3 ms·

"According to a 2024 analysis by The Washington Post, 60% of low-income countries were under some form of U.S. financial sanction. The analysis also concluded t

"According to a 2024 analysis by The Washington Post, 60% of low-income countries were under some form of U.S. financial sanction. The analysis also concluded that the U.S. imposes three times as many sanctions as any other country or international body." - from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_sanctions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_sanctions Really quite ridiculous that there are sanctions on something like 1/3 of the world.

nozzlegear 2y ago
From that same link, financial sanctions against a country can be one of any of the following: * authority to prohibit U.S. citizens from engaging in financial transactions with the individuals, entities, or governments on the list, except by license from the U.S. government * requiring the United States to oppose loans by the World Bank and other international financial institutions, * diplomatic immunity waived, to allow families of terrorism victims to file for civil damages in U.S. courts, * tax credits for companies and individuals denied, for income earned in listed countries, * duty-free goods exemption suspended for imports from those countries, and * prohibition of U.S. Defense Department contracts above $100,000 with companies controlled by countries on the list. If we look at the map on that same page, we can see that very few countries have a total financial sanction such as the likes of Iran. > Really quite ridiculous that there are sanctions on something like 1/3 of the world. Sanctions are one of the de facto tools in the arsenal of American soft diplomacy. To be frank, the US has so many sanctions because the USD is so powerful.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > the US has so many sanctions because the USD is so powerful That's appealing to sanctions' effectiveness. It's unclear they are. Instead, they're a potent signalling mechanism that's more palatable than shipping arms or worse, soldiers.
  - nozzlegear 2y ago
    I'm not sure I understand. That's exactly the point of sanctions, to use the power of the US economy and the USD to exert American influence. You're right, they're not always effective at achieving their immediate goals, but they signal US disapproval and help pursue long-term goals without shipping those arms or soldiers anywhere.
nradov 2y ago
Ridiculous in what sense? Perhaps those low-income countries should get their shit together and stop sponsoring terrorists, introduce multiparty democracy with free elections, allow free-market capitalism, extradite wanted criminals, and adhere to the treaties that they've ratified. The USA is under no obligation to trade with unfriendly countries.
- black_briar 2y ago
  [dead]
literallycancer 2y ago
Is it? Why should a random third world country be allowed to trade with Russia, Iran, North Korea or China? If anything, it would make sense if there were more sanctions, not less, with how things are going.
- QuercusMax 2y ago
  Why should they be allowed to trade? Because the US isn't the boss of the entire world?

nozzlegear 2y ago

From that same link, financial sanctions against a country can be one of any of the following: * authority to prohibit U.S. citizens from engaging in financial transactions with the individuals, entities, or governments on the list, except by license from the U.S. government * requiring the United States to oppose loans by the World Bank and other international financial institutions, * diplomatic immunity waived, to allow families of terrorism victims to file for civil damages in U.S. courts, * tax credits for companies and individuals denied, for income earned in listed countries, * duty-free goods exemption suspended for imports from those countries, and * prohibition of U.S. Defense Department contracts above $100,000 with companies controlled by countries on the list. If we look at the map on that same page, we can see that very few countries have a total financial sanction such as the likes of Iran. > Really quite ridiculous that there are sanctions on something like 1/3 of the world. Sanctions are one of the de facto tools in the arsenal of American soft diplomacy. To be frank, the US has so many sanctions because the USD is so powerful.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> the US has so many sanctions because the USD is so powerful That's appealing to sanctions' effectiveness. It's unclear they are. Instead, they're a potent signalling mechanism that's more palatable than shipping arms or worse, soldiers.
- nozzlegear 2y ago
  I'm not sure I understand. That's exactly the point of sanctions, to use the power of the US economy and the USD to exert American influence. You're right, they're not always effective at achieving their immediate goals, but they signal US disapproval and help pursue long-term goals without shipping those arms or soldiers anywhere.

nradov 2y ago

Ridiculous in what sense? Perhaps those low-income countries should get their shit together and stop sponsoring terrorists, introduce multiparty democracy with free elections, allow free-market capitalism, extradite wanted criminals, and adhere to the treaties that they've ratified. The USA is under no obligation to trade with unfriendly countries.

black_briar 2y ago
[dead]

literallycancer 2y ago

Is it? Why should a random third world country be allowed to trade with Russia, Iran, North Korea or China? If anything, it would make sense if there were more sanctions, not less, with how things are going.

QuercusMax 2y ago
Why should they be allowed to trade? Because the US isn't the boss of the entire world?