Like you said, North Vietnam was supported by a Superpower. But what do you mean by "the only arms that could flood into NK after that would be from China"? I remember that the last time there was a war a wretched China was able to turn the tide of the war pretty quickly, what do you think a significantly wealthier China could do if they throw their support behind the North? Certainly the United States would not be winning any war in that peninsula if China seriously backs up the North, Infact the US would lose badly.
While it is possible that China would militarily intervene against a U.S invasion of NK, it is something that can only be speculative, since we never seen (exception of India and Pakistan) 2 countries with nukes go to war with one another outright.
Also with China and U.S much more intertwined than before, that would devastate their economy (probably China's more than U.S) due to the export/import imbalance.
and what gives you the right to speak for Iraqis or Afghanis? Are you from either country? Did you live as a citizen in any of them? Do you have any family or relatives who live there? Also what is there to speak about Libya and Yemen? One is a failed state run by a dysfunctional government and barely even that since it's more like run by warlords. Terrorism has become a much more normal occurence there and radical Islam has a stronger foothold there now. NATO regime change turned it from one of the most developed African countries to a Salafi shithole with warring extremist factions. At least NATO's best buddies in Middle East are happy. Yemen meanwhile is facing the world's worst famine in a US/UK/Saudi led genocide.
"Speak for" meaning I do not have enough knowledge on the conflict or history of Libya or Yemen to have any opinion on it. Also you do not need to live in said nation to hold an opinion on it. Afghanistan was going to be invaded anyways and I agree with the invasion since it hosted terrorist camps, I would even agree to sanctions on Saudis for them not having a tighter hold on terrorist groups until a couple years ago. That won't happen because the effects on world oil supply would be too significant.
It's sad how uninformed and ignorant people become once a false media narrative has become embedded into conventional wisdom. Arming thousands of proxies to carry out a regime change at over $1 billion a year and yet neocons and people like you push the myth of a "lack of intervention" or a "non-intervention". It's incredible.
I guess I should be more clear in my wordings since you seem to nitpick it. When I said "lack of intervention" I mean a full on military intervention such as a no fly zone or a complete bombardment of Syria's military assets.
I do not consider meager supply of arms to be the intervention that Syria needed, especially since the supply of these arms came too late while the Saudis and their allies poured money and arms unrestricted to anyone who claimed to want to fight Assad. This led to the rise of terrorist groups in Syria as moderates would join those groups because of the lack of support from U.S.
NK and its dictatorship is far from anything good and its people (and Koreans generally) deserve much better. However, having the warmongering US do anything is terrible. This is the same warloving country that firebombed North Korea with 630 000 tons of mostly napalm bombs, leveling at that time at least 9 of the 22 major cities in North. The destruction and killing was so bad that even some of its own generals were disgusted. US is a nation that loves war, death and destruction and you don't assign one of the biggest warmongerers in modern history with millions of deaths on their hands to solve problems in a dictatorship. Sadly right now there's no power in this world that can invade US, carry out a regime change in that shithole, try their politicians for war crimes and keep the country occupied until it's no longer a threat for much of the developing world or basically any country not aligning with western interest and geopolitics.
Regime change enthusiasts should be the first ones to go live in the countries they endorsed a regime change for. Of course none of them will because it's usually white people writing comfortably from their apartment while they live safely in their developed nation. They don't have to worry about their or their close ones safety nor do they have to worry about getting blown to bits by bombs being dropped above their head by a hostile foreign actor. They don't have to worry from the effects of the war, of having their neighborhood or city bombed so there they sit and talk comfortably about the best way to destroy another country full of brown people or some other third world country.
I feel no need to answer to this part of your post since its more just ranting or venting. I agree that U.S committed a lot of bad shit throughout it's history, not sure what you expect with this though.
