6 ms·

The cynicism of 'either nuke or vassal' is completely wrong, equally the moral relativism of support for 'sovereign states' such as North Korea and the Islamic

The cynicism of 'either nuke or vassal' is completely wrong, equally the moral relativism of support for 'sovereign states' such as North Korea and the Islamic Theocracy of Iran is also wrong. Iran wants nukes to further destabilising and terrorise the ME. NK wants nukes to keep it's nation sized prison under total control. South Korea and Japan, both glaring examples that contradict your entire statement - do not have nukes and they are 'Good Places' not 'Vassals' of anyone.

throwaways85989 5y ago
Iran is the UK of the middle east. They want their empire back and cant have it, because alot of the other big empires cant have little pet-empires. It makes the game-board look messy. Ideology or religion does not factor into it on all related sides.
DocTomoe 5y ago
> do not have nukes and they are 'Good Places' not 'Vassals' of anyone. Tell that to the Okinawans.
- jollybean 5y ago
  Okinawans are Japanese, who overall absolutely want the support of the US. Thankfully, the deeply racist and xenophobic Okinawans who don't want white men around their daughters and who lack the broader context of understanding how important their overal security is ... don't get entirely to make the call entirely themselves. Or rather, if there were 'sovereign and independent' of both Japan and the US, they'd have to instantly reverse course and beg for the Americans and Japanese to come back in some form, lest they be completely controlled by China.
  - zardo 5y ago
    No US servicemen sexually assaulted women in Okinawa, and if they did, they were brought to justice. Don't even waste your time looking it up because there is nothing to see here.
_8j50 5y ago
South Korea and Japan are prime examples of vassal states. They have autonomy until their autonomy is a problem. They literally depend on a super-power's military on their land to keep them safe. If a country's economic and security wellbeing depends on another country then all policy making is subject to that other country's influence making it an indirect vassal state -- what I think is best called a neo-colony where domestic business is left alone but anything affecting geopolitics and foreign policy is far from an autonomous decision. > Iran wants nukes to further destabilising and terrorise the ME. NK wants nukes to keep it's nation sized prison under total control. Yes, and I don't support either nation one bit but they are a sovreign state and the very fact that you and many others in the west show support for overturning their government means your democratically elected governments are using their power and influence to turn them into neo-colonies by dictating their domestic activity as if they answer to you. We can hate bad governments all we want but if a nation is truly sovreign our opinions as outsiders shouldn't mean anything. A government's prime directive is to preserve sovreignity over its land and people which is why it can send soldiers to death to preserve these things. What is lacking from your disapproval of NK and Iran is an acknowledgement that they do not answer to you , your government or any other nation. You speak of Iran destabilizing ME fully knowing what the west has been doing there for over a century. At least Iran has security and religious ties to its neighbors. A sovreign nation has self-determination, they get to have horrible leaders and dictators, famines and civil wars as they do great leasers, prosperity and peace all of which is determined by the people whether through elections or violence. "At least we don't export revolutions" is the primary selling point of the CCP in africa and other places which is working wildly. I applauded NK and Iran because they preserved their sovreignity but I do hope their own people cause a change in regime but ultimately it is their country. The US has no business in NK vs SK conflict so I can't support that, but Iran is helping hezbollah which is a security risk for US and in that respect alone I support any type of aggression against them.
- jollybean 5y ago
  It's a bit glib to suggest that Japan and Korea are 'vassal states' because they partner with other nations towards mutual self defence. Belarus is a vassal of Russia, Japan is not a vassal of the US or NATO. It's also wrong to suggest that 'nations influence one another' as some kind of nefarious thing. Big countries with more people are naturally going to have more economic power, that's a universal issue, it doesn't mean that sovereignty is ceded. "you and many others in the west show support for overturning their government means your democratically elected governments are using their power and influence to turn them into neo-colonies by dictating their domestic activity as if they answer to you" This kind of rhetoric is better off on Reddit. You have no idea what I think, or what I support and none of that can be inferred from my comment. "What is lacking from your disapproval of NK and Iran is an acknowledgement that they do not answer to you" Piling on bad assumptions of others intentions don't make your case. Or any case. Nowhere in my rhetoric did I suggest these states need to be 'answerable to anyone' let alone 'me'. "I applauded NK and Iran because they preserved their sovreignity" ??? 'North Korea' is not 'sovereign'. 'Kim Jong-Un' is. Only a wayward moral compass caught up in technical pedantry would 'applaud' the ruthless and totalitarian subjugation of millions of people to something worse than slavery as some kind of positive thing 'because sovereignty'. 'Sovereignty' should be a distant concern at that point. Who gives a crap about 'sovereignty' in the context of 'Kim Jong-Un'? It's almost irreleavnt. "The US has no business in NK vs SK conflict so I can't support that" Who cares what you support? What do you think the people of S. Korea want? The intervention in S. Korea was a UN mission - a broadly plural effort to help defend South Koreans from a fairly totalitarian North. South Koreans are very glad to have the support of Americans (and others by the way, who fought in the 1950's and would come to their aid again). You're ranting on about 'sovereignty' but implying that the US has 'no business in S. Korea' even at the behest of South Koreans? 'Because you don't support it'? Just step back from the keyboard for a few years. Active young minds start learning about the world and various so-called injustices have a difficult time putting them into context. There is a such thing a 'good' and 'moral'.
zardo 5y ago
> Iran wants nukes to further destabilising and terrorise the ME. NK wants nukes to keep it's nation sized prison under total control. Sounds like a cartoon villain.
- jollybean 5y ago
  They are cartoon villains. Definitely. Read their public statements. They write their own scripts.

throwaways85989 5y ago

Iran is the UK of the middle east. They want their empire back and cant have it, because alot of the other big empires cant have little pet-empires. It makes the game-board look messy. Ideology or religion does not factor into it on all related sides.

DocTomoe 5y ago

> do not have nukes and they are 'Good Places' not 'Vassals' of anyone. Tell that to the Okinawans.

jollybean 5y ago
Okinawans are Japanese, who overall absolutely want the support of the US. Thankfully, the deeply racist and xenophobic Okinawans who don't want white men around their daughters and who lack the broader context of understanding how important their overal security is ... don't get entirely to make the call entirely themselves. Or rather, if there were 'sovereign and independent' of both Japan and the US, they'd have to instantly reverse course and beg for the Americans and Japanese to come back in some form, lest they be completely controlled by China.
- zardo 5y ago
  No US servicemen sexually assaulted women in Okinawa, and if they did, they were brought to justice. Don't even waste your time looking it up because there is nothing to see here.

_8j50 5y ago

South Korea and Japan are prime examples of vassal states. They have autonomy until their autonomy is a problem. They literally depend on a super-power's military on their land to keep them safe. If a country's economic and security wellbeing depends on another country then all policy making is subject to that other country's influence making it an indirect vassal state -- what I think is best called a neo-colony where domestic business is left alone but anything affecting geopolitics and foreign policy is far from an autonomous decision. > Iran wants nukes to further destabilising and terrorise the ME. NK wants nukes to keep it's nation sized prison under total control. Yes, and I don't support either nation one bit but they are a sovreign state and the very fact that you and many others in the west show support for overturning their government means your democratically elected governments are using their power and influence to turn them into neo-colonies by dictating their domestic activity as if they answer to you. We can hate bad governments all we want but if a nation is truly sovreign our opinions as outsiders shouldn't mean anything. A government's prime directive is to preserve sovreignity over its land and people which is why it can send soldiers to death to preserve these things. What is lacking from your disapproval of NK and Iran is an acknowledgement that they do not answer to you , your government or any other nation. You speak of Iran destabilizing ME fully knowing what the west has been doing there for over a century. At least Iran has security and religious ties to its neighbors. A sovreign nation has self-determination, they get to have horrible leaders and dictators, famines and civil wars as they do great leasers, prosperity and peace all of which is determined by the people whether through elections or violence. "At least we don't export revolutions" is the primary selling point of the CCP in africa and other places which is working wildly. I applauded NK and Iran because they preserved their sovreignity but I do hope their own people cause a change in regime but ultimately it is their country. The US has no business in NK vs SK conflict so I can't support that, but Iran is helping hezbollah which is a security risk for US and in that respect alone I support any type of aggression against them.

jollybean 5y ago
It's a bit glib to suggest that Japan and Korea are 'vassal states' because they partner with other nations towards mutual self defence. Belarus is a vassal of Russia, Japan is not a vassal of the US or NATO. It's also wrong to suggest that 'nations influence one another' as some kind of nefarious thing. Big countries with more people are naturally going to have more economic power, that's a universal issue, it doesn't mean that sovereignty is ceded. "you and many others in the west show support for overturning their government means your democratically elected governments are using their power and influence to turn them into neo-colonies by dictating their domestic activity as if they answer to you" This kind of rhetoric is better off on Reddit. You have no idea what I think, or what I support and none of that can be inferred from my comment. "What is lacking from your disapproval of NK and Iran is an acknowledgement that they do not answer to you" Piling on bad assumptions of others intentions don't make your case. Or any case. Nowhere in my rhetoric did I suggest these states need to be 'answerable to anyone' let alone 'me'. "I applauded NK and Iran because they preserved their sovreignity" ??? 'North Korea' is not 'sovereign'. 'Kim Jong-Un' is. Only a wayward moral compass caught up in technical pedantry would 'applaud' the ruthless and totalitarian subjugation of millions of people to something worse than slavery as some kind of positive thing 'because sovereignty'. 'Sovereignty' should be a distant concern at that point. Who gives a crap about 'sovereignty' in the context of 'Kim Jong-Un'? It's almost irreleavnt. "The US has no business in NK vs SK conflict so I can't support that" Who cares what you support? What do you think the people of S. Korea want? The intervention in S. Korea was a UN mission - a broadly plural effort to help defend South Koreans from a fairly totalitarian North. South Koreans are very glad to have the support of Americans (and others by the way, who fought in the 1950's and would come to their aid again). You're ranting on about 'sovereignty' but implying that the US has 'no business in S. Korea' even at the behest of South Koreans? 'Because you don't support it'? Just step back from the keyboard for a few years. Active young minds start learning about the world and various so-called injustices have a difficult time putting them into context. There is a such thing a 'good' and 'moral'.

zardo 5y ago

> Iran wants nukes to further destabilising and terrorise the ME. NK wants nukes to keep it's nation sized prison under total control. Sounds like a cartoon villain.

jollybean 5y ago
They are cartoon villains. Definitely. Read their public statements. They write their own scripts.