4 ms·

The honest answer is they have a lot of ICBMs. And besides, what would it do? We’ve got no more sanctions left. Short of invading (which nobody is going to do b

The honest answer is they have a lot of ICBMs. And besides, what would it do? We’ve got no more sanctions left. Short of invading (which nobody is going to do because of those ICBMs) there’s nothing left to do. We shot our wad on Ukraine sanctions. At this point unless we somehow convince the big nations that still trade with them (like China) to stop, we’ve got no levers to pull, and we don’t care enough to give China whatever massive ask they’d have for that.

actionfromafar 2y ago
What to do? Instead of only giving them scraps, send some serious weapons their way. Stop the trickle support, step up.
consumer451 2y ago
> The honest answer is they have a lot of ICBMs. That is not the honest answer. Also, the response to the threat of ICBMs is well known, it's called mutually assured destruction. The honest answer is that it would lead to sanctions on countries who continue to do business with russia. These are countries who we could like to consider as allies, such as India.
- mattmaroon 2y ago
  Not really. Why would it? Those same allies trade with other nations we’ve designated as terrorists. And we’ve already pulled basically every sanction lever against Russia anyway. At this point we’ve probably sanctioned them more than anyone we call a terrorist state. The difference is nukes.
  - consumer451 2y ago
    I respect your opinion, even though I disagree. FYI, the website in your bio is down.
    - mattmaroon 2y ago
      Ha I think I joined here in 2007. It worked back then.
      - consumer451 2y ago
        The only reason that I found this is that I recently made a Firefox extension that shows a tooltip with the user's bio, when hovering over a username on this site. I am not sure what to name it, HN Inappropriate Snoop?
vlovich123 2y ago
No, the honest answer is much more mundane - natural gas and Europe’s continued reliance on it to get through the winter and keep overall energy costs a bit more controlled. Who knew that denuclearizing the energy grid would have such benefit for Russia /sarcasm.

actionfromafar 2y ago

What to do? Instead of only giving them scraps, send some serious weapons their way. Stop the trickle support, step up.

consumer451 2y ago

> The honest answer is they have a lot of ICBMs. That is not the honest answer. Also, the response to the threat of ICBMs is well known, it's called mutually assured destruction. The honest answer is that it would lead to sanctions on countries who continue to do business with russia. These are countries who we could like to consider as allies, such as India.

mattmaroon 2y ago
Not really. Why would it? Those same allies trade with other nations we’ve designated as terrorists. And we’ve already pulled basically every sanction lever against Russia anyway. At this point we’ve probably sanctioned them more than anyone we call a terrorist state. The difference is nukes.
- consumer451 2y ago
  I respect your opinion, even though I disagree. FYI, the website in your bio is down.
  - mattmaroon 2y ago
    Ha I think I joined here in 2007. It worked back then.
    - consumer451 2y ago
      The only reason that I found this is that I recently made a Firefox extension that shows a tooltip with the user's bio, when hovering over a username on this site. I am not sure what to name it, HN Inappropriate Snoop?

vlovich123 2y ago

No, the honest answer is much more mundane - natural gas and Europe’s continued reliance on it to get through the winter and keep overall energy costs a bit more controlled. Who knew that denuclearizing the energy grid would have such benefit for Russia /sarcasm.