Certainly nothing to help prevent death and destruction.
The main function of sanctions to cut off the import of technology to Russia will not shut things down immediately, but as things break and Russia can't get replacement parts or manufacture them, their war machine will grind to a halt.
No smart bombs, guided missiles, functioning aviation industry...
At least until they can pivot to China -which may be multiple years by some estimates, and who knows, China may actually value its economic relationship with the US more than it does value the cheap ass natural resources it can grab from Russia...
There's very little chance of Russia preemptively using a nuclear strike on Ukraine as things stand.
Not really relevant to the question i asked, which is how do you STOP a tactical nuclear strike on Ukraine...
If you mass Western troops on Russia's border the risk of nuclear strikes jumps considerably.
That is a valid point, the question becomes moot if we are assuming a strike. But foregoing that, i would still argue that a show of force is the only thing Putin will respond to.
According to the strategic analysis, Russia is only safe if it controls all the land attack vectors, and Putin has been ploughing them up one by one for ~15 years. If this is correct it means two things. Putin does not feel Russia is safe and secure, therefore he fears invasion along these routes. And he will not stop with Ukraine.
Thus if NATO is proven weak (in not taking military actions to support Ukraine - which any collection of NATO members can do without the alliannce's permission - then Putin will be moving on Eastern Europe next (believing NATO is weak). And that actually increases the risk of nuclear war.
So again, speak the language Putin understands, and that will force him to the negotiation table.
Russia has one of the most comprehensive nuclear arsenals ever assembled.
Yeah, about that. Putin will certainly say so, because that is what he believes. But how many of those missiles actually work? How much of the money going to run them has been siphpned off due to corruption? The same applies to every part of the Russian military, and is a factor in their poor performance on the battlefield.
If the nukes were never actual going to be used, then nobody will notice when they aren't kept in working order. Look at the US problems with the same (under funding, parts broken, pizza delivery guys just walking in, doors held open with spanners...) Which we know about because the US has a lot more press freedom. Now magnify the issue at least an order of magnitude in Russia - which has a culture of stealing stuff (mostly Putin stealing stuff from the people).
Putin knows this, and no amount of imperialist sabre rattling will change this fundamental reality. All we would achieve by pursuing such an action, aside from increasing the risk of nuclear war, is to make ourselves look foolish and weak. This will not help negotiations
What Putin knows is only what his intelligence briefings tell him. And they do infact lie to make Russia look bad. He believed Russia was strong militarily (Ukraine has demonstrated that was wrong) and that the West was weak and easily divided (he was wrong about the latter part, likely still see this as weakness).
I suppose the alternative is to hit Russia fuel and ammo dumps (in Russia) with cruise missiles, blow up train junctions on the Ukrainian borders, directly affect his ability to wage war in Ukraine as a show of strength.
Much more direct, and risky imo, but still directly helps the war effort and doesn't require a bluff.
So far Putin has relied on the West backing down every time he escalates (ég the US offer to evac Zelensky from Kyiv). Because they can't risk a nuclear war. So take his exact strategy, escalate knowing Russia can't afford a nuclear war. Strike first and break his ability to project military force (taking out rail lines and fuel depots). Show him that you will not be pushed around.
Then see if he wants to negotiate.