Drlee wrote:Wait. You want to have a lot of wars because it shows those who are oppressed by peace just who the oppressors are when they start killing them?
If the oppressors willingly step down when it is found that they cannot handle it, then there is no problem.
As an example, CY Leung had been doing very bad, and most of recent Hong Kong perils have been caused by him, but he stepped down after just one term. As long as his effective influence is gone I am OK.
However, there are always others who don't.
Drlee wrote:What nonsense. Trump has bent over backward to protect the most powerful despots in the world. He offs one Iranian general and you ignore Kim, Putin and the House of Saud? Get a grip.
I have repeatedly stated that I am against Trump's Middle East policies. I also repeatedly advocate offing China and Russia leadership so as to eliminate support of most despots around the world. In fact, I strongly believe the West should never have given up their colonies in the first place.
While I credit Trump for stirring up the opportunity, it does not necessarily mean that he is genuinely into it. It does not change anything if we bet every single chip on a single entity.
I admit I have a soft spot for Kim Jong-un because he's of similar age to me, and he tries to be different from his reclusive late father, but the track records of Saddam Hussein and Qaddafi have hindered him from actually engaging rapprochement. (On a side note, during this epidemic he quickly shut off his whole country which, judged by the circumstances, should be praised)
EDIT: As for the Saudis, their society has always been tribal, and only tribal means can remove them.