The crimea problem
From the perspective of the President I would think of things like this:
Keeping Russia out of the G-8 was a smart move on our part. Also finding a way to limit Russia's ability to sell their resources on the open market would also hit Russia economically. Of course a wounded bear is not so easily contained and there is a fine line between showing international condemnation and making that bear even more angry and hostile. Remember a defeated Germany after WW1, instead of being cowed by sanctions and world derision they turned to the Nazis and so we ended up with the horror that was WW2. A wounded and angry Russian bear could turn us back into the days of the Cold War. Russia is in a highly vulnerable state, economically and internationally. We do not want to make the same mistake with Russia that we made with post WW1 Germany.
Unless we as a nation are willing to go to war over Crimea (we need to ask ourselves, and answer honestly, is this incident worth the lives of our people before we decided military action is needed) then the only alternative is economic sanctions and keeping Russia out of organizations like the G-8. Of course the reality is that the entire first world has to be in line in order for there to be any real effect upon Russia. However, there are too many financial and economic ties to Russia for any one nation to truly do anything about Russia's aggression. Businesses worldwide would have to be willing to take a huge financial hit if they boycotted Russia and that is not something that anyone is going to make happen anytime soon. As president I must ask myself what is the tipping point? Considering that...