I referred to these countries as prime, historic examples of upmost political legitimacy regardless of their unmatched brutality in the past. They just happen to be white, but that's beside the point I was making...you're the one keep mentioning race as if I'm coming from a racial perspective. You implied in your original comment that the US is more trustworthy than NK/KJU cause "long list of broken promises, oh and they're brutal", and I'm contending that's a poor and ironic argument for trustworthiness and legitimacy in face of world history, especially in relation to America, Russia, and most of Europe. Again, I'm not making a racial point here, but a historic and political one. Also, let's not forget how the whole Korean conflict even started (Potsdam, 1945 - US/Soviet decision to split Korea and install their respective puppet/ideology with 0 Korean consultation).

As for your second paragraph, you admit that you're not familiar enough with NK, yet you're making loose comparisons and jumping to conclusions in regards to KJU. I'm curious, how has he been ruling, given the shit show he inherited from his predecessors? I mean in 6-years, he obviously couldn't just flip a switch and undo everything that is NK. So I'm interested in the nuances.

As far as your last paragraph, I guess that makes Moon and much of the SK population illegitimate and traitorous cause they just had the leader of the illegal militia group over for dinner on diplomatic grounds, with both leaders effectively calling each other president.