This may be one of the dumbest takes I have ever seen. Sanctions are done instead of armed combat as a diplomatic tool. So instead of using those we should "checks notes" go to more war? That way war kills more people than sanctions.
Only target the leaders with sanction not the population
Ok. How?
Right, also we should all hold hands and sing Kumbaya.
The Lancet, so others can skip the propaganda piece.
It's kind of fascinating that warfare could be so limited that peacetime economics could determine more lives. They also mentioned that UN sanctions have no such effect, so pretty much all the usual suspects wouldn't be contributing.
I don't know, I have to assume there's credibility to this for it to be published, but it just seems impossible.
Pretty glaring omission of the sanctions on Russia in this blog-post universally condemning sanctions.
Looks like the People's Dispatch is far-left biased, so probably tankies deliberately writing stuff that benefits Russia.
Damn tankies and their checks notes suggestion we not use policy to murder 500k people a year.
First of all, "causing excess death" is not "murder", no matter how much you want to equate them.
But merely lamenting the consequences of sanctions is like lamenting how lives are ruined by imprisoning criminals with no attention given to what would likely happen if crime just went unpunished.
Sanctions are applied in response to something and have to be viewed through that lens. How many more deaths would result if repressive governments felt they had free rein to commit crimes against their own populations and those of their neighbours if they faced no repercussions for doing so?
This is why the article is written irresponsibly, and probably is a propaganda piece: it does not make any attempt to relate the outcome of sanctions to likely alternative situations in which sanctions were not applied. This way of examining sanctions (or anything) can perfectly well be used to criticise sanctions as causing suffering in excess of what they are supposed to be combating.
There’s a case to be made for sanctions in times of war. The point on the left though is sanctions are an act of war and in the past they’d be enforced through something like a blockade or siege. We’ve white-washed it to make it sound like it’s just simple economic policy though.
The problem with this position is that it doesn't make sense to say that countries are obliged to trade with one another. If there's no obligation to trade, then there's no obligation to avoid sanctions. The difference between sanctions and a blockade is that you're not forcing other countries not to trade.
The arguments may differ when there are frozen assets but it comes down to the same thing: we categorise actual use of force differently from harmful acts short of force for a reason.
No, mate, the parent commenter asserts that the tankies only claim it murders 500,000 people a year because it also economically hurts Russia.
The left has been harping on this for quite a while.
I am not reading through a fucking 10,000 word podcast transcript to find the relevant two paragraphs. Quote some points if you want.
Edit: I actually underestimated this thing. The transcript is so large that it crashed LibreOffice Writer the first time I tried pasting it in to get the actual word count. The transcript is 16,719 words long.
Exactly man. Stay strong. You're not here for nuance or context. You're the kind of guy that likes having little Snippets hand fed to you. Reading is for nerds. If there ain't a YouTube video saying it while a guy gives shocked reaction faces you don't need to know it.
I am not opposed to reading. I will happily read a 1,000 or 2,000-word article to hear new ideas. What I will not do is listen to a 90-minute podcast or read its transcript, which is so long it crashed LibreOffice Writer when I tried pasting it to get the word count, just to understand what CabbageRelish@midwest.social is talking about with the comment that took them twenty seconds to write.
It's not unreasonable for me to say that if you took less than 60 seconds to write your comment, I'm going to spend a maximum of 5-10 minutes thinking about and writing my response.
I am not saying tankies wrote the Lancet article.
I suggest to count how many more people would Russians kill without sanctions.
Food and medicine aren't subject to sanctions in the case of Russia. AFAIK agricultural machines also aren't yet, despite evidence that some of its components had been reused for military equipment.
Contrast this with sanction on countries like Iran or until recently Syria, that affect food and medicine.
Yes, the EU and the USA should widen sanctions on Russia to cover food and medicine too.
We should do the same to israel right?
we should stop sending unlimited bombs and air defense missiles to Israel too
right
Good
Statements like this only help Russia to claim that Ukrainians and their supporters are genocidal Nazis.
No sane people care about what Russian nazies claim.
By saying to deny medicine and food to a population you only make it more likely that you are perceived in the same way. It is wrong and nothing good comes out of starving and denying medical treatment to people.
EDIT: Wow, people now downvoting opposition to crimes against humanity.
Fuck off, there's only room for hate on Lemmy. You just have to make sure it's directed at the other guys*.
We've been down this road with North Korea. If a country's leadership wants to burn the proverbial furniture and impoverish its people to fuel their war machine, no amount of foreign aid or trade is going to stop the impoverishment, because they will leverage it to offset spending to even more war.
no amount of foreign aid or trade is going to stop the impoverishment
The whole reason why israel didn't collapse is that we keep sending them billions to finance occupation and genocide
Which needs to stop and Israel must be sanctioned both militarily and economically. Still doesn't justify denying them access to food and medicine.
Israel csn produce them by themselves
I suggest to count how many less people will die if we didn't make ourself the enemy of iran and mamy africans countries forcing them to deepen relation with russia
That is a very difficult calculation. But you're welcome to do the math.
Did war write this article?
Worse, tankies.
The COVID-19 pandemic brought this dynamic into even harsher focus. Countries like Iran and Venezuela struggled to import critical supplies, including testing kits, vaccine materials, and vaccines themselves.
What an absolute shit article. I doubt anyone will argue we've, historically, treated Iran or Venezuela well, but to not even touch on why the sanctions are in place is awful journalism. The disputes didn't happen in a vacuum and I'd like to hear about what they suggest the sitting regimes are doing to remedy the situation
The disputes didn't happen in a vacuum
Yes, like ithe usa and the british overthrew the democratically elected prime and put a dictator instead for wanting those countries to stop taking advantages of their natursl ressources
Man what did I write?
I doubt anyone will argue we've, historically, treated Iran or Venezuela well, but to not even touch on why the sanctions are in place is awful journalism.
Maduro is an authoritarian who's starving his population and ask the women of Iran how they feel about their government. Why they're in the situation they are is clearly with the influence of the us and large parts of the western world. If you do have an alternative to financial blockades please, I am actually all ears.
As someone who tries to avoid American and Chinese made products I really dislike the idea of us indulging even more terrible regimes
why the sanctions are in place To collectively punish countries who doesn't align with the west. Iran could turn democratic and pro human rights and they would still get sanctionned
Maduro is an authoritarian who's starving his population and ask the women of Iran how they feel about their government.
The usa is starving the country they sanctions, the usa did war crimes all over the world with other western countries support and complicity, never get sanctionned, israel is comiting genocide and mass starvation never got sanctionned. Saudi arabia is an authoritarian regime as bad as iran never got sanctionned. You can ask saudis women how they feel their government too, you can ask people who fon't vote because they believe nobody represent them.
This will be the last one for me because you're clearly looking for a fight and not a discussion when you argue that I'm speaking for these other authoritarian and genociding regimes. And since it seems I have to spoon-feed you it, they should face serious repercussions. Every country that doesn't abide by basic human rights should be held accountable
What a cheap shot from you , you can't defend the hypocrisy i mentioned so you start claiming that i just want a fight.
The western countries who caused the mess has zero right to punish other countries for their human right violations. Let Iranians fight their own oppressors
Ok, one more, maybe you'll actually read what I write now.
I start by saying we haven't treated either Iran or Venezuela well and that no-one should argue that. And you mention the overthrowing of their leaders which is part of what I meant. We agree.
I again mention that we clearly have a part play in the situation they're in, and that if you have any better alternatives you should voice them. You do no such things. Instead you! add other countries into the mix which we do not sanction. Again we agree that they should face repercussions.
So now I'm asking you to copy paste my text where in defending western hypocrisy or you should perhaps stay on topic which the article was about. I'm not defending what we've done, I also don't defend current regimes mentioned in the article. I also at least hope some countries have these sanctions in place because they do not want to be complicit and add funding to authoritarian regimes. Do you understand me now?
How cute is to say that we caused the issue but then talk about how we should continue to punish Iran with sanctions. What repercussions did we get from instauring the shah, invading iraq and afghanistan, financing a genocide in gaza. Should we sanctions ourself or be ok with other countries sanctionning us?
I am not again sanctions in general. In case of invasion or genonide which both russia and israel are doing, i am for it. For iran we shouldn't sanctiona them , it will only made it support russia more out of necessity. Supporting the end of regime with ulterior motive won't work.
Only iranians who really love the countries could do it without intervention can do it not the traitors who cheared killing hundred of iranians in israel/ iran. Tunisian revolution was relatively succesful because it was natural with no western intervention
I know! God damn it! It's like talking to a brick fucking wall! Christ, are you deliberately avoiding my questions and points just to regurgitate the obvious? I mean, we fucking agree!
Point to my comment about me justifying western hypocrisy!
You know what, nevermind we both know you're not going to. You're just going to keep talking about our previous fuckups instead. I'm out.
You clearly love to create drama, it's clear that it's you who don't read. I also answered all your wuestion, it's you who didn't answer mine.Where did we agree that the west should impose sanctions on iran?
About overthrowing iran regime, you don't care about how it should be overthrow while i do i want zero western intervensions. If israel succesed in overthrowing the mullah it would be caos like in syria
Seeing that the sanctions comes from a political point rather than a moral stand point imposed by countries that themselves commited ton of war crimes that showed again and again only hurt the sanctionned countries population amd not the leaders is justifying western hypocrisy.
Besides western indepedent human right organizations exposing the abuse we should not intervene unless there is a genocide
Sanctions are just siege warfare using our trade influence to kill normal people in the hopes that the misery causes dissent against the government. Under anything but the "rules based order" they would be an act of war.
As a kid, I thought sanctions should be considered a war crime because they deliberately target non-combatants in order to cause suffering on a mass scale. As an adult, I still view it the same way. It's cruel, and aimed at the people who have no control over what their governments do.
So, sanctions do work, good to see.
I am pretty sure the upcoming and intensifying wars are accepting the challenge.
A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/