Jack Q
@jackq.bsky.social
Bisexual Satanist veteran who's really into Martin Luther King Jr.
“The evils of capitalism are as real as the evils of militarism and racism."
“The evils of capitalism are as real as the evils of militarism and racism."
Here is the sanction for the UK, it designates "persons by name"
www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2019/85...
www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2019/85...
The Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019
These Regulations are made under the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018 (c.13) to establish a sanctions regime under that Act in relation to Russia. These Regulations are made for the purpos...
www.legislation.gov.uk
December 12, 2025 at 7:04 PM
Here is the sanction for the UK, it designates "persons by name"
www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2019/85...
www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2019/85...
Here is the EU sanction under which Italy seized these assets. It applies to "natural persons" i.e., individuals.
eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-conten...
eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-conten...
eur-lex.europa.eu
December 12, 2025 at 7:03 PM
Here is the EU sanction under which Italy seized these assets. It applies to "natural persons" i.e., individuals.
eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-conten...
eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-conten...
So then, if the only action permitted by a sanction was this action, you would be okay with that type of sanction?
December 12, 2025 at 6:42 PM
So then, if the only action permitted by a sanction was this action, you would be okay with that type of sanction?
Diplomacy utilizes coercion.
December 12, 2025 at 6:00 PM
Diplomacy utilizes coercion.
Diplomacy is political. All diplomacy falls under a political framing. I never said they're not a form of economic coercion. But as I showed and you agreed, they do not always inflict widespread cost. You then said that was pretext or something and didn't explain what that meant
December 12, 2025 at 5:58 PM
Diplomacy is political. All diplomacy falls under a political framing. I never said they're not a form of economic coercion. But as I showed and you agreed, they do not always inflict widespread cost. You then said that was pretext or something and didn't explain what that meant
Lol. You're ignoring reality rather than just admit you didn't properly consider your position. Grow up bub.
December 12, 2025 at 5:32 PM
Lol. You're ignoring reality rather than just admit you didn't properly consider your position. Grow up bub.
It's incoherent because you stated sanctions are bad due to being collective punishment. But that would also apply to military intervention. That's contradictory and therefore incoherent.
December 12, 2025 at 5:31 PM
It's incoherent because you stated sanctions are bad due to being collective punishment. But that would also apply to military intervention. That's contradictory and therefore incoherent.
Sanctions are diplomacy. They're just a form of diplomacy you don't like.
December 12, 2025 at 5:31 PM
Sanctions are diplomacy. They're just a form of diplomacy you don't like.
Nobody liked your dumb meme, it ain't a big deal.
December 12, 2025 at 5:30 PM
Nobody liked your dumb meme, it ain't a big deal.
"If you don't eat dog shit how can I expect you to appreciate a steak?"
December 12, 2025 at 5:05 PM
"If you don't eat dog shit how can I expect you to appreciate a steak?"
To that I would again point out that lululenin is the one who said instead of sanctions, there should be invasion. So it seems fair to ask him about the comparable costs of those things. Doesn't it?
December 12, 2025 at 4:55 PM
To that I would again point out that lululenin is the one who said instead of sanctions, there should be invasion. So it seems fair to ask him about the comparable costs of those things. Doesn't it?
Buddy that's a Rick and Morty meme. Is that part of the literature now?
December 12, 2025 at 4:50 PM
Buddy that's a Rick and Morty meme. Is that part of the literature now?
If that figure is fantasy, then it's no moreso than any other estimations of harms that we'd want to prevent. You can't know how many people will be harmed by a sanction until it's imposed either. But you can estimate it can't you?
December 12, 2025 at 4:49 PM
If that figure is fantasy, then it's no moreso than any other estimations of harms that we'd want to prevent. You can't know how many people will be harmed by a sanction until it's imposed either. But you can estimate it can't you?
Lululenin stated directly that war was acceptable but sanctions unacceptable for reasons that are still not clear based on their incoherent responses. So yes, that is implied in the question, because it's the alternative they presented.
December 12, 2025 at 4:48 PM
Lululenin stated directly that war was acceptable but sanctions unacceptable for reasons that are still not clear based on their incoherent responses. So yes, that is implied in the question, because it's the alternative they presented.
Okay but that doesn't mean they're ineffective. I just don't know why you can't be consistent. If you'd like to say both things are true: they are ineffective and capitalist, you can do that. But you don't. You keep pretending you're saying the same point when it keeps changing.
December 12, 2025 at 4:47 PM
Okay but that doesn't mean they're ineffective. I just don't know why you can't be consistent. If you'd like to say both things are true: they are ineffective and capitalist, you can do that. But you don't. You keep pretending you're saying the same point when it keeps changing.
Your belief that sanctions shouldn't be used because they are ineffective is not the same as saying they should be opposed for being capitalist. Do you not understand that?
December 12, 2025 at 4:26 PM
Your belief that sanctions shouldn't be used because they are ineffective is not the same as saying they should be opposed for being capitalist. Do you not understand that?
What is the "main point"?
December 12, 2025 at 4:23 PM
What is the "main point"?
I mean, even if I accept that premise, I don't think that invalidates my question.
December 12, 2025 at 4:23 PM
I mean, even if I accept that premise, I don't think that invalidates my question.
Under the pretext? Don't you mean pursuant to the authority of?
December 12, 2025 at 4:20 PM
Under the pretext? Don't you mean pursuant to the authority of?
I ain't reading all that
December 12, 2025 at 4:11 PM
I ain't reading all that
But you do think sanctions should be utilized in no cases?
I do think opposing genocide justifies the use of force
I do think opposing genocide justifies the use of force
December 12, 2025 at 4:10 PM
But you do think sanctions should be utilized in no cases?
I do think opposing genocide justifies the use of force
I do think opposing genocide justifies the use of force
Though I will say you do appear more rational and reasonable than lululenin
December 12, 2025 at 3:41 PM
Though I will say you do appear more rational and reasonable than lululenin
If you did not mean for your statement to be so blanketing, you can say that. That would be understandable.
December 12, 2025 at 3:40 PM
If you did not mean for your statement to be so blanketing, you can say that. That would be understandable.
It is though. You made a blanket statement about sanctions with no exceptions. I highlighted an example that shows how your statement was false.
December 12, 2025 at 3:40 PM
It is though. You made a blanket statement about sanctions with no exceptions. I highlighted an example that shows how your statement was false.
And if you tell them they have to quarantine they will decry it as tyranny while cheering on the locking up of immigrants in Guantanamo bay to be shipped to death camps in El salvador and Africa.
December 12, 2025 at 3:39 PM
And if you tell them they have to quarantine they will decry it as tyranny while cheering on the locking up of immigrants in Guantanamo bay to be shipped to death camps in El salvador and Africa.