> The idea that we'd ever let Japan have a nuke is ludicrous. Do you really think we'd let a country we nuked twice have such weapons?
Not ludicrous at all - Trump was open to Japan and Korea acquiring nukes. [1]
> After all, it wasn't china that sanctioned india when they developed nukes...
That was at a time when India's wasn't clearly aligned to the US. Subsequently it was the US which drafted the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) exemption for India.
> If there is a war in asia, it will be a war for liberation - not from china, but from the west.
What liberation? People hold favorable views of the West (compared to China) in East Asia, South East Asia, or India. Many of them are now in disputes with China, which often involve violence. The situation is different in West Asia - but it's always been that way.
> It's so funny how we truly deluded ourselves into thinking we are the good guys in asia and not the murderous colonial powers that we truly are.
Modern western influence is largely positive compared to the alternatives.
> Not ludicrous at all - Trump was open to Japan and Korea acquiring nukes. [1]
Don't link to paywalls. Who is talking about Trump? I'm talking about the US. Also, Trump was open to a lot of things. Including Mexico paying for the wall.
> That was at a time when India's wasn't clearly aligned to the US. Subsequently it was the US which drafted the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) exemption for India.
Countries like india, china, russia are never "clearly aligned" with anyone. They are too big for that.
> What liberation? People hold favorable views of the West (compared to China) in East Asia, South East Asia, or India.
That's because we are the dominant occupying power with dominant propaganda and wealth. The leaders of these "subjugated" nations could easily turn the propaganda against the US. Look how quickly our propaganda was able to turn the sentiment against china. How easily do you think Japan, Korea, Philippines, etc could turn their nations sentiment against the US.
> Many of them are now in disputes with China, which often involve violence.
What disputes, violence? The only real dispute seems to be with the US and the west ( aka china's and asia's former european colonizers ). That's another danger, that asians, africans, etc are going to pick up on.
> The situation is different in West Asia - but it's always been that way.
What violence? Is it china that invaded afghanistan, iraq and sanctioned iran?
> Modern western influence is largely positive compared to the alternatives.
No. It hasn't been. Not for the aborigines. Not for the natives. Not for the africans. Not for the indians. Etc. That's the point. It's actually modern chinese influence has even been more positive. Considering the wealth of japan, korea and much of asia has been due to trade with china. And that's why we are "pivoting to asia" - a place we do not belong. A place, btw, we caused the deaths of tens of millions of innocent people.
Not ludicrous at all - Trump was open to Japan and Korea acquiring nukes. [1]
> After all, it wasn't china that sanctioned india when they developed nukes...
That was at a time when India's wasn't clearly aligned to the US. Subsequently it was the US which drafted the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) exemption for India.
> If there is a war in asia, it will be a war for liberation - not from china, but from the west.
What liberation? People hold favorable views of the West (compared to China) in East Asia, South East Asia, or India. Many of them are now in disputes with China, which often involve violence. The situation is different in West Asia - but it's always been that way.
> It's so funny how we truly deluded ourselves into thinking we are the good guys in asia and not the murderous colonial powers that we truly are.
Modern western influence is largely positive compared to the alternatives.
1: https://www.ft.com/content/c927017c-f398-11e5-9afe-dd2472ea2...