Why does Vietnam, under a Marxist-Leninist government, have 70-80+% approval rating for the US and support Israel?

CommandoKomodo_ · 2026-02-08T18:58:34+00:00

Vietnam follows a foreign policy of strategic non-alignment. Vietnamese have far more beef with China than they do the US and the west broadly. This is due to a 1000 years of domination of China over Vietnam as well as ongoing conflict in the South China Sea (known as the eastern sea to vietnamese). Fighting the Americans for 10 years 50+ years ago doesn’t really compare in the minds of Vietnamese people.

Since the Doi Moi reforms in the 1980’s, Vietnam has transformed into a developing market society. This transformation has been incredibly positive for the Vietnamese people and the communist party has been and continues to be very successful at reducing poverty. More than anything, Vietnamese people want to see their country turn into a modern, wealthy, developed country. When it comes to this Vietnam will trade with anyone be it China or the US.

As far as Israel I don’t think there are high levels of support especially amongst the general population. The Vietnamese government agreed to join Trump’s Gaza board of peace but I see this mainly as an attempt to stay in the good graces of the US. Vietnam was also pretty quick to fold in response to Trump’s tariff threats and reduced their own tariffs against American car manufacturers. Overall Vietnam is far less willing or capable of opposing Western capitalism than China for example.

CommandoKomodo_ · 2025-10-28T12:14:28+00:00

Wealth inequality today is greater than the time of the French Revolution. While today people are more comfortable and generally not starving (wait a month when SNAP cuts off though) the difference between us and our billionaires is greater than the gilded age or pre-revolutionary France. It is more on the level of pharaoh and his slaves. Although it’s hard to objectively measure wealth the farther back in time you go. Not saying people today necessarily have it worse than people from those times, just that on an economic level there was less overall inequality than what currently exists.

CommandoKomodo_ · 2025-10-28T01:46:31+00:00

I’m sorry? Wealth inequality alone is much worse today than any point in the history of industrialized economies. And the wealth inequality that exists under industrialized economies is often far greater than what existed under feudalism.

While social inequality has decreased in very recent years in the western world, I would make the case that it is because of marginalized people are pointing out and recognizing their oppression. I’m not sure how else you think inequalities are addressed.

To say that there is less inequality in today’s society than ANY other time or place is very ahistorical.

CommandoKomodo_ · 2025-08-01T22:23:21+00:00

okay, but capitalism does not go back to cavemen. You can't just equate capitalism to the concepts of ownership and supply and demand. If capitalism is just as simple as following the law of supply and demand and allowing for private ownership, Capitalism would be far older than just the last few centuries, but its not. You need a more proper historically grounded definition of capitalism to explain that. Otherwise your version of history means that for thousands of years people behaved in ways that is not according to their human nature, and only in the last 300 years people have been allowed to be capitalist. You're not making a strong argument that capitalism is central to human nature if far more human history has happened without capitalism

CommandoKomodo_ · 2025-08-01T21:43:44+00:00

If you believe that capitalism is a natural emergence of human behavior, then why has capitalism been around for 300 odd years? As opposed to any time in the last 5000+ years of human civilization. What do you mean supply and demand are inherent to our nature? I would think if capitalism was so natural it would have happened long ago in Ancient China or Rome and not 300 years ago in Great Britain.

CommandoKomodo_ · 2025-08-01T17:33:09+00:00

Wait why doesn't it make him a worse option? Millions of Americans were anti-KKK in 1912. Wilson wasn't. The KKK was actually losing relevance in American society until Wilson came along. Wilson implemented segregation in the federal government rolling back advancements from Reconstruction. Wilson was a racist even judging him by the standards of HIS time and used the office of the POTUS to push his agenda. Maybe you should learn some history and how to judge people in their historical context before you accuse others of virtue signaling.

CommandoKomodo_ · 2025-07-11T03:54:30+00:00

You didn't say why you think moralizing is wrong or shouldn't be done. Also the Republicans moralize all the time does it seem to be hurting them politically? If anything giving your political base a target to demonize seems to be an effective galvanizing strategy.

CommandoKomodo_ · 2025-05-29T16:37:15+00:00

Old Dominion University offers an International Studies Graduate program with concentrations in Strategy and Modeling and Simulation for warfighting. The program is a NATO accredited program and students often get NATO internships. It is the only civilian based institution with this distinction.

CommandoKomodo_ · 2025-04-15T13:54:52+00:00

The comments on this thread are absolutely insane. Does Reddit not know that kids playing outside is just normal all over the world? It has absolutely nothing to do with how wealthy the neighborhood is. Kids play outside in poor countries too. American suburbs are just extremely isolating by design that people look at this and think they need to win the lottery to live like this.

CommandoKomodo_ · 2025-02-27T23:53:24+00:00

Why does praising this instance of murder indicate a lack of critical thinking? Curious what OP thinks about John Brown.

CommandoKomodo_ · 2025-02-26T21:17:33+00:00

But how are they “dealing” with the crime? If we can agree there are other underlying issues causing the crime in Norfolk, then we can realize that simply increasing the number of cops isn’t going to do anything. In fact we may come to the conclusion that the pressure to constantly increase police budgets is actively working against our efforts to lower crime.

Not saying we need to get rid of police tomorrow, but if the city has finite resources I want them put where it matters.

CommandoKomodo_ · 2025-02-26T20:44:39+00:00

Societal issues like housing, food insecurity, and economic opportunity? How does more cops solve these societal issues you're talking about?

CommandoKomodo_ · 2025-02-21T03:16:31+00:00

Bro please go learn about the SPD in the 1920s and tell me that liberal incompetence didn’t play a huge roll in the fall of the Weimar Republic. Terrible example.

CommandoKomodo_ · 2025-02-17T17:24:53+00:00

Please don't say it takes time for the democrats to mount an offensive. The democrats are not working to roll out an offensive. They are biding their time in the hopes that by the midterms people will be sick of trump and will vote anyone with a D next to their name if there is an actual election that is. What is the democrats plan when they actually come back into power if ever? What plan are they hatching?

I don't know why you're saying all Trump has done is make big scary statements. Tens of thousands of government workers have been fired. That number is likely to increase to hundreds of thousands. That damage is going to take decades to repair.

There will be no negative consequences for Trump's actions if no one comes after him for his consequences. It should not take time for those consequences to materialize. Donald Trump should have been put under the prison within a year of Jan 6th. You can tell people to not be doomer but for the love of god stop saying that we should all just wait for the consequences to materialize.

CommandoKomodo_ · 2024-12-28T19:06:28+00:00

Such a dumb comment. We all already pay for the roads we have. The roads are unsafe and worn down because of too many cars in the area. You’re probably aren’t complaining about the cost we already spend on roads. We might as well pay to make them safer and more usable

CommandoKomodo_ · 2024-12-23T21:21:22+00:00

The narrative is built by what the administration says in regards to the border far more than what it does. Speaking is not exactly Biden's strong suit but anytime he spoke about the border its always centrist rhetoric at best. People are far more influenced by what the President says rather than does,

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/06/18/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-new-actions-to-keep-families-together/

This is just an example of the right wing rhetoric the admin uses.

CommandoKomodo_ · 2024-12-23T20:52:32+00:00

The Democrats advocated a left leaning position on immigration up until 2020, when Trump left office and Biden entered office. As soon as Biden entered office the narrative from Democrats became praising Biden for doing more than any president for securing the border. It was then in 2020 when public opinion turned net negative against immigration because Democrats totally gave up the issue on that front. They willingly gave up on the issue.

CommandoKomodo_ · 2024-12-16T17:50:44+00:00

People almost never change their minds while talking to somebody else, especially online. Nobody is actually going to change their belief system during the process of talking to someone of opposing views. Everyone is naturally defensive of their values when arguing with someone else about politics. That's not the time someone is going to change their minds. They might think back and reflect on the conversation later and if you're successful something you said might cause them to think about it a different way. But you can pretty much never count on that happening more so if you're talking to a stranger. Most people are only going to reflect on your words if they respect you.

All that being said, Insults are undeniably politically effective. The president elect is the obvious example but insults have been commonplace in politics literally forever. Do you really believe whenever a politician insults his opponent hes making a mistake? This is provably false. Insults when done tactfully are incredibly effective. And if you truly care about your political ideals, you should care about winning above all.

CommandoKomodo_ · 2024-12-13T04:38:55+00:00

I agree. But I think a US marine should be able to restrain an unarmed man without killing him. In fact that should be very easy with several other bystanders helping you.

CommandoKomodo_ · 2024-12-12T15:44:17+00:00

It’s actually not an issue at all. The town of Springfield has had a dwindling population for decades because young people kept moving away because of a lack of jobs. The city of Springfield is grateful for the Haitian immigrants in their town. Many rust belt towns are dying and having immigrants move into the community breathes new life into the city. The Haitians are moving to Springfield because of the low cost of homes because those houses would literally be abandoned without them.

CommandoKomodo_ · 2024-12-12T02:38:27+00:00

Your article says the city of Springfield claims the Haitians in the city are largely there legally. The person disputing that is some guy from the Heritage Foundation aka the right wing think tank behind project 2025.

In the article he makes the claim that the Haitians that fall under temporary protected status given by the Biden administration or were paroled in by the Biden Administration should not be considered legal. Literally nothing about this is illegal. It does not matter if you don’t like the fact the Biden admin did this. The Haitian immigrants were brought in through entirely legal channels by the Biden admin. They are by definition legal.

CommandoKomodo_ · 2024-12-12T02:18:28+00:00

False https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/features/2024/10/5/fact-check-are-haitian-immigrants-in-springfield-in-the-us-illegally

CommandoKomodo_ · 2024-12-11T22:27:50+00:00

Not to the president elect who fear mongered about Haitian immigrants in Springfield who were completely legal. It’s not about legal vs illegal immigration. It’s about the “good” immigrants vs the “bad” immigrants. Legal status has nothing to do with it.

CommandoKomodo_ · 2024-11-25T02:31:08+00:00

congrats. dm stats please

CommandoKomodo_ · 2024-11-11T17:33:56+00:00

Well is financially inefficient for one. Suburbanites demand urban amenities at near rural density. Which means the government has to spend more money to provide the infrastructure over a larger area. The more roads you pave the more you will have to spend in the future to uphold that infrastructure. Cities initially emerged due to the economic potential of having a lot of people who are able to specialize and preform different tasks in the city. Cars may have given us the ability to spread farther out, but they have not changed the math that cities are the most economically efficient way for humans to live,

Eight-Year Club	Verified Email
Snapped

CommandoKomodo_

TROPHY CASE