4 ms·

When there's a global structure that has decided that those countries are not worth doing business with over the actions of their government. That's the whole

When there's a global structure that has decided that those countries are not worth doing business with over the actions of their government. That's the whole point... You seem to be implying a value judgement I'm not making. I'm not making some random condemnation of Russia/Iran/Whoever, or extolling the virtues of western countries - I'm telling you the point of sanctioning those countries is that it's a path towards adjusting behavior by removing consent of those governed. If the Russian/Iranian/Whoever people are happy, content, well-fed, and have easy access to luxury items... what the hell is their incentive to change how their government is acting on the international stage? The sanctions serve to show those people providing consent that the rest of the group of nations they are interacting with are not happy. It's a feedback mechanism that is not: "hey - we're going to kill you now". Which Western nations are using 1) because it's less expensive in terms of both capital and bodies. 2) because it's arguably more humane. 3) Because nuclear weapons have made countries averse to full war. There's no value judgement about whether the sanctions are good or bad, or some prescriptive judgement that the west is better. It's just the clear intent of the sanctions is to make life harder for the citizenry without having to kill them. Whether the countries making the sanctions are moral or not (in my opinion, your opinion, or that of anyone else) has fuck all to do with the functional manner in which they are being used. Sanctions are a tool, whether that tool is being used justly has zero relation to how the tool itself functions.

potatototoo99 4y ago
There's also the matter of whether or not sanctions work, and judging by their track record, they do not.
- horsawlarway 4y ago
  Sure - the tool itself may not be particularly effective. No argument here. It's essentially a signaling mechanism - how strong that signal is received can vary a lot. In the case of Russia at least - it's dampened quite a bit because both India and China are not participating. While they're not outright supporting Russia - they don't find the current government so unpalatable that they're willing to break off economic activities (and again - this is not a value judgement either way... simply a statement of efficacy). In my opinion - I don't really think sanctions are going to be terribly effective (I also think the price cap on oil purchases will not be effective), but people don't seem to grasp that a very real possible alternative is outright war. Which, at least personally, I'd like to avoid. So I'm willing to let sanctions ride for a bit and see. But I'm also in favor of providing more arms and weapons systems to Ukraine in the meantime. that said... I also have a bunch of duct-tape, plastic sheeting, water, and some iodine pills in my basement - because while I tend to hope that all the nuclear powers involved here will act with some restraint, those items will be very difficult to acquire in the 15 minutes when I might really need them, and they're relatively cheap to buy right now. So picking between that and sanctions... again - I vote for sanctions right now.

potatototoo99 4y ago

There's also the matter of whether or not sanctions work, and judging by their track record, they do not.

horsawlarway 4y ago
Sure - the tool itself may not be particularly effective. No argument here. It's essentially a signaling mechanism - how strong that signal is received can vary a lot. In the case of Russia at least - it's dampened quite a bit because both India and China are not participating. While they're not outright supporting Russia - they don't find the current government so unpalatable that they're willing to break off economic activities (and again - this is not a value judgement either way... simply a statement of efficacy). In my opinion - I don't really think sanctions are going to be terribly effective (I also think the price cap on oil purchases will not be effective), but people don't seem to grasp that a very real possible alternative is outright war. Which, at least personally, I'd like to avoid. So I'm willing to let sanctions ride for a bit and see. But I'm also in favor of providing more arms and weapons systems to Ukraine in the meantime. that said... I also have a bunch of duct-tape, plastic sheeting, water, and some iodine pills in my basement - because while I tend to hope that all the nuclear powers involved here will act with some restraint, those items will be very difficult to acquire in the 15 minutes when I might really need them, and they're relatively cheap to buy right now. So picking between that and sanctions... again - I vote for sanctions right now.