Please don't argue in the flamewar style on HN. We don't want this site to go down in flames. This gets more important, not less, when the world is on fire.

"Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Yea what is the solution when the west throws sanctions but keeps buying Russian oil and gas? Basically bankrolling this invasion.

Like others have said the solution to this crisis might be “drill baby drill” but that’s unfortunately more toxic or an argument than a country getting bombed to the ground. I guess we can stomach the war but not domestic oil and gas production.

I would definitely support stop buying Russian gas as well. I encourage folks to call their reps as I will. (for those in the states)

I don't mind wearing extra t-shirts indoors, or even a jacket or winter cap. (Seriously, in case anyone wonders)

Good for the environment and world safety

The solution is obviously to punish those causing the harm directly, no?

Obviously much easier said than done. Also not sure why you’re mentioning America here - the article is about Norway

> The solution is obviously to punish those causing the harm directly, no?

You mean direct war against Russia? That would certainly also cause collateral damage on innocents.

Fighting the people directly who are holding the guns will do less “collateral damage” than uniform discrimination of all Russians.

I’m not a fan of violence in general, though. Ideally they’d find another way without killing anyone.

> Fighting the people directly who are holding the guns will do less “collateral damage” than uniform discrimination of all Russians.

Nato forces directly attacking Russian military in Ukraine would be the start of a third world war. The collateral damage of a direct war between Nato and Russia would be unfathomable.

> Fighting the people directly who are holding the guns will do less “collateral damage” than uniform discrimination of all Russians.

Nuclear war between NATO and Russia would cause less collateral damage than Russian people not getting to play chess tournaments for an indefinite period of time?

I disagree.

What is the principle you're applying which results in punishing uninvolved, opposed people?