supply that they cut off from Crimea. Conceding on some of those things might have been a good alternative to war.
DennisP 5y ago
When both sides have nukes, you can't win by nuking things either.
Hendrikto 5y ago
It is always easy to criticize. What do you think should happen? Just yield Ukraine to Putin? Did not work with Germany and Elsass-Lothringen, did not work with Russia and the Crimea, won’t work now. What happens if you give in to a dictator’s demands isn’t that he is satisfied and stops. Instead he will realize that he got away with it, then try something bigger next time. There are countless examples of this in history.
- erdos4d 5y ago
  Absent evidence to the contrary, my take on Putin's actions are that he wishes to reestablish the buffer region Russia has historically maintained around itself to absorb invaders. He controls every state near him except Ukraine, so I would let him have it and then he will have his buffer and hopefully be happy. He has nowhere else to go after that except actually attack NATO, after which there is world war, so the appeasement that is possible in this case is rather limited, it really can't go further than this. Anyway, I get the argument that you should stand up to the bully, but this guy gives me the vibe that he's actually all-in and will (literally) lose his head if he loses this war. I think if this continues and he gets into a losing spot, he will gamble that his nuclear forces will win. I don't see any other option for him actually.
  - stephen999 5y ago
    Really he controls NATO member Latvia? He controls Finland? He controls Poland? All these countries are only a few hundred miles away.

belorn 5y ago

Not buying Russian oil and gas is not an act of war. Any nation has a right to decide if they want to buy a product, how much, by whom, and at what price they are willing to accept (tariffs and import tax, up to infinitive). Calling sanctions war is like calling boycotts theft. Vegetarians are not stealing money from beef producers. What boycotts and sanctions can be is passive aggressiveness. It harms people on a social level, and since humans are social creatures, it feel like violence. The problem of comparing violence with social violence is that not being invited to a party hurt, but it hurts in a different way from getting knifed. Our brain interpret social pain as physical phantom pain, but we must be able to distinguish between real and non-real pain. Society depend on it. The reason blocking a port is a act of war is that the nation blocking that port is also blocking it for other nations who might be willing to trade. That is like a vegetarian going out during the night and killing off the beef productions herd of cows.

coldtea 5y ago
Sanctions are not independent country decisions for "not buying X". In real life they work by throwing a huge economy's and diplomatic power's might against lesser countries they don't like, and in pressuring satellite countries and global organizations a side controls to stop trading, sending supplies, even food and health kits, to other countries.
- belorn 5y ago
  People are not exclusively operating on an independent basis. They form societies, like countries, and abide to democratic elections. People who work together occasionally achieves more than what each independently would. Same occurs with nations. Small nations joins together to form large collection of nations, voting democratically on rules and decisions. EU is an union of European countries. If a country want to be in EU they will have to follow the decisions on the democratic process. We can eval this further and say that independent individuals can choose to form nations, and those independent nations can choose to form unions, and those unions can form global trade agreements, each however limited to the democratic process which dictate conditions, rules and laws. Individuals can also choose to leave their countries, countries can leave unions, and unions can leave the global trade agreements. It is a choice. They do however loose the ability to achieve those things that is only possible when people work together.

MattGaiser 5y ago

> War doesn't necessarily mean killing human beings. You could bomb an empty munitions factory and it would be an act of war. But it does require attacking or destroying. We aren’t engaging Russia at all. This is like calling a boycott theft. > It's saying anyone who does business with russia is going to get attacked. It's why china was attacked for trading with iran when china doesn't have any economic sanctions on iran. It's saying the whole world can't do business with russia. Sanctions are telling people that they must pick a side. We will not be friends with X and if you are friends with them, we will not be friends with you. China was not attacked. It was just told that it can be only with one group.

oceanplexian 5y ago

I think we are all slinging mud over the same reason, but money is only a part of it, it's really about geopolitical domination. The EU wants to dominate the cultural and political landscape in Eastern Europe. The West have their ideals of human rights, democracy, climate change, migration, etc. Russia has different views. Even if Ukraine were to become a part of the EU and NATO, all that happens is the problem is postponed. At some point the West will impose sanctions on Russia anyway, regardless of an invasion, because Russia is an obstacle to Globalization. I think that Putin saw the writing on the wall and that's why he made a move. I certainly don't agree with it, I don't agree with the war, but what did the EU think was going to happen? They and the US smugly admitted to tampering with the internal affairs Ukraine over the last several decades, and and have made their designs on Eastern Europe obvious. Now that they are implementing extreme sanctions on the Russian people, it is only confirmation bias for the Russians and more reason for them to double down on the direction they are headed in.

paulryanrogers 5y ago
> Even if Ukraine were to become a part of the EU and NATO, all that happens is the problem is postponed. At some point the West will impose sanctions on Russia anyway, regardless of an invasion, because Russia is an obstacle to Globalization. Yet Russia hasn't just been self isolating. It has demonstrated a thirst for influence outside its borders. And has been behaving much like the USSR before it, just with less success and the appearance of some democratic process like elections. EU and NATO countries are trying to strike a different balance between nation sovereignty and economic power. At one point Putin apparently wanted to join NATO. Though I doubt because of shared values or mutual defense against aggression.

anikan_vader 5y ago

Blockading a port is only achievable by destroying vessels and people attempting to access that port. Similar to establishing a no-fly zone, it is an action that almost always involves shooting at people. I simply don't understand the moral argument for why people and countries are required to engage in trades that produce economic surplus if they dislike the person or country with whom they are trading.