Back then most of the world was divided into communists and non communist countries.
The communists tried to expand by force in Korea and non communists defended against that.
Generally whenever the Communists took over you had refugees or locked borders.
Part of my point is, many of the non-Communist countries, especially many of the ones the U.S. and other West Bloc nations wanted to keep in power, or to install in power, against Communist regimes, were just as authoritarian, tyrannical, bloody-handed, power-abusive, and blatantly corrupt as the Communist regimes they were meant replace or stand firm against. Where is this "higher ground," mentality you keep quoting? You talk about me "justifying some really crappy regimes crimes," when that's EXACTLY what you're doing, just ones whose only meaningful, core difference is sucking up to the West Bloc rather than the East Bloc
What about slutshaming someone involves any form of truth? If any truth is present, it's completely irrelevant to the act of shaming someone. It's a moral condemnation. It doesn't have to have any roots in a "truth", just the virtue of the person doing the shaming.
For a (nominal) Christian like Carlson, "slutshaming" becomes incredibly easy because religion in general offers a ton of moral high horses from which to shame people from.
Who is this "Carlson," (with no first name, I'm clueless), whom is he "slutshaming," (which is completely Un-Christian behaviour for someone following the Ministry of Christ and the Apostles as is), and how did the conversation on highly dubious regimes supported by the U.S. by military power lead to this?
Yes it was. Unless you are the kind of person who agrees with Saddam that Kuwait was somehow the "rightful territory" of Iraq that was "stolen" from them by British colonial redrawing of borders.
Not to mention Iraq's invasion of Kuwait was condemned by an overwhelming majority of the world's nations and the US/Coalition were given a mandate by the UN to expel Iraqi forces from Kuwait's territory.
Doesn't get more morally justifiable than that. Unless there is some other US intervention in Kuwait you are referring to?
No, Desert Storm had no higher ground at all. It was ALL about oil and the greed of oil. And, yes, the British Empire did redraw a lot of maps arbitrarily whose unjust consequences are still being felt to this day, despite your arrogant and cavalier, "these are the maps now, live with them," attitude. A Hell of a lot of war, bloodshed, and horrible hatred that is not really as old as many really think came from other "Auntie Knows Best," border drawing in the day, like many instances in African, issues from the Partition of India, and the root of every single conflict, without exception, at the source, in the post-WW1 Levantine region.
This is a perfect demonstration of why HuffPo is not a credible media organization. This is tabloid journalism. I mean damn, they seriously used Daily Beast as one of their sources on this article.
ALL American "news" outlets have lost all credibility and veracity since about the time Walter Cronkite retired. They're all now just fire-spitting, vitriolic, partisan propaganda machines where very obviously facts are optional, and yellow journalism, clickbait, and other sensationalist tactics are mainstream draws. I no longer get my news from American "news," outlets, but from more reliable and sober, if certainly not perfect, sources like the BBC and the CBC.
