> They have to pour money into the region to keep control of it due to people in the region being unhappy, out of work, etc.

From what I've heard Russia is doing exactly that. And the people there seem happy, atleast according to a reddit AMA by a Crimean.

> And the people there seem happy, atleast according to a reddit AMA by a Crimean.

It's amazing to me that anyone would put any faith in a random AMA in an occupied territory.

For an alternative random redditor, this guy had to get divorced, all his friends left, and he's leaving for Kiev: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/9p6d9r/serious_r...

Save for the indigenous Crimean Tatars and some Ukrainians who are, although a minority, being harassed like there's no tomorrow.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/11/14/crimea-persecution-crime...

Well, seeing we already talk anecdotes… I was there myself this year in May on a week-long hike and a few days at the sea, and they're doing alright. The year of 2014 was quite rough (especially with the electricity shortages when Ukraine cut off their supplies), but now, with the two new power plants, they're energetically self-sustainable. After the bridge link to the mainland opened last year and with a newly-rebuilt airport in Simferopol, they also no longer feel so isolated.

> The idea is to try and make it unsustainable for Russia to hold

Why, then, blocking does not apply to all Russia, but to its victims only?

That’s horrible. I was unaware of this until now and I’m deeply upset by it. :(

What do you then suggest? Going to war about it, or just letting territorial annexations continue?

If you have no better alternative, what reason is there to be upset?