• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sanctions. Effective or counterproductive

Hampton86 said:
You know that whole energy independence thing was debunked as being misleading and simplistic, right?
Click to expand...
Not going to get bogged down on it in this thread but since you asked


“The U.S. produced more petroleum than it consumed in 2020, and the numbers were essentially in balance in 2021, according to the Energy Information Administration.”
www.axios.com

The U.S. is now energy independent

The U.S. produced more petroleum than it consumed in 2020, and the numbers were essentially in balance in 2021.
www.axios.com www.axios.com
 
Chainsawmassacre said:
Leaving oil out of sanctions really makes sanctions kind of weak and for looks more than results
Click to expand...
Oil sanctions could still be used. But, at this point it looks like broad oil sanctions would drive up the price of oil to Putin's benefit, since their economy depends on oil revenues.

Here's a snippet from Forbes on the sanctions: While Western sanctions might not have an immediate impact on the Russian economy and people, given the government’s war-chest, the losses will accumulate and eventually become harder to ignore.

Further, many of the Russian elites are going to suffer losses from the collapsing Russian stock market and exports, along with sanctions. Though they might not individually have the power to remove Putin’s inner circle, ultimately they could prove a major opposition power center.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michae...ll-make-energy-more-volatile/?sh=2dd95e545eb7
 
Chainsawmassacre said:
Sanctions didn’t stop Putin and historically have a very poor record of success so I have to wonder if imposing them on Russia is cutting off our nose to spite our face. Gas is already high and will go higher which will drag down our economy and make inflation even worse and the Dow is crashing.
Can someone tell me exactly why these Biden sanctions are going to do anything but hurt us as much or more than they hurt Putin?
For once I’m actually indecisive on something and could be swayed either way with the right argument.
Click to expand...
Are you for sending US troops to the Ukraine?
 
Mr Person said:
We can freeze assets of individuals and companies. We can lock them out of the global financial system. We can do all sorts of things that will knock the Russian economy to its knees, and for a long time. This eventually affects ability to wage war (though they are sitting on a reserve of several hundred billion...built up specifically to resist sanctions).

A miserable people also tend not to support their leader as much.

And there's a secondary punitive purpose behind pramgatic purposes.



But this is all in answer to a false premise. You said "these Biden sanctions are going to do anything but hurt us as much or more than they hurt Putin." Given our economy and global standing relative to Russia's, no way in hell is that true.
Click to expand...
Eventually, you said. Yes, no doubt you're right, they'll have an effect. Eventually. The posters here are saying Ukraine will be lost in a week. The sanctions will take months to wear down Russia's ability to war, but the war will be long over and Ukraine will be lost. It's resources, though, which are significant, will be flowing to Putin.
 
MaryP said:
Eventually, you said. Yes, no doubt you're right, they'll have an effect. Eventually. The posters here are saying Ukraine will be lost in a week. The sanctions will take months to wear down Russia's ability to war, but the war will be long over and Ukraine will be lost. It's resources, though, which are significant, will be flowing to Putin.
Click to expand...
I don't think this is over in a week. It is possible that Russia runs the government out of Kiev in a week, but that doesn't mean they have taken over. Here's a couple of paragraphs from Max Boot in a WaPo editorial earlier today.

The 190,000 troops that Putin has assembled to invade Ukraine are sufficient to effect regime change — but, as Petraeus recently noted, they are completely insufficient to control a country of more than 43 million people. That would likely require hundreds of thousands more Russian troops and could expose them to a costly, drawn-out guerrilla war that could sap Putin’s popularity.

Putin’s best bet would be to install a puppet regime in Kyiv — but how to keep it in power? The Ukrainian people have already used “people power” to topple two previous pro-Russian leaders, in 2005 and 2014. What is to stop them from doing it a third time? Putin would need to create a pro-Russian security force in Ukraine but, given the growing nationalism of the populace, that will be hard to do.

None of this is to suggest that his offensive is doomed to fail. It would be foolhardy to bet against a tyrant with Putin’s track record. But there is nothing foreordained about Russian success — and much that the West can do to stymie his aggression.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...litary-success-ukraine-invasion-riskiest-yet/
 
Chainsawmassacre said:
Yes Reagan beat the USSR economically with economic moves but not necessarily sanctions. My favorite Reagan trick was feeding Russia flawed info on how to make pumping stations for their pipeline which then failed after Russia spent billions on them. Good stuff!
Click to expand...
We had China write the assembly instructions.
 
MaryP said:
Eventually, you said. Yes, no doubt you're right, they'll have an effect. Eventually. The posters here are saying Ukraine will be lost in a week. The sanctions will take months to wear down Russia's ability to war, but the war will be long over and Ukraine will be lost. It's resources, though, which are significant, will be flowing to Putin.
Click to expand...

Ok. Do you propose a hot US war with Russia? Bear in mind, this is a calculating sociopath bent on holding power. One with nukes, which may or may not be used.

With questions this large, I wish I could hear people's bottom line cost/benefit before their criticism. You can criticize sanctions for not working to cripple the economy immediately*, but is there a counter-proposal? Without one, it's "this sucks" without "and here's how it could maybe not suck."



*(they don't need to - it's the threat of crippling for years and years that's supposed to be the disincentive)
 
Mr Person said:
Ok. Do you propose a hot US war with Russia? Bear in mind, this is a calculating sociopath bent on holding power. One with nukes, which may or may not be used.

With questions this large, I wish I could hear people's bottom line cost/benefit before their criticism. You can criticize sanctions for not working to cripple the economy immediately*, but is there a counter-proposal? Without one, it's "this sucks" without "and here's how it could maybe not suck."



*(they don't need to - it's the threat of crippling for years and years that's supposed to be the disincentive)
Click to expand...
I'm not criticizing so much as questioning their helpfulness, but you said something that helps me understand...
I had been thinking of the sanction threats by US and EU as something that would STOP Putin. They didn't. But you have pointed out, "it's the threat of crippling for years and years that's supposed to be the disincentive."

I was looking to the sanctions to do something they aren't designed or intended to do, I guess.

Thanks. That's why I bring up my questions.
 
Chainsawmassacre said:
Not going to get bogged down on it in this thread but since you asked


“The U.S. produced more petroleum than it consumed in 2020, and the numbers were essentially in balance in 2021, according to the Energy Information Administration.”
www.axios.com

The U.S. is now energy independent

The U.S. produced more petroleum than it consumed in 2020, and the numbers were essentially in balance in 2021.
www.axios.com www.axios.com
Click to expand...
Thanks for demonstrating your claim is simplistic

And, because of fracking which started long before donnie

Your "facts" are mislabeled
 
Chainsawmassacre said:
Yes Reagan beat the USSR economically with economic moves but not necessarily sanctions. My favorite Reagan trick was feeding Russia flawed info on how to make pumping stations for their pipeline which then failed after Russia spent billions on them. Good stuff!
Click to expand...
LOL. You really like to give people credit for things they didn't do

And sanctions are economic warfare
 
Chainsawmassacre said:
I’m assuming Russian oligarchs were part of the decision making process on invading Ukraine and are willing to weather the storm for future financial gains.
Click to expand...
I'm sure, they like the old Russia but there is enough new blood in there to cause a rift and a lot of Russians have relatives in Ukraine. I expect by the end of the week to see some crowded streets of pissed off Russians. We'll see.
 
Lutherf said:
You really think Putin will get voted out? Wow. I guess you really do believe that elections can't be rigged.
Click to expand...
Well Putin has been planing an exit because he's old. Russia depends a lot on stakeholders now, and they have some leverage over Putin. It will depend on what other countries pull out of their ass as far as sanctions, particularly the UK.

And, the younger Russians are as worried about busting Putin's balls. So, we will see. If he's killing their sons, daughters, and extended family, that might just trigger some unrest, and his stakeholders might decide, given his age, it's time to go.

foreignpolicy.com

Russia Is in Agony, but Putin’s Dictatorship Is Going Down

Garry Kasparov on why this weekend’s protests may be the beginning of the end of autocracy in Russia.
foreignpolicy.com foreignpolicy.com

They've been sick of it for a while now, so this will just fuel that movement. As dangerous as it is for them.

Golly Geee, huck huck, maybe I am just darn stupid about rigged elections, gee gum it. (Is this more of what you wanted?)
 
Court Jester said:
Russia's move here is in consideration of both their short and long term oil and gas goals, which are crucial to their economy. Do you really believe that Russian energy will not find a way onto the global market? Has sanctioned stopped Iranian oil from getting to market?

If you want to blame anyone for his move by Putin, blame Germany---especially Merkle. When Germany decided to shut down their nuclear energy production in a misguided environmental move; assuming to rely more heavily on renewables, it meant they would fall short of that goal and then be forced to buy MORE Russian gas. Something Donald Trump warned about it but was ignored.

This is why our global security in the west had moved to making MORE oil and gas production from the USA, Canada, and even Mexico where that was possible. Russia is a energy PRODUCING nation, and as such somewhere in the world their oil/gas is GLADLY wanted. But liberal progressive environmental lunatics would rather cripple Western Democracies in this all out rush to "save the planet" while giving POWER to the worst players in the world like Iran, Russia, China---and yeah, Saudi Arabia.

When Biden showed weakness in the Afghanistan withdrawl, he invited Putin to act boldly. Now wait for China to move on Taiwan... you know they are dying to that sooner than later. China takes Taiwan and then all of use will be wondering where to get our semi conductors from, and Putin won't be the one to worry about us shutting of technology exports, China will control most of that.
Click to expand...
Jesus dude lay off the rightwing talking points.
 
US&THEM said:
Jesus dude lay off the rightwing talking points.
Click to expand...
^^^

This friends is what is called the sound of hammer falling on an empty chamber. Either debate my points, or go back to your video games.
 
Mach said:
How about we all agree that Putin is to blame for Putin's choice to invade Ukraine.
Click to expand...
Is it somehow new news to you how Russia and Russians are? Nothing Putin is doing was not expected to happen. I guess you must have been asleep in 2014 when Russian invaded and annexed Crimea?

Mach said:
He primarily wants two things
- destroy Ukraine's military capability
- retribution on the 2014 revolution leaders/key people
Click to expand...
Or maybe he doesn't want another NATO nation on his border, and sees right now as this best opportunity with a weak US president, and Germany already in his pocket due to energy needs from Russia in Germany, so why not roll in now? If Putin waits for the next US President to be elected, which will be way stronger than Biden if a Republican, maybe even a democrat. Then Putin would have waited to long.


Mach said:
This has nothing to do with Biden.
Click to expand...
LOL

Putin did not do this during Trump for a good reason. This has EVERYTHING to do with Biden being in office. Biden is weak, and no President who is weak ever fares well with Russia/Russians.
 
Lursa said:
So then you dont have a solution. Got it, thanks.
Click to expand...
if you wanted a solution that saves Ukraine, NATO troops needed to move into Ukraine BEFORE the invasion, and we would need to be playing a game of chicken with Putin right now.
 
Hypothetical said:
if you wanted a solution that saves Ukraine, NATO troops needed to move into Ukraine BEFORE the invasion, and we would need to be playing a game of chicken with Putin right now.
Click to expand...

Are you asserting that there's no way that there will be an independent Ukraine after this?

(And under the treaty, your suggestion wasnt 'allowed' and IMO would have been called an act of aggression by Putin, also working in his favor.)
 
Lursa said:
Are you asserting that there's no way that there will be an independent Ukraine after this?

(And under the treaty, your suggestion wasnt 'allowed' and IMO would have been called an act of aggression by Putin, also working in his favor.)
Click to expand...
I mean ask Putin, not me. how would I know? seeing how aggressively they are moving in, it would seem not to me.

ok then , what do you propose as a solution to the problem? no matter what you do NOW, Ukrainians are dead and dying.

obviously , part of the treaty should have been a breach upon massing troops at the border.
 
Hypothetical said:
I mean ask Putin, not me. how would I know? seeing how aggressively they are moving in, it would seem not to me.

ok then , what do you propose as a solution to the problem? no matter what you do NOW, Ukrainians are dead and dying.

obviously , part of the treaty should have been a breach upon massing troops at the border.
Click to expand...

I dont if anything can succeed. I believe in throttling every bit of their economy...and yes, esp. the EU suffering the high fuel prices and attendent belt tightening for food...so that Putin is seen as failing and causing his people and most of all, his oligarchs, more pain than they'll take.

OTOH, IMO pressure from 'the people' wont work...he doesnt give a shit. It's only true economic failure and pressure from the 'high-placed' that might work.

I think it's 50-50 for an independent Ukraine and that's being optimistic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom