Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

This is a bit of a spinoff from the What would it take thread. I made a comment about giving a bully a bloody nose. It made my mind dwell on what could any administration - Bush/Obama/Trump - do that really would give Putin a bloody nose that would not lead to all out Armageddon. That led me to wonder about sanctions. Which led to this post.

We have sanctioned the heck out of regimes for the last 2 decades. Iran/NK/Russia probably another dozen or so that don't make the news all the time. And without any research on my part, it FEELS LIKE (not fact just personal opinion), the bad regimes could give a rat's ass about economic sanctions.

Without a stick of some sort, no administration can effectively curtail bully regimes, so do Economic Sanctions create a big enough stick? Can they if a leader doesn't care about the poverty class of a nation (except that it's not big enough/strong enough to overthrow the leader)?

As Trample used to say -- What sayeth the mob?

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

I don't have any clue as to how much it actually influences their actions. I also don't know what level of economic impact they have.

Because I think it comes down to the US doesn't want to get into a fight over these things, but we'll take steps to ensure our economies and the economies of our allies thrive at the expense of the perpetrator. I have no idea how effective it is, I've seen no data or analysis on the subject.

Basically I have nothing of value to add.

[YT]praFGD51ih8[/YT]

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

I wouldn't put North Korea and Cuba on 1st Team All-Ballin Economies. They have been decimated.

The last round of Iranian sanctions before remove were devastating to their economy.

Its certainly an effective tool.

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

LOL, that video got me. LOL.

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

What's the alternative? Bombs?

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

[quote=MTK;1165167]What's the alternative? Bombs?[/quote]

Twitter insults?

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

[quote=MTK;1165167]What's the alternative? Bombs?[/quote]
That's probably a corollary to the initial question. If economic sanctions don't work, and a country is intent on doing wrong - breaking treaties, building nukes, putting weapons in places they ought not be, what other options does the international community have.

In terms of giving Putin or another dictator (bully) a bloody nose - in the cold war era it was done via surrogates. I don't know if we are headed back in that direction but if not, are people ok with just allowing rogue states to do whatever they want - our allies be damned? (thinking of China/NK in South Sea/nukes with that question)

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

I dare say... this is something... that... might... support Drumpf?

I don't mind chipping in around the world, but sometimes I get tired of us having to make the first move internationally. I'm America first to be sure, but sometimes it gets old when the world calls on us for guidance and when we jump into a conflict suddenly there's a huge swell in nationalism (internationally). You can't have it both ways. If you want us to help be prepared to put in some resources. If not, stop bitching.

I do want to clarify a bit...

This might support what Drumpf wants to do. I still think he's a moron and isn't PREPARED to do it nor are the people around him.

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

Russian expansion and aggression - I doubt sanctions would do anything.
They're to big.
Assassinating Putin and his immediate lieutenants would be nice if it couldnt get traced back to the USA.
It would send Russia into a tailspin.

China - Very tough call. We are deeply in bed with them (trading)
The South China Sea islands - They are claimed by at least 6 nations.
The Philippines are one.
I'd explore helping them put an airfield on one of the islands with the notion of allowing our aircaft to "visit" there.

Iran - I would rescind all deals.
Then change the rules of engagement in the Straits of Hormuz.
Their navy would do something very stupid soon after that.
And then right after that their navy would cease to exist.
I would then sanction them every way possible and then and try to force a revolution to get them out from under the ayatollahs.

North Korea - since they threaten us all the time I would just wait till they do it one more time.
Then I would force a build up and a blockade over there and make them flinch.
Then I'd drop a feckload of cruise missiles on their nuclear facility's and all of fat fuck Kims hideouts.

And yes, it is easy for me to say this from my recliner.

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

AW the thought of assassinating Putin and all his cronies are nice and all, but you can bet there will always be another person in line to jump in on the chaos and use it to his advantage to become the next Putin. Like has been said, I think sanctions work on some countries and don't work on others. The ones it doesn't work on are the ones that don't play by the rules, like Russia. Sure they might lose a little money on it, but if Putin has his fingers in every business' pockets like has been suggested (unverified) it won't hurt as much. I also agree with TMC, I am tired of being the savior for everyone else's problems, but you have to pick and choose your battles. If England or one of our other major allies had a problem and needed our help, of course I'd help. But we can't always be the savior for every country.

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

[quote=mooby;1165192]AW the thought of assassinating Putin and all his cronies are nice and all, but you can bet there will always be another person in line to jump in on the chaos and use it to his advantage to become the next Putin. Like has been said, I think sanctions work on some countries and don't work on others. The ones it doesn't work on are the ones that don't play by the rules, like Russia. Sure they might lose a little money on it, but if Putin has his fingers in every business' pockets like has been suggested (unverified) it won't hurt as much. I also agree with TMC, I am tired of being the savior for everyone else's problems, but you have to pick and choose your battles. If England or one of our other major allies had a problem and needed our help, of course I'd help. But we can't always be the savior for every country.[/quote]

I would agree, but the Russian scenario would at least slow then down for a while.
I would hate to see them get The Ukraine back....

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

Ok, assassinations start world wars. Let's look for other answers.

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1165200]Ok, assassinations start world wars. Let's look for other answers.[/quote]

You sure? The idea of ridding the world of Putin and all his cronies sure sounds enticing. And if we do it right nobody can blame it on us (even though they obviously would). Besides, what other country would have a problem with another country eliminating the leader of a world power?

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

[quote=mooby;1165201]You sure? The idea of ridding the world of Putin and all his cronies sure sounds enticing. And if we do it right nobody can blame it on us (even though they obviously would). Besides, what other country would have a problem with another country eliminating the leader of a world power?[/quote]

Maybe we could convince Kim Jung Un's girl friends that they ought to cozy up to Putin. Then we do the deed framing NK, Russia nukes NK, NK tries to respond but the missile lands in Tehran, Iran thinks China prompted NK to do it so they nuke Beijing, and we calmly offer our services to help clean all the radiation up!

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1165202]Maybe we could convince Kim Jung Un's girl friends that they ought to cozy up to Putin. Then we do the deed framing NK, Russia nukes NK, NK tries to respond but the missile lands in Tehran, Iran thinks China prompted NK to do it so they nuke Beijing, and we calmly offer our services to help clean all the radiation up![/quote]

It's brilliant! Somebody get this man a job with our administration.

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

[quote=Chico23231;1165169]Twitter insults?[/quote]

Only works if they're bigly

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

I think it can work if a country has enough to lose. It did definitely influence Iran and brought them to the negotiating table with Obama. Whether or not that's a good or bad thing is another discussion. But it definitely strangled Iran's capital to the point where it was willing to negotiate.

But yeah, every time a nation violates international norms or laws, you as the most powerful nation in the world have to decide what you're willing to do about it. Is the violation really worth the lives of our military?

There's a red line somewhere. It's like porn, I don't know the definition and I don't know where the red line is, but I know it when I see it.

So far I would agree nothing with Russia or China has gotten me anywhere close to the point where I definitely see the red line. Syria's use of nerve gas against its own people, that was a different story. I don't think I would have been able to let that go, if I were president.

Of course, then your reward for doing the right thing would be miring yourself in a Syrian nightmare of a power vacuum.

Sometimes there's no good answer.

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

[quote=Schneed10;1165206]I think it can work if a country has enough to lose. It did definitely influence Iran and brought them to the negotiating table with Obama. Whether or not that's a good or bad thing is another discussion. But it definitely strangled Iran's capital to the point where it was willing to negotiate.

But yeah, every time a nation violates international norms or laws, you as the most powerful nation in the world have to decide what you're willing to do about it. Is the violation really worth the lives of our military?

There's a red line somewhere. It's like porn, I don't know the definition and I don't know where the red line is, but I know it when I see it.

So far I would agree nothing with Russia or China has gotten me anywhere close to the point where I definitely see the red line. Syria's use of nerve gas against its own people, that was a different story. I don't think I would have been able to let that go, if I were president.

Of course, then your reward for doing the right thing would be miring yourself in a Syrian nightmare of a power vacuum.

Sometimes there's no good answer.[/quote]

Reviving this post for the NK situation. I am curious if any here could define a line where a military solution becomes viable. I am talking about the old shock and awe type solution, not a flyover or decapitation strategy.

It's my opinion that the NK army is a straw man like the first gulf war. I believe that if you barrage the frontline artillery positions that can reach Seoul, and at the same time take out the known missile launchers, that the North soldiers would surrender en masse.

BUT, At what point is that option even viable?
Now, I don't think so.

but what if a missile lands at or near Guam? or Alaska?

What is your point of no return? As Schneed said above: There's a red line somewhere. It's like porn, I don't know the definition and I don't know where the red line is, but I know it when I see it.

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

I think these missiles over Japan is enough to warrant some kind of action (from them). If Canada was constantly lobbing missiles over into the Gulf, I have a feeling we wouldn't put up with it.

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;1174535]I think these missiles over Japan is enough to warrant some kind of action (from them). If Canada was constantly lobbing missiles over into the Gulf, I have a feeling we wouldn't put up with it.[/quote]

I agree with this. The Japanese are our allies and right now they have an immediate threat not too far away that is capable of reaching their homeland.

Nukes are not the solution, the NK people deserve better especially considering the daily hell they live in. I wish we could just throw major boots on the ground and have Kim Jong Un dead in a week but I honestly have zero idea how viable that option is. And of course you'd have to think of the repercussions with China, but sooner or later they have to realize supporting a dictator will have some blowback on them when the dictator eventually falls.

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1174534]Reviving this post for the NK situation. I am curious if any here could define a line where a military solution becomes viable. I am talking about the old shock and awe type solution, not a flyover or decapitation strategy.

It's my opinion that the NK army is a straw man like the first gulf war. I believe that if you barrage the frontline artillery positions that can reach Seoul, and at the same time take out the known missile launchers, that the North soldiers would surrender en masse.

BUT, At what point is that option even viable?
Now, I don't think so.

but what if a missile lands at or near Guam? or Alaska?

What is your point of no return? As Schneed said above: There's a red line somewhere. It's like porn, I don't know the definition and I don't know where the red line is, but I know it when I see it.[/quote]

The issue with use of force is with first strike would have to be the biggest military coordination use of force since WW2 because of NK troop size in terms of mass installations, we would have to be sure [B]all [/B]nuclear site would be totally destroyed and then we have knock out many leadership positions.

The biggest thing we fear is South Korea and Seoul in particular is vulnerable to the point they certainly would sustain substantial damage. If North Korea does anything first, it would be to do as much damage to SK as possible...that's their number one priority and enemy.

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;1174535]I think these missiles over Japan is enough to warrant some kind of action (from them). If Canada was constantly lobbing missiles over into the Gulf, I have a feeling we wouldn't put up with it.[/quote]

There has to be a response to Canada lobbing missiles. Maybe we could lob long underwear back at them, eh?

[YT]0pPRaD6TKLc[/YT]

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

As soon as I said Canada, I definitely laughed a little in my head...

And you're right about Seoul. I wouldn't want to be the first country involved in a strike that would certainly kill thousands (if not more) of South Koreans. I read this article where Kim Jong Un's main concern is staying in power. He doesn't want any part of a conflict, because we would definitely kill his ass and most of his army. I just don't see how he's so insane he keeps doing this shit. At some point SOMEONE will say they've had enough.

If South Korea is the one to do it, we need to get China/Japan on board and wipe our collective asses with them. I worry he's just crazy enough to deploy one nuclear missile in the region...

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

[quote=Chico23231;1174557]The issue with use of force is with first strike would have to be the biggest military coordination use of force since WW2 because of NK troop size in terms of mass installations, we would have to be sure [B]all [/B]nuclear site would be totally destroyed and then we have knock out many leadership positions.

The biggest thing we fear is South Korea and Seoul in particular is vulnerable to the point they certainly would sustain substantial damage. If North Korea does anything first, it would be to do as much damage to SK as possible...that's their number one priority and enemy.[/quote]

It would be massive no doubt with the focus like you said to knock out the immediate threat to Seoul, and Japan, but between our troops there and the naval and air force power we/Japan/SK could commit, an immediate blitz attack would almost certainly lead NK's surviving forces/leadership to sign a near immediate armistice. (Assuming China stays out of it).

Again, not saying this should happen, but what line would have to be crossed to make this option even viable.

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1174560]It would be massive no doubt with the focus like you said to knock out the immediate threat to Seoul, and Japan, but between our troops there and the naval and air force power we/Japan/SK could commit, an immediate blitz attack would almost certainly lead NK's surviving forces/leadership to sign a near immediate armistice. (Assuming China stays out of it).

Again, not saying this should happen, but what line would have to be crossed to make this option even viable.[/quote]

Seoul is so close to the border, 4th largest metro population in the world with like 25 million. They are in the kill zone range of NK weapons.

If Seoul was in the South...we would have already attacked North Korea.

Re: Do Economic Sanctions Work
 

[QUOTE=Chico23231;1174563]Seoul is so close to the border, 4th largest metro population in the world with like 25 million. They are in the kill zone range of NK weapons.

If Seoul was in the South...we would have already attacked North Korea.[/QUOTE]Agreed