Historically, when has a sanction worked?

[pknopp]

Forgetting the lessons of pre-WWII that nipping shit it the bud may prevent it from becoming our battle on our own doorstep.

Have you seen the polls where people are in large numbers saying that they do NOT support the U.S. getting involved with troops? Do you understand a large part of that is because of the lies that have got us into useless wars in the past?

 

[Couchpotato]

I watched this great movie. It's called "They Shall Not Grow Old". At the end one soldier was asked what he hoped would be taken from what happened during WWI. He said he hoped we learn to never do anything like that ever again. Well, obviously we didn't.

If a country isn't interested in being taken over, they have to fight back. We were defeated in both Iraq and Afghanistan by people who decided that. WWII doesn't happen if people didn't simply walk into the trains.

If we lost in Iraq and Afghanistan it's because we didn't have the stomach to fight a COIN operation the way it has to be fought, not because we couldnt beat them militarily. I don't think Russia will have that problem to the extent we did, if Ukraine even becomes an insurgency which I kind of doubt it will.

 

[blackhawk]

A total embargo might work. I mean total. You turn off NG to Germany, you stop them from importing anything. you stop buying anything from them.

This wouldn't be a blockade, which would be the next step. Places like China, Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea and China would still trade with them, but that's limited in scope.

From what I am hearing on the news Putin could have control of the country by Monday so it may already be to late for any of this.

 

[pknopp]

Again, wrong terrain type and wrong people.

Ukraine is perfect for mobile armored warfare, Afghanistan is not.

Afghanis have a long history of ******* over invaders, Ukraine is one of the most conquered pieces of land out there, maybe besides Poland.

We spun our wheels in Iraq and Syria also.

 

[martybegan]

Have you seen the polls where people are in large numbers saying that they do NOT support the U.S. getting involved with troops? Do you understand a large part of that is because of the lies that have got us into useless wars in the past?

Considering we have a volunteer military, it's not like that puts said polled people at risk, unless the draft comes up again, and if it does it's because we are in serious serious shit.

 

[pknopp]

If we lost in Iraq and Afghanistan it's because we didn't have the stomach to fight a COIN operation the way it has to be fought, not because we couldnt beat them militarily. I don't think Russia will have that problem to the extent we did, if Ukraine even becomes an insurgency which I kind of doubt it will.

We did what we did because there was NOTHING to win. It was all over lies and there was nothing to "fight for".

 

[pknopp]

Considering we have a volunteer military, it's not like that puts said polled people at risk, unless the draft comes up again, and if it does it's because we are in serious serious shit.

Irrelevant.

 

[Votto]

I think letting the Olympics happen there was better with regards to shining a flashlight on China and how much it sucks.

I don't.

The world needs to get tough against a government that conducts open genocide as well as the scandal revolving around a world wide pandemic they helped create.

So why is the world tougher on Russia?

Cuz China has the world's second biggest economy.

China has bought off the rest of the world, and they will keep Putin afloat as well just like they helped North Korea stay afloat as well.

China has the most evil regime in the world today.

 

[martybegan]

From what I am hearing on the news Putin could have control of the country by Monday so it may already be to late for any of this.

Too late for Ukraine now, not too late to crunch his economy before he turns north or west to the Baltic States or Poland.

 

[martybegan]

I don't.

The world needs to get tough against a government that conducts open genocide as well as the scandal revolving around a world wide pandemic they helped create.

So why is the world tougher on Russia?

Cuz China has the world's second biggest economy.

China has bought off the rest of the world, and they will keep Putin afloat as well.

I respect your opinion, but to me unless you want to go full sanction, half assing it doesn't work, and going full sanction would trigger a war.

Which may be coming anyway, so in any even the next decade is going to ******* suck.

 

[Circe]

Forgetting the lessons of pre-WWII that nipping shit it the bud may prevent it from becoming our battle on our own doorstep.

I understand that issue. But after many years study of WWI and WWII I am satisfied that America being dragged into the war only after several years of all-out battle by the actual principals is quite good enough. I like how those two wars worked out for us.

Fighting their battles FOR them is stupid, and suicidal in this age when surely the next general war will normalize nuclear weapons. All weapons are always normalized. Sometimes they are put aside by some adversaries, like poison gas and biowarfare, only to be used in brushfire wars or rebellions, as in Iraq and Syria and whenever any country gets desperate enough.

I don't know what you mean by "on our doorstep" if you aren't referring to ICBMs launching nukes at our whole East Coast from their home base: sounds like you are talking about Red Dawn, troops coming in thru Mexico, the only plausible "doorstep" we have (and quite a good one, militarily: illegals use it daily). I'm thinking only China is up to that kind of troop transport, but what do I know. And it couldn't be done while our Navy is intact: it would have to wait for Civil War dissolution here, I think.

 

[Votto]

I respect your opinion, but to me unless you want to go full sanction, half assing it doesn't work, and going full sanction would trigger a war.

Which may be coming anyway, so in any even the next decade is going to ******* suck.

We are at war.

Democrats just are in denial is all and fighting their own citizens instead.

 

[Couchpotato]

We did what we did because there was NOTHING to win. It was all over lies and there was nothing to "fight for".

that has nothing to do with our unwillingness to fight those wars they way they have to be fought if you want to win. Im not sure we as a society would ever sign off on winning a COIN war. Regular citizens would balk at the tactics required. And there were things to "win" in Afghanistan and Iraq, they were just strategic aims. A stable, successful US/Indian backed Afghanistan is a hedge against China. A stable successful US/Europe backed Iraq is a hedge against Iran.

 

[martybegan]

I understand that issue. But after many years study of WWI and WWII I am satisfied that America being dragged into the war only after several years of all-out battle by the actual principals is quite good enough. I like how those two wars worked out for us.

Fighting their battles FOR them is stupid, and suicidal in this age when surely the next general war will normalize nuclear weapons. All weapons are always normalized. Sometimes they are put aside by some adversaries, like poison gas and biowarfare, only to be used in brushfire wars or rebellions, as in Iraq and Syria and whenever any country gets desperate enough.

I don't know what you mean by "on our doorstep" if you aren't referring to ICBMs launching nukes at our whole East Coast from their home base: sounds like you are talking about Red Dawn, troops coming in thru Mexico, the only plausible "doorstep" we have (and quite a good one, militarily: illegals use it daily). I'm thinking only China is up to that kind of troop transport, but what do I know. And it couldn't be done while our Navy is intact: it would have to wait for Civil War dissolution here, I think.

I'm talking about France and England being backed into a corner, having to use their nukes, and at that point do you really think Russia would only retaliate against them?

 

[martybegan]

We are at war.

Democrats just are in denial is all and fighting their own citizens instead.

The new Cold war for us, no doubt.

And it just got hot for Ukraine, and it's warming for a few of our NATO allies.

 

[Couchpotato]

I understand that issue. But after many years study of WWI and WWII I am satisfied that America being dragged into the war only after several years of all-out battle by the actual principals is quite good enough. I like how those two wars worked out for us.

Fighting their battles FOR them is stupid, and suicidal in this age when surely the next general war will normalize nuclear weapons. All weapons are always normalized. Sometimes they are put aside by some adversaries, like poison gas and biowarfare, only to be used in brushfire wars or rebellions, as in Iraq and Syria and whenever any country gets desperate enough.

I don't know what you mean by "on our doorstep" if you aren't referring to ICBMs launching nukes at our whole East Coast from their home base: sounds like you are talking about Red Dawn, troops coming in thru Mexico, the only plausible "doorstep" we have (and quite a good one, militarily: illegals use it daily). I'm thinking only China is up to that kind of troop transport, but what do I know. And it couldn't be done while our Navy is intact: it would have to wait for Civil War dissolution here, I think.

Neither the Chinese or Russian Navy is up to that task.

 

[Votto]

The new Cold war for us, no doubt.

And it just got hot for Ukraine, and it's warming for a few of our NATO allies.

Again, the Left is far to busy to fight the air and their own citizens.

They have no interest in this war, I can assure you.

 

[Circe]

When do you suppose people will stop us from invading other countries? Are you unable to see the damage the lies we created to invade Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, etc have done?

They will stop us invading other countries when they CAN stop us, of course: that's true of everyone everywhere. As for lies, all countries tell them so they can make war at will: look at Putin's propaganda now. The thing to do is to get older and not believe a thing your government or any government says, because it's all lies, as far as I can see. Just as people have to fight their own fights, we have to think out for ourselves what is going on. Other people will just lie about it.

 

[Circe]

Neither the Chinese or Russian Navy is up to that task.

Not at the moment ------

Time passes, things change.

 

[pknopp]

that has nothing to do with our unwillingness to fight those wars they way they have to be fought if you want to win.

There was NOTHING to win.

Im not sure we as a society would ever sign off on winning a COIN war. Regular citizens would balk at the tactics required. And there were things to "win" in Afghanistan and Iraq, they were just strategic aims. A stable, successful US/Indian backed Afghanistan is a hedge against China. A stable successful US/Europe backed Iraq is a hedge against Iran.

We wanted to take over Afghanistan and yet we condemn others for doing the same? This is why our standing in the world has fallen so far. The world understands that we are really not much different than Russia. What we did in Iraq wasn't any better than what Russia is doing. At least Russia is not creating a lie to do it.