Sanctions and Strategic Bombing
scholars-stage.org
Sanctions and Strategic Bombing
1–10 of 88 posts
Re: Sanctions and Strategic Bombing
#2So what's wrong with sanctions as an instrument of attrition?
Re: Sanctions and Strategic Bombing
#3So what's wrong with sanctions as an instrument of attrition?
You are punishing people for rolling poorly on the parental lottery.
Some kid starving to death because of sanctions doesn't understand what's happening. Their parents will be too poor and hungry to meaningfully fight back against their leaders.
It's only going to hurt the vulnerable people in a country - militaries and oligarchs will not be impacted unless you target them specifically and narrowly.
Imagine if China said, "we're no longer shipping electronics to America and will not do business with anyone who does". You and I would experience huge jumps in costs and probably be angry at China, not our own government. But you probably aren't going to take up arms up being down your own government.
Broad sanctions are just bad policy.
Re: Sanctions and Strategic Bombing
#4So what's wrong with sanctions as an instrument of attrition?
I think the point of the article is that sanctions as an instrument of attrition have the same problems as strategic bombing as an instrument of attrition: it works, but causes a lot of collateral damage that doesn't contribute much to attrition, so if you hope to achieve quick results by turning the enemy's civilians against their military, you'll be disappointed.
Re: Sanctions and Strategic Bombing
#5So what's wrong with sanctions as an instrument of attrition?
You are punishing people for rolling poorly on the parental lottery. Some kid starving to death because of sanctions doesn't understand what's happening. Their parents will be too poor and hungry to meaningfully fight back against their leaders. It's only going to hurt the vulnerable people in a country - militaries and oligarchs will not be impacted unless you target them specifically and narrowly . Imagine if China…
[flagged]
Re: Sanctions and Strategic Bombing
#6So what's wrong with sanctions as an instrument of attrition?
I think the point of the article is that sanctions as an instrument of attrition have the same problems as strategic bombing as an instrument of attrition: it works, but causes a lot of collateral damage that doesn't contribute much to attrition, so if you hope to achieve quick results by turning the enemy's civilians against their military, you'll be disappointed.
I wonder how much can we even talk about collateral damage when almost all the enemy civilians support an aggressive war. I get that they're non-combatants, but they're not innocents.
Especially when the "collateral damage" is in this case is "I can no longer buy iphone".
Re: Sanctions and Strategic Bombing
#7So what's the plan when China takes Taiwan?
Re: Sanctions and Strategic Bombing
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are punishing people for rolling poorly on the parental lottery. Some kid starving to death because of sanctions doesn't understand what's happening. Their parents will be too poor and hungry to meaningfully fight back against their leaders. It's only going to hurt the vulnerable people in a country - militaries and oligarchs will not be impacted unless you target them specifically and narrowly . Imagine if China…
[flagged]
No post body was provided.
Re: Sanctions and Strategic Bombing
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the point of the article is that sanctions as an instrument of attrition have the same problems as strategic bombing as an instrument of attrition: it works, but causes a lot of collateral damage that doesn't contribute much to attrition, so if you hope to achieve quick results by turning the enemy's civilians against their military, you'll be disappointed.
I wonder how much can we even talk about collateral damage when almost all the enemy civilians support an aggressive war. I get that they're non-combatants, but they're not innocents. Especially when the "collateral damage" is in this case is "I can no longer buy iphone".
The more I get old, the more I notice that people’s opinions are not really their own, but are function of the nation’s medias. Can we blame people for their opinion?