Comment on China says US broke international law by seizing oil tankers off Venezuela
frisbird@lemmy.ml 1 day agoChina’s not good for ignoring it. China is violating international law in its attempt to establish its national security against the constant threats by the US and its allies.
The US violates international law to steal oil, traffick human slave, drugs, and weapons, train and arm terrorists, dump toxic waste in poor countries that can’t defend themselves, and bomb whoever the fuck even thinks about running their own country.
These are not the same violations of international law.
It’s like saying that guy violated the law when he pulled an illegal uturn while you’re standing there with a rifle and 12 bodies at your feet.
Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
Oh, so what China is doing is “bad”…but they’re doing it for “good reasons”? I find it hard to believe that you don’t see how disingenuous that argument is.
Americans have been hiding behind their own sense.of exceptionalism to justify all kinds of bad behavior. Small transgressions. Large ones. Doesn’t matter. They have an excuse for all of it, because they think the rules don’t apply to them. They think that because “(insert excuse here)”, they have the right to ignore them.
All you’re doing is making the same arguments that they do…you’re just doing it for China instead of the US, and acting like it’s SO different when China does it, because the US did it worse. It’s not a valid argument.
frisbird@lemmy.ml 23 hours ago
Violating law is not inherently bad, no. We all know this. Laws do not have moral/ethical value. So what China is doing is in violation of international law, but that does not mean it’s bad.
What the US does, as the world’s most violent empire, is bad - not because it violates international law but because it is acting in the interest of total domination and subjugation of the world’s people.
What China is doing in the SCS is very clearly in the interest of establishing its own national security against exactly the immoral behavior of the USA. Sure, harassment of fisherman feels like a terrible thing, but when we look at it in the full context, China is asserting its willingness to control a region of the waters and apply a consistent rule in those waters (no one has access) in an attempt to create conditions under which it can stop war ships from the US, UK, Japan, and other anti-Chinese powers from operating with impunity in those waters. And the reason it wants to be able to do that is because these countries have all raped and pillaged not only China but many of the countries that have coastlines on the SCS.
What the US is doing is, having successfully raped and pillaged multiple countries with shorelines on the SCS, attempting to say it has the right to peacefully move war ships including nuclear-capable submarines into the SCS because it’s international waters and it doesn’t matter if strategically that means China will have a gaping security hole in its national defense.
Again, it’s like saying cryptography is illegal, and now that we’ve made it illegal, it is actually immoral to protect your home computers from hackers and then saying someone installing cryptography is just as wrong as the hackers stealing their data. It’s total bullshit and you and people like you totally understand the concept of immoral laws and laws with immoral consequences when it involves concepts in your own ideology but you discard it immediately when it comes to the national defense of the West’s military targets. You have to see how disingenuous this is.
Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 20 hours ago
Your entire premise is actually backwards. You are claiming that international laws are arbitrary, and don’t have any “moral/ethical value”. That is completely incorrect. They are based on common sense, fair practices that seek to reduce or eliminate conflict between nations. The entire point is to sustain a moral and ethical balance, where everyone’s rights are respected.
It isn’t the same thing as declaring cryptography illegal. That would be an example of an arbitrary law. In the case of international waters being open for anyone’s use, it is anything but arbitrary. Other countries have every right to use those waters for trade and travel. Restricting their access to those waters represents an infringement on their rights.
What you’re saying China had every right to do, directly violates someone else’s right to do the same thing. That is why it is illegal. No one is out there in the South China Sea, stopping China from moving through the area, are they? No one is stopping them from sending ships past the North American coast to Panama either. The US has no right to patrol those waters and harass ships that use them…because those waters belong to everyone.
What the US is doing right now in the Caribbean however, IS illegal for exactly the same reason. It’s even worse, because they’re also just blowing up boats that they claim are transporting drugs…but even if all they were doing was seizing those vessels or harassing traffic through the area…they would still be violating the law.
It doesn’t matter what justification they claimed they had, regarding their own “security”…they have no right to restrict other countries access to trade and travel, through territory that belongs to everyone.
frisbird@lemmy.ml 16 hours ago
Right, so your position is that everyone has to follow the rules even if doing so puts them in a weaker position that could be exploited by the USA, because defending against potential violations of international law by the USA which pose existential threats to your nation is not valid and instead the rights of fishermen trump the right to national self defense because we say so.