- Mar 20, 2000
- 102,405
- 8,585
- 126
Originally posted by: eskimospy
For an example, look at Saddam. While economic sanctions didn't topple his regime, they certainly vastly reduced the amount of money he had to spend on his army, etc. They significantly contributed to him being unable to threaten his neighbors and helped to reduce his army to a shell of its former self.
Now sure they also contributed to the deaths of... well... a lot of people, but they did help contain him.
it worked to that extent then.
i have a problem with starving the common man to attain the goal of removing the leadership, i guess.
Originally posted by: 0marTheZealot
Economic sanctions work if the ruler gives a crap about the people. More often than not, they don't. Plus, it's applied in a haphazardly way.
this is true. economic sanctions can't do anything unless pretty much everyone is involved. in some instances the economic sanctions appear to have helped keep the goal from happening (in cuba, for example, castro can blame everything on the embargo, even though he can trade with practically anyone else in the world).
