> And get arrested and charged with "discrediting the armed forces", right.
If you don't register that as a problem but somehow limiting your tourism options is a concern, that is already telling regarding what your priorities are.
You keep coming back to the tourism and inconvenience angle, but if you dial back to what the commenter -- who is also taking a significant risk in talking to us, so that you and I might have some hope of finding out how things are viewed by people in the country who are well-informed and definitely not brainwashed, outside of what the media echo chamber tells us to think -- actually said, that very clearly wasn't their point at all. And the point that they did make was perfectly valid.
Go back and read more carefully please.
(And also: they very obviously do register the problem you're referring to, and there's no way to read their statement otherwise).
> I do register that as a problem but it's the same kind of problem as bad weather. Nothing can be done about it.
Yes there is. From Europe's side, one of the most basic things that can be done is stop taking in tourists from a nation hell-bent on starting wars of invasion with neighboring countries and threaten the whole world with nuclear Armageddon.
Cutting economic ties is also a good strong start.
If those hypothetical tourists don't feel strongly about their own nation conducting genocide or bombing hospitals or blowing up damns then perhaps in the very least they should understand that it's something that can negatively affect them too and perhaps, even for the worst possible reasons such as inconveniencing their travel plans, that should not be something they support.
And yet here we are, arguing that changes in travel plans are unfair while ignoring a full blown existencial war.
> If those hypothetical tourists don't feel strongly about their own nation
We do feel strongly about it but we can't act on these feelings. The government is not taking any feedback.
Again, it's like screaming into the void at something you can't change, like weather. Except in this case, if you scream loudly enough, you will get arrested and charged with "discrediting the Russian armed forces" or "spreading fake information about the use of Russian armed forces". First time it's a fine, subsequent times it's a felony.
> We do feel strongly about it but we can't act on these feelings. The government is not taking any feedback.
That's a problem you need to solve.
Again, it's very telling that this only registers as a concern when the subject of mild inconveniences, such as not benefiting from the privilege of visiting some countries as tourists, is brought up.
It's also very telling that the only argument that's expressed in favour of dropping sanctions against Russia is this puerile expectation that Russian citizens should not be subjected to mild inconveniences. Aren't Ukrainians or Georgians entitled to the same expectations?
I'm open to suggestions about possible solutions to this problem.
And by the way, I'm not talking about myself as a tourist right now. I was saying that Russian people in general being able to easily visit European countries would lessen the Russian official propaganda's grip on the population.
And those sanctions against the civil aviation industry are nothing but straight vandalism.
And get arrested and charged with "discrediting the armed forces", right. Must be nice to write all that from the comfort of your Western home.