4 ms·

> Does he really believe it or is he just cynical Neither, IMO. From observing him over the years, he knows what's good for him, and he knows how to get a good

> Does he really believe it or is he just cynical Neither, IMO. From observing him over the years, he knows what's good for him, and he knows how to get a good vibe going with others at the same time. The vibe can make anything true or false and is not known for being concerned with moral true/false questions, which get into subjective (qualitative) ethics. (You can argue that those same ethics prevent reasonably helpful business from being done in many cases, as distasteful as it sounds.) I'd add that he has a good nose for opportunity and a higher than average threshold for risk. This is your typical "fixer" type.

mc32 7y ago
It’s probably like being an ambassador from a country with lots of controversy around human rights and so on and they get interviewed when something big hits the news. It’s not like they don’t know what happens but it’s in their and their countries’ interest to see things differently.
- hangphyr 7y ago
  Probably this. No atrocities committed by any government were done because the government viewed itself as 'evil' so it must do evil things, the perpetrators always view their crimes as justified for some form of greater good. If one believes a single lie is just a single stepping stone on the path to some grand utopia, or if that lie would prevent some chaos (social disorder, rebellion, etc), some will have no problems telling that lie as many times as they need to.
- 9nGQluzmnq3M 7y ago
  An ambassador is a citizen of their country and is subject to getting recalled and being sent to reform-through-labor camp to forage corn kernels from frozen pig shit if they don't toe the line. This guy, on the hand, has voluntarily chosen to be an apologist and enabler for one of the most oppressive regimes on the planet.
  - Ididntdothis 7y ago
    “one of the most oppressive regimes on the planet.“ Does North Korea have any competition for this title? I thought they were number one on that list.
    - 9nGQluzmnq3M 7y ago
      Eritrea is right up there as well, but they don't have nukes, so nobody cares. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Eritrea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Eritrea
      - jacobush 7y ago
        On the other hand, should the stars align so that anyone cares, Eritrea is open to foreign intervention. Libya cancelled its nuclear program in the early 21st century and welcomed UN inspections. Then an international alliance force removed Gaddafi from power and he was killed. I am sure would-be-dictators all over the world are taking note - if you have nukes, you don't face invasion.
        hackerman123469 7y ago
        Unless you have "nukes"
        mc32 7y ago
        Although he was a bad guy, doublecrossing him was a terrible choice and we’re feeling the consequences of that hubris. That said what keeps the west from invading NKorea aren’t the nukes. It’s the katyusha and other conventional armament that would rain down on Seoul a few Kms across the border.
        jacobush 7y ago
        I actually believe the nukes are a great deterrent for common people until they are used. Then people will figure out that NKs tiny nukes are toys

mc32 7y ago

It’s probably like being an ambassador from a country with lots of controversy around human rights and so on and they get interviewed when something big hits the news. It’s not like they don’t know what happens but it’s in their and their countries’ interest to see things differently.

hangphyr 7y ago
Probably this. No atrocities committed by any government were done because the government viewed itself as 'evil' so it must do evil things, the perpetrators always view their crimes as justified for some form of greater good. If one believes a single lie is just a single stepping stone on the path to some grand utopia, or if that lie would prevent some chaos (social disorder, rebellion, etc), some will have no problems telling that lie as many times as they need to.
9nGQluzmnq3M 7y ago
An ambassador is a citizen of their country and is subject to getting recalled and being sent to reform-through-labor camp to forage corn kernels from frozen pig shit if they don't toe the line. This guy, on the hand, has voluntarily chosen to be an apologist and enabler for one of the most oppressive regimes on the planet.
- Ididntdothis 7y ago
  “one of the most oppressive regimes on the planet.“ Does North Korea have any competition for this title? I thought they were number one on that list.
  - 9nGQluzmnq3M 7y ago
    Eritrea is right up there as well, but they don't have nukes, so nobody cares. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Eritrea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Eritrea
    - jacobush 7y ago
      On the other hand, should the stars align so that anyone cares, Eritrea is open to foreign intervention. Libya cancelled its nuclear program in the early 21st century and welcomed UN inspections. Then an international alliance force removed Gaddafi from power and he was killed. I am sure would-be-dictators all over the world are taking note - if you have nukes, you don't face invasion.
      - hackerman123469 7y ago
        Unless you have "nukes"
      - mc32 7y ago
        Although he was a bad guy, doublecrossing him was a terrible choice and we’re feeling the consequences of that hubris. That said what keeps the west from invading NKorea aren’t the nukes. It’s the katyusha and other conventional armament that would rain down on Seoul a few Kms across the border.
        jacobush 7y ago
        I actually believe the nukes are a great deterrent for common people until they are used. Then people will figure out that NKs tiny nukes are toys