Purpelia wrote:The New California Republic wrote:That's a bit strong...
Not at all. That is literally what it is. Big nations breaking into smaller ones and forcing them at gunpoint to oppress their people by violating their fundamental right to self determination (to chose their government type and way of life).Scomagia wrote:So what you're saying is that it's criminal and disgusting to stop doing business with countries with whom you have extreme moral differences? That's interesting and also very stupid.
And in what way is it criminal, exactly? Care to direct the rest of us to the relevant international law or treaty that sanctions violate?
Would you like it if someone was to put your nation under sanctions because they disagree with your customs?
Assume for a moment you are american. It's a simply thing to assume since you either are (most people on the internet are) or are at least heavily familiar with their strange and confusing culture due to massive exposure (again, internet). So let's assume you are.
Now, where I am from most american customs are strange, confusing or outright revolting. The idea that they allow everyone to own and walk around with deadly firearms. The idea that they allow people to school children at home and teach them all sorts of insane pseudo-science and creationism instead of actual knowledge (leading to religious violence). The idea that they refuse to have socialized medicine. Their distrust of government and its officials. The list is endless.
Now imagine if my nation was to get the UN to sanction America until they decide to reverse those customs. After all it's only reasonable to have these barbarians who keep killing each other on the streets give up their weapons. Or to have remove the government they so obviously distrust and replace it with something more civilized. And of course there surely can be no question of the moral validity of freeing them of the mind dulling oppression that comes with religious extremism. Surely, those sanctions would be just and proper? Right?
And this is NOT a farce either. Like, from where I am standing you can make a perfectly valid argument for doing just that. And if I were not in opposition to interventionism as a matter of principal I'd find it hard to find any other reason to oppose them.
Thing about that for a moment.Duhon wrote:
... ah, the moral high horse of straddling on the same side as the executioners of LGBTs.
I disagree with their choices but must defend to the death their right to make them. Lest my right to make my choices fall along side with theirs.Gormwood wrote:So you're saying North Korea and Cuba should not be sanctioned?
Absolutely not. Nobody should ever be forced to change their internal politics at gunpoint. The people of those nations have the right to run them as they see fit. And if we find their ways strange, alien or even evil we must simply shrug and accept that to them we seem just as strange, alien and evil. It is the same principal that drives us in the west to show the tolerance we are renowned for. The very thing that drives you in your replies to me.
So you claim to support sovereignty but oppose sovereignty on trade?
WTF?
No country is forced to trade with any country, any country may trade or not trade with anyone they want, for any reason.
Sovereignty gives a country complete control over its trade.
This is not “gun point”, this is not “legalize gay sex or we bomb you”.
This is saying “you want to trade with us, you have to accept our conditions, if you do not like the conditions it is your sovereign right to choose not to trade with us”.
Which again we have every sovereign right to do!
We have every sovereign right to regulate and control our trade.
To choose our trade partners.
And yes I know, this means other countries can refuse to engage in business with the US.
Great. Sanction us if you wish. It is your right.
I do not care if Germans ban the export of German cars to the US because they think our gun laws are bad or whatever (though your claim anyone can buy a gun is false).
Or the can ban US cars going into Germany and then we ban their cars. Cool.
Bring it on.
Also the people of Brunei never chose this. They last had elections in 1962!
So if you are arguing the people have the sovereign right to make their own internal policies (they absolutely do but again we absolutely have the sovereign right to restrict our trade too) the people actually have to have a say in government for popular sovereignty to be applicable.
