Reprinted from the Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity.
In his effort to promote the United States government pursuing a noninterventionist foreign policy, Ron Paul has often commented that sanctions are an act of war. Like other acts of war, Paul argues, the right course is to avoid sanctioning unless actually necessary to defend America from attack.
Over at the Washington Post, Jeff Stein and Federica Cocco presented on Thursday a much less sweeping critique of US sanctions. They defend sanctions as good policy to an extent, but they also document that over this century US sanctions have proliferated enormously, leading to various problems. Stein and Cocco describe the lay of the land regarding the state of US sanctions with this introductory paragraph:
Today, the United States imposes three times as many sanctions as any other country or international body, targeting a third of all nations with some kind of financial penalty on people, properties or organizations. They have become an almost reflexive weapon in perpetual economic warfare, and their overuse is recognized at the highest levels of government. But American presidents find the tool increasingly irresistible.
From there, Stein and Cocco delivered an interesting analysis, which you can read here, of how this situation arose and some of the problems associated with it.
Maybe the Washington Post article is a sign that there is hope for a significant receding of US sanctions. And maybe. once that receding begins, support will grow for the Paul recommendation of ending all the sanctions.
Adam Dick worked from 2003 through 2013 as a legislative aide for Rep. Ron Paul. Previously, he was a member of the Wisconsin State Board of Elections, a co-manager of Ed Thompson’s 2002 Wisconsin governor campaign, and a lawyer in New York and Connecticut.
Some very good things to ponder and indeed to consider. I look forward to some good and open discussion here..
To start with, is there a case for sanctioning any foreign polity?
The only thing I know right now Luchorpan is that it seems Iran is gearing up for war, which I dearly hope (and pray) they are not….It seems as though Israel is anticipating it…
Well, Israel could just offer to exit Gaza, and Iran would likely forego the response.
Aug 10, 2024 Majority Of Americans Oppose U.S. Troops Defending Israel!
A majority of Americans oppose sending U.S. troops to defend Israel if it's attacked by a neighboring country, according to a poll released Tuesday. The Chicago Council on Global Affairs (CCGA) poll found that 55% of Americans oppose such military support of Israel while just 41% favor it, marking a shift from previous iterations of the poll over the last decade in which support for the U.S. defense of Israel was just above 50%.
https://youtu.be/2PtBwAGmaMA?si=DV6Wo6vbK0FTpoqM
How many favour allying with Iran against Israel? I’m joking, but that would be interesting to poll.
Yes it would, or how many are willing to send their sons or daughters to die in any of Americas wars overseas?
Most Americans are against sending troops to Israel. That should make the people vote for Jill Stein, she wants to end the wars and proxy wars the USA fights in or funds.
Some people say Harris will take a tougher stand on Israel if she is elected, she won't, she'll do the same thing Biden is doing and what Trump will do if he is elected. She is all talk and no action.
Sorry friend, but you are wrong about Trump. He has been the only peace president in my over half a century not to invade any country.
US presidents and their wars.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/f1181f251d8d63c376b2a80b3d60b8132d741601fd80b5a4bffb94633e2ebd74.jpg
Feb 27 , 2019:Trump meets with North Korea’s Kim Jong Un
https://youtu.be/rceK7wfi_NA
Sorry, friend, you are partially right about Trump. Trump started no wars when he was the POTUS and Russia started no wars at that time. He had peace talks with Kim Jong Un of North Korea. His war of words with him did not work. Trump wasn't exactly a peace time POTUS.
He rolled back trade, travel and diplomatic ties with Cuba and transferred the embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. East Jerusalem is the Arab Section of the city. He scrapped the Iran Deal and sent a drone to kill Soleimani. He was the first president to approve of Israeli Settlements in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem. He meddled in Venezuela's affairs by saying Guaido was legitimately elected and Maduro was legitimately elected, he meddled in Brazil's election to get Jair Bolsonaro in power and they bragged about wrecking the environment together.
Trump said different things about how he'll handle the war in Ukraine if he gets back in the White House. He said he'll negotiate with Putin and Zelensky to end the war, he'll stay out of the conflict and let the Europeans decide how to handle it and he'll be tougher on Russia in his second term.
He said he'll invade Mexico if he gets back in the White House. If he does that, a wall would be a barrier to the invasion. I've heard there will be more Hispanics voting for him, invading Mexico should be a deterrent for them to vote for him.
Trump called North Koreas Kim Jong Un rocket man, and yet he has been the only President in my lifetime to visit North Korea.
Here is a short clip of Professor David Siegel providing news about sanctions. They failed against Russia that now has the highest economic growth rate in Europe.
https://youtu.be/4Pl41YRagl8?t=468
Russia would very much prefer the sanctions were dropped. Sanctions obliterated Venezuela and greatly hindered NK until recently when Russia rescued NK out of mutual benefit.
"Sanction" is a contronym . So if a government or political leader announces sanctions, well…if the announcer put it in writing and/or moved his lips, it was nonsense at least, and probably just another effing lie. Not mutually exclusive, BTW.