Sanctions vs declaring war

veryangryman

Did countries do these pusssy sanctions in the ww1 and www2 times?

Not that I'm justifying the latter option. It just seems that sometimes you're better throwing a punch than calling HR. Rare times admittedly but they do exist.

dotsman

The germans/japs/italians/soviets didn't have nukes back then.

o1s1n

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119685006#Comment_119685006

End of thread. OP is comparing apples and oranges.

ohnonotgmail

The americans placed sanctions on Japan before the US entered WW2. It is one of the reasons they went south to the dutch east indies as they needed the oil for their ships.

Larbre34

Yes.

But, global trade wasn't as interwoven then like it is now, so international sanctions would have had only limited effects on larger self-sufficient Imperial powers of the time.

But it would be foolish to think WWII just kicked off in Sept 1939. It was brewing for up to 7 years prior with alliances and negotiations and sanctions and resettlements and all that jazz.

You'll hear many people contend it actually began as a hot war in July 1937, when hostilities kicked off in China between that Country and Japan.

1874

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119685570#Comment_119685570

Hostilities kicked off between China and Japan well before 1937, and WW2 itself seems more like a temporary reprieve in hostilities between the French and Germans since WW1, and even since the defeat of the 3rd Republic in the Franco Prussian war, the French had wanted revenge. although the terms of surrender included reparations similar to those placed on Prussia by France under Napolean (So the Prussians wanted revenge?).

The Op seems to think somehow trouncing Russia wont be met with a response today, as imo highlighted above between France/Prussia (Germany), Nations have held onto offences and looked for revenge over terms of defeat from decades previous.

The idea of MAD as a Policy was that everyone would suffer, so it some way it maintained peace, in some kind of a Nuclear Mexican standoff, what wasn't considered was that people would be too stupid and forget what the outcome of Major Nuclear armed powers facing off to others directly or indirectly in proxy wars and making threats could lead to, i.e. MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction.

Varik

There's legal limits on what third countries can do when dealing with a belligerent in an actual war. It's the reason most "war" haven't been declared since WW2.

Some countries would already have laws or even their constitution to limit their involvement when dealing with nations at war.

Even if any 3rd country decided to have troops involved they're unlikely to declare war.

Larbre34

MAD is no excuse to appease Russia indefinitely.

Their bluff should have been called months, nay years ago. Letting them annex Crimea with a shrug in '14 appears a criminal decision now.

But anyway, Ukraine are going to keep retaking their territory, piece by piece, including all 5 areas of "annexation" into the motherland. If Putin decides he isn't bluffing and employs a battlefield nuke, then he will die in flames regretting it, if he even sees the reckoning coming at all.

Strumms

If Russia deployed a nuke into The Ukraine…basically what would the options be aside from raise large parts of Russia to the ground with nukes from the west.. be sorry for the hundreds of thousands of casualties or even millions but the west has to look after itself. Ukraine invaded today, where next ? Poland ? Czech Republic ? Latvia ? Lithuania ? Belarus ?

Putin is off his head, big time but he’s not doing what he’s doing without support from others, in political terms mainly but militarily too he’s been positively enabled…

you’d wonder actually what the Bush’s, Clinton, Reagan or even Obama might have done… Biden the passive old grandad is great as regards the smiley sound bytes but in terms of displaying a proactive deterrent toward Russia, it’s been quite clear he’s been not very proactive or even properly reactive…. I don’t think Putin would have tried this with Obama, Bush, Reagan or Clinton in situ.

dxhound2005

A big part of the reason that he tried it out, is because he was able to get away with annexing Crimea in 2014. And he has been running a proxy war in the East of Ukraine for years. Nothing much was done, even when those forces shot down a civil airliner with a Russian missile.

Strumms

If he gets emboldened by nuking a part of the Ukraine and only has to face down a collective sound byte of derision as a consequence of that, he certainly may think.. “ ohhhh ok, so maybe I can go a bit further “…. “ maybe I get to do a bit more “…..

riffmongous

MAD just outsourced the violence to other countries, now instead of fighting directly countries would support one faction in a war against the other. Good for Europe, not so good for the rest of the world.

On the topic of sanctions, have they ever actually worked?

85603

Give the sanctions time.

Without the irreplaceable European market the Russian economy will turn to shyte. And the masses (already protesting openly) will turn on Poots.

Russia can hit Europe with the gas supply weapon once, maybe twice. When it doesn't work they're long term screwed.

I've been sanctioned by my partner more times than I care to remember. Worked every time.

85603

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119689767#Comment_119689767

Maybe relocate your pipeline.

Wibbs

War, like politics is at the core economics. The winners of any war end up controlling the economics of the vanquished. Now bombs and bullets can bring down the economy of a nation, but so can sanctions. Especially in these days of global markets and interdependency.

It wouldn't have had much effect in the days of the Soviet Union where pretty much everything an average Soviet citizen came in contact with was made within the Soviet Union. It was essentially a second isolated market of its own. Go back to those times and all their airliners were made locally, every bolt and scrrew pretty much. Today they have bought in Boeings and Airbus, now near useless to them and even their own homegrown airliners run western engines and flight systems.

One thing that really buggered Russia was when the Wall fell and chaos reigned for a decade. It just happened to be the decade where IT, the internet and all that stuff, the stuff that now runs the world exploded and advanced year on year. By a quirk of history they were left out of that and still are way behind other IT producers.

Zebra3

Why are there sanctions on Russia but there were never sanctions on all those countries that invaded Afghanistan and Iraq?

Wibbs

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119691697#Comment_119691697

"Reasons". Russia is far easier to sanction. For its size the economy is tiny. About all they have as leverage is oil, gas and fertiliser. Now they're bloody important, but... There were huge worldwide protests against the American(and allies) invasions of Iraq, but politically they got away with it far more. I suspect part of that is they were invading Brown people. Invade White Europeans and shít gets real it seems. The war in Syria resulted in around the same number of displaced people and Ireland took in 3000 over a ten year period, each vetted and checked. We've taken in ten times that figure of Ukrainians in months.

Russia were dumb as rocks. They could have Done an America(tm), gone to the UN with appeals about Russian speaking peoples in Donbas, egged on the figures and spin and then invaded just Donbas, claiming they had to for humanitarian and security reasons etc. Oh they would have taken static for it, but nothing like the static they got for trying and failing to take the whole country while crapping on about "nazis". Militarily and logistcially they would have fared much better too if they'd just concentrated on these "independent republics" and more of the population would have welcomed them. If the West/NATO/US were goading them, well they took the bait hook line and sinker. Dumb as rocks.

Everlong1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119691697#Comment_119691697

Because America and Britain have better public relations machines. Those nasty old third world dictators have never really gotten the hang of a good soundbite.

Wibbs

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119691860#Comment_119691860

So with the exception of bases, just like the Russians then? Though they had plenty of bases back in the oul USSR. They're both cheeks of the same arse in many ways, but even though America has a loooong way to go as a society and has many woes I'd still far prefer them to Russia, a near medieval feudal imperial state in practice and mindset.

dxhound2005

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119691860#Comment_119691860

You just did.

Wibbs

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119691903#Comment_119691903

Almost entirely because they're used to dealing with a population that accepts their BS and has done for centuries. They didn't have to improve their spin, as it still works for the most part on the locals and those it doesn't work on either keep quiet, are kept quiet, or leave, but it looks like dated total amateur hour beyond their shores.

xhomelezz

I would say sanctions and help to Ukraine is working, maybe slowly but surely. It makes Putin do more and more mistakes, personally I think his days as a Russian leader are numbered. Question is what or who is gonna replace him. So many options are opened there .

Thelonious Monk

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119691860#Comment_119691860

Yeah well they are the reason Ireland is rich, 1/3 of our tax receipts come from 10 American multinationals. We let planes land in Shannon. We are Team America whether you like it or not. I'd rather that to Russia anyway.

dxhound2005

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119692015#Comment_119692015

Because of media control, nothing can be reported about the succession in Russia. Just looking up the possible names, there is no great prospect of a Gorbachev type figure emerging. It would be a bit ironic if Medvedev got the job back.

https://carnegieendowment.org/politika/87633

dxhound2005

There has always been a very strong anti American sentiment in Ireland, and in Europe. Nothing has ever stopped anyone expressing that view. The Soviet Union also had many strong followers in the West, some of whom supported their invasions of Hungary and Czechoslovakia. If anything has changed, it is a recognition that the socialist paradise which was promised was a cruel hoax.

Zebra3

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119692873#Comment_119692873

You make it sound odd that people would have anti-American attitude.

But why would people be opposed to a racist state that is built on genocide, ethnic cleansing and slavery that for centuries has been engaging almost non-stop war?

dxhound2005

Not that many centuries. They were still having their capital burned down by the British in 1814, but they managed to assert their independence after that. And eventually expand the original territory beyond the small area in the North East which went rogue in 1776.

Of course they were nearly all Europeans, just living in another place. Despite their high ideals that "all men are created equal", they only meant men (not women) from the elite white class. Among their complaints against the British king is this part, which does not read too well today.

"He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions". (Declaration of Independence).

As with all empires, the current American and Russian ones are exercising their muscle when they see fit. Look out for the Chinese.

pgj2015

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119692926#Comment_119692926

Do you want to live in China or America? its as simple as that, obviously the Americans aren't perfect but they have freedom like you wont get in China, North Korea, Russia, Iran the list is endless. Sometime bombs need to be dropped and wars fought. If we all lived under a dictator we would be better off dead.

AMKC

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119686969#Comment_119686969

Ukraine invaded today, where next ? Poland ? Czech Republic ? Latvia ? Lithuania ? Belarus ?

Well not Belarus anyway as that is practically a state of Russia anyway only reason it is not is because poor deranged Putin has to try and look like he has some friends and countries that think what he is doing is right.

Zebra3

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119693441#Comment_119693441

Why do you think I have to choose between living in your comprehensive list of two countries?

So the US is ok because they mainly slaughter people outside their own borders?

And hilarious that you mention the US, Iran while ranting on about freedom and dictators. You should think a bit more before you post or maybe in your case read up a bit more.