4 ms·
The topic is cybercrime and espionage, not nuclear brinksmanship or colonialism. Whatever parallels can be drawn don't seem to be very relevant, so the comment
by charonn0 1y ago
The topic is cybercrime and espionage, not nuclear brinksmanship or colonialism. Whatever parallels can be drawn don't seem to be very relevant, so the comment comes off as an attempt to deflect criticism.
- torben-friis 1y agoMaybe it wasn’t clear, but I think the comment is explaining the importance for superpowers of keeping their immediate surroundings politically aligned - china wants NK on their side for the same reason neither the US or the URSS wanted nukes on their doorstep.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- codpiece 1y agoIt was still a fascinating aside, and it's not like HN stays on topic in a thread. I learned something today.
- corimaith 1y agoI do wonder what's the state of history education today when one only learns a basic history event today, and through a layman's forum post which is surely going to have all the complete perspective as opposed to setting out an explicit agenda.
- skinnymuch 1y agoYou can’t separate colonialism and imperialism from Korea. As if any of us know what Korea would be doing if the west didn’t invade then sanction among other things.
- corimaith 1y agoNorth Korea invaded South Korea after US pressured South Korea to disarm. North Korea was the imperialist actor here.
- skinnymuch 1y agoThat’s not what imperialism means. At all. Next you’ll say China wanting reunification with its own people is imperialism but NATO in Ukraine isn’t. Or they can be equivocated. I haven’t heard about the disarming stuff. I don’t think that part happened.
- noduerme 1y agoWhat an apt comparison you make in your apologia for dictatorships! For the imperialist Beijing regime to "reunify" with an independent state in Taiwan which it never controlled is just like the czarist empire based in Moscow "reunifying" with Ukraine: It's an autocracy invading an independent democracy, killing people, and taking away their right to self-determination. Comparing this with Ukraine wanting to join NATO or the EU for the defense of their right to self-determination and to live free of an authoritarian police state is laughable. But such a comment can only come from ignorance of the differences between systems of government with human rights and those with none, or else be sheet wicked propaganda paid for by an authoritarian regime. The equivocation here is in your comment - one must wonder what your actual motive is.
- skinnymuch 1y agoUkraine arguably gave up its sovereignty when it became a neo-colony of the imperialist west and NATO in 2014. No one has the heavens mandate to any land. We are only human. Not gods. You don’t get to do whatever you want on the land of your nation state just because of blood and soil arguments like you and your blood is from there. Western and liberal democracy is not about human rights. If China never had claims to Taiwan…then the KMT never should’ve gone there either according to your logic. And don’t have rights to that land now unless settler logic is used. > one must wonder what your actual motive is. I am an anti-imperialist and [pan-]nationalist. I don’t hide that. That is in contrast to most westerners or Europeans who go based off enlightened centrist and liberal vibes along with western, white, settler, and European chauvinism and supremacy.
- the_af 1y ago> The topic is cybercrime and espionage, not nuclear brinksmanship or colonialism. Those are all closely related topics in geopolitics.