Sure. Where are you getting that these are a critical source of FX?
> Gas is a laughable non-issue
To FX? Seriously?
> have you ever read about the sanctions on Rhodesia & south Africa?
Yes. Zimbabwe is still sanctioned. South Africa had preëxisting power-sharing negotiations.
> Even China won't sell them any modern airframes. That should tell you something
...that Beijing isn't drunk? Why do you think Washington got pissed off when Turkey bought Russian air defences and let them paint our fighter fleet?
> have evidence of Western & non-western countries banding together to sanction consistent bad actors
One, during a unipolar world. Someone else commented on this, but in a multipolar world, that is a luxury that simply doesn't emerge. (Even the bilateral world of the Cold War very rarely saw international sanctions regimes effected. That was just a nudge for someone to switch from one system of alliances to another.)
> Do you have any evidence of any country surviving sanctions without severe economic damage?
Yes [2]. In the short term, they cause damage. ("Severe" needs to be quantified, however--when regime change is targeted, it's only successful about a third of the time.) In the long term, they're less effective. Economies go into cockroach mode.
If you want a list, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Belarus, Burma and Venezuela are each heavily sanctioned and pretty much setting themselves up to permanently be so. (Pyongyang and Minsk having practically turned it into an art.)
> I'm simply projecting based on history, which is why I cite precedent
You haven't cited anything! Based on history, Israel is highly unlikely to get sanctioned by anyone, let alone America, and if it were, it's likely to be fine.
Sure. Where are you getting that these are a critical source of FX?
> Gas is a laughable non-issue
To FX? Seriously?
> have you ever read about the sanctions on Rhodesia & south Africa?
Yes. Zimbabwe is still sanctioned. South Africa had preëxisting power-sharing negotiations.
> Even China won't sell them any modern airframes. That should tell you something
...that Beijing isn't drunk? Why do you think Washington got pissed off when Turkey bought Russian air defences and let them paint our fighter fleet?
> have evidence of Western & non-western countries banding together to sanction consistent bad actors
One, during a unipolar world. Someone else commented on this, but in a multipolar world, that is a luxury that simply doesn't emerge. (Even the bilateral world of the Cold War very rarely saw international sanctions regimes effected. That was just a nudge for someone to switch from one system of alliances to another.)
> Do you have any evidence of any country surviving sanctions without severe economic damage?
Yes [2]. In the short term, they cause damage. ("Severe" needs to be quantified, however--when regime change is targeted, it's only successful about a third of the time.) In the long term, they're less effective. Economies go into cockroach mode.
If you want a list, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Belarus, Burma and Venezuela are each heavily sanctioned and pretty much setting themselves up to permanently be so. (Pyongyang and Minsk having practically turned it into an art.)
> I'm simply projecting based on history, which is why I cite precedent
You haven't cited anything! Based on history, Israel is highly unlikely to get sanctioned by anyone, let alone America, and if it were, it's likely to be fine.
[2] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01475...