• HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 hours ago

    What’s the difference?

    You don’t see the difference between a drone and a balloon?

    A drone is a weapon of war. A drone can collect surveillance, or even deliver a payload to a target.

    But even if you want to consider a balloon an invasion, the South still invaded first when it aerial dropped propaganda.

      • HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        First of all, I doubt that’s the kind of balloon that was carrying trash.

        Secondly, spy balloons were a thing back in the 1950s because satellites didn’t exist yet. No one would use a balloon for warfare these days, because you can’t steer a balloon.

        What even is your point? If you think Washington was justified in freaking out over a weather balloon but Pyongyang was not justified in freaking out over frickin’ drones, you’re not making sense.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          35 minutes ago

          Ah, so these are (maybe, because you doubt it) not the right kind of balloons to count as an invasion.

          This is quite the very narrow range of necessary characteristics for something that isn’t doing any attacking to count as an invasion.

          Especially when that drone didn’t even drop any garbage. And, of course, you have no idea if that drone was doing any intel gathering or if it was armed.

          As for what my point is, I’m just using your logic. A drone that doesn’t do any attacking over North Korea is an invasion, therefore garbage balloons, which are doing more of an “attack” than that drone, are an invasion.

          It seems to me this is more an issue of you liking North Korea and not liking South Korea.