3 ms·

With all due respect, that's the point of sanctions. You've brought it up as some sort of gotcha. It's not. They're a means to cripple the war-making ability of

• ipaddr 4y ago
  To say look North Korea is evil they don't feed women and kids misses the fact that this is a policy we did for whatever justifible reason. Kids are not eating and dying because of choices we made.
  • Swenrekcah 4y ago
    Kids are not eating well because NK leadership spends all the country’s money on themselves and the military in order for them to stay in power. If your neighbour beats his children and constantly threatens to shoot your house up, you are not morally obligated to spend money at their restaurant.
    • ipaddr 4y ago
      If you prevent the next door neighbour from bringing in food because you have a fued with them you can't turn around and say look at those kids not eating. It's because you live like kings. They spend money on military not to supress the local population, they do it to protect themselves against you. You are morally responsible for your choices including preventing kids from eating.
      • w7 4y ago
        I don't understand your argument. It seems based on some premise that North Korea is only bad because other nations are "mean" to it. Many authoritarian regimes have historically used food availability as a weapon against their own populations. North Korea clearly is one such regime. There is no private enterprise in North Korea-- I don't know what you think lifting of non-food covering sanctions would do other than further strengthening a rogue state that has no intentions of having anything other than a perpetual slave caste.
        • ipaddr 4y ago
          That doesn't stop trade with Saudi Arabia so it can't be used here.