Thanks for the charitative reading of my post, I appreciate that you took the time and we're having a discussion and not a dunk contest.

I generally agree with mostly everything you're saying in your comment, except for a few things like non-proliferation treaties for nuclear weapons, and sanctions not starving Russians.

On the first hand, I simply don't think it's fair that the "international rule-based order" that allows the genocide of Palestinians gets to decide who has the right to nuclear weapons and who doesn't. Historically, it's one of the best assurances against western invasion, and for example Iran clearly regrets now not pursuing nuclear weapons, as regardless of whether it does or not, it has been treated as though it does (we've been seeing news headlines of Iran being a year away from nuclear weapons for 30 years). I do not like nuclear weapons, but I can't blame a country whose history with the US is that of invasion and bombing, for wanting to ensure its own retaliation capabilities.

On the other hand you're right that the sanctions in Russia aren't having the impact that they have on, say, Venezuela or Cuba, if only simply because of the dynamics of economic development and resource availability. That said, I just wanna make it a point that the sanctions include the medical and pharmaceutical sector, and the Russian economy, being capitalist, relied on import of such medical goods for treatment of certain conditions. Applying sanctions to the medical and pharmaceutical industry also amounts to murdering people, although ofc not on the same scale as the sanctions to NK or Cuba.