There are two fundamental logical problems with any argument in favor of using sanctions as a primary method of attempting to reduce Russia's capacity to inflict harm beyond its borders. The first is historical: sanctions have never, at any time or in any place, prevented a belligerent nation from continuing to behave aggressively toward its targets. Sanctions may fractionally reduce some aspects of the aggression, but this is no comfort to the thousands who die and the millions whose homes are turned to rubble by the non-degraded capability.

The second argument is even more simple: if we really want to help Ukraine then why attempt to do so indirectly, ineffectively, and unconvincingly? It is more than clear that NATO, even in its under-resourced state due to thirty years of complacent cost-slashing, could crush Russian forces within a couple of weeks, thus saving thousands of Ukrainian lives and tens of billions of dollars of destruction. The idea that any Russian officer would authorize the launch of nuclear weapons is illusory - no one wants to see Russia turned into radioactive dust no matter how much the sad little ex-KGB colonel might rant and rave.

The reason people focus on sanctions is so we can pretend we're doing something while in reality doing nothing of real value. Even the military aid is always far too little, far, far too late. We should be ashamed of our cowardice and incapacity to act.