This lost their sovereignty argument is kind of bullshit though. You recognize that. Don't you? How did Iraq lose its sovereignty? The United States invaded and killed their leadership. How did Afghanistan lose its sovereignty. That's all whole story. Russia invaded then America invaded then America invaded again. If being invaded by someone is enough to qualify as a loss of sovereignty and justification for occupation, that's a very slippery slope.

With this same defense. It would be possible for China to claim that a number of countries lost their sovereignty as well and therefore must be occupied and policed by them. I think there is a bigger defense for it in terms of countries like Japan. Absolutely. Post world war II. The occupation was always a given. But the United States has not always had that same justification. And justifying our actions in that way is dangerous because it could be just as easily applied to another bad actor like China.

Y'know, I agree largely. But that doesn't really change the overall trend. Vietnam etc. We, America absolutely had the term world police literally coined for us.

I think it was wrong for us to do much of that, as China policing other countries is also wrong. But I'm surprised and find it quite funny how many here are absolutely offended. But can't offer a single rebuttal to the overall point. Because it's absolutely true. So they just down vote circle jerk. Even though we pretty much agree. Just because I had the audacity to hold my country responsible too. Though a lot of it could be because of all the disingenuous ML circle jerking going on elsewhere. Criticizing the US and other Western Nations while defending the same actions elsewhere.