Russia should not be sanctioned!

I am sorry, I cannot bold text. No matter, what Pro says will be in brackets. < I read your counter argument and saw something that made me tear out every hair on my head: Churchill wanted more action against Hitler... WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE RUSSIAN ANNEXATION OF CRIMEA. THIS IS NOT A DEBATE ON THE HOLOCAUST OR ANY OTHER ELEMENT OF WORLD WAR 2. THERE WILL BE NO MORE TALK OF THIS SUBJECT IN THIS DEBATE. Now that that's out of the way: I would like to start with refuting your argument, I will do the rest later. > I take it that is a concession, no? Exactly. I am asking for more action against Putin, for actions he did. < Why are we even bringing this up? It's Russia's annexation of Crimea that's the subject matter here, not Russia's military arsenal. Also, the budapest memorandum on security assurances does not apply to the Crimea crisis because separation of Crimea was driven by an internal political and social-economic crisis (this statement was provided from the link YOU provided. > Ah. And Putin did not support the rebels and proclaim Crimea as his own? < Russia isn't planning on starting world war 3. Crimea voted on a referendum and decided to join Russia. 97% of the Crimean population is russian... > Yes, and Austrians in the 1930's were also German. Hitler was justified in uniting Austria and the Sudetenland to Germany. Germans were treated badly in Europe. Hitler was trying to protect his people. Get the point I'm trying to make? < You're stating that we should punish an already broken country for an act that would in all other cases be considered tolerable? Let's look at a highly-talked-about subject-ISRAEL. Israel did precisely what Russia is doing in Palestine, only they did it by force and against the will of the population (much more like the dritten reich). If we do choose to sanction Russia, we should do the same to Israel. > Ah, but this is off task. However, there was some shabby work done when Israel was founded. The Middle East is Hell on Earth, eh? Oh, and Russia isn't taking Crimea peacefully. Sending troops across the border isn't peace. < Again, please don't compare this to the acts of the third reich, it's ludicrous. Also, you should probably go back to school and learn more about world war 2. America didn't join the war until 1941, before that they fully cooperated with the third reich. They only joined the war after the bombing of pearl harbour and after they were substantially gifted by the allies. America's factories continued working for the first three years of the war. Russia is not breaking internation law. The annexation of Crimea was fully legal and ethical. If most of the population wishes... > How did America work with Nazi Germany? < Unless that nation provides 10% of your GDP... Germany (and the rest of the EU) would be plunged into deficit if this came to pass... > If Russia actually does this, they would collapse. They won't just cut ties if they have Russia's future in mind. There will be rattled sabers, that's it. < I already addressed how incredibly idiotic this comment is...my point was that only America supports the sanctions against Russia, don't bring good ol' Winston into this and please stop comparing Putin to Hitler... > Oh I see. Well, that was aggressive. < Russia's actions cannot be compared to the actions of nazi germany. > No kidding. However, the preluding events to World War 2 can. < by international law, belongs to Russia. > No. Look back on that link I gave you. < So really we'll be punishing Russia for Putin's actions. As I said a while ago, do you think that economical sanctions would have stopped nazi germany? A country that was, from 1918, bankrupt and forbidden from having any type of arsenal? There are precisely 4% of ukranians living on crimea, 1% of which voted to join Russia...Let them stay there or let them leave, it's their choice. In addition to your whole christmas gift comparison (I'm jewish for the record), Imagine if it turned out that you accidentaly put your one of your favourite toys in there and a little tiny piece for the receiver, what would you do? Russia didn't break any agreement, the Budapest memorandum does not apply in this situation. Crimea was always an object of doubt. The Budapest Memorandum is not a formal treaty, but rather, a diplomatic document under which signatories made promises to each other as part of the denuclearization of former Soviet republics after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Under the memorandum, Ukraine promised to remove all Soviet-era nuclear weapons from its territory. In return, Russia essentially consecrated the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine as an independent state, which Russia did not break, they simply peacefully took an area that wished to join them. It is an unofficial treaty and has no means of enforcement. > If you were asked to leave your home, would you be happy? But it's too late bringing this up. The vote wasn't done by the UN. It's invalid. I'm afraid the rest of Pro's round is ranting and not of much use. Pro has not brung legit sources, nor did his arguments have base and he has insulted me multiple times. I suggest a Con vote.