• woop_woop@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

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

        • njm1314@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          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?

      • woop_woop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Arguably any revolution comes from a critical mass of the population being unhappy…

        • njm1314@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          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?

    • jeffw@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      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
        19
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        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
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          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?

            • jeffw@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              Neoliberals love sanctions. Leftists typically oppose suffering.

              • beardown@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                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
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        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
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          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!