Historically, when has a sanction worked?

I like. I'm making a small collection of peoples who thought we could easily be backed off, and I think Japan was the only example in my album so far. Now I have two, with Bin Laden.

It's just hard to SEE Bin Laden could have had such an idea, because it was so crazy! But that's what war does, you see what you want, not what's there, I guess. I just read Barbarossa, and German estimates of Soviet troop strength was 80 divisions just before June 22, 1941. It went up and up and up till a rather disheartened German general facing defeat said that intelligence had said he was up against 200 divisions now, but he had counted 360.

And yet they almost pulled it off. They tore through the border divisions and most of central Russia.

I shudder to think what would have happened if the war started in 1941 or 1942 instead of 1939.
 
Hitler prepared a war against Russia - better to say against Stalin - not against the French and Brits.

He wanted revenge against France first, that was the enemy he fought in World War I. That's why he went to the Armistice negotiations. France was about revenge, Invading the Soviet Union was about land, resources, and power.

Remember in 1917 they actually beat the Russians, it's their loss in the West that made them give up that victory.
 
Historically, FDR's oil embargo sanctions against Japan didn't turn out so good. The problem today is that we have a weak president and global warming activists running the show who actually want high energy prices to punish Americans for our comfortable lives. That's what we are going to get until we kick the bums out next November.
What a great example of sanctions that oh, so very did not work out well. Also scrap metal, I read. We started refusing to sell them any more scrap metal because of the atrocities in Manchuria (I think after the Rape of Nanking). They were buying the oil and metal they needed for their war machine, but after the sanctions bit, they started thinking they could just take over all the European colonies and get it directly. They just had to drive us off. Easy peasy.

The more I read about sanctions, the more persuaded I become that it's a BAD idea. It never worked from the very beginning, the League of Nation's Secret Weapon to prevent war.
 
And yet they almost pulled it off. They tore through the border divisions and most of central Russia.

I shudder to think what would have happened if the war started in 1941 or 1942 instead of 1939.
Because Hitler would have been better armed and thus not deafened by the whining poormouthing of his generals? What I have read is that if they just had the five weeks that Hitler put off the invasion into Russia (I can't remember why) and started May 10 instead of June 22, they could have made it into Moscow before winter after all. He was always putting off his pushes. That was one of his big mistakes, IMO, that and his nutso refusal to let any German ever withdraw from any position. I believe he wasted half his army that way.
 
Because Hitler would have been better armed and thus not deafened by the whining poormouthing of his generals? What I have read is that if they just had the five weeks that Hitler put off the invasion into Russia (I can't remember why) and started May 10 instead of June 22, they could have made it into Moscow before winter after all. He was always putting off his pushes. That was one of his big mistakes, IMO, that and his nutso refusal to let any German ever withdraw from any position. I believe he wasted half his army that way.

That is one theory, the other is the roads weren't ready in April or May anyway, the mud season was still in session.

Remember they had to get through the Pripyat marshes first, the drier terrain wasn't until further on.
 
That is one theory, the other is the roads weren't ready in April or May anyway, the mud season was still in session.

Remember they had to get through the Pripyat marshes first, the drier terrain wasn't until further on.
And so do the Russians, at least, today 2/25/2022! Those are BIG marshes. I was just reading about Stalingrad about the important city of Kharkiv then and it just got bombed the same day I was reading about it. Confusing. I'm thinking, When am I, when am I??
 
Just say'in.

I mean, what sanctions could ever hold down a despot hell bent on war?

Hmm?

Also, FYI, higher taxes don't make global temperatures go down either.

But that is for another thread.
Lol, they and the Afghanistan war is what brought the wall down.
 
He wanted revenge against France first,

Possible - but unimportant. The French did do many crimes in Germany after world war 1 - and their greed was more than only immense. But France declared war on Germany and not Germany declared war on France.

that was the enemy he fought in World War I.

I don't know where he had been in world war 1 and whether he had reasons to hate French.

That's why he went to the Armistice negotiations.

To the what? Which Armistice negotiations?

France was about revenge, Invading the Soviet Union was about land, resources, and power.

Revenge ... no idea what to do with this word in this context now. I know a lot about the Nazis but I don't remember now a special propaganda against France.

Remember in 1917 they actually beat the Russians, it's their loss in the West that made them give up that victory.

Okay - my mistake I guess- we speak about different things. I spoke about world war 2 - you spoke about world war 1. In world war 1 everyone was a criminal idiot who took part in this war.
 
Possible - but unimportant. The French did do many crimes in Germany after world war 1 - and their greed was more than only immense. But France declared war on Germany and not Germany declared war on France.



I don't know where he had been in world war 1 and whether he had reasons to hate French.



To the what? Which Armistice negotiations?



Revenge ... no idea what to do with this word in this context now. I know a lot about the Nazis but I don't remember now a special propaganda against France.



Okay - my mistake I guess- we speak about different things. I spoke about world war 2 - you spoke about world war 1. In world war 1 everyone was a criminal idiot who took part in this war.

WWI led to WWII, Hitler had a hard on for France due to his war experience. Read the Battle of France on Wikipedia for the background information.

France and the UK declared war on Germany because he invaded Poland, not whilly nilly.
 
Because Hitler would have been better armed and thus not deafened by the whining poormouthing of his generals? What I have read is that if they just had the five weeks that Hitler put off the invasion into Russia (I can't remember why) and started May 10 instead of June 22, they could have made it into Moscow before winter after all. He was always putting off his pushes. That was one of his big mistakes, IMO, that and his nutso refusal to let any German ever withdraw from any position. I believe he wasted half his army that way.

Don't waste your time to ask yourselve why Hitler lost. It was because of the Jewish generals.
 
WWI led to WWII,


Two parts of the same war.

Hitler had a hard on for France due to his war experience. Read the Battle of France on Wikipedia for the background information.

I'm not interested in wars nor in battles. Something written there what helps against Putin and his murderous megalomania?

France and the UK declared war on Germany because he invaded Poland, not whilly nilly.

Exactly. And Hitler eliminated together with Stalin Poland. The next step had been a war between Russia and Germany. But France and Great Britain and the rest of the world felt to be neglected.

 
Last edited:
Two parts of the same war.



I'm not interested in wars nor in battles. Somethingf written there what helps against Putin and his murderous megalomania?



Exactly. And Hitler eliminated together with Stalin Poland. The next step had been a war between Russia and Germany. But France and Great Birtian and the rest of the world felt to be neglected.



if you are not going to do the background work to understand a given topic you are discussing, I'm not going to waste my time with you.
 
if you are not going to do the background work to understand a given topic you are discussing, I'm not going to waste my time with you.
I need something what helps against Putin. Now! So if you read something in your profound background - tell it. Now!
 
Just say'in.

I mean, what sanctions could ever hold down a despot hell bent on war?

Hmm?

Also, FYI, higher taxes don't make global temperatures go down either.

But that is for another thread.

Well some old Republican's thought so once upon a time.

We had a good discussion, the Foreign Minister and I and the President and I, had a good discussion about the nature of the sanctions -- the fact that the sanctions exist -- not for the purpose of hurting the Iraqi people, but for the purpose of keeping in check Saddam Hussein's ambitions toward developing weapons of mass destruction. We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq...

Secretary Powell: The sanctions, as they are called, have succeeded over the last 10 years, not in deterring him from moving in that direction, but from actually being able to move in that direction. The Iraqi regime militarily remains fairly weak. It doesn't have the capacity it had 10 or 12 years ago. It has been contained.

 

Forum List

Back
Top