From that article:
Yes the goal is only to impose sanctions that don’t interfere with western business. 
FWIW, Abramovich’s wife is one of Ivanka’s best friends, and the two couples have traveled together. Also, Mrs. Abramovich invested in a business with Kushner’s brother.
Since the sanctions now in place hurt ordinary Russians a good deal, yes, it will take a lot more to make a difference.
I think the effect would be to further cement in hatred of the West.
We have had comprehensive sanctions against Iran for 27 years, and against Cuba for 82 years. Is that too short?
I’m thinking that even if Russian mostly wins the present war (not certain, just putting my fears here), there will be appealing insurgents fighting and dying while they use smuggled-in weapons. I’m worrying more about a long war, punctuated by dire threats from all sides, than business as usual.
It is a terrible situation and I know more what not to do than what to do. But a defensive military buildup, in the West, is more likely to deter than trying to lower the typical standard of living in Russia, or even the standard of living of the super-rich. Winning the new and (hopefully, soon) Cold War by hurting Russian civilians is an on-the-cheap (for us) approach likely to backfire.
This isn’t unanswerable but is worth considering:
The United Free World. Only democracies.
It’s fairly clear that’s certainly necessary.
Today I emailed my MP demanding that the government, among a few other things, start taking our military seriously.
I"m on board with this. Just confiscate all Russian owned assets, apartments, business etc. and have a sale.
This should be done in every Western country.
Expel not only diplomats, but Russian students, “Tourists” and other rich pricks who love to vacation in Western Europe and the USA.
Announce that Russia will not be participating in the 2024 Olympics, under a Russian flag, or any other flag of convenience. Any athlete with a Russian passport will not be competing in the Olympics. Full stop. (Yes, I know the corrupt IOC is not likely to do this, as their hands gladly accept Rubles.)
@Kropotkin, supported by @AK84 , has been making exactly that argument for a few days now in the Neville Chamberlain thread, without any traction from US posters. But heck, if the Baltimore Sun is saying it …
Would they? In the pre-Ukraine war world, that was the case, but now they wouldn’t be able to exchange those rubles for dollars or euros, so they might not be as willing to accept them.
off topic
How would you define democracy? Canada, Britain, US and similar systems are not particularly democratic. So defining as “how we do things is good” is partly how we got into this mess. And requires ignoring a lot of our history.
Well, like I said, I’m in favor of sanctions. I just want people to really understand what that means, and the effect it will have on us, not just Russia.
If we don’t really understand that, in six months we’ll have a flood of people complaining about how the sanctions hurt them, and demanding they be lifted. That doesn’t do anyone any good.
Of course they are. They just aren’t perfect democracies. But then no such thing exists or in all likelihood could exist.
But they are governments elected by popular vote. That anti-democratic forces are always trying to manipulate or skew the vote is neither here nor there in terms of definition as long as the government, in the end, is still elected by some reasonable degree of universal franchise. And no, things like the Electoral College or gerrymandering are not disqualifiers. They’re just structural problems.
The US was intentionally built as a Republic. The members of the government are meant to represent the full populace (e.g. to be reminiscent of a democracy), but not be an actual democracy (ergo “democratic” republic / adjective noun).
Democracies are fickle, crazy, and tyrannical. A mediating force needs to be in place to compromise the calls of the majority against the protection of minorities and basic humanistic morality.
The United States is both a republic and a democracy. “Democracy” does not mean “mob rule in the absence of mediating forces, like a constitution.”
Modnote: I’m cutting this off early. Debates about Democracy can go in a new thread. No more of this here.
Do we wish other countries to act similarly when they disagree with our nation’s policies?
Has anyone seen an “economic” analysis of this action? Moving the forces into place was not cheap, nor is the loss of manpower/equipment. Add in the long and short-term cost of sanctions…
How far down the line do we have to look for this to not have been a VERY costly action?
Do you seriously think that Hitler invading Poland and subsequently much of the rest of Europe constituted a “disagreement with policy”? Because the invasion of Ukraine is exactly analogous.
To quote what I said in the “Why should I care?” thread:
I don’t know which is morally worse when innocent people are dying, being injured, and seeing their homes and homeland destroyed by ruthless thugs: those who wonder why they should care, or those who worry about how it will affect the price of gas.
Seriously?
Invading a country and shelling civilians in a major city is now simply a policy that we disagree with? I’ve heard many euphemisms before, but this one is exceptional.
I suppose the Pacific Ocean is a bit damp.
How about our invasion of Iraq?
I vehemently opposed that invasion. Primarily, because it violated Iraq’s national sovereignty. But also because it was unnecessary. And yes, because the expense far exceeded any possibly gain. The mere facts that there may be multiple arguments for and against a certain action, does not mean the various arguments are not each meaningful and legitimate.
Also, I use the terms “economics” and “costs” broadly. The costs of our invading Iraq included tossing trillions of $ down a hole in the desert, the lost opportunity costs and transfer of wealth that resulted from those expenditures, losing international respects, embracing torture and casting off due process, reducing internal trust in our government and accepting policymaking based on lies, creating an expanded welfare class of entitled veterans…
War is policy - admittedly at one end of a continuum. Terrorists/freedom fighter/invaders/liberators/…
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen confirmed on Sunday that the European Union is shutting down the EU airspace to Russia. Our airspace will be closed to every Russian plane. And that includes the private jets of oligarchs too," she said.
I hope that next, the private residences and businesses of Russians who own property in the EU and Britain are put into government hands. They can be told that they’ll get them back when their man Putin leaves Ukraine.