zlacker

Let's also not forget if this was in any other country, the US would be sanctioning them already, making a bad situation even worse! I am personally very glad to see this potentially being the end of the US hegemony.

>>jialut+(OP)
The issue of "What comes after US hegemony?" should trouble you even more.

I can envision a lot of scenarios that are worse than now.

>>ofcroo+Dg
Time to start learning Chinese?

>>jialut+(OP)
What utter nonsense.

>>thatgu+1l
How do you say 'how do I keep my internal organs AND my religion' in mandarin?

>>ofcroo+Dg
Power vacuums are a very dangerous thing. This is how ISIS/ISIL came to power after all...

>>bobmcb+Pl
Which part? The sanctions part or the hegemon part? Here is a list of US sanctions:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_sanctions

I love this part specifically: "Reasons cited for sanctions includes Venezuela's poor human rights record", pretty much for all of them.

And then let's look at US's involvements in Latin America:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_r...

Funnily enough, the CIA overthrew Iran's democratically elected government in 1953, only to sanction them when they are not willing to be US's pawns anymore.

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/31/690363402/how-the-cia-overthr...

>>ofcroo+Dg
What troubles me more is the idea that you think there needs or has to be some sort of hegemony in the first place. I personally know of scenarios that is already far worse in the world today because of this idea of someone having to uphold some sort of hegemony.