Talk:Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act

Deleted false information about March 15th Sanctions

A recent edit argues that the most recent sanctions against Russian govt was fulfillment of CAATSA. This is not true. While both sanctions were stated publiclalu to be a response to 2016 Russian interference efforts, these sanctions discipline different Russian individuals and business. Deleted this edit, because it was unreliable. ⁂ (talk) 19:32, 15 March 2018 (UTC) ⁂ (talk) 19:32, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

So why did CNN say it was from the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act? I have a source backing it up. https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/15/politics/russia-sanctions-trump-yevgeniy-viktorovich-prigozhin/index.html AHC300 (talk) 22:53, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Let's talk takheles. The Act is to drum up more business for the American weapons industry and through that achieve Full Spectrum Dominance, or Primacy, or whatever you want to call it. Indonesians were happy with their Sukhoi planes. Australian influence was not benign in this instance. It's about a weapons monopoly, a power monopoly, and economic monopoly (think international corporations like Coca Cola, microsoft, amazon). We are all to buy from American corporations, the goal looks like. Ally H-G 2001:8003:A02F:F400:386F:7E1:97BB:E269 (talk) 05:58, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

"Russia Sanctions" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Russia Sanctions and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 7#Russia Sanctions until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

The same goes for Russia sanctions. Sdrqaz (talk) 22:37, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Proposing a major cleanup

This article is poorly organized and harder to read than it needs to be. Presumably as a result of the developing nature of the content, information is repeated and disjointed. I propose to reorganize the provisions, implementation and reaction by target country, plus 3rd parties directly impacted such as India and Turkey. Domestic moved below, then reaction EU reaction and other criticism/commentary should go into a separate section. About 25% reduction in total length should be feasible. Any thoughts/objections? Keitsist (talk) 21:43, 29 December 2022 (UTC)