3 ms·

What is your history with sanctioning? What country are you from? Have you ever sanctioned anyone before in this manner? Israel? Syria? Iraq? The US? China? In

What is your history with sanctioning? What country are you from? Have you ever sanctioned anyone before in this manner? Israel? Syria? Iraq? The US? China? India? I never said sanctioning couldn't be done. I'm just saying if your sanctions affect random citizens who are already powerless, and not the leaders of the country, then you're just being an asshole, and no, you aren't helping.

fouc 5y ago
Sanctions are a step down from going to war. Are you advocating that sanctions should be skipped, and we should just go straight to war? Sanctions are just one of the few tools in the toolbox that can be used to punish a country's leadership, besides going to war.
- oh_sigh 5y ago
  I've already stated that I'm okay with sanctions that target the actual leadership of Russia but not random citizens who already have no power over their government.
  - fouc 5y ago
    How is that possible? Leadership already steal from their citizens anyways.
beebmam 5y ago
Are you claiming that sanctions on Russia will affect ONLY the average citizens of Russia; that is, are you arguing that sanctions on Russia will have ZERO effect on the country's ability to wage its aggressive war in Ukraine? It seems to me that this is your implied argument here, and if so, that's straight up incorrect. If that ISN'T your argument, is your argument then: "Sanctions will affect both the Russian government's ability to wage war AND the Russian people, and because the sanctions affect the Russian people, they are not justified" ? Could it ever be the case that sanctions could affect only a government's ability to wage war and never the people of a country? Are you then arguing that sanctions are never justified no matter the circumstances? How far are you willing to take this argument? Should a country be forced to trade and engage in business with a country that is currently invading them? I really don't understand exactly what you're arguing here and I'd appreciate clarification

fouc 5y ago

Sanctions are a step down from going to war. Are you advocating that sanctions should be skipped, and we should just go straight to war? Sanctions are just one of the few tools in the toolbox that can be used to punish a country's leadership, besides going to war.

oh_sigh 5y ago
I've already stated that I'm okay with sanctions that target the actual leadership of Russia but not random citizens who already have no power over their government.
- fouc 5y ago
  How is that possible? Leadership already steal from their citizens anyways.

beebmam 5y ago

Are you claiming that sanctions on Russia will affect ONLY the average citizens of Russia; that is, are you arguing that sanctions on Russia will have ZERO effect on the country's ability to wage its aggressive war in Ukraine? It seems to me that this is your implied argument here, and if so, that's straight up incorrect. If that ISN'T your argument, is your argument then: "Sanctions will affect both the Russian government's ability to wage war AND the Russian people, and because the sanctions affect the Russian people, they are not justified" ? Could it ever be the case that sanctions could affect only a government's ability to wage war and never the people of a country? Are you then arguing that sanctions are never justified no matter the circumstances? How far are you willing to take this argument? Should a country be forced to trade and engage in business with a country that is currently invading them? I really don't understand exactly what you're arguing here and I'd appreciate clarification