• redtea@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    This is rather semantic. I’m not making an argument about which state or which territorial claims are legitimate. And that legitimacy doesn’t change the fact that the US has a presence in Korea – the whole peninsula is Korean, yes? regardless of which state has a claim to which part – whereas the DPRK has no presence anywhere that could be called US territory. The point is that the US is the aggressor and the DPRK is peaceful.

    • pingveno
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      2 years ago

      While the peninsula as a whole is Korean, sure. Doesn’t mean the North Korean government has any legitimate jurisdiction over South Korea or grounds to complain if South Korea invites US troops to be stationed in South Korea. And if North Korea wanted to claim that it was peaceful, maybe it wouldn’t have artillery trained on the world’s 4th largest metropolis, no?

      • CountryBreakfast@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        The South Korean state is run by US generals. RoK is as legitimate as the genocidal maniacs that facilitated it’s creation and development throughout the on going conflict. Pearl clutching about peace during a multidecade conflict that is part of an even longer decolonial struggle is like concern trolling about world peace during slave revolts in the colonies.