The US plays "fairly" in international relations? Honestly amazed if anyone truly stands by that statement.
The irony of mentioning treaties too. That's some next level true believer stuff.
Would love to have a chat about:
* Chemical weapons convention
* Mine ban treaty
* Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
* Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty
* Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty
* Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention
* Kyoto Protocol
* Reneging on the Iran deal and then forcing Europe to do the same despite US intel chiefs saying Iran they held up their end of the bargain.
* The half dozen worldwide commitments Trump has pulled out of in the last year, there's too many to count.
American foreign intel agencies have far more funding and skills than the next 10 largest countries combined. They do not play fair nor do they have to. Anyone claiming otherwise likely doesn't know much about it or wilfully ignores it out of nationalism.
> The US plays "fairly" in international relations? Honestly amazed if anyone truly stands by that statement.
If you consider how much power the U.S. has and how often it does not use that power to its fullest advantage, it's pretty remarkable how much it holds back.
There are dozens of countries murdering their own citizens. The US is not nearly as much as problem as people want to make it seem and Pax Americana has led to almost a century without major worldwide war.
You mean criminals tried, found guilty, lost all appeals, and sentenced to death? This is not the same thing as countries killing their own innocent citizens.
There's a massive difference between wrongly-fully sentenced inmates and countries that kill innocents through authoritarian means. It's disingenuous to pretend otherwise.
They are not overshadowed because life is not a commodity bartered according to rules of law. Once you take a life there is no restitution. Life is not a transaction: it is destiny, and it is above the law.
Rules and reasons for why killing is okay are therefore all equally wrong.
This is a religious stance and not how the world actually works, nor does it have anything to do with the previous discussion of the relative moralities and freedoms of countries. Since you think North Korea is the same as the US, there's nothing further to discuss here.
I don't think they're holding back so much as the Pax Americana system is the most profitable for them. They aren't powerful enough to choke the whole world, nor would they even want to.
This is actually a fair call. It could be far far worse. Still reasonable to complain about as a Western citizen barely affected if not benefiting from it.
But tit for tat responses are problamatic. Eg: Responding to terrorism with more terrorism is hardly going to lead to solutions. US supposedly does not operate in the same ethical-moral framework as the Russians.Is it even legal under American law to disrupt or cause damage to other countries property, while not engaged in war? I think the whole think smacks of extra-legality, and that is one place where democracies should not be going.
Even the major driver behind the mine ban treaty Frank O'Dea notes that the only reason the US didn't sign the treaty is no exception was made for the Korean DMZ. He gives significant credit to the United States for making the ban possible in the first place.
If you have time I highly recommend reading his book "When All You Have is Hope" - his transformation from an alcoholic to running a large coffee change and then later charitable work is heartening.
If you look into the international treaties worldwide you'll find the US has exceptions made for it all the time to the point of making the treaties basically not apply to them.
Why are mines in the Korean DMZ more important than mines anywhere else on earth? Because if that was all it was about then why are US violations of the (non-signed) treaty still carried out across the globe? Mines were used in Afghanistan.
Exceptionalism and nationalistic fervour that demands inequitable laws isn't something to proud of.
There's still thousands killed and maimed by US landmines each year in SE Asia and the sole country responsible has wiped it's hands clean of it. You don't have to look far in Cambodia to see old women missing limbs thanks to Uncle Sam.
The actual legal steps to ban landmine usage and production only occured in 2014 under Obama.
Mines along the DMZ are important because it prevents North Korea’s significant land army from crossing into the South. Without it Seoul is at significant risk.
Everyone points to the south’s modern weaponry and US backing as reasons why the DMZ mines are not needed. However the US had a significant tech advantage in the Korean War and almost lost completely (even before China entered the war). They were saved only by a daring beach landing in the Battle of Inchon.
The irony of mentioning treaties too. That's some next level true believer stuff.
Would love to have a chat about:
* Chemical weapons convention
* Mine ban treaty
* Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
* Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty
* Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty
* Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention
* Kyoto Protocol
* Reneging on the Iran deal and then forcing Europe to do the same despite US intel chiefs saying Iran they held up their end of the bargain.
* The half dozen worldwide commitments Trump has pulled out of in the last year, there's too many to count.
American foreign intel agencies have far more funding and skills than the next 10 largest countries combined. They do not play fair nor do they have to. Anyone claiming otherwise likely doesn't know much about it or wilfully ignores it out of nationalism.