• jeffw@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Sanctions disproportionately hurt innocent civilians. Sanctioning individuals is one thing but entire nations shouldn’t be sanctioned. I thought we learned our lesson from Cuba but apparently not

    • woop_woop@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Isn’t that part of the point? If the populace suffers, government changes are more likely

      • jeffw@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        It’s still inhumane. It’s fine to starve people out via sanctions but not via bombings? There’s a reason people like Sanders continue to oppose sanctions

        • EchoCT@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          That’s the inhumane condition you care about? Not the 34000 dead? Murdering journalists, doctors, food workers? None of that?

          • jeffw@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Sanctions don’t stop that. So you have a genocide and a starving populace in a second country. JFC when did Lemmy turn into a bunch of neolibs?

                • beardown@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  Israel is a democracy, or so we have been told.

                  Which means sanctions would motivate the voters to elect a new government that opposes genocide. Which is the result we want.

                  Therefore, sanctions are justified because they would stop Israel’s genocide of Gaza by forcing Israeli voters to face the consequence of voting for genocidal fascists

        • woop_woop@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Which would be better to you? You’re a civilian somewhere - do you prefer to watch your livelyhood slowly being destroyed by your government or do you want a boom?

          I’d assume the former gives you a chance to recognize it and do something, the latter is just boom.

          • jeffw@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            False dichotomy. Sanctions don’t stop genocidal maniacs. They just ADD suffering to the world. Would I rather have 1 million people suffer or 2 million? I know the answer!

          • njm1314@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            History shows it’s never quite that clear cut. However that’s rather irrelevant. I’m asking when have US sanctions sparked a popular revolution that overthrew a government that was sanctioned?

          • njm1314@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            You’re suggesting that the end of Apartheid was caused solely by the US sanctions causing a popular revolt in South africa?

    • SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Sanctions have been used many times since Cuba with varying success.

      I’d say this situation calls for them to protect other innocent civilians.

      • jeffw@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Varying success politically, yes. But it always damages innocent civilians.

          • jeffw@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            An arms embargo restricts weapons sales and the like. Sanctions are designed to harm civilians. Suffering is the point. The (typically incorrect) idea is that suffering people will force political change. But again, that has rarely happened. People just end up suffering.

      • wurzelgummidge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Yes, also; Afghanistan, The Balkans, Belarus, Central African Republic, China, Cuba, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Hong Kong, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Mali, Myanmar, Nicaragua, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, Syria, Ukraine, Venezuela, Yemen, Zimbabwe and countless individuals

      • jeffw@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Great examples of suffering people! Especially North Korea.

        Edit: and also cases where the sanctions did literally nothing to change those governments’ actions