4 ms·

Foreign nationals violating sanctions are not breaking US law since they are not in the US and all of that due process stuff is not something the US is obliged

by _8j50 3y ago

Foreign nationals violating sanctions are not breaking US law since they are not in the US and all of that due process stuff is not something the US is obliged to honor. Matter of fact, Guantanamo lawfully exists and they treat foreign nationals a lot worse there. If it wasn't for diplomacy, they would be assasinated and the US public wouldn't even pause out of concern.

2Gkashmiri 3y ago
imagine iran arresting americans under "plausible deniability" and holding them hostage and torturing them and the world would just carry on. Oh wait, there would be mass protests about "regime change" and "human rights violations", so on and so forth.
- _8j50 3y ago
  No, there would be war and special ops assasinating people if those americans did not go to iran willingly to begin with. I never understand why this moral indignation by some people about US foreign policy never accounts for military might and it's role in deciding these things. Every country uses it's might to protect its people and interests, that isn't a moral thing, it's a survival thing. Saudi kidnapped, tortured and murdered an american journalist and they got away with it because that was in the interest of the US. Nation states are not instruments of justice, they exist because they are strong enough. All those people in Guantanamo did not belong to a country who could keep them safe and secure.
  - nevermindiguess 3y ago
    Exactly my point about Ukraine. I don’t understand the moral indignation with the attack. Just like you are saying. Russia is big enough to get away with it and so does it. Agree?
paulryanrogers 3y ago
Tit for tat still applies and (IMO) is the most likely the reason the US stopped assassinating people.
- _8j50 3y ago
  I agree but that only applies when the other side is capable of a response. If the US assasinates people in Guatemala or Bangladesh, I doubt there is any concern for their people to retaliate in kind.

by _8j50 3y ago

2Gkashmiri 3y ago

imagine iran arresting americans under "plausible deniability" and holding them hostage and torturing them and the world would just carry on. Oh wait, there would be mass protests about "regime change" and "human rights violations", so on and so forth.

_8j50 3y ago
No, there would be war and special ops assasinating people if those americans did not go to iran willingly to begin with. I never understand why this moral indignation by some people about US foreign policy never accounts for military might and it's role in deciding these things. Every country uses it's might to protect its people and interests, that isn't a moral thing, it's a survival thing. Saudi kidnapped, tortured and murdered an american journalist and they got away with it because that was in the interest of the US. Nation states are not instruments of justice, they exist because they are strong enough. All those people in Guantanamo did not belong to a country who could keep them safe and secure.
- nevermindiguess 3y ago
  Exactly my point about Ukraine. I don’t understand the moral indignation with the attack. Just like you are saying. Russia is big enough to get away with it and so does it. Agree?

paulryanrogers 3y ago

Tit for tat still applies and (IMO) is the most likely the reason the US stopped assassinating people.

_8j50 3y ago
I agree but that only applies when the other side is capable of a response. If the US assasinates people in Guatemala or Bangladesh, I doubt there is any concern for their people to retaliate in kind.