[tetromino_]

The Brookings article you linked to directly contradicts your point. It argues (correctly) that sanctions will hurt Russia's people but are extremely unlikely to change Putin's policies, and in fact, will only entrench Putin's control over what remains of the Russian economy.

I suspect you might have stopped reading the article at the first paragraph - which presents a thesis that the rest of the article then proceeds to analyze and disprove.

[jimbob45]

>It argues (correctly) that sanctions will hurt Russia's people but are extremely unlikely to change Putin's policies

If I'd linked you an article that said the Russian people wouldn't be hurt but that the sanctions were likely to change Putin's policies, then would you feel the opposite? It seems like you're trying to play both sides of the coin here.

We can only control the financial damage of the Russian people with our sanctions in the hopes that their public opinion will sway the opinion of Putin's cabinet and we've accomplished that here. There is no intervention on Earth that would guarantee the changing of Putin's mind short of a gun to his head. I'd go so far as to say you've erected a straw man.

[tetromino_]

> If I'd linked you an article that said the Russian people wouldn't be hurt but that the sanctions were likely to change Putin's policies, then would you feel the opposite?

Of course.

> It seems like you're trying to play both sides of the coin here.

It seems like your telepathy machine is broken.

> There is no intervention on Earth that would guarantee the changing of Putin's mind short of a gun to his head.

That might be the case. But if you think that is the case, why are you suggesting a different, ineffective but cruel intervention? An uncharitable interpretation of your proposal is that you want to hurt ordinary Russian people because you want to see someone suffer for Putin's actions.