Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Lollerscooter t1_j5ozlc6 wrote

Neutrality = War profiteering

340

Alphabadg3r t1_j5r3eg9 wrote

I'm unsure so someone correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't medicine one of the things not sanctioned?

70

ernyc3777 t1_j5rcs40 wrote

That would make sense. The people of Russia don’t need Coca Cola or an Audi.

But they can’t go without their diabetes medications or cancer treatment.

49

Temporala t1_j5sgog2 wrote

Probably not, and it's one dumb af thing to sanction.

I fully consider any politician wanting to do that to be pretty much a murderer. Food, water, medicine, basic shelters and such should not be sanctioned, under any circumstances.

13

deepfield67 t1_j5shvgm wrote

If we could only figure out a way to prevent only government officials from getting food, water, and medicine...

6

EnricoPallazzo-- t1_j5ssvwf wrote

While definitely immoral and the last thing you probably would wanna sanction but that’s about it.

The way Russia is targetting civilians and civillian infrastructure, weaponizing food etc; which threatens the survivability of the Ukrainian and poor countries around the world and would be quite similar here, so shipping medicine to Russia is just taking a moral high stance.

Putin is a sympton of a larger problem in Russia so the population is not blameless. Possible suffering among the Russian population is not really a high priority for those in charge there and shouldn’t really be for western leaders either.

3

Antonio_is_better t1_j5sprch wrote

It's nothing economical sanctions don't already do indirectly. Why is it the Wests responsibility to keep Russias fascist population alive?

0

Zandonus t1_j5sy8no wrote

Prisons don't kill people, people kill people.

3

hansobolo t1_j5t826j wrote

The goal of the sanctions is to punish the population. In a democracy civilians are guilty of the crimes of the state.

−1

and_dont_blink t1_j5r5i61 wrote

Eh, medicine isn't under sanctions. I'm not sure what the alternative would be or you're hoping or, and I say that as someone who has hated how Europe half-halfheartedly went into sanctions with all kinds of exemptions most weren't aware of. The west aren't ogres, and we aren't targeting civilians.

There are still children in Russia that are undergoing surgeries and need medications, the fact that Russia is bombing hospitals doesn't mean we should target them as well. Sanctions should be even harder, we had governments saying they wouldn't pay in rubles publicly while telling their banks to go ahead privately -- but in this case the Swiss simply exported pharma more than they did other things, so they're fairing better than others that exported rifle scopes.

43

Fallacy_Spotted t1_j5r4z86 wrote

As a person with morals, fuck Russia and glory to Ukraine. Also as a person with morals, sell Russia more Cancer medication if it can help innocent people with Cancer because fuck Cancer. These aren't conflicting positions.

32

Fox_Kurama t1_j5ry3jn wrote

Indeed. And lets be real. ANY of those medicines being sold are not actually making it to conscripts anyway. It is going to those who actually pay for the medicines they need because they are well enough off or scrounging what they can to get medicine.

The enlisted/conscripted are often having to buy clothing, armor, and even weapons. They have no budget for meds other than a nice pain-killing vodka.

7

oroechimaru t1_j5r6s3o wrote

Not really up until today they were blocking other countries from sending Swiss made ammo

Medicine is not sanctioned by the west

12

baryluk t1_j5t7ilw wrote

So you are trying to tell me US, Germany, France, Poland, Czech, Finland , none of them sell medicine to Russia?

2

Nonsense_Producer t1_j5tv7c6 wrote

Age old Swiss tradition. Trading with Nazis, no problem. Trading with fascist Russia, no problem.

1

JimTheSaint t1_j5w5jpm wrote

Medicine is not in any of the sanctions packages.

1

amircruz t1_j5sfmcx wrote

Just like how this country became a stronghold for bankers and money laundry during and after WW2… these dudes. Anyways, greets

0

1nfinitydividedby0 t1_j5q6b0o wrote

They sell medicine, how is it war profiteering?

−19

slow_connection t1_j5qd5gi wrote

It's profiteering if the swiss are selling medicine to Russia at a markup under the guise of "neutrality" when others have sanctioned Russia and refuse to sell to them.

I don't know if that's the case right now because I'll admit that I didn't read the article, but I do know what profiteering is

15

oroechimaru t1_j5r6wgi wrote

Selling medicine isnt sanctioned

Swiss blocking ammo from other countries for a year was a sin

8

[deleted] t1_j5qg1f8 wrote

[deleted]

−19

smigglesworth t1_j5r17sf wrote

The Swiss take it to a new level. Swimming in nazi gold.

1

Cenom t1_j5s515e wrote

Sweden and Norway responsible for 85% of the belic raw material used by Germany but Swiss are the evil for taking their gold

2

smigglesworth t1_j5tdemn wrote

The thing is neither Sweden nor Norway constantly advertise their supposed neutrality conflict after conflict. It’s not neutral though, it’s greed.

Do you have a few more whataboutisms to add?

1

Cenom t1_j5tdxry wrote

Dude, Swiss bought gold, but you can't do shit with money if Norway and Sweden didn't sell iron to Germany. Without iron there would be no war, no guns, no tanks. It's not whataboutism in this case, we are talking about the same thing.

1

smigglesworth t1_j5tjekf wrote

So we agree that the Swiss are hypocrites with their claims to neutrality and in fact are greedy? Didn’t need the detour to other countries to confirm that.

1

[deleted] t1_j5tpg83 wrote

[deleted]

0

smigglesworth t1_j5tw6iq wrote

I think India has shown they are patently not neutral in the Ukraine - Russia conflict. They support Russia. Similar to how the Swiss supported the Nazis.

There is nuance, sure, but the basic facts are clear.

1

tonytony87 t1_j5pc58q wrote

Then what is your vision for neutrality? To not sell anything at all to anyone? Or two sell to everyone? Because picking a side and not selling to someone seems like the opposite of neutrality

−45

shooowan t1_j5phnr7 wrote

Not to speak for OP, but I'm pretty sure they're not saying that there's a "better" or "more correct" kind of neutrality. They're implying that remaining neutral in situations like this has moral implications

57

tonytony87 t1_j5rt39a wrote

That I can get behind, and that is a statement that makes much more sense. If a country says we have a moral obligation to not do business with you and we will suffer the consequences then yea I’m all for that.

But if a country says we will remain neutral and no matter the moral conundrums our people and our business remain #1 priority we can’t afford to not do business then I can also respect that too ya know?

I don’t think it’s 100% fair to shit in them one way or the other. It’s a damned if they do, damned if they don’t. And I think people gotta also take that into account

1

Ayylmaothoughyaknow t1_j5r3t7w wrote

“If you invade we won’t deal with you during it.” Pretty neutral. Doesn’t take a side or support the opposition it only changes something for the instigators through lack of action rather than action itself.

1

tonytony87 t1_j5rledf wrote

I like It, agree it could be a good work around but I do see a downside, now their industry is tied to another country’s politics, which could be extremely unstable no?

Because now they lose out on money and business just because two countries are at war, which seems unfair to the neutral country no?

2

ThrowAwayAway755 t1_j5slwe8 wrote

I mean, I hope you’re not talking within the context of the article. Medicine should never be denied, to any country

1

Ayylmaothoughyaknow t1_j6fho3u wrote

We can agree to disagree. If the country is Russia right now I don’t see moral qualms with limiting drug exports aside from specifics which are not produced in Russia at all or with a sufficient alternative. The west right now is trying to, rightfully, destroy Russian industry and economy. That directly hurts individual Russians. So does limiting medicine imports. Just because you don’t have to acknowledge that poorer areas of Russia are seeing malnutrition and worse life conditions right now from the other sanctions doesn’t mean it’s not what we are causing (tbh Putin causing it all through unjustified aggression and slaughter). That’s because individual Russian make up the Russian economy and therefore the war machine. It’s the whole point of sanctions. Did y’all really think this wasn’t hurting Russian citizens and causing some to skip or miss meals?

0

ThrowAwayAway755 t1_j6fn5el wrote

Disrupting medical care (even to enemy soldiers, let alone) to civilians is a war crime. That’s not up for debate.

War crimes committed by one side do not necessarily justify war crimes by the other.

Hurting civilians economically is not morally equivalent to withholding medications. It’s just not.

I understand why you feel the way that you do, but your judgement is being clouded by your emotions.

1