Do Economic Sanctions Work

[CRedskinsRule]

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?

[Schneed10]

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.

[Chico23231]

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.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

LOL, that video got me. LOL.

[MTK]

What's the alternative? Bombs?

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by MTK

What's the alternative? Bombs?

Twitter insults?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Twitter insults?

Only works if they're bigly

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by MTK

What's the alternative? Bombs?

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)

[Alvin Walton]

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.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

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.

[mooby]

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.

[Alvin Walton]

Originally Posted by mooby

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.

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....

[CRedskinsRule]

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

[mooby]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

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

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?

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by mooby

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?

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!