• Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.

Russian & DPRK Sanctioning

Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Torch
I don't believe that sanctions are going to destroy the Russian economy, and if the goal is for Russia to withdraw from Ukraine, as of now,
it's missed target.
In history there are several examples:
North Korea for several decades and has not stopped
the development of nuclear weapons.
Japan: reason for the attack on Pearl Harbor
Germany: after WW1, Germany
was ruined which made it easier to create a monster
like Hitler and exacerbated the German nationalist.

In conclusion, the more sanctions there are, the more the situation will deteriorate, especially if China gets involved, which is likely.
Sanctions against China? The world economy would collapse!
Well, that's my opinion!
 
Saguenay said:
North Korea for several decades
Click to expand...
Can't compare their sanctions to Russia and how they are riding it out. Not similar in anyway. Russia depends on world economy/market. North Korea does not and never has. North Korean economy grew into what it is today over decades of sanctions.

North Korea has truly 99% isolated themselves from world over many decades and produce almost everything locally expect for the few coal & grain shipments from China to offset collapse/starvation in DPRK. Cannot in anyways be said for Russia.
 
As sanctions do not work:
Solution: It will take a USA|NATO intervention
on the ground in Ukraine, at least 500,000 SOLDIERS!
Russia would withdraw from Ukraine.
 

Have US-imposed sanctions ever worked?​

Click to expand...
www.trtworld.com

Have US-imposed sanctions ever worked?

Gary Hufbauer, an American academic who's extensively worked on US sanctions, explains both the upside and downside to isolating nation states from the global economic system.
www.trtworld.com www.trtworld.com

Interesting discussion concerning the success rate of U.S. imposed sanctions.
A little dated, but interesting none the less.
 
Saguenay said:
As sanctions do not work:
Solution: It will take a USA|NATO intervention
on the ground in Ukraine, at least 500,000 SOLDIERS!
Russia would withdraw from Ukraine.
Click to expand...
500000 is grossly overstated and based on old weaponry and targeting.
That said it’s not completely evident it would take nato on the ground for Ukraine to prevail.
It will take more advanced nato offensive weapons for Ukraine to drive Russia out farther out.
This has always been an obvious necessity from the start. The Artillery and HMARS have done their part thus far.
With the presumed influx of tanks and armored troop transport and more artillery as well as likely fighters and patriot systems. It stops being solely a numbers gain.
Russia has been using the human wave suicide charges the last two months in Ukraine and gained very little for the cost. Some casualty rates estimate 8-1 in recent fighting. This is of course unverifiable but significant in its estimates.

I have a question.
Do you want Ukraine to lose and Russia to occupy them like they have done in the past?
What is such an anathema to Ukraine wanting their complete independence from Russia.
 
There is a propensity to regard Russia as some kind of superpower juggernaut that has a proportionally large economy and subsequently large military as well.

Russias GDP BEFORE the war was on par with the single State of Texas.
It is even more degraded now.

The proposition that Russia can wage on ongoing offensive war in Ukraine in opposition to the economies and weapons of the US Europe Japan GB Canada and Scandinavian nations is actually kinda funny. All things being equal it’s laughable.

So it eventually comes down to a couple of things
China
The unity of western governments to see this through.
And if Russia is actually froggy enough to use nuke in a self-inflicted conventional loss.
It’s always said Russia has never been successfully invaded. This is true. But it is also true that Russia has never won and war of expansion towards Europe.
Poorly trained conscripted troops can only take you so far.

So do the western nations have the stones to see it thru?
And is Russia so foolish to think a tactical nuke or two will salvage their folly.
 
DEFCON Warning System said:
Decades of sanctions that were skirted by China and Russia.
Click to expand...
As far as anyone's concerned the sanctions on DPRK have done their job and are still doing their job. The few real glimpses we get of the hermit nation is very terrifying and depressingly in crippling poverty borderline starvation. Even their soldiers.

The sanctions are not intended to make DPRK collapse and allow China/Russia to ship coal/grain to prevent collapse of DPRK. The sanctions are to constrict their economy and make the people suffer to make the general population dissatisfied with their government overtime in hopes they rise up or someone does somthing about Kim Jong Un.

IF we wanted too we could put sanctions in place that would result in the collapse of DPRK and the starvation of millions of people because of it. BUT we don't because that is a bad scenario. We don't want DPRK to collapse.

As they say you break it you fix it. Would cost unfathomable amounts of money to aid the sick and starving masses fleeing the country by the millions in the resulting collapse in place of true sanctions put on DPRK.
 
DarkNoon said:
As far as anyone's concerned the sanctions on DPRK have done their job and are still doing their job. The few real glimpses we get of the hermit nation is very terrifying and depressingly in crippling poverty borderline starvation. Even their soldiers.

The sanctions are not intended to make DPRK collapse and allow China/Russia to ship coal/grain to prevent collapse of DPRK. The sanctions are to constrict their economy and make the people suffer to make the general population dissatisfied with their government overtime in hopes they rise up or someone does somthing about Kim Jong Un.

IF we wanted too we could put sanctions in place that would result in the collapse of DPRK and the starvation of millions of people because of it. BUT we don't because that is a bad scenario. We don't want DPRK to collapse.

As they say you break it you fix it. Would cost unfathomable amounts of money to aid the sick and starving masses fleeing the country by the millions in the resulting collapse in place of true sanctions put on DPRK.
Click to expand...
Personally, I do not think most sanctions on the DPRK are morally justifiable, nor do they help our cause. I do not think it is moral to put sanctions on a country resulting in the people suffering simply because we do not like their government(there are good reasons, this is not one).

I think the way we treated North Korea, trying to facilitate its collapse, is the reason it seeked nuclear weapons.

If we hadn't sanctioned and threatened it in the first place, maybe they would have never developed nukes, or if they did, we would be able to actually use diplomacy. But why would they want diplomacy now? They are paranoid of it, they think it will only hurt them more. The nuclear ship has sailed. But the chances of them using those nukes are low, they know the US would respond.

And for what? The regime isn't changing. As you said, we don't want it to collapse anyway.These people see America as the cause for all their woes. Their own government is divine to them. Just making millions suffer because we do not like their government.
 
intel-bank said:
Personally, I do not think most sanctions on the DPRK are morally justifiable, nor do they help our cause. I do not think it is moral to put sanctions on a country resulting in the people suffering simply because we do not like their government(there are good reasons, this is not one).

I think the way we treated North Korea, trying to facilitate its collapse, is the reason it seeked nuclear weapons.

If we hadn't sanctioned and threatened it in the first place, maybe they would have never developed nukes, or if they did, we would be able to actually use diplomacy. But why would they want diplomacy now? They are paranoid of it, they think it will only hurt them more. The nuclear ship has sailed. But the chances of them using those nukes are low, they know the US would respond.

And for what? The regime isn't changing. As you said, we don't want it to collapse anyway.These people see America as the cause for all their woes. Their own government is divine to them. Just making millions suffer because we do not like their government.
Click to expand...
Maybe if they had not fermented a civil war in Korea there would have been no need.
I agree with you that sanctions are not always productive.
But in terms of a bellicose nation who is frequently making threats total destruction against it neighbors and others. Then sanctions are preferable to war.
Sanctions would never work for DPRK. I don’t agree with DN that the DPRK could actually brought to submission with them. Simply because Russia or China will always bail them out just enough to stay afloat and continue their nuclear weapons development.
So hey “all is fair in love and war, all stratagems feints and lies are useful it they achieve the desired ends”
So lets sponsor ROK and Japans own nuclear program.
 
DarkNoon said:
s far as anyone's concerned the sanctions on DPRK have done their job and are still doing their job.
Click to expand...
No. They are not. Not at all.

The regime still lives quiet well. They still have a massive army. They still are developing nuclear weapons.

Sanctions have done nothing to stop any of that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Torch
DEFCON Warning System said:
No. They are not. Not at all.

The regime still lives quiet well. They still have a massive army. They still are developing nuclear weapons.

Sanctions have done nothing to stop any of that.
Click to expand...
Sanctions alone weren't going to stop it regardless. Only direct intervention would stop any Nation from doing so if they are determined enough. (Building nuclear weapons)

I listed the reasons above what the sanctions are intended for really.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Torch
intel-bank said:
Personally, I do not think most sanctions on the DPRK are morally justifiable, nor do they help our cause. I do not think it is moral to put sanctions on a country resulting in the people suffering simply because we do not like their government(there are good reasons, this is not one).

I think the way we treated North Korea, trying to facilitate its collapse, is the reason it seeked nuclear weapons.

If we hadn't sanctioned and threatened it in the first place, maybe they would have never developed nukes, or if they did, we would be able to actually use diplomacy. But why would they want diplomacy now? They are paranoid of it, they think it will only hurt them more. The nuclear ship has sailed. But the chances of them using those nukes are low, they know the US would respond.

And for what? The regime isn't changing. As you said, we don't want it to collapse anyway.These people see America as the cause for all their woes. Their own government is divine to them. Just making millions suffer because we do not like their government.
Click to expand...
You realize that a state of war still exists between North Korea and ROK/ UN right? We COULD be bombing the shit out of them. I hardly thing sanctions of any kind are hash in that context. As for “we do not like their government”? Actually we HATE their government. Nothing is too good for them, and that’s exactly what they should get.
 
Torcher said:
You realize that a state of war still exists between North Korea and ROK/ UN right? We COULD be bombing the shit out of them. I hardly thing sanctions of any kind are hash in that context. As for “we do not like their government”? Actually we HATE their government. Nothing is too good for them.
Click to expand...
They might be able to get a few nukes off on the Mainland US.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Torch
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom