Its not clear that the sanctions have anything to do with the moral considerations, as opposed to the domestic and geo-political considerations, which actually dominate the decision making process. Sanctions on Russia after Ukraine had no more to do with the moral significance of their invasion than the absence of French/German sanctions on the UK/US after the invasion of Iraq. We only sanction bad behaviour when either geopolitics or domestic politics makes it convenient to do so.

> We only sanction bad behaviour when either geopolitics or domestic politics makes it convenient to do so

I'd say when both make it convenient to do so, or one makes it an overwhelming necessity.

I hate to be pulling this thread into politics on HN, but you mentioned sanctions so I believe you speak about political sanctions.

All 19 hijackers of 911 attacks were Saudis. We have sanctioned many countries and murdered 100,000 innocent children and civils in last Iraq war that most americans still don’t know the reason we invaded, yet Suadis remain off the radar. Now the greencard holder got in altercation at the embassy and ended up treated with bonesaw, meanwhile POTUS tells we invested 1B in their contracts so we have to be careful what we say. On the top of that he has multiple private businesses at the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars at stake with Saudis. Tell me again about some sanctions against them, please?